Laserfiche WebLink
The traffic study which was completed on a school holiday is completely inaccurate as <br /> there was no regular school traffic on the intersections in the neighborhood to the two local <br /> schools. Although the city claims that 161 st is a minor arterial road, MnDOT defines an <br /> arterial road as one that provides high speed service for high traffic volumes with few <br /> access points. Metropolitan council further defines a major or minor arterial road as <br /> connecting cities and towns and containing signalized intersections from local roads. Both <br /> define a local road as mainly providing access to residential homes. This road provides <br /> service to residential homes and a park.and does not provide for high speed access nor is it <br /> situated to allow for high volume traffic no matter how many improvements are made on the <br /> road. The homes are too close to the right of way. The fact that there is a park on 161 st <br /> does not automatically make it an Arterial road. This will be a local residential road with all <br /> traffic from the school using it twice per day. All of that traffic will need to exit the local road <br /> through non signalized intersections. Locally we do not want to see this faulty traffic study <br /> lead to a situation that requires signals put in on 161 st Ave and variolite and 161 st Ave and <br /> Armstrong at taxpayer expense. A corrected traffic study during the week should be done. <br /> Will the applicant have to contribute to this? Will the city actually assess the school for this <br /> instead of the 8 homes on this road? <br /> The parking and dropoff and pickup plan is also lacking. The current plan is short spaces <br /> for anticipated needs and relies on sharing parking. That shared parking should also be <br /> formalized before moving forward with this plat. There also needs to be study into how <br /> many cars can queue in the parking lot for the anticipated pickup. Currently 161 st does not <br /> allow parking. If parking would be allowed it will be too narrow for emergency vehicles to <br /> use the road if needed. An opinion of the fire marshall should be obtained to account for <br /> that. <br /> Additionally the stormwater retention pond has several serious faults most of which have <br /> been commented on by staff but given the small amount of land left to correct sloping the <br /> applicant should show that they are capable of complying prior to having this plat move <br /> forward. Notably absent is an access road to clean out the retention pond as needed. <br /> Additionally the site still has not addressed snow storage and melting. There does not <br /> appear to be a plan in place to make sure that the water runoff does not enter onto 161 st <br /> Avenue creating a hazardous condition as can be seen from the park runoff that creates <br /> numerous potholes and a large puddle or ice hazard. The City should request that the <br /> applicant connect to the storm sewer on Variolite at its own cost if significant improvements <br /> are not made to the drainage on the site. <br /> Another issue with the stormwater pond is the potential for it to become an attractive <br /> nuisance to the neighboring children. It should be required to be enhanced with fencing to <br /> sufficiently deter the children of the adjacent residential neighborhoods and visitors to the <br /> adjoining park. Privacy fencing would go a long way toward making this safer and non- <br /> obtrusive to the neighborhood. <br />