Minutes - Council - 05/22/2007 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Associate Planner DaInes responded in the affirmative. She stated staff maintains that a public road is required to go through these properties no matter what, and that the cul-de-sac would take up a lot more right-of-way than a simple through street. Mayor Gamec commented that approving this would get the sale of the other two properties quicker; it is impossible to deal with one of those particular property owners. Associate Planner DaInes stated the County has said that only one access will be granted for these three properties. Councilmember Strommen stated as she recalls, when they first looked at GAD's Prairie the Council sent it back for the applicant to work with the landowners to the north regarding the access and they were unable to come to an agreement. She reluctantly went along with this because there was not an option to the master plan. The City cannot force the landowners to work together and they ran into the situation of whether this property owner will be held hostage since this could not be worked out with the adjacent landowners. Councilmember Elvig stated these folks are almost landlocked from that standpoint. This project is suitable and nice; he likes the appearance and the elevations. He questioned if but not for the City whether the person to the north will move on the property, and if there is some sentiment that if the road is put in the adjacent landowner will not have to pay to help bring it all the way over. Associate Planner DaInes stated the property owner to the north already received a letter from the County giving him access, but in other developments roads have been stubbed in with cul-de- sacs. The property is one acre and if there is a public road put in, which the City requires, with a public cul-de-sac, there will not be any land left. However, if they extend the road from the south 45 feet, which is a reduced right-of-way, that is much less land being required for roads and a better situation in staff s opinion. Councilmember Look commented with the layout of the church's land and the proximity to the street this could pretty much reduce their land to being useless. Associate Planner DaInes stated she has spoken with various people interested in that property about possible configurations on the road, and she believes the City is not taking the development rights from one property to give to another. Regardless, a development would have to include a public street, and if the property to the north would like to develop next month they would have the same requirement as this development. If the property in the middle came forward the road could connect. Staff is trying to come up with the most viable solution to give property rights to the person whose property is currently zoned R-2 and has submitted a proposal. Councilmember Elvig commented the possibility is that this project goes forward as it is for a period of time, and if the church to the north wants access to 146ili they can access that. A project could be done with a ghost road that would tie these projects together. That would City Council / May 22, 2007 Page 16 of 24