Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Harlicker <br />October 16, 2002 <br />Page Two <br /> <br />Another issue that we discussed with the developer and his engineer was the location of <br />sidewalks throughout the project. Based on this discussion, sidewalks have now been <br />added on both sides of all public streets, although in some cases, the sidewalks are <br />located outside of the public rights-of-way. In addition, sidewalks are shown around Block <br />1 and Block 3 of the townhouse units, which are located on the north side of the project. <br />One issue yet to be decided would be who maintains the sidewalks adjacent to the public <br />streets: the City Street Department or the Townhouse Association. <br /> <br />The two most recent submittals, the Preliminary Site Plan/PUD and Concept Commercial <br />Plan, are in conflict with one another. Some of these conflicts are as follows: <br /> <br />· Driveway locations shown differently on each of the plans. <br />· Parking areas segregated on one plan while combined on another plan. <br />· There is no ponding shown on either plan for the area west of Twin Lakes Road. <br />· The Concept Commercial Plan shows a layout for property on the west side of Twin Lakes <br /> Road, which we understand is not owned by the developer. <br />· The proposed access into the site on the east side of Twin Lakes Road does not line up <br /> with the existing access into the MnDOT park and ride facility on the west side of Twin <br /> Lakes Road. <br />· Both of these plans, the Concept Commercial Plan and the Preliminary Site Plan/PUD <br /> show Street A accessing Twin Lakes Road at a full access intersection, providing for left <br /> turns into Street A and left turns onto Twin Lakes Road. This is not acceptable; Street A <br /> must be a right-in/right-out only. <br /> <br />The Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for this development has been revised, <br />reviewed and approved by City staff. We believe it is still in the period of public comment. <br />From an engineering standpoint, the major change in the EAW caused by the change in <br />usage from the original proposal for Elk River Station is a much lower traffic count. The <br />current proposal of this property will generate traffic that can be handled by the two access <br />points shown, one being full movement at the southwest comer of the site, and the other a <br />right-in/right-out at the northwest comer of the site. <br /> <br />If you have any questions regarding this information, please call. <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />Howard R. Green Company <br /> <br />TJM:sgw <br /> <br />Ltr-101602-Harlicker <br /> <br />Howard R, Green Qompany <br /> <br /> <br />