My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 10/06/2005
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2005
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 10/06/2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 9:38:02 AM
Creation date
9/30/2005 11:48:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
10/06/2005
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.
/
314
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
Street is opened up as a through street between the two neighborhoods. Also, the Commission <br />was agreeable to the alternate trail alignment along the south boundary of the property. Staff is <br />requesting a decision from the City CounciI regarding the construction of Traprock Street as a <br />through street in conjunction with phase 3 of the development plan, or when redevelopment <br />~)ccurs in Traprock Commons and to what intensity. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated he will be abstaining fi.om the discussion and vote on this case. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec indicated his preference in waiting to construct Traprock Street as a through <br />street. He noted an easement has been provided and there are two accesses to Variolite Street <br />currently. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cook questioned if the Traprock extension was included in the traffic analysis. <br /> <br />Ms. Frolik replied the Traprock extension was not considered in the traffic assessment. <br /> <br />May(Jr Gamec suggested the blind intersection on Variolite Street Coming up towards 161st be <br />reviewed. <br /> <br />Councihnember Jeffrey indicated his preference in waiting to construct Traprock Street as a <br />through street. <br /> <br />Councihnember Cook stated it is not necessary to connect Traprock Street at this time. His <br />concern is relating to these roads being put in as dead end streets wiih barricades for the <br />exclusive purpose of allowing future roads to go through. He does not want to set a precedent of <br />not proceeding with the roads. <br /> <br />Councihnember Strommen noted the street is clearly marked as a future street extension and <br />shows the City's intent. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec asked if the City black tops and stubs these dead end streets or if an escrow is <br />collected. <br /> <br />Public Works Director Kapler stated it is a pleasure to look at a development with this many <br />accesses. It is not a big loss not to connect Traprock Street at this time, but he would suggest a <br />sign be posted stating that it will be a through street in the future. He indicated there have been <br />examples of both the City paying and an escrow being collected with the blacktopping. <br /> <br />Assistant Public Works Director 01son indicated in this case if black top is put in to the property <br />line they would be very close to the existing cul-de-sac and it would be used by people. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Trudgeon advised in every development with a stub street a <br />sigu is posted that states it will be a future through street. <br /> <br />Councihnember Olson inquired if there is any possibility of connecting the two developments <br />with a trail that would allow bike access. <br /> <br />City Council / August 23, 2005 <br /> Page 17 of 28 <br /> <br />P33 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.