Minutes - 19840827 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

~~ 4 is to be decided before it is known if apartments or owner conc'.o/tovmhouses would be built. He incuired why the area was not still suited for R-1 as he felt R-1 was still the best use o:E this land. He expressed concern that traffic from another development in this area would only make traffic problems worse. Lorrain Evenheis expressed concern regarding the entrance to Gseaver Dairy Road as the primary entrance to the Sedgewood project. She noted that her townhouse property backs up to this property line and inquired if there was a setback provision for the road or could the road go -- straight up to the property line. G~Tould trees be left along the roacway? Graves responded that from a legal standpoint the road could go to the property line. This road lias been platted since 1979 when it was approved as part of the Sedgefiela Subdivision. The developer will be happy to move the road if he can do so but there must be a variance to the 100' buffer on the side away from the Coventry Townhouses. Dr. Gertrude G•Jillis disagreed with the director of Carol G~TOOds and is very concerned with the increase in traffic and the entrance being so close to the 2-~40 junction. Frank Evenheis inquired what was meant by "the road is already there." Graves responded that it is a platted road with dedicated right-of-way that has not been constructed. P9r. Evenheis expressed concern with adjoining development patterns, feeling that density is too high already. Vivk responded that G~eaver Dairy Road is a major thoroughfare and scheduled for ~-lining. F?e also noted the distance between Lockwood and Z-a0. The distance is a total of 1?.00' or equivalent to three city blacl:s. Dave Christianson inquired when the traffic estimates wer4 made and what developments were included in the estimate. Vick responded these figures came from annual traffic surveys by JQT supplemented by counts made in late August and late spring at the intersections. ~'illhoit noted that a specific request had been made of DoT to survey while school was still in session, such as in late spring. Christianson stated that congestion was worse in the morning. Vick noted that the higher peak was found in the afternoon anc that all the information caws taken into consideration during the design of the intersection. Vick stated that included in the estimate were Timberlyne, Kemingston Trace, Steeple Chase and Coventry. Graves noted that this project was of lower density than surrounding projects. Graves also noted that he has been a resident of the area since 1978 and congestion was a problem even in 1976. The problem will be somewhat alleviated by a traffic light. ~'ir. Evenheis inquired if Y.ensington Trace caas in Chapel ~Ii11's jurisdiction. t7illhoit responded that it was. his. Evenheis further noted she was not opposed to this specific density, they just did not need any more development at all. I:izer inquired of Tom Heffner if he had considered the respective property value impact on surrounding properties with both apartments and condos. Heffner responded that surrounding property values usually suffer more from apartment complex>es than from condominiums. The fact that apartments use less expensive construction has bearing on the related values. F?effner stated that probably 600 of the surrounding property is rental and the other Q0~ owner occupied.