Planning Commission - 01/12/1987 AGENDA
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, January 12, 1987
7:30 p.m.
COMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairman Ed Schuck, Richard Anderson, Julianne Bye,
Christine Dodge, Virginia Gartner, Robert Hallett, Charles
Ruebling
STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Director of Planning; Michael Franzen, Senior
Planner; Don Uram, Assistant Planner; Kate Karnas,
Administrative Assistant
Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
II. MEMBERS REPORTS
III. MINUTES
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
*(7:35) A. RIDGEWOOD WEST PLAT SIXTH ADDITION, by Centex Homes Corp. Request
for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on approximately 101
acres with variances, Zoning District Change from R1-13.5 to RM-2.5
on 8.1 acres and Preliminary Plat of 8.1 acres into 11 lots and 4
outlots for construction of 76 condominium units. Location: North
and east of Wellington Drive, north and west of Cumberland Road. A
continued public hearing.
*(8:05) B. THE TREE FARM, by Countryside Investments, Inc. Request for Com-
prehensive Guide Plan Change from Public Open Space to Low Density
Residential on 11.3 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-
13.5 on 33.6 acres, Preliminary Plat of 33.6 acres into 78 single
family lots and road right-of-way. Location: South of County Road
#1, west of Surrey Street. A continued public hearing.
*(8:35) C. SUBURBAN NATIONAL BANK/PRESERVE MEDICAL BUILDING, by Supplee's 7-Hi
Enterprises, Inc. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from
Low Density Residential to Office on 1.09 acres, Zoning District
Change , from Rural to Office on 1.09 acres with variances to be
reviewed by the Board of Appeals and Preliminary Plat of 1.09 acres
into one lot for the construction of a two-story office building.
Location: South of Anderson Lakes Parkway, west of County Road #18.
A continued public hearing.
*(8:40) D. WESTWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARK 3RD ADDITION, by Dallas Development Com-
pany. Request for Preliminary Platting of 20 acres into two lots
within the Westwood Industrial Park. Location: South of County
Road #67 and East of Bury Drive. A public hearing.
*(8:55) E. MITCHELL ESTATES, by Ray Mitchell . Request for Zoning District
Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.04 acres and preliminary platting
of 1.04 acres into two lots and road right-of-way. Location:
Southeast quadrant of Scenic Heights Road and Hiawatha Avenue. A
public hearing.
Agenda
Planning Commission
Monday, January 12, 1987
Page Two
*(9:10) F. CARMEL 6 & 7, by Hans Hagen Homes, Inc. Request for Planned Unit
Development Concept Amendment on approximately 58 acres, Planned
Unit Development District Review within an R1-13.5 zoning district
on 16.26 acres with variances for lot frontage, zoning district
change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 0.66 acres, and preliminary platting
of 16.26 acres into 27 single family lots and road right-of-way.
Location: North of Fallbrook Road and east of Thornhill Road. A
public hearing.
V. OLD BUSINESS
VI. NEW BUSINESS
VII. PLANNER'S REPORT
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
NOTE: THE TIMES LISTED ABOVE ARE TENTATIVE, AND MAY BE SIGNIFICANTLY EARLIER,
OR LATER, THAN LISTED.
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, January 12, 1987
School Board Meeting Room
7:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Ed Schuck, Julianne Bye, Christine Dodge, Virginia
Gartner (8:15 p.m.) , Robert Hallett
MEMBERS ABSENT: Rich Anderson, Chuck Reubling
STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Director of Planning; Michael Franzen, Senior
Planner; Kate Karnas, Administrative Assistant
Pledge of Allegiance--Roll Call
I . APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION:
Motion was made by Hallett, seconded by Bye, to adopt the agenda as printed.
Motion carried--4-0-0
II . MEMBERS REPORTS
None.
III. MINUTES
MOTION:
Motion was made by Bye, seconded by Hallett, to approve the minutes of the
November 24, 1986, Planning Commission meeting as printed.
Motion carried--3-0-1 (Dodge abstained)
k
IV. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
A. RIDGEWOOD WEST PLAT SIXTH ADDITION, by Centex Homes Corp. Request
for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on approximately 101
acres with variances, Zoning District Change from R1-13.5 to RM-2.5
on 8.1 acres and Preliminary Plat of 8.1 acres into 11 lots and 4
outlots for construction of 76 condominium units. Location: North
and east of Wellington Drive, north and west of Cumberland Road. A
continued public hearing.
