Minutes - Council - 08/14/2007 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

".' '.- "'.-' . -'" .-. .,....'- -,,_., " :.-:', properties to the north at1d prepared purchaseagreell1ents'eqw.valent to' theappralsedvaluef'or the parcels. The offers were declined.' '." Assistant Community Development Director Frolik stated the applicant isptoPcosing 7 detached townhomes. The property is zoned R-2 Medium Density ~esidential,,,,,hich'~llows up to 7 units per acre. The overall density of the project is 4.1. units per a,cre. Beca.usedetached townhomes were not defined in City.Code when the preliminary plat was cOl1sidered, a PUD rezoning was. processed and approved for this site. The units are a mix. of single-level and two-level homes. Detailed building elevations have been submitted and are. included in the packet. Ms. Frolik stated' one of the comments in the Staff Review Letter, revised}une 23; 2006, noted that any City approvals are contingent upon addressing t4e access and traffic concerns of the County. However, the County failed to submit comments regarding this plat until May 7,.2007. In this letter, the County outlines its standard concerns with ,developments proposing access. onto a County Road. Ms. Frolik stated this siteis challenged, with no alternative accesses except via the County Road at this time. The proposed development adds 7 additional homes on the existing single-fa,mily access and increases the number of vehicles on County Road 5. However, seeing no viable alternative for gaining access to the site, the County has agreed to permit access. onto the COunty RQad with the contingency that if others to the north develop, the p~operti~swill gain their access through the GAD's Prairie development and all existing accesses vyillbe removed. The applicant has complied with City Council requirements to make a validattempttodevelop the properties as one project and has revised the. plat to accommodate a full cul-de-sac on his property. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the final plat, contingent upon the City Staff Review Letter dated May 18, 2007 and the Developer entering into a Development Agreemel1t that specifically requires.the elimination of the County Road access at such a time that the temporary cul-de-sac is extended to connect to 146thAvenue. Mayor Gamec pointed out that there has been a lot of wOl'kwith this. This developer has done.a lot, and the Council asked the developer to work with the other developers. . Councilmember Elvig stated he is still struggling with the civic responsibility. ,There will be the same number of cars on the street on County Road 5; that is not an issue. Thejssue is where the cars will get on and off .and.how many accesses there are. He 'still struggles with the civic responsibility of whether this is okay at this time. The developer has done a good job and ~taff has worked to get people in the room at the same time with knqwledge of costs and 9Pportunities, which he believes was a good solid move. They are at a dead .end but he still st1'uggles with the responsibility and what the safety hazard may imply. Councihnember. Jeffrey stated his position has not changedbn.. this. The, safetY of this is probably his number one concern. Yesterda.y he was goingd()Wn County RoadS and turned on his right blinker to turn right. on 146th. A car in front of him turned left on 146th and a . car decided to pass them both on the right. He stated there is a bypass.lane onthe streetprior to this entrance. He does notthipk it is safe for cars to.be dumping onto County Road'S. The product looks fine, his concern relates to safety. City Council I~u~st!~, 2007 . Page 1'0 of3Z'/