My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2001_0626_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2001
>
2001_0626_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2014 10:25:26 AM
Creation date
10/25/2010 1:37:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
345
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
4.3 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR): The DNR comments were in <br />reference to possible permits required for work affecting DNR protected wetlands and <br />protected waters, required permits when dewatering more than 10,000 gallons a day, <br />or one million gallons per year, requirements of Shoreland Management Ordinance <br />that must be addressed, stormwater techniques to decrease water runoff into protected <br />waters, trail connections encouraged, preservation of County Ditch 4 and suggested <br />development controls to protect erosion and preserve and enhance natural habitat. <br />The DNR was encouraged by the decrease in impervious surfaces proposed for the <br />area and has offered assistance in the process as development occurs. <br />4.4 Fredrikson & B_yron, P.A. (attOrnev representing the Regari Familv who are <br />owners of redevelopment area #7.1: The letter explains the desire of the property <br />owners to create a retail use within redevelopment area #7. Although nominal <br />comments were provided regarding the environmental impacts, the letter supports <br />retail uses based upon assurances that any impacts generated from that use could be <br />addressed by the property owners. <br />5.0 MITIGATION FACTORS <br />5.1 City consultant DSU has prepared the mitigation attached plan (Attachment #4) <br />addressing the comments of the above agencies and suggestions from staff to reduce <br />any negative environmental impact. These measures will be further reviewed and <br />explained in detail at the public hearing. <br />6.0 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT <br />6.1 Currently the Twin Lakes Master Plan area has a comprehensive plan designation of <br />both "Business" and "Industrial" (refer to e�sting comprehensive plan map <br />attached). <br />6.2 In 1994 a Twin Lakes Master Plan was adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan <br />but the land use designation was not officially changed. <br />6.3 With the renewed Twin Lakes Master Plan process that began in 7anuary of 2000, <br />staff is recommending that a new designation be created to help address and support <br />the land uses proposed in Redevelopment Scenario 1 and/or Scenario lA. ° <br />6.4 Staff recommends that a Comprehensive Plan `Business Park" designation be <br />approved for Twin Lakes. A Business Park is an office park with a mix of service <br />retail and housing that would serve as a more livable campus setting. It is defined as a <br />geographically identifiable area which contains an architecturally consistent mix of <br />office, office-laboratory, office-showroom-warehousing biotechnical, biomedical, <br />high-tech software and hardware production uses with support services such as <br />limited retail, healtl�, fitness, lodging and multifamily housing. The Business Park <br />has well-planned roads, utilities, ponding and communication systems. Parcels <br />within a Business Park have access to an internal parkway and/or external County <br />minor arterials as well as access to the Interstate Highway System. Emphasis is <br />placed on creating a unique, safe and high-quality work and play environment by <br />PF3232 — RCA(062601) Page 3 of 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.