05/08/2002 P&Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • • Planning & Zoning Board April 10, 2002 Page 13 regarding the City sewer capacity would not handle the proposed increase with the approximately 100 new homes. He asked if the existing sewer could handle the new load. If not, who would pay to correct it? He stated several property owners on or near the Birch Street had been told that they could not hook up to existing sewer because it was already at capacity because of Pheasant Hills Preserve. As taxpayers, there was a consensus that capacity issues on sewer should include existing property owners, and that those owners have the opportunity to hook up once sewer was available. Mr. Masonick stated there was a great deal of concern on the traffic of Birch. Both adjacent Centerville Road and Birch Street already had problems with existing traffic. The addition of approximately 100 x 2 (average cars/household) equaled 200 more cars driving on that 1/4 mile stretch that could create a number of problems impacting pedestrians, drivers, noise, pollution, and quality of hf in the area. He asked if Birch street would be upgraded to accommodate more�t affic and if so, when and how, and if not, why not. He asked if Centerville Road o accommodate more traffic, and if so, how and if not, why not. Hen`s ke here d utlets from the Stoneybrook development onto other streets (such oily Dnv how would the greater traffic affect the existing roads, traffic, of life of area residents. He ��y� asked if there would be ongoing traffic studs „pnce dev � r ent was underway and what would happened if they showed traffic much asked if development slowed down while roads were improve Mr. Masonick stated it was well the Rice Creek Watershed Distri stated neighboring property o board of neutral party should r interest. He state far greater sour fanning or hi properties and proposed dev be shown the de owner selling was a member of they p 1 vehis was a conflict of interest. He xpresse a botcern that an outside watershed district e proposed plans to ensure there was no conflict of epted fact that residential development was a ecially fertilizers — to watersheds than . He asked what would be done to ensure that proposed development are not impacted by the there were any contingency plans in place should it d wetlands. He asked how the wetlands be e development was complete. He asked who held was such an impact. regulated i m' ds adjacent ti erlt. He aske i YL'Y. ntent -imn maintained and mo liability for these issues`r` Mr. Masonick asked if there would be any studies on the impact this development would have on wildlife in the area. He asked what would be done if wildlife was impacted. He stated there was a general consensus amongst area neighbors that loss of wildlife would affect the quality of life. He indicated there were a number of nesting migratory birds, waterfowl, prairie species, fox, deer, wild turnkeys, pheasants, and smaller mammals in the area. Mr. Masonick-stated the increase in traffic on Birch would impact the ability of pedestrians to cross Birch and access trail systems in Pheasant Hills Park Preserve, as well as eventual trail systems that hook into Chain of Lakes Park. He stated the safety of children crossing Birch Street to visit friends in Pheasant Hills Preserve and access park trails was of particular concern. He asked if there were any plans to create pedestrian crosswalks/bridges /lights in the area for residents on the South side of Birch to ultimately DRAFT MINUTES