Laserfiche WebLink
maintained. Mr. March noted there is an issue with a trail coming from Chauncy Barrot <br /> Gardens connecting to the subdivision between units 2 and 3. Mr. March noted there is , <br /> aLso an issue with unit 3's building pad encroaching into the easement. <br /> Mr. Rawlings noted the trail would connect to a private road. He then asked if the City <br /> has authorization to revert the road to a public road. <br /> Ms. Jean Davis, 1764 Ojibway Drive, stated she did not know when she bought her home <br /> that the road was private. She then expla.ined that since the street is not on the map of <br /> Centerville it took the post office three weeks to find her. Whenever she receives <br /> deliveries they are delayed because they aren't able to find her. <br /> Mr. Larry Boerner, 7014 Dupre Road, questioned why they are stuck with private roads. <br /> Mr. Quigley explained tha.t private roads are quite common in townhome developments. <br /> He then noted the private road infom�ation was on the plat from the beginning, and on the <br /> plat in the sales office. <br /> Mrs. Peterson, 7065 Dupre Road, noted the original plat showed Ojibway Drive going <br /> through and exiting on Meadow Lane, not as a cul-de-sac. Mr. Quigley explained that it <br /> was requested at a previous meeting that Ojibway end in a cul-de-sac. Mrs. Peterson <br /> stated she did not want a cul-de-sac. I <br /> I <br /> Mr. Brian Cazlson, 1771 Meadow Lane, questioned the type of trees to be planted as a I <br /> screen from Parkview. He then noted the building with units 7 and 8 would be very close ' <br /> to his backyard and asked that the building be moved forward ten (10) or more feet to <br /> provide more privacy. I <br /> Commissioner McLean noted the City Engineer had recommended the building be <br /> moved ten (10) ar twenty (20) feet forward to provide more privacy to the home on <br /> Meadow Lane. ' <br /> Chairperson Hanson read the rest of the recommendations of the City Engineer <br /> concerning the preliminary plat for Eagle Pass 2° Addition. Mr. Quigley stated he would <br /> look at all the issues raised and noted the screening was done as a request during the <br /> sketch plan phase. <br /> Mr. Jim Juhl, 1825 Voyager Court, questioned if the density for the new development is <br /> the same as his .Association. He noted that Lot 6, Block 2 is realiy close to the last unit <br /> on his street. Mr. Quigley stated he thought the density is less than the original <br /> development and noted there are fewer units than originally planned. <br /> Mr. March requested the developer's response to the easement between Lots 2 and 3, <br /> Block 1, Mr. Quigley stated he felt it was appropriate to plat over an easement line. Mr. <br /> March explained the edge of the house would be built adjacent to the easement, which is <br /> not a desirable situation. <br /> Page 3 of 12 <br />