Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Councilmember Menth asked if there is any appetite on the Council to suggest not providing funds <br />towards the turn lane. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove stated that she would agree with that but noted that during the last <br />session the consensus was to contribute. She stated that traditionally road improvements are a <br />developer cost. <br /> <br />Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that there was discussion and consensus to use 30 <br />percent as a guide for the City cost-share. He stated that this project by itself, 26 individual lots, <br />would not sustain a $200,000 turn lane improvement on its own. He stated that it would be difficult <br />for any residential project to sustain that. He stated that the demand for the turn lane is not just <br />because of this project but because of the existing traffic on the roadway. He stated that without <br />this project, the City would need to bear a larger portion of the cost in order to bring the <br />improvement forward. He stated that staff and the Planning Commission feel strongly that there <br />be a cost-share because the demand for this improvement is not solely based on the demand from <br />this project. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Chairperson Bauer stated that the Planning Commission had strong feelings <br />that the turn lane is needed. He noted that he previously lived north of that intersection for 13 <br />years and he would frequently be traveling north on Nowthen and would have to stop and wait to <br />turn with vehicles stacking behind him and others bypassing on the shoulder. He stated that there <br />was also recently an accident at that location. He noted that this is an existing problem now, <br />regardless of this development. He felt that the City should have a role in that turn lane. He stated <br />that to put the burden on the developer to solve a problem that already exists would not be fair to <br />the developer. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kuzma stated that there is a safety concern, especially with the recent accident <br />and therefore supports the 30 percent cost-share. <br /> <br />Councilmember Riley stated that he supports the comments of Chairperson Bauer that this is an <br />existing problem and believes that 30 percent would be an excellent cost-share. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove asked staff for details on who pays the cost for Saturday construction, <br />specifically whether there is a staff cost. <br /> <br />Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that there would not be a cost for Saturday construction <br />unless inspections are needed on that day. He stated that if an inspection is needed on a Saturday, <br />that weekend inspection fee would be paid by the developer. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Menth, seconded by Councilmember Kuzma, to Adopt Resolution <br />#20-205 Approving Final Plat and Development Agreement for Hampton Townhomes. <br /> <br />Further discussion: Councilmember Specht stated that he now recalls the previous discussion on <br />this topic and asked if the 30 percent cost-share would be acceptable by the developer. Jason Bebo, <br />developer, stated that without doing the math he does not see the project being feasible at that rate. <br />Councilmember Specht asked what the developer would believe to be feasible for a cost-share. <br />City Council / September 22, 2020 <br />Page 10 of 14 <br /> <br />