Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />OCTOBER 23, 2002 <br />LaValle stated that he was uncomfortable with McDonell's comments about working <br />with the neighbors without any specifics or guarantees. LaValle stated that he did not <br />support Preserve Trail connecting to Viking Drive and preferred the long cul-de-sac. <br />Anderson stated that he understands the concerns of the two adjacent property <br />owners. However, he did not know that the rest of the neighborhood would not <br />prefer another access point for public safety vehicles in the event of an emergency. <br />Montour noted that a second access point would spread traffic rather than having <br />traffic concentrated at one intersection. <br />Fahey urged the Council to consider the professional staff s recommendations. <br />Fahey felt a second access was an improvement for public safety reasons as well as <br />for traffic flow. <br />Anderson noted that if the Sculley property developed, the City would allow a road <br />access from LaBore Road that would create corner lots for the adjacent property <br />owners. <br />Scalze stated that she would not be happy if someone bought the lot adjacent to her <br />and improved a road on it to access the Sculley property. Scalze suggested that had <br />the neighbors knows that the developer would buy the house that was for sale on <br />Viking Drive with the intentions of improving a road on that lot, they would have <br />gotten together and purchased the lot themselves. <br />George LeTendre, attorney representing Mr. and Mrs. Palmen, indicated that in 1999 <br />the City granted conceptual approval for a development the included a long cul-de- <br />sac. One of the reasons was that there would be homes on only one side of the street, <br />therefore, the impact of a long cul-de-sac was lessened. LeTendre questioned the <br />public safety concerns with a long cul-de-sac given the minimal amount of homes. <br />LeTendre pointed out that Mayor Fahey voted in favor of this concept proposal in <br />1999. <br />Fahey noted that to allow a cul-de-sac longer than 500 feet would require a variance. <br />Fahey felt there was no hardship present to warrant the granting of a variance. Fahey <br />felt that without access to Viking Drive, the cul-de-sac length should be limited to <br />500 feet. <br />The City Administrator pointed out that the 1999 concept review was a cursory <br />review that did not involve detailed evaluations. The Administrator also noted the <br />Council's heightened awareness of pipeline safety concerns since that time. <br />Fahey felt that given the pipeline safety concerns, a second access point creates <br />another exit from the area in the event of a problem. <br />l4 <br />