CC 11-26-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 26,2001 12 . Mr. Jim Paulet, 1285 Wyncrest Court, stated the City Engineer's report should be seriously considered. He noted the City Engineer felt the road should be designated as a public road. He added the applicants had stated the development was consistent with the neighborhood. He stated that if that were true there would be room for a public road. He noted Mr. Goserud stated he did not have the opportunity to purchase access to Wyncrest Court. He added he knew of a neighbor that would dispute that. He stated that if a hardship was an issue, he thought it should be investigated. He noted two of the homes were existing homes on Amble Road. He added that only two of the homes were a new development. He stated that in terms of hardship, both of the applicants have had an opportunity to develop their sites with access to Amble Road or Wyncrest Court in the past. Ms. Diane Gibson,1297 Wyncrest Court, stated she had nothing to add. She noted she shared all the concerns about safety and flooding. She added it was her understanding that both residents had options to have an access. Ms. Maravelas stated Hamline A venue has really become a war zone to try to get off and on to. She noted none ofthe streets line up so there is no logical place to put in a stop light. She added the cars rev up for the ramp so the speeding there is atrocious. . She stated it is way below the standard for a county road. Councilmember Larson stated he certainly could not support the concept plan as proposed given the City Engineer's comments and the comments from the Fire Department. He noted that at the same time, this area is landlocked. He added that it was part of the city that could be developed although perhaps not to the intensity shown here. He stated this configuration is the wrong one. He noted he was not sure there is a right one. He noted the applicants should be given the opportunity to review it again. He added if the applicants wish to go forward, it would be worthwhile to look at it. He stated he lived next to an empty lot for five years and he loved it. He noted the lot was eventually developed and it was sad. He added it was the owner's right to develop that property. He stated it was not totally fair to the current property owners to say they would not develop the land because the neighbors like the open space there. Councilmember Aplikowski stated landowners do have certain rights. She noted she could not support this level of development. She added she was supportive of a modified plan with a cul-de-sac at the end. She stated she did not think it was a reasonable response to say the owners had a chance for an access 20 years ago and that was their only chance. She notes she could understand concerns about the loss of open space. She added her neighbor built a fence that destroyed her view. She stated she would like to say go back to the drawing board. She noted she was not against . doing something, but this is too much. Councilmember Grant stated he lived in an area with a meadow in the back. He noted he could relate to some of the comments, but Councilmember Larson expressed it