At its December 8, 1986, meeting, the Planning Commission continued this
item pending revision by the proponents based on concerns raised by the
neighborhood and in the Staff Report of December 5, 1986, on the proposed
• development.
Planning Commission Minutes 2 January 12, 1987
Planner Enger reported that the proponent had held a neighborhood meeting on
Thursday evening, January 8, 1987, but did not have detailed plans finished
in time for this Planning Commission meeting. Because of this, proponents
were again requesting a continuance in order to provide for resolution of
the concernss according to the direction given by the majority of the
Commission at its December 8, 1986, meeting.
Mr. Tom Boyce, representative from Centex Homes, reviewed the changes made
so far in the plans. He pointed out that there had been a realignment of
the interior road which was designed to eliminate any direct access to
Wellington Drive. He stated that there was now a different mix of
structures within the proposed development. The revised plans showed twice
the nubmer of four-unit structures, thereby eliminating four units and
reducing the number of total units for the proposal to 68 units. He noted
that the internal private drivees and parking areas had been altered in
order to provide for more room for landscaping within the development.
Finally, the architecture was more defined than before, and more in line
with what was existing within the adjacent existing structures within the
Westover development.
Planner Franzen stated that Staff had not had an opportunity to review the
proposed revisions. He pointed out that one of the major concerns of the
Staff previously, and with this plan, was transition to the adjacent
existing developments. He stated that it was Staff's opinion that the
• proponent would need to increase the setbacks to the north and west property
lines, provide for greater berming height, and provide for heavier plantings
on the berms. He stated that another possibility for providing transition
may include the provision of more four-unit structures along the perimeter
of the site, thereby placing the eight-unit structures toward the interior
of the site.
Mr. John Ginn, 8961 Knollwood Drive, stated that he was opposed to the
proposed development and that he would prefer the property to be developed
as single family residential, similar to the was the adjacent sites were
developed. He stated that he was also concerned with transition to the
adjacent, existing developments and that he was concerned about the proposed
density in terms of impact on the neighborhood park in the area. Mr. Ginn
stated that one of his major concerns was that of increased traffic from the
development if it were allowed at the higher density. He added that units
such as those proposed were likely to become rental, instead of owner-
occupied and that he was concerned that renters may not be as concerned
about maintaining their property as homeowners were.
Mr. Ned Devine, 8811 Hawthorne Drive, stated that he concurred with the
statements of Mr. Ginn, in particular with respect to potential traffic
impacts on the surrounding neighborhood.
Ms. Janis Krall, 8966 Knollwood Drive, stated that she was aware that there
was the potential for the property to become multiple family, and had
reviewed the overall development plan available in the sales office at the
• time, showing such development. She stated that she was not concerned
because the road access to the site was not located directly across from her
home. However, the revised plans showed the access directly in front of her
home. She stated that she would not have purchased the home if she had
Planning Commission Minutes 3 January 12, 1987
known that b the case.
ow a this would d e
Ms. Cindy Doms, 13949 Wellington Drive, stated that she had signed forms at
the time of closing on her home that indicated that she was aware of the
fact that multiple residential development may take place across from her
property. She stated that there were many forms to be signed at closing
time, and that this issue was "breezed over. " She stated that she felt the
matter had been misrepresented to her at that time, as it would have
impacted her decision to purchase.
Ms. Doms stated that she would like a better explanation of the zoning
change which had taken place on the property. Planner Enger reviewed the
history of the zoning and development approvals on the property.
Hallett asked Ms. Krall who had informed her about the potential development
across from her. Ms. Krall responded that she discussed the matter at
length with Michael Livingston from the Centex sales staff. She stated that
he had told her that the property was designated for multiple residential,
that it likely would develop as single family residential, similar to her
property. She added that they discussed the access road location at length,
to the point where she was sure that it would not be located directly across
from her home based on what he represented to her.
Dodge asked if anyone in the audience had contacted the City with respect to
the status of this property prior to purchasing their home. Of the
approximately 20 members of the audience attending the meeting for this
issue, no one responded that they had contacted the City.
