Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout15 Development Permit 375 Arnold Property' ' ' ·· . . . "' . : , ' f • . . , , ' . . - ~ ooo 1cfdi ~bj I " ro~ OJ\() . ~\~ 1-------~ - - - - - - --_.___ - - --- - - - - - -~--'T---------- TREET) r BIKE TRAIL (NOT A STREET) , i ARNOLD RD ~ r<J K6 ~ HASSELT ST ~ ~ a ~ I ---------- w, (72 1'0TS, I I I - P rinted by Shirley Volk 5/10/95 3:32pm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shirley Volk To: Jane Kee, Jim Callaway, Kent Laza, Natalie Thomas, Veronica Morgan Subject: fwd: Development-type questions ===NOTE===============S/09/95==1:4Spm======================================= Recently a VERY pre-development meeting was held about some duplex/patio home type development which would be abutted by Arnold Road, Schaffer Road and Graham Road. The question came up regarding what would be required as far as improvements to those 3 roads in order to get a plat approved in this area. While the question is still tentative at this time, apparently several staff members have talked to several different people about development in that area, so perhaps some consensus of opinion should be reached pretty soon, because it looks like sooner (rather than later) development is going to happen in that area, and to date, nobody has any type of answer! Not even a guess! Might help our credibility if we could have an answer or at least an idea the next time we hear the question. Another question which needs to be addressed immediately is the extension of s. Kyle south to (as I've been telling people) connect with Lassie Lane. It has been pointed out to me in not very gentle language, that this type of extension would render the 8 acre Noonan tract worthless for development, and further, that a curve that steep in that short a spece is not feasible! We are meeting with some people from a company planning to develop that property on Wed. A.M., so be prepared to hear a great deal about that street extension at that time. None of it will be good! Fwd=by:=Jane=Kee======S/09/95==3:10pm======================================= Fwd to: Shirley Volk CC: Jim Callaway, Kent Laza we're prepared on the Kyle s. questions. As to the other, if the only access to these lots are via the streets you mentioned then I would anticipate some improvement be required. W/o seeing a layout it's hard for me to say more. Fwd=by:=Shirley=Volk==S/09/95==4:19pm======================================= Fwd to: Jane Kee cc: Jim Callaway, Kent Laza There's the rub! How much improvement? 100% developer cost? 100% City cost? Some kind of participation? What about closing Arnold Road? (V mentioned something about that). All of these were questions at the meeting yesterday, and we had no answers -which was o.k., but now that the questions have been asked once, I guess it's time to think about possible answers in the pretty near future. Also, what about Kyle? Fwd=by:=Kent=Laza=====S/10/95==8:42am======================================= Fwd to : Shirley Volk CC: Jane Kee Regarding Arnold, Schaffer, and Graham Roads, don't we normally ask that a study be performed to show what impacts the new development will have on the roads and then base any oversizing on that report. Earl Havel came to me about 6 weeks ago asking about a development along Graham Road and I told him the City participation would depend on the traffic report. He indicated the traffic would be relatively light on Graham. That 's where we left it. Page: 1 P.,.rinted by Shirley Volk 5/10/95 3:33pm From: Shirley Volk To: Jane Kee, Jim Callaway, Kent Laza, Natalie Thomas, Veronica Morgan Subject: fwd: Development-type questions ===NOTE===============S/09/95==1:4Spm======================================= Recently a VERY pre-development meeting was held about some duplex/patio home type development which would be abutted by Arnold Road, Schaffer Road and Graham Road. The question came up regarding what would be required as far as improvements to those 3 roads in order to get a plat approved in this area. While the question is still tentative at this time, apparently several staff members have talked to several different people about development in that area, so perhaps some consensus of opinion should be reached pretty soon, because it looks like sooner (rather than later) development is going to happen in that area, and to date, nobody has any type of answer! Not even a guess! Might help our credibility if we could have an answer or at least an idea the next time we hear the question. Another question which needs to be addressed immediately is the extension of s. Kyle south to (as I've been telling people) connect with Lassie Lane. It has been pointed out to me in not very gentle language, that this type of extension would render the 8 acre Noonan tract worthless for development, and further, that a curve that steep in that short a spece is not feasible! We are meeting with some people from a company planning to develop that property on Wed. A.M., so be prepared to hear a great deal about that street extension at that time. None of it will be good! Fwd=by:=Jane=Kee======S/09/95==3:10pm======================================= Fwd to: Shirley Volk CC: Jim Callaway, Kent Laza we're prepared on the Kyle S. questions. As to the other, if the only access to these lots are via the streets you mentioned then I would anticipate some improvement be required. W/o seeing a layout it's hard for me to say more. Fwd=by:=Shirley=Volk==S/09/95==4:19pm======================================= Fwd to: Jane Kee CC: Jim Callaway, Kent Laza There's the rub! How much improvement? 100% developer cost? 100% City cost? Some kind of participation? What about closing Arnold Road? (V mentioned something about that). All of these were questions at the meeting yesterday, and we had no answers -which was o.k., but now that the questions have been asked once, I guess it's time to think about possible answers in the pretty near future. Also, what about Kyle? Fwd=by:=Jane=Kee======S/09/95==4:45pm======================================= Fwd to: Shirley Volk CC: Jim Callaway, Kent Laza Arnold Road is to be closed as part of the Edelweiss Dev. Agreemnt. I think you are expecting solid answers to questions that depend on different situations. We have general policies that we expect developer improvement for on-site stuff and with the Carter lake plat -developer improvement for off-site that supplies access (we'll see what CC does on Thurs. evening). In terms of participation that is always a question a developer can ask of our Council. Again w/o seeing any specifics on the Arnold thing I can't give more opinion than this. Kyle is what I mentioned to you earlier -I'm going to listen to what they say. George Ball asked Jim to be there and Jim said No. He's leaving that for me to make the call. After I listen, unless I hear something unusual I will ask that they dedicate the ROW and the City will build the street. I will NOT offer this until I hear more about where they are in their project planning. I will also not be able to make that decision but only recommend a course of action to CC. They will ultimately decide thru the platting process. I hear they will also talk about platting half the ROW which we wil NOT support. Our subd. regs. don't allow it. Page: 1