Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Commissioner Trites Rolle stated along with the safety issue, this is located on a curve, which <br />only adds to the problem. This piece of property has a lot of challenges because of its location, <br />and there are multiple landowners. There is nothing the Commission can do to change that fact. <br /> <br />Acting Chairperson Levine noted the Commission directed the previous developer to see if there <br />was a way to work with the other properties in order to have a plan for the whole area instead of <br />piecemealed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Brauer commented Mr. Wellman had said that no one had contacted him, and that <br />he was more than willing to talk with the developer. He finds it interesting this was not done, <br />especially since it was specifically mentioned with the previous plat. The other thing <br />Chairperson Nixt brought up with the previous plat was the additional traffic this would generate. <br />The detached townhomes included in the previous plat would actually generate less traffic than <br />the to\\i11homes included in this plat. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski indicated a traffic analysis was completed with the GADS Prairie plat. <br />At that time it showed an additional 46 trips for the seven units. Using the same traffic <br />generation rate, these nine units would generate approximately 59 additional trips. <br /> <br />Commissioner Van Scoy expressed concern regarding the safety issue of the service road's <br />proximity to Nov..then Boulevard. He asked what type of screening would make this safe. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski indicated some things to consider for blocking the headlights would be <br />landscapjng, a privacy wall, and rubber headlight deflectors that are used on medians. He noted <br />this has been identified a number of times as an issue. <br /> <br />Commissioner Van Scoy asked who would be responsible for the screening and City Engineer <br />Jankowski replied screening \vould be the developer's responsibility. <br /> <br />Commissioner Brauer questioned why the road would be located next to Nowthen Boulevard, <br />rather than at the rear. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Daines replied there are other possibilities for this site. This is the preferred <br />alternative because the right-of-way can be shared with Nowthen Boulevard. In order to develop <br />this property with the 60 feet of right-of-way there would be a need for a series of variances for <br />front yard and side yard setbacks. Staff suggested the solution of sharing the right-of-way from <br />Nowthen Boulevard. Also, if the road were to be placed on the west side there would be <br />to\vnhomes on double frontage lots that would face Helium Street and have their backs to <br />Nowthen Boulevard. This does not seem like a preferred scenario in any way, shape or form <br />from staffs opinion, but it would be possible to do if all three of these property owners were to <br />get together. She does not feel this plat can be denied based on the developer compromising with <br />the adjacent property owners. The temporary cul-de-sac is being provided to allow access to <br />these properties in a better \vay than access is allowed currently. Some developer's have to give <br />a lot more of their property as a percentage to roads than this; this is 45 feet and it is less than the <br />standard. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/ February 1,2007 <br />Page 8 of 12 <br />