Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />ROSEVILLE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION <br />MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7, 2008 <br />ROSEVILLE CITY HALL ~ 6:30PM <br /> <br />PRESENT: <br /> Brodt Lenz, Johnson, Kamrath, Kruzel, Pederson, Ristow, Stark, Willmus <br />ABSENT: <br /> Hiber and Kendall notified staff ahead of time that they were unable to attend <br />STAFF: <br /> Brokke, Anfang <br /> <br /> INTRODUCTIONS/ROLL CALL/PUBLIC COMMENT <br />1. <br />No Public Comment <br /> <br /> APPROVAL OF MINUTES – JANUARY 3, 2008 MEETING <br />2. <br />Commission Recommendation:. <br /> Minutes for the January 3, 2008 meeting were approved unanimously <br /> <br /> TWIN LAKES – McGOUGH PROPOSAL <br />3. <br />Staff presented the McGough Development Proposal for Twin Lakes. The proposal involves the <br />redevelopment of the 26 acre PIK terminal site. Plans include two, six story office buildings, a lab and 2 <br />parking structures (3 and 4 stories each). Current site plans were reviewed by Brokke. <br /> <br />The proposed development borders Langton Lake Park. Tonight’s review and discussion is meant to address; <br /> <br /> <br />Access to the park for neighbors and the public <br /> <br /> <br />How are connections to the park best made <br /> <br /> <br />How does this development fit/work with the park <br /> <br /> <br />Consideration to whether the most appropriate park dedication for this project is land dedication or a <br />cash contribution <br /> <br />Following Brokke’s presentation, Carol Erickson (35 year Roseville Resident and Langton Lake Park neighbor) <br />shared her comments with the Commission. Erickson described how much neighbors love Langton Lake Park and <br />how many have been involved with the park since 1973. Carol questioned the “lab” description for a portion of the <br />development and wondered if this might actually be a manufacturing or warehouse site as there is not a recognized <br />occupant for this site. Erickson asked the Commission to consider the land dedication on this project to extend the <br />buffer between the buildings and the park. Carol also asked the Commission to be aware of and consider storm <br />water, drainage and lake issues as they review and evaluate this proposal. <br /> <br />Commission discussion followed; <br /> <br /> <br />Willmus reminded Commissioners that Twin Lakes Redevelopment has been going on for 25 years. <br />Willmus also voiced his concern over the lab/warehouse and its 20 foot set-back from the park. Willmus is <br />concerned by the amount of buffer between the development project and the park and would like to see an <br />increased buffer area considered. <br /> <br /> <br />Following some discussion on increased traffic, Ristow questioned what the difference is between cars <br />passing through Roseville on freeways and highways and traffic that enter Roseville to access businesses. <br />Ristow also added that we cannot continue to let the land sit vacant. <br />Following a spirited discussion, the commission was in agreement that they are interested in collaborative design <br />efforts that make the project work with the existing park and take into consideration environmental concerns. <br />Commissioners see the buffer between development and park as well as access to the park as the significant issues <br />in this redevelopment proposal. <br /> <br /> DEPARTMENT REVIEW <br />4. <br />Jill Anfang briefed the Commission on recent department operations and upcoming and recently hosted <br />programs and events. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />