Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. March questioned whether Ground Development had considered other plans prior to presenting the <br />plans to the City. Mr. Sterm stated that they usually have one (1) plan they feel strongly about and not <br />several plans. <br /> <br />Commission Member Kilian questioned whether the residents to the north had been consulted as to <br />whether they wanted a trail running behind their property. Mr. Sterm said that they had not contacted <br />these residents, however, they would be willing to do so. <br /> <br />Chairperson Hanson questioned whether the. developer anticipated a traffic problem on Centerville Road <br />being the only access to the development. Mr. Sterm indicated a traffic study has not been completed, <br />but one could be done. Mr. Sterm also indicated he will be working with Anoka County with regards to <br />Centerville Road being the only access and additional road requirements needed. <br /> <br />Commission Member LaMotte questioned whether the development was contained in the MUSA. Mr. <br />Hannah indicated two thirds (2/3) of the development is contained in MUSA for 2001 and the final one <br />third (1/3) is contained in MUSA for 2005. Mr. LaMotte also questioned if the development would be <br />built in phases based on the MUSA line. Mr. Hannah stated it would be built in phases beginning with <br />those lots closest to Centerville Road. <br /> <br />Commission Member LaMotte questioned how Ground Development intended to handle the <br />development where the drainage ditches are concerned. Mr. Hannah indicated they were just made <br />aware of the ditches and would work with the City Engineer to comply with requirements and <br />recommendations of the City. <br /> <br />Mr. March stated that it would be the City's preference for temporary cul-de-sacs rather than pads for <br />turn-arounds based on the fact the turn-arounds in the past have been used for extra storage of boats and <br />vehicles rather than turn-arounds. <br /> <br />Council Liaison Broussard Vickers stated, as a property owner to the south of the proposed <br />development, she would prefer to have the cul-de-sac so that it would look like the road had ended. She <br />noted if the street appears to go through; off road vehicles, including snowmobiles, will go straight <br />through onto her property and she would prefer not to have that type of problem. <br /> <br />Commission Member DeVine questioned whether the City would require a park in the development. <br />Mr. March indicated the Parks and Recreation Commission had not meet on the issue but he thought <br />they would prefer a park dedication fee. <br /> <br />Commission Member LaMotte questioned the type of homes Ground Development anticipates building <br />in the development. Mr. Hannah stated they would use a diverse group of builders so there would be a <br />diverse type of homes. Mr. Hannah stated that it is their preference to have as many ramblers and <br />walkout ramblers as possible rather than split entry homes. He believes having ramblers rather than split <br />entry homes will enhance the value and appearance of the property. <br /> <br />Mr. Hannah provided a copy of the covenants and restrictions required in Ground Development's <br />development in the City of Independence. <br /> <br />Mr. March questioned how the developer intended to enforce the outside storage covenants and <br />restrictions. Mr. Hannah stated that the covenants are given to builders who in turn give them to the <br />property owners. Mr. Hannah stated he works in conjunction with the builder, the City and the property <br />owner to make sure outside storage complies with the developer's covenants and City ordinance. <br />Page 7 of 13 <br />