Loading...
Planning Commission - 02/26/1979 AGENDA . .:.k Eden Prairie Planning Commission Monday, February 26, 1979 7:30 PM, City Hall COMIMISSION MEMBERS: Chairman Rod Sundstrom, William Bearman, Richard Lynch, !i z Retterath. Oke Martinson, Matthew Levitt, and George Bentley STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Planning Director; Jean Jchnson, Assistant Planner; Donna Stanley, Planning Secretary Pledge of Allegiance - Roll Call 7:30 I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA a! 7:30 II . APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. MINUTES OF JANUARY 15 19i9 B. MINUTES OF FEB. 12 1979 C. MINUTES OF FEB. 9 j 1979 7• III. MEMBERS REPORTS A. CHAIRMAN B. OTHERS 7:45 IV. REPORTS AND RECOirMiENDATIONS A. Saint Andrew Church request to rezone 3.5 acres from Ruralto PUBLIC for construction of a church building. The site is located within the Edenvale PUD, in the jiortnwest quadrant of the intersection of Valley View Road and Mitchell Road. A continued public meeting. Continue to March 12th meeting. 7:50 B. Olympic Hills , Sixth Addition, by Olympic Hills Corporation and the Preserve. Request to rezone approximately 67 acres from Rural to RI-13. 5s preliminary plat approval of 89 single family lots and-7 outl o`s upon the entire III acre site, and approval i of Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The site is located west cf the Olympic Hills Clubhouse, east of Sunnyb*ooic -Road, and south of Neil Lake. A continued public hearing. Continue to Mstrch 17th meeting. 7:55 C. United Methodist Church request to rezone .9 acres from f''=.IC to R1-22 or an existing home t 15150 Scenic Heights Road. A public meeting V. PETITIONS AND REqyESTS 8: 15 A. Out 1 of A Crestwood 4 by Alex Dorenhmper and Richard Wi l son. guest to rezone . ocres from Rural to R1-22 and � -^eli&fnary plat approval for 3 lots, Located North of tall Drina and east of 9659 Dell Drive. A public hearing. )_!�X�. . ';�?- L Z .y . . . .. ., .. _.:k+F+�9°"'';�5s�!�!� '<�q;;Fx,"-77C�C�►'�!L"Q' St°tis�.rh..rs+.«ps+a:.t�r/1. �. ...���.._ . _ _ ...r. D• C EDEN PRAIRIE PLAHKING C"ISSI0N KINUTES Approved NONDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1979 7:30 PM, f iTY MALL COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Rod Sundstrom, Richard Lynch, William Bearman, Liz Retterath , George Bentley, and "Matthew Levitt COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Oke Martinson STAFF PRESENT: Chris Enger, Director of Planning; Jean Johnson , Assistant Planner; Donna Stanley, Planning Secretary Pledge of Allegiance - Roll Call I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Retterath moved to approve the Agenda as published.. Bentley seconded. Motion carried unanimously. II . APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. MINUTES Of JAN_UARY 1 S,- 1979 MOTION : Bearman moved to approve Minutes of Janudry 15, 1979 as published. Retterath seconded , motion carried 4-0-2. Lynch and Bentley abstaining. B. MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 12, 1979 MOTION : Burman moved to approve the Minutes of February 12 , 1979 as published. 'Retterath seconded, motion carried 4-0-2 , Levitt and Sundstrom abstaining. - C. MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 19, 1979. MOTION: Retterath moved to approve the Minutes of Fehruary 19 , 1979 as published. Lynch secor-+ded, motion i.arried 4-0-2 , Seaman and Retterath abstaining. II1 . MEMBERS REPORTS A. Chairman - None.- J B. Oibers - None - F mm A ApprovedApproved2b 197a _ Planning Commission Minutes 3 Fes��r. y , C. United Methodist Church. .publlic meeting. (cont'd) Bearman inquired why this particular area was chosen as a lot - shape. Pierce explained this parcel shape was chosen in order to avoid the possible 212 alignment and to allow a usable background for the homy. The shared access of the driveway to Scenic Heights Road mas ..dis cussed, and it was noted that the church, owned half of the drive- way, and the other half was owned by Mr. . Kent Barker. Levitt inquired whether this request was to be looked at as .a plat. The Planner responded that the staff is considering it as an administrative land 44vision, which will be handled through the En- gineering Uepartmeto� .. part of Ordinance 161 , if. there are no object- . tions from surrounding land owners and it is not contrary to any City ordinances. Lynch questioned item no. 4 of the staff report, regarding the pay- ