2002.11.14 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting November 14, 2002- page 5 moratorium could be put on and the CD Director said statutes are silent on that but specific reasons are needed for a moratorium. DebbieVranyes, 5720 1591" Street, said she was told that a stop sign may be installed at a future time and she would like it to be reconsidered. Dean Dehling, 15749 Fenway Avenue, said the City shouldn't let $2 million in free land factor into their decision on this development. Bob Harding, 5350 159`h Street, asked approximately how many people would the development bring to Hugo. Tom Stanke replied it would be approximately 1,100 people. There were no other comments and Schumann closed the public hearing. The Commission took a short break and reconvened at 10:20 pm. Rosenquist suggested the trail be taken out and asked if it could run down the sidewalk in front of the homes instead of behind them. Dennis Griswold said they could take the trail out to the street. Schumann said he would like to see the homes moved to the west and the buffer widened. Griswold said they would be impacting other areas and imposing on public dedicated spots, but they could provide buffering. Bailly asked if 1591h Street could be a dead end road and Schumann pointed out that it could not because it was a collector street. Schumann said the City needed to look at stop sign issues in Creekview. Rosenquist asked if the temporary road would be blacktopped prior to home sales and Griswold said it would. McRoberts said, in referring to the density, that it was nice to see developers not ask for the maximum. However, in the Everton Avenue Study, McRoberts said the principle was to go from higher density near TH61 to lower density to the west and this principle was being violated with high-density homes near the agriculture properties. He also said the wildlife corridor should be left as intended -for wildlife. McRoberts said he felt the proposed development was not accommodating the spirit of smooth transition in density and the sprit of what was intended for a wildlife corridor. Peltier concurred. Schumann said he felt it was not a gross violation in density. Malaski said the developers in Creekview should have had some forethought. She said she wants to see landscaping of the homes on the east side of the development if they do remain as proposed, but she can't see having higher density near Creekview.