09-12-2016 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES August 22, 2016 DRAFT 3 postponement of the resolution on this matter; the city attorney will be consulted on the addition of 90 language regarding those concerns. 91 92 Mayor Reinert opened the public hearing. 93 94 There being no one present wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. 95 96 Mayor Reinert moved to postpone consideration of Resolution No. 16-80 pending a discussion with 97 the city attorney and further council review. Council Member Kusterman seconded the motion. 98 Motion carried on a voice vote. 99 100 6B) St. Clair Estates 101 i) Consider Resolution No. 16-78 Approving Variance and Preliminary Plat 102 City Planner Larsen noted the St. Clair Estates development and previous council direction postponing 103 consideration. Approval of a variance and a preliminary plat are now being brought forward again for 104 consideration. 105 Ms. Larsen reviewed a presentation including: 106 - Location of the proposed project; 107 - A neighborhood map indicating surroundings of the proposed development area; 108 - The preliminary plat map; 109 - Inclusion of a bike trail, a sidewalk and an emergency access/pedestrian trail; 110 - Comprehensive Plan consistency; 111 - Project density (gross and net density indicated); 112 - Consistency with zoning requirements. 113 Ms. Larsen indicated a focus has developed regarding traffic, access to Birch Street and the length of the 114 cul-de-sac included in the project. She intends to provide more information on those areas. 115 Traffic – all developers are required to submit a traffic study with a development such as this including 116 traffic counts. The traffic information gained on this project indicated in a study does not project traffic 117 that will exceed 1,000 trips per day. The study also includes information on levels of service. 118 Information was presented on what criteria the city’s subdivision ordinance includes that would indicate 119 that this is a premature development; that criteria is not met. 120 On the question of access to Birch Street, Ms. Larsen recalled a corridor study done recently that 121 examined Birch Street. Staff did review this proposal in light of this corridor study and found it to be in 122 compliance with the findings of that study. Included in the study was right ins/right outs. Staff did ask 123 the developer what would happen if Hokah Drive became a right in/right out access, noting that would be 124 a county driven decision. The study results of that scenario were reviewed and they still met the under 125 1,000 trips per day criteria. Ms. Larsen introduced Doug Fisher, Anoka County Engineer, present to 126 speak on the subject. 127