Mr. Boyce stated that the multiple family residential development was listed
in the bylaws for the property. He ,stated that Centex had tried to make
people aware of their plans for multiple development in the future.
Mr. Michael Mlazgal, 13983 Wellington Drive, expressed concern regarding
traffic and safety of the children in the area, if this intense of a
development were approved for the property. He added that he was also
concerned as it was his opinion that there was neglect on the part of Centex
to keep up-to-date on maintenance matters within the development. He
questioned what this might mean to a multiple family development and the
impact of a poorly maintained development on the value of his property.
Ms. Judith Mulvey, 13973 Wellington Drive, stated that she felt the
development of this property as multiple family residential would break up
the continuity of the neighborhood, in that the rest of the area had been
developed as single family residential . She stated that she was concerned
that people living in the multiple family units would not have the same
priorities as those in owner-occupied homes in terms of upkeep of property,
etc.
Mr. Dennis L. Wavra, 13980 Wellington Drive, stated that he felt it was
logical for the property to be developed as single family residential, based
on the existing zoning of the property and the existing development of the
surrounding neighborhoods.
Hallett stated that he was pleased to see that Centex had taken positive
Planning Commission Minutes 4 January 12, 1987
steps in redesign of the project. He stated that he did t p g p � i no feel that any
decision of the Planning Commission would be made based on the opinion that
people living in multiple family residential housing were "second class
citizens" and less interested in the maintenance of their property. He
pointed out that the road and other utility systems in the area were planned
based upon this property being developed as multiple family residential ;
therefore, people could be assured that the public utilities and facilities
had been built to handle the capacity of residents proposed.
Hallett stated that he felt the zoning and land use guiding on the property
were confusing to everyone. He asked Staff for a detailed explanation of
the history of this property with respect to the zoning and guiding.
Planner Enger explained that, prior to the time when Centex had purchased
this property, the City had designated the land as Medium Density
Residential. In 1978, Centex had purchased the property and proposed a
development to the City that was completely single family in nature, or Low
Density Residential. The change was made at that time to R1-13.5 zoning and
to Low Density Residential . In 1982, Centex returned to the City with a
proposal for a total of 168 units on the property, showing a mixture of
single family homes, cluster homes, and condominiums. At that time, the
Comprehensive Guide Plan was amended to return the property to Medium
Density Residential and Centex began rezoning portions of the property from
R1-13.5 to match the unit types they had proposed, or RM-6.5 and R1-9.5.
Some of the property for single family development was also designated as
R1-13.5, particularly along Purgatory Creek where the single family lots
were larger. This particular piece of property was part of what was
reguided in 1982 to Medium Density Residential. However, since Eden Prairie
does not rezone property without a specific plan, this property was not
rezoned from R1-13.5 in 1982, and it was not proposed to be rezoned until
such time as a plan was presented with the exact use delineated in order
that the City could rezone according to a specific plan.
Planner Enger stated that the current status of the property was that it had
an approved Planned Unit Development Concept plan for multiple family
residential 96 units and that it was designated for Medium Density
Residential development according to the Comprehensive Guide Plan. The
existing zoning of R1-13.5 was "left over" from a previously approved plan,
which was superceded by the 1982 Planned Unit Development Concept. The
City, and Centex, expected that a proposal would be forthcoming for multiple
family residential on this property which would match the land use of the
Comprehensive Guide Plan ,for Medium Density Residential and which would
request rezoning to some form of multiple family designation.
Mr. Devine asked how the City staff would have responded, if asked what the
property was zoned. Planner Enger stated that it was possible that someone
might simply respond that the property was zoned R1-13.5. However, he
stated that the Planning Staff was careful recognize areas such as this and
would have made a more full explanation of both the zoning and the land use
• guiding designation for the property. He pointed out that this was one of a
handfull of parcels in the community where there was such confusion.
Generally, the property which had not been developed in the City was zoned
Rural, alerting people to the fact that anything was possible.
Planning Commission Minutes 5 January 12, 1987
Bye asked that Staff provide an outline of the approval history on this
property for the next meeting, delineating the zoning and guiding history on
the development. Planner Enger responded that this would be done.
Mr. Ginn asked how this proposed development could be considered an asset to
the community. Mr. Boyce responded that the original purpose of this
overall mixed residential development was to provide for a variety of
housing in the City, which, he felt, Centex had accomplished.
MOTION:
Motion was made by Bye, seconded by Dodge, to continue this item to the
February 9, 1987, Planning Commission meeting pending receipt of revised
plans from the proponent.
Motion carried--4-0-0
(Gartner arrived at 8: 15 p.m. )
B. THE TREE FARM, by Countryside Investments, Inc. Request for Com-
prehensive Guide Plan Change from Public Open Space to Low Density
Residential on 11.3 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-
13.5 on 33.6 acres, Preliminary Plat of 33.6 acres into 78 single
family lots and road right-of-way. Location: South of County Road
#1, west of Surrey Street. A continued public hearing.
Planner Enger explained that, at the November 24, 1986, Planning Commission
meeting, the Commission determined that the relationship of this project to
the Flying Cloud Airport Safety Zone B was a primary consideration. The
Commission continued the item to allow time for resolution of the conflict
with Safety Zone B .
Subsequent to that meeting, the proponent revised the subdivision, removing
all lots within the area designated as being within Safety Zone B. They
also continued discussions with the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC)
staff.
It was the determination of the MAC staff that the proposed development did,
in fact, meet the intent of the model ordinance in terms of density and,
therefore, intensity of development acceptable within the Safety Zone B
area. This was approved by their governing agency, the Minnesota Department
of Transportation, as well . A letter would be forthcoming acknowledging
this. Planner Enger stated that the possibility of MAC purchasing the
property was also discussed. It was determined that MAC was not interested
in purchasing the land.
Mr. Ron Krueger, representing proponent, asked if it would be necessary for
the proponents to construct the trail along County Road #1 at this time. He
pointed out that the trail would not be connecting to any other trail to the
• east, or west, at this time. In addition, even it were built, an asphalt
trail , unused, would likely become unsightly due to the growth of weeds and
grasses through the asphalt over a short period of time.
Bye stated that the City had encountered difficulties in neighborhoods where
Planning Commission Minutes 6 January 12, 1987
trails were installed after the homeowners were moved into their homes. She
stated that the trail was necessary, eventually, along County Road #1 and
that it would be important to inform the future residents of this
subdivision that this trail would be installed.
Hallett asked if the City would be responsible for construction of the trail
if it were not built at this time. Planner Enger stated that this could be
the case, but that it was also possible that the City could require the
developer to provide a bond for future construction of the trail, instead.
Gartner asked if it would be possible to place signage in the area
indicating the location of the BFI landfill and the Fly4ng Cloud Airport in
close proximity to this property. She stated that she felt it would be
appropriate to notify the future and potential residents of this area of
what type of neighbors they had from the beginning. Planner Enger stated
that the City could provide for directional -type signs indicating this
information. He noted that this had been done in the Bluffs West 2nd
Addition. Bye added that she felt this should possibly be done for the
future trail , as well .
Mr. Al Lange, 13801 Pioneer Trail , manager of Elliott Beech Craft, one of
the business operations at Flying Cloud Airport, expressed concern that this
property was located within the "noise footprint" of the airport. He stated
that he felt the airport was a public asset to the community, a sizable
employer, and that he felt residents should be given fair warning as soon as
possible that they would be in close proximity to the airport. He stated
that he felt this was a pre-existing condition, along with the landfill, and
Highway #169, that the future residents should be made aware of up front,
prior to purchase of their property.
Mr. Denny Daugaard, 12390 Surrey Street, asked for a detailed explanation of
the changes to the plan from the previous proposal. Mr. Krueger reviewed
the changes and noted the area where several lots had been eliminated.
Mr. Gary Schmidt, MAC staff representative, stated for the record that MAC
was now of the opinion that the plan, as currently proposed, met the intent
of the model ordinance for Safety Zone B . He stated that he was certain
that the letter confirming this would be in the hands of the City prior to
review of this matter by the City Council.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to close the public hearing.
