My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 08/28/2001
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2001
>
Agenda - Council - 08/28/2001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 12:26:55 PM
Creation date
9/4/2003 2:30:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
08/28/2001
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.
/
472
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
I <br /> I <br />'1 <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> .I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br />'1 <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson stated that he felt that the developer has been accommodating and the <br />other people were not interested because they were going to sell. He inquired if there was a way <br />to mitigate the concern.that has been expressed along Ute Street. <br /> <br />Mr. Blake replied that there has been some discussion regarding a buffer strip, but it is difficult <br />for him representing his company to give up a bunch of land so the people to the north requested <br />that they purchase the land. In the area of Ute Street that would be more difficult to do. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson inquired if the developer was open to some consideration to a bike path <br />concept in the area. <br /> <br />Mr. Blake replied that he would be open to that discussion, but many people don't want a bike <br />path in their backyard. He noted that the new neighborhood will have covenants on their lots <br />which will be quite significant. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson questioned the developers opinion on removing the through street at Ute <br />Street. <br /> <br />Mr. Blake replied that it would have no impact to Centex other than making the connection at <br />Waco Street more important. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt stated that he thought the estimated trips at Ute Street were artificially high. <br /> <br />Mr. Corkle noted that the typical household.'Mll have ten trips per day and the' Ute Street <br />connection would serve primarily the homes on the cul-de-sac. <br /> <br />Commissioner Watson stated that if 80 percent of the traffic would be heading south, why is it <br />feasible to have 410 vehicles going west on 155th Lane. He suggested connecting the two cul-de- <br />sacs in the southern part of the development and m.aking another exit onto 153rd from the <br />development. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski stated that the traffic consultant has indicated that some of the traffic <br />might go down Waco Street to 142''d Avenue and if that is the case he would urge that something <br />be done to discourage that route. There is already over 1,000 cars at the intersection of Waco <br />Street and 142"d Avenue. He recommended reconfiguring the deyelopment so that the main <br />access would come off Xkimo Street and then cubde-sac Waco Street at 153rd Avenue. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson stated that the area of Ute Street is having the largest impact by the <br />development and felt that the street should be left .as. a cul-de-sac to try and minimize their <br />impact. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt stated that he would like to see as much traffic contained within the <br />development and discourage as much traffic as possible from going east to west. <br /> <br />Planning. Commission/July 12, 2001 <br /> Page 17 of 23 <br /> <br />-41- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.