Laserfiche WebLink
14) <br /> <br />~5) <br /> <br />16) <br /> <br />19) <br /> <br />20) <br /> <br />22) <br /> <br />but the concept they would like to present would be for 133 units, plus or minus 10 or 15 <br />units. <br />Ms. Horn noted that currently there is an easement for a bike path from the property to <br />connect to 145th, which is something she would not like to see. Mr. Feges replied that <br />those types of issues are not in control of the developer if the City has an interactive trail <br />plan. City Administrator Norman noted that City Code does require sidewalks and trails. <br />Some residents stated that if they keep delaying projects for the site they would end up <br />with a bad project. Some of the residents felt that they were being proposed a quality <br />project. <br />It was questioned if fences would be permitted within the development. Mr. Feges <br />replied that the fence would have to meet architectural standards. <br />Ms. Horn stated that she would like to know what the property lines would be in <br />comparison to the existing homes. Mr. Feges explained that the plat presented was not <br />done to scale. He stated that if the lots are 100 feet deep the typical location would be 30 <br />to 50 feet from the rear yard. <br />Residents questioned the size of the interior roads. Mr. Feges explained that the passage <br />roads would be the traditional size roads, the alleys are typically 18 feet to accommodate <br />bypass traffic. The development will include a combination of private and public roads <br />and they will have to comply with all of the parking requirements. <br />Residents questioned if there would be an option for a single car garage and would there <br />be more than one builder in the development. Mr. Feges replied that the units would be <br />designed with two car garages with the option of a three-car garage. There will only be <br />one developer. <br />Mr. Feges stated that if there is a consensus that the proposed development might be a <br />good neighbor then they could proceed onto the next step. He noted that he understood <br />that the residents largest concern is the bait and switch concept. He stated that working <br />with Mr. McDonald, what they see is what they will get. If conceptually the development <br />is something the residents would like to see in the neighborhood then it would give them <br />the feeling to spend money and proceed with the project. The residents expressed that it <br />is very important for them to meet with the developer. Residents questioned what the <br />price would be on the top end. Mr. Feges replied $300,000 to $350,000. <br />The majority consensus of the residents was to proceed to the next step, noting that it was <br />not a final approval. <br />Residents questioned what the double units would look like. Mr. Feges explained that <br />they would probably look like a large house with two entries to break up the <br />repetitiveness. The residents replied that they did not know that that would be <br />acceptable. Mr. Feges replied that those are things that they will have to look at further <br />as part of the overall plan. <br />Residents inquired if the development would comply with the current zoning. Mr. Feges <br />replied no, noting it would require a planned unit development. City Administrator <br />Norman noted that the developer could enter into a neighborhood agreement that can be <br />added to the subdivision agreement and become a legal document. <br />Direction was given to schedule a meeting for one month. <br /> <br />Neighborhood Meeting/May 30, 2002 <br /> Page 3 of 4 <br /> <br /> <br />