My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 04-26-1999
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1999
>
CCP 04-26-1999
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:15:23 PM
Creation date
11/13/2006 11:17:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
163
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - MARCH 29,1999 <br /> <br />DRAFT 10 <br /> <br />Mayor Probst stated that, in his opinion, the Official Map should be maintained as is. If this <br />requires the allowance of a temporary condition, it would be acceptable. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Mr. Rekuski noted that the Bachman property has access to Shoreline Lane, by way of the <br />temporary cul-de-sac, as well as access to Lake Lane and Lexington Avenue. He indicated that <br />if, in the future, the Bachman property were to develop and the owner wanted Shoreline Lane to <br />be brought through, it could be since this proposed development will have only four homes. At <br />this time it may be best to provide temporary access and wait to see what happens with the <br />Bachman property in the future. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson stated that he would not favor changing the Official Map. He noted that <br />the City and Staffhave indicated that, for a variety of reasons, it would be best to have a through <br />road, rather than cul-de-sacs. By allowing the Official Map to remain as is and creating two <br />small cul-de-sacs, this results in exactly what the City does not want. If the situation is likely to <br />continue for a lengthy period of time in the future, not only is the City getting what it does not <br />want, it would be getting cul-de-sacs which are smaller than the City allows. <br /> <br />Mr. Rekuski noted that there are other places within the City of Arden Hills with 50 foot cul-de- <br />sacs. Councilmember Larson stated these are not as desirable as the 60 foot cul-de-sacs for the <br />purpose of turn arounds for school buses and other large vehicles. For this reason the City <br />wishes to discourage cul-de-sacs and encourage through streets. <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson stated that he ultimately wants to maintain the possibility for the <br />Bachman property to be subdivided into two parcels and a through street being constructed. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Councilmember Malone concurred with Councilmember Larson. He noted that the original <br />objective of the Official Map was to ensure the ability to develop the land. He indicated that he <br />would not be inclined to change the Official Map since there are utilities in place. Unfortunately, <br />the only option at this time may be to allow the temporary cul-de-sacs. He pointed that, even if <br />smaller cul-de-sacs are constructed this will at least allow a turn around area and it protects the <br />easements. <br /> <br />Councilmember Malone stated that there have been other times when temporary cul-de-sacs have <br />been allowed within the City. He asked Staff if it would be acceptable for a temporary cul-de- <br />sac with a 50 foot radius. Mr. Ringwald stated that Staff would support this option. He <br />suggested that the cul-de-sac be extended to the north property line so the pavement is extended <br />to the property line. This will eliminate gaps in the pavement and make any future changes to <br />the road easier. Mr. Rekuski agreed to this suggestion. <br /> <br />Mr. Rekuski noted that he had spoken with the Rice Creek Watershed District and the only <br />comments he received were to add additional ponding. <br /> <br />Councilmember Aplikowski asked the applicant which lot would be eliminated from his <br />proposal. Mr. Rekuski stated that lot three would be removed and merged into lot two. With the - <br />temporary cul-de-sac, lot three would not be large enough to build without a variance. For this .. <br />reason he would prefer to include the land from lot three with lot two. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.