2008-07-22_PWETC_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. ©© ©® Attachment D Comments on Land Use, Housing, Accessibility and Related Issues Jim DeBenedet July 1, 2008 1. Community Mixed Usa: I am stilt a tittle concerned that we don't really know what we will get with this one. The pictures look good and the redevelopment at Apacthe Mall looks good, but what can we do to assure we say CMU and get CB? While v.~e have spent a lot of time on this, Ithinksomefollow-up will be Headed to bather define what we are Drinking of here. One specific request I have is to insert Neighborhood Business as one of the land uses that could be included. Maybe another way to address my concern is to state that no single land use component of the CMU area within a Dis6'ict can exceed 40°~ of the floor area. 2. Rica Street: John Goedeka mentioned the Ramsey County planning project for Rice Street I have been on the technical advisory committee thr about 18 months. Rosevlile's representatives have worked to keep the road project in scale with our need for safety, access to existing homes and businesses, allow for a future pathway ar sidewalk and landscaping without requiring significant new right of way acquisition. This was presented to the Council on June 1 B°i. The County r~n11 do a traffic study as part of the Rice STMWY 36 interchange design and I expect our staff will keep the Public Works Commission informed. I wonder if Community Business is the right use for so much of the Rica St frontage in Districts 6 and 16. 1 recoil this is another area where additional study wilt be required so maybe that will address my concerns, but 1 am concerned that CB means larger buildings and larger sites and more fraffic. More traffic means a wider roadway and more ROW acquisition. If this goes the way I Fear, there w{n1I be pressure to add soma of the land west of the CB area to the CB and convert existing businesses b the CB type of use, and on it goes. 3. District 11: At the bottom of page 4-22, a paragraph starts `If this land is developed.,." I recommend the following edits, if this land is developed with residential uses, the provision of public or private parkslopen space should be sensidered-required as part of the development. This park land seutd should be designed ... as well as provide connactlvfry b the n3malnder of the community's park system. 4. Sustainat>ility: There is a statement on sustalnabllity on page ii~3 (n the Transportation element. recommend we add the sentence "Sustatnabilityaisoincludes understanding -and piannhtg for -the fuA social, environmental, and economic costs assocfated with land use decisions' To the Sustalnabiliry paragraph on page 1-2. It would fit immediately after `to meet their own needs. In the fifth line.l 5. LEED Standards: Someone suggested we consider requiring some form of sustainability requirement for new development and redevelopment, at least I thought t heard that. I recommend we put a statement Into the economic development element to require any development or redevelopment that uses City funding or any sort of City sponsored funding to be LEED certified. I will follow up with a scan of a FAQ page about LEER. Also, anyone who is interested can look Into this on the website of the US Green Building CounG'i at www.usgbc.orq, 6. Affordable housing: I support having affordable housing In our community. l chink the issues many suburbanites fear ere based in poor management of rental property and lack of enforcement of nuisance codes. The recent series In the Pioneer Press seam to support those positions at least to some extent 15