Motion carried--5-0-0
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City
• Council approval of the request of Countryside Investments for Comprehensive
Guide Plan Amendment from Public Open Space to Low Density Residential on
11.3 acres for the Tree Farm, based on plans dated January 8, 1987, subject
to the recommendations of the Staff Reports dated November 21, 1986, and
January 9, 1987, and with the added direction that the City be responsible
Planning Commission Minutes 7 January 12, 1987
for providing directional signage regarding the location of the BFI
landfill, the Flying Cloud Airport, the future trail , and that the proponent
be responsible for providing this information about pre-existing conditions
to the future residents of the development in writing.
Motion carried--5-0-0
MOTION 3:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Countryside Investments for Zoning
District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 for 33.6 acres for the Tree Farm,
based on plans dated January 8, 1987, subject to the recommendations of the
Staff Reports dated November 21, 1986, and January 9, 1987, and with the
added direction that the City be responsible for providing directional
signage regarding the location of the BFI landfill, the Flying Cloud.
Airport, the future trail, and that the proponent be responsible for
providing this information about pre-existing conditions to the future
residents of the development in writing.
Motion carried--5-0-0
MOTION 4:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Countryside Investments for Preliminary
Plat of 33.6 acres into 72 single family -lots for the Tree Farm, based on
plans dated January 8, 1987, subject to the recommendations of the Staff
Reports dated November 21, 1986, and January 9, 1987, and with the added
direction that the City be responsible for providing directional signage
regarding the location of the BFI landfill, the Flying Cloud Airport, the
future trail, and that the proponent be responsible for providing this
information about pre-existing conditions to the future residents of the
development in writing.
Motion carried--5-0-0
C. SUBURBAN NATIONAL BANK/PRESERVE MEDICAL BUILDING, by Supplee's 7-Hi
Enterprises, Inc. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from
Low Density Residential to Office on 1.09 acres, Zoning District
Change from Rural to Office on 1 .09 acres with variances to be
reviewed by the Board of Appeals and Preliminary Plat of 1.09 acres
into one lot for the construction of a two-story office building.
Location: South of Anderson Lakes Parkway, west of County Road #18.
A continued public hearing.
Planner Enger reported that, at its meeting of December 16, 1986, the City
Council took action to continue this item to a later Council meeting,
meanwhile returning it to the Planning Commission for additional review.
Staff had met with the proponents in the interim. At this time, plans were
not available for review. Therefore, the proponents have requested a two-
week continuance.
Planning Commission Minutes 8 January 12, 1987
MOTION:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to continue to the January 26,
1987, Planning Commission meeting per the request of the proponents.
Motion carried--5-0-0
D. WESTWOOD INDUSTRIAL PARK 3RD ADDITION, by Dallas Development Com-
pany. Request for Preliminary Platting of 20 acres into two lots
within the Westwood Industrial Park. Location: South of County
Road #67 and East of Bury Drive. A public hearing.
Planner Franzen explained that this was basically a "housekeeping" item for
the proponent. He noted that proponent was requesting the splitting of one
lot into two lots for purposes of sale of the property.
Mr. Bernie Frye, representative of Dallas Development Company, stated that
the building being constructed on the future lot was a mirror image of the
existing structure. He noted that the structure met all City Code
requirements.
Planner Enger informed the Commission that this type of subdivision would
likely be more frequently reviewed by the Commission in the future. He
stated that, previously, this type of simple subdivision was handled
. administratively. However, by requiring the proponents to be processed
through platting review, it was much more clear that necessary utility
easements were obtained, vacated, and recorded where required.
Chairman Schuck asked for comments, or questions, from members of the
audience. There were none.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Bye, seconded by Gartner, to close the public hearing.
Motion carried--5-0-0
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Bye, seconded by Gartner, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Dallas Development Company for
Preliminary Plat of 20 acres into two lots within the Westwood Industrial
Park, based on plans dated December 30, and 31, 1986, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated January 9, 1987.
Motion carried--5-0-0
E. MITCHELL ESTATES, by Ray Mitchell . Request for Zoning District
Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.04 acres and preliminary platting
• of 1.04 acres into two lots and road right-of-way. Location:
Southeast quadrant of Scenic Heights Road and Hiawatha Avenue. A
public hearing.
Planner Enger explained that this was a "simple subdivision, " wherein Mr.
Planning Commission Minutes 9 January 12, 1987
Mitchell was requesting the splitting of his relatively large lot to build
another home on the property.
Mr. Ray Mitchell presented a plan for the home to be built on the property,
indicating that he felt it would blend well with the existing homes in the
neighborhood.
Chairman Schuck asked for comments, or questions, from members of the
audience. There were none.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Dodge, to close the public hearing.
Motion carried--5-0-0
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Dodge, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Ray Mitchell for Zoning District Change
from Rural to R1.13.5 on 1 .04 acres for Mitchell Estates, based on plans
dated December 29, 1986, subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report
dated January 9, 1987.
Motion carried--5-0-0
MOTION 3:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Dodge, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Ray Mitchell for Preliminary Plat
approval of 1 .04 acres into two lots for residential development to be known
as Mitchell Estates, based on plans dated December 29, 1986, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated January 9, 1987.
Motion carried--5-0-0
F. CARMEL 6 & 7, by Hans Hagen Homes, Inc. Request for Planned Unit
Development Concept Amendment on approximately 58 acres, Planned
Unit Development District Review within an R1-13.5 Zoning District
on 16.26 acres with variances for lot frontage, Zoning District
Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 0.66 acres, and preliminary platting
of 16.26 acres into 27 single family lots and road right-of-way.
Location: North of Fallbrook Road and east of Thornhill Road. A
public hearing.
Mr. Hans Hagen, proponent, explained that there were several changes to the
previously approved Carmel Addition preliminary plat which required the
review of the Planning Commission due to the extent of the changes involved.
Mr. Hagen explained that, due to the grade of the property, it was not
possible to provide the connection to the Ward Holasek property to the west
as was presented in the original preliminary plat. Alternative access had
been provided to Mr. Holasek 's site. The 50 ft. wide right-of-way for
access to the east was, therefore, eliminated.
Planning Commission Minutes 10 January 12, 1987
Secondly, Mr. Hagen stated that there was one lot in the northeast area of
the subdivision which had been designed to have road frontage on three
sides. In reviewing the platting in greater detail, it was found that a
slight realignment of the road would provide for the lot to be a "normal"
corner lot, eliminating one of the road frontages for that lot.
Lastly, after detailed discussions with the Director of Community Services,
it was determined that it would be appropriate to "swap" small parcels of
property between the park and the developer in order to provide for better
access to the park and better design of lots for the proponent. Therefore,
this change was also being requested at this time. Mr. Hagen noted that a
20 ft. wide easement for vehicle access to the park was also being provided
with this revised platting.
Mr. Hagen stated that, overall, the elimination of the 50 ft. right-of-way
access to the property to the east, the realignment of the road, and the
swapping of property with the City resulted in the addition of a portion of
property back into the subdivision, which provided for one more lot,
overall, within the Carmel development.
Chairman Schuck asked for comments, or questions, from members of the
audience. There were none.
MOTION 1:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Dodge, to close the public hearing.
Motion carried--5-0-0
MOTION 2:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Hans Hagen Homes for Planned Unit
Development Concept Amendment of approximately 58 acres for Carmel 6th and
7th Additions, based on plans dated December 30, 1986, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report dated January 9, 1987.
Motion carried--5-0-0
MOTION 3:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Bye, to recommend to the City
Council approval of the request of Hans Hagen Homes for Planned Unit
Development District Review and Zoning District amendment within the R1-13.5
Zoning District for 16.26 acres; with variances for lot frontage, and Zoning
District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 for 0.66 acre, for Carmel 6th and 7th
Additions, based on plans dated December 30, 1986, subject to the
recommendations of the Staff Report of January 9, 1987.
. Motion carried--5-0-0
MOTION 4:
Motion was made by Gartner, seconded by Dodge, to recommend to the City
Planning Commission Minutes 11 January 12, 1987
Council approval of the request of Hans Hagen Homes for Preliminary Plat of
16.26 acres into 27 single family lots for Carmel 6th and 7th Additions,
based on plans dated December 30, 1986, subject to the recommendations of
the Staff Report dated January 9, 1987.
Motion carried--5-0-0
V . OLD BUSINESS
None.
VI . NEW BUSINESS
None.
VII . PLANNER'S REPORT
None.
VIII . ADJOURNMENT
MOTION TO ADJOURN was made by Hallett, seconded by Bye. Chairman Schuck
adjourned the meeting at 9:35 p.m.
•