Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />Josh Fuhreck, 14573 Bowers Drive, thanked Capstone for their efforts on this project. He stated <br />that overall, this is a good project and the developer has given consideration to the unique forestry <br />environment that exists on the property. He stated that overall, he supports the project, but he does <br />not support the Bowers Drive connection. He stated that the public safety concerns mentioned <br />have an extremely remote possibility of occurring. He noted that if the connection is provided to <br />allow the additional pedestrian traffic on the narrow roadway of Bowers Drive, that would create <br />a much more likely and real safety concern. He stated that it would be very unlikely that a tree <br />would fall, and an emergency situation would occur at the same time, noting that has not happened <br />once in 80 years. He stated that the City’s survey was extremely slanted, mentioning only the City <br />points and a statement that said if you do not respond we will assume you favor the connection. <br />He presented a survey of 85 homes, noting that 60 residents responded in opposition of the <br />connection to Bowers Drive. He asked the Council to consider the survey he presented rather than <br />the survey completed by the City. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove asked what the area between the homes is right now. <br /> <br />Mr. Fuhreck stated that currently it is a strip of land between two homes and one would assume <br />that the land belongs to one of the two adjacent homes. He confirmed that the area is not mowed <br />or maintained. <br /> <br />James Wadey, 14447 Bowers Drive, stated that he is one of the homes adjacent to the proposed <br />access connection. He echoed the comments of the previous two speakers. He stated that when <br />he purchased his home two years ago there was no indication that there would be a road and it was <br />shown as an outlot. He stated that they asked Capstone the plans for the outlot and there was never <br />a mention of a road connection. He stated that they signed the survey in opposition of the road. <br />He agreed that the pedestrian traffic is already heavy with Bowers Drive residents and opening the <br />secondary access would bring additional security concerns. He stated that there are a number of <br />studies that show opening up a cul-de-sac has a detrimental impact on burglary. He commented <br />that the City was never transparent through the channels he had available when he purchased his <br />home about a potential road connection. <br /> <br />Carol Larson, 14480 Bowers Drive, stated that she has lived on Bowers Drive for 56 years and has <br />seen a lot of changes. She stated that she appreciates that they have been isolated from a lot of the <br />changes in Ramsey. She noted that she anticipated that there would be development on the <br />Capstone property and Riverstone South and therefore does not object to that development. She <br />stated that she does object to placing a roadway between two homes that were not alerted to that <br />possibility. She stated that those homes would lose all privacy and they would have chosen other <br />lots would they have known that. She stated that she has submitted several things to the Council <br />in written form. She explained that if you go down Bowers Drive in the winter the driveways are <br />plowed but the snow is yellow and brown because of the dogs in the area and did not want to see <br />additional dogs being walked on the road. She commented that vehicles travel on Bowers Drive <br />and adding additional pedestrian traffic would seem to be the opposite of increasing public safety. <br />She believed that the one access should be provided from Highway 10. <br /> <br />City Council / September 8, 2020 <br />Page 7 of 10 <br /> <br />