Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />April 11, 2001 <br />Page 8 <br />Mr. Thill asked if one builder would be used for the development or if there would be various <br />builders. Mr. Smyser replied that would be up to the developer. The City would not be involved <br />in the choice of builders, but the builders would be licensed by the State. <br />Mr. Smyser stated the reason they were considering a townhome development was because the <br />current aging population wanted homes that required less maintenance, as well as the younger <br />population not being able to afford single- family homes. <br />Beverly Morris, 6640 Hokah Drive, stated they do welcome new neighbors, but encouraged the <br />Board members to walk the area. She encouraged the City to keep the wetlands. She expressed <br />concern about traffic. She stated she wanted to see the area remain as single family homes. <br />Conine Schultz, 6641 Hokah Drive, stated her concern was were Ware Road and Hokah Drive <br />met. She asked this area be looked at regarding traffic concerns. <br />Sharon Peterson, 6501 Hokah Drive, stated she was concerned about the convenience store <br />noise, lighting, garbage issues, and the buffer area. She was concerned about the increased <br />traffic and asked if there was some way to reduce traffic on Birch Street. She expressed concern <br />about safety issues. <br />Jay Bruster, 6591 Hokah Drive, stated Apitz Garage had been there a long time and it was in <br />place before the neighborhoods. He stated Apitz Garage was a good neighbor, but that did not <br />mean they should put more businesses in that area He expressed concern about the increase in <br />traffic. He stated there would need to have additional lighting added to the area also and he <br />believed that was counterproductive to what the City wanted. <br />Mr. Smyser stated he had received an e -mail from Mary and Deniel Nissen, 6541 Hokah Drive, <br />who expressed much of the same concerns as had been addressed tonight. <br />Chair Schaps invited applicant to make comment. <br />Mr. Goertz presented to the Board his proposal. He stated on page 2 of the staff report, he had a <br />concern regarding the draft land use plan.; He stated that was not the same as the plan he had <br />seen last fall. With respect to the 150 -foot setback, he stated the concern was lot 26, which was <br />30 -foot at one point. He stated that had been taken into consideration and it was possible to put a <br />relatively large home on that lot. With respect to the easement along the back of the lot, they <br />were willing to do whatever they had to do. He stated they were in favor of a trail, but he <br />understood the Park Board did not want a trail, but they are willing to give an easement for one if <br />they needed to.' With respect to the Site Plan, he understood they were not required to prepare <br />one right away because, it was very expensive, but they were willing to do a Site Plan in the <br />future. He stated he'believed the townhome development was a plus for the City. He stated <br />there would be less traffic generated with the townhomes, rather than if they added single family <br />homes. <br />Chair Schaps asked if Mr. Goetz eliminated the townhomes, how many single- family homes <br />would there be. Mr. Goertz replied there would be approximately 32 homes, but the existing lots <br />would be changed. <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />