05-27-2003 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . Planning Commission Minutes May 27,2003 Page 7 stated that he felt the development was a good transition between the businesses along Highway 10 and the single family residential. He explained that the townhome association would maintain the wedands. Mr. Sanford discussed the connection of the road with Big Lake Township, where trees would be preserved and additional trees planted, and the location of the proposed park He indicated where sidewalks would be installed. Judy Thompson, 14122 182nd Avenue, stated that it was her understanding that the Gty placed a moratorium on townhomes because there were too many being built. She stated that she did not feel that density of this plat created a transition between the single family and highway. She asked how many single-family homes are included in the plat. Mr. Harlicker stated that there are 15 single-family homes proposed along the southern boundary of the plat. Ms. Thompson asked that the Planning Commission deny the plat. ?? Kelly Barry, 14415183rdth Avenue, stated that she did not receive a notice of the public hearing. He stated that he owns the property to the west from 183rd to the south end of the proposed plat. She expressed concerns with the impact on wedands and the high water table. She asked the Commission to deny the plat. Mark Fuslet, 182nd Avenue, stated that he moved to Elk River 1 ~ years ago to get away from the city. He stated that he felt it is mandatory to show a need for additional housing in order to approve a zone change to multiple family. He stated that the public has not been shown what type of townhomes will be built. He felt there doesn't appear to be a need for this type of housing and asked that the Planning Commission deny the request. Tom Warner, 14189145th Street, Big Lake Township, stated the he asked Big Lake Township if they were aware of this plat and was told they were not aware. He explained Mr. Warner stated that this plat could potentially be dumping up to 300 vehicles a day onto their rural Big Lake Township road. He was aware the township wanted the road to be connected for fire access. Mr. Warner stated that when the frontage road along Highway 10 is connected, a large amount of traffic would end up on their rural township road. He stated that the road is narrow and not designed to handle the additional traffic, and that residents would end up being assessed for improvements. A petition signed by the residents of Royal Oaks Estates will be presented to Big Lake Township Board on Wednesday, May 28th, requesting that the Board not allow extension of the road, stating that the does not benefit the residents, and asking for the use of knock-down barriers to provide emergency access. The residents feel that if the street is connected, the Gty of Elk River should pay for the cost of the improvements to their road in Big Lake Township, as well as providing a pedestrian pathway. Mr. Warner noted that the Big Lake Township residents were not notified of the public hearing until Saturday, May 24th. Heath Peterson, 18285 Yankton Street, asked if a berm was being proposed as in the first plat proposal. Mr. Sanford stated that no berm is being proposed and that the buffer of trees on the southern boundary of the plat will be left instead. Mr. Peterson asked what the price range would be for the townhomes. He expressed his concern for the additional traffic this plat would create. Mabel Schultz, 14494 County Road 30, Big Lake Township, stated that she did not receive her notice of the public hearing until Saturday, May 24m. She stated she did not feel the proposed plat fits in the rural residential setting. She stated that her family owns 80 acres and is zoned agricultural. Ms. Schultz expressed concerns regarding tree loss, runoff, the impact on existing wells, increased traffic, and the potential for snowmobiles and 4-wheelers coming onto their property.