Laserfiche WebLink
Don't have to worry about sewer and water for 15 years; sewer and water were installed <br />in his neighborhood 10 years ago. If the desire is to have a city that is looked up to by <br />residents and outsiders, then the plans have to be followed without making willy -nilly <br />changes. The residents made big investments in their property to have what they have <br />now and all of a sudden it's going to change. Mr. Stritesky talked about traffic; when <br />there is a school event there is traffic 500 feet on both sides of 151 The road is too <br />narrow to accommodate parking on both sides and 2 -way traffic without scraping door <br />handles. There are a lot of children that walk to school in the neighborhood. Parents <br />drive their kids to 151 and County Road #5, drop off their children, and turn around in <br />his driveway or make a `u' turn to go back home again. At least 20 cars turn around in <br />his driveway each day. He is very concerned that with the additional traffic, someone is <br />going to get hurt. Especially in the winter time; the entrance to Skyline is on a downhill <br />slope and it does get icy. <br />Joel Anderson — 6080 151 Lane N.W. — Inquired as to what constitutes changing the <br />zoning laws. <br />Chairperson Nixt replied that the criteria for a land use or zoning change was established <br />by City Council years ago. Council has also adopted an Interim Policy for <br />Comprehensive Plan amendments until the Comprehensive Plan is updated. Land use is <br />intended to go to the best and highest use. In this case, it could be argued that the best <br />and highest use, because of the presence of two major traffic corridors, is townhomes. <br />Land costs, yield in units, access to public facilities — all of those aspects drive land use <br />changes. In this particular case, there are townhomes to the northwest; there is a <br />developer interested in providing amenities that provide opportunity for higher density. <br />In some cases it is appropriate and in some cases it is not. There are also geographic <br />differences between the east and the west side of County Road #5. <br />Jeff Liftin — Minnesota Skyline Partners— Stated that they have made lots of concessions <br />and are proud of the plan they are presenting tonight. Density, traffic and a second access <br />were issues and the developer feels that they have been addressed in this plan. The <br />density is down to 5.2 units per acre and we may have to reduce it even more based on <br />Staff review letter. The traffic analysis revealed nothing out of the ordinary. The <br />school has issues but they can't be made the developer's issues. A second access was <br />important and it was obtained. <br />Bruce Chalupsky— LHB — Explained that they are not big developers and this site in an <br />opportunity for a signature development. Referred to the inquiry for a compelling reason <br />to change the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that he reviewed the Comprehensive Plan <br />as it relates to the Skyline development. Bruce presented exhibits (attached to these <br />minutes as Exhibits A through F). Exhibit A addressed Skyline Pointe as it relates to <br />general housing goals listed in the Comprehensive Plan. Exhibit B reflects how Skyline <br />Pointe fits the definition of medium density residential development in the <br />Comprehensive Plan. Exhibit C identifies that the type of development is compatible <br />with surrounding development that also reflects the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. <br />Exhibit D recalls the original plan for Skyline. Exhibit E represents plan changes based <br />