2011_0808_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment F 14,14, Further discussion included the timing of the traffic study and trends for a.m./p.m. peak traffic 145 with little change in those trends based on summer traffic accessing Lake Josephine; 146 commendation to staff for the environmental work on this plat and for application of the Tree 4 7' Preservation Plan; and apparent gaps in the berm for the private property with the drainage 148 easement. 149 Developer, Ian Peterson, VP of Land for Pulte Homes 50 Mr. Peterson reviewed the area in question on private property and appearing to be a gap. Mr. 51 Peterson referenced staff's Condition 7.b regarding limiting fences to preserve the integrity of 52 the storm water treatment areas; and the developer suggesting one deviation along Lexington 5'3 Avenue to bridge that gap and avoid access of the public onto private property by installing a 54 fence across that easement area,, to be owned and maintained by the Homeowner's Association, 55 with the understanding that it could be removed or replace in order to repair the pipe, at the 56 Homeowner Association's expense. Mr. Peterson opined that this would allow continuity as 5 7' well with the proposed four foot (4'), fence and retaining wall along Lots 9, 10 and I I - and 58 agreed that no stone columns would be installed on that easement. 59 Discussion among City Councilmembers and Mr. Peterson included the extensive drop-off on 60 the western elevation along County Road C-2 and their intent to address that grade through with 61 level driveways off County Road C-2 and walk-out home designs for those lots, in addition to 62 fill; removal of the existing billboard on the northeast comer of the property as part of the 6'3 purchase transaction, with the advertiser already given notice for removal, pending City action &4 on the Final Plat and subsequent land purchase; and aesthetics of the proposed four foot (4'), 65 fence and its common theme rather than each individual homeowner having their own choice of 66 fence. 6 7, Further discussion included proposed property covenants and timing for their administration with 68 the Association based on occupancy levels and addressing interior and exterior requirements; and 69 targeted price ranges for the six (6), different options and floor plans at approximately $,430,000. 7'0 Public Comment 7'1 Written comment via e-mail was received from Jeffrey Strobeck, 1297 West County Road C-2 7'2 (opposed to opening County Road C-2); Gerald McDonald 2857 Dellwood Avenue (opposed to 7`3 opening County Road C-2); Scott Cummings, 1175 Josephine Road in support of opening T14 County Road C-2); Richard Skaggs, 1160 Josephine Road (comments related to drainage 7'5 infrastructure), were provided by staff as bench handouts, attached hereto and made a part hereof 7'6 Pam Newcome, 1245 Josephine Road 7 . .... 7' Ms. Newcome noted her attendance at the March Planning Commission meeting and the robust 7'8 discussion held on whether or not to open County Road C-2; and subsequent advisement by the 7'9 Commission that County Road C-2 would not be part of the discussion of this development, but 80 was a separate issue. Ms. Newcome expressed her frustration that the Traffic Study was not 81 available on the City's website. 82 Ms. Newcome questioned the traffic study's methodology of current observation predicting 8'3 future use; questioned traffic patterns and possible alternative routes and distribution for 110 cars &4 per day; their rate; and her assertion that Josephine Road residents were being overburdened and 85 bearing the brunt of east/west traffic from Hamline to Lexington. Page 2 of 7