03/12/2003 P&Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• Planning & Zoning Board February 12, 2003 Page 17 DRAFT MINUTES permanent cul -de -sac. He indicated under advisement from the City Council, Mr. Uhde's development was sent to the P &Z Board to review other options extending Carl Street, for example, including access to the north into Robinson's Sod property and power line access. He noted the City planners had not offered any other solutions as advised by the City Council. He stated the Airpark is unique in comparison to normal neighborhoods. The runway divides the north residences from the south. To "connect" neighborhoods does not fit since our community is unique to aviators. He stated the traffic study completed by the City and Mr. Uhde's development firm specifically stated that the traffic flows into Carl Street did not warrant the extension. He stated the majority of Carl Street residents signed a petition not to extend Carl Street. He noted there were developers interested in purchasing the sod fields for development. He asked why the City did not plan for the future with the Comprehensive Plan to forecast, design and develop without infringing upon existing neighborhoods. He noted from an engineering standpoint, the street would not fit. He asked who was responsible to design and implement the extension. He asked why the City had not proved their point with written documentation. He stated the Rice Creek Watershed District required a 50 -foot easement from the center of the ditch. He stated the Cities easement from the curb to his house was 35 feet. He asked how would the street fit with that easement. He asked if the storm pond was filled, where would the run off water go. He asked about the cul -de -sac removal, driveway extension, and trees. Chair Schaps asked if he was opposed to the development, or just to the extension of Carl Street. Mr. Kolstad replied he was not opposed to the development, just to the extension of Carl Street. Carl Johnson, 314 Carl Street, stated he was opposed to the extension of Carl Street. He asked if it was possible if Carl Street had to go through, that it be maintained at a narrower width. Mr. Studenski replied the City standard for a street was 32 -34 feet. Mr. Johnson noted he was concerned about the small portion that was along Mr. Kolstad's property. Mr. Studenski replied currently Carl Street was substandard to City requirements. If a new road was put in, it would be put in at the current City standards. Mr. Johnson inquired about the bike path along Carl Street. Mr. Johnson replied there was a six foot sidewalks, not an eight -foot bike path that was proposed on Century Trail and whether it went down Carl Street was up to the City. Mr. Johnson noted if there were not a sidewalk, there would leave a larger buffer. He reviewed the history of Carl Street as he understood it. Mr. Rafferty asked if Lots 15 and 16 were ever on the Final Plat. Mr. Johnson replied those lots were undevelopable due to wetland issues. Glenn Martig, 376 Carl Street, stated Lot 15 and 16 were wetlands and could not be developed. He stated the cul -de -sac was put in with the understanding it would remain a cul -de -sac. He noted Carl Street had two "S" turns, which he did not believe would be appropriate for emergency vehicles. He noted traffic would increase drastically if Carl Street was put in. DRAFT MINUTES