Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 10/10/2001

Home

City Attorney Goodrich replied that it would be legal if the developer chose to do that, but the Court order allows the developer to have lots ora minimum of 10,800 square feet. Councilmember Anderson stated that she preferred Option B being that there are five cul-de-sacs and five through streets. She did not think a neighborhood should be "wailed off". As a resident of the existing neighborhood she has some concern that in the future they will be unable to get out onto T.H. #47 because of the increase of traffic so it is very likely that the e,,dstmg nei~Sborhood will need to get access to 153"~ Avenue. The proposed through streets to the north were designed as through streets years ago and should stay that way. The property has been placed inside the M'USA area and she does not know of many developers who would want to develop one acre lots. The proposed density of the development is 2. i units per acre. It seemed to her that Centex has tried to make some accommodation to the east and west of the development so that it will be a minimum impact on the existing homeowners. She hoped that Centex would salvage as many trees by moving them to the perimeter edges where existing neighbors are more heavily impacted. Councilmember Hendriksen inquired as to what they Mayor was ~ ' o =om= to do about density transitioning. Mayor Gamec replied that he is unable to do anything in this case because of a Court order, but he is willing to continue working on a density transition ordinance. Councilmember Hendriksen responded that what the City is saying that if a developer chooses to sue the City the Council would be prohibited fi'om discussing density transitioning. He suggested that the Council get a density transition ordinance in place that is meaningful. City Engineer Olson stated that a question was brought forward regarding the sewer and water trunk fees including the storm sewer projects. AlSer some research he did find out that due to the nature of the preliminary plat they have not completely come up with the sewer and water extensions costs. Roughly there will be $210,000 in costs that would be attributable to the developer off-site. Council.member Hendriksen stated that easy explanation is that the plat does not call out the amount of storm storage that does not have an outlet to the Rum R/ver. If they are to provide an outlet to the Rum River there is about $130,000 in cost they don't have a funding source for. City Engineer O[son reviewed the drainage plan of the site, which include an overflow for the interior development. The $130,000 is for the positive overflow, but there is also a benefit to the City because of the park and low [and. At this time staff did not have the particulars of where the money would be coming from, but in other developments in the City the issue was handled in detail in the development a~eement and any additional costs were born by the developer. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that earlier in the Finance Committee they were wrestling with a situation where the City did not develop an outlet for the drainage pond in Business Park City Council/September i1, 2001 Page 10 of 22