07-25-1983 CC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes July 25, 1983 Page Six the idea of a road running along the western most edge and the type of buffer housing. This posed a definite threat to the adjoining neighborhoods in the terms of traffic, noise, and litter. Many people spent countless hours trying to obtain an acceptable buffering plan. Finally, last November we thought we had that. Also, during all those discussions, it was stated that there would never be a road allowed along the western edge." "What we have before us tonight is a variation of this original plan. It's a scaled down roadway; it doesn't line up directly with existing neighborhood streets for future connections; it,is designed and intended only to move traffic thru the new housing, and it's being recommended that it be a private road. It would be much more acceptable if the low-density buffer housing was moved to the westernmost edge, and the road moved to flow between the low-density and higher density housing unit. I would also like it stipulated in'the Developer's Agreement that current dead-end neighborhood streets would not be opened up to move traffic into and out of the PUD area." "Our recently adopted policies on roads stipulated a minimum of 24' bituminous roads. While it allows for the establishment of new private roads, the intent was to allow these in rural areas where an individual is building a single house well off the beaten path. This City is well aware of the problems involving pri- vate roads. It would be a real compromise for me to officially give my approval because I don't think we are meeting the specified requirements of our ordinance in a straightforward manner. I've had numerous conversations with the City Admin- istrator, and I want to thank him for addressing my concerns as best he could, and for involving our City Planner, Zack Johnson." "From August through November of 1982, the Phasing Plan of the entire concept became a very 'critical tool that was used to obtain approval of the preliminary plat and it is a part of the conditional use permit. It came inDO play because of the objection to the proposed 105,000 sq. ft. of the main shopping center building. This much space far exceeded the projected needs of Elk River in and of itself without even taking into consideration existing and already approved new commercial area. This Phasing Plan was designed to have commercial and housing construction interact to justify each other. I was always veryileary that this Phasing Plan would be somewhat meaningless. In the 2 drafts of the thus-far unapproved Developer's Agreement, the stated Phasing Plan is somewhat different from the approved Phasing Plan. The difference is in allowing any or all housing as part of Phase I. Conceptually, that might be OK. However, to me that constitutes a change in the conditional use permit - a change from what the public heard approved at the public hearing. It bothers rue that this Phasing Plan is not being considered specifically tonight - especially with the varied housing types involved." "I have expressed these concerns to the City Administrator. He has addressed them to my satisfaction, I guess. That being that when any housing is built, it will either be: 1) All the low-density buffer housing, or 2) A complete west to east segment of both buffer and high density housing. If and when a Developer's Agreement is reviewed by the Council, this Phasing Plan would be firm. I think we should make this part of our consideration tonight, to alter the phasing to allow all housing in Phase lat the developer's discretion with the aforementioned stipulations. Then, there won't be any more surprises for anyone. Also, our Ordinance is quite specific in requiring a site plan. I was hoping to have one tonight. It makes me wonder how we can consider these changes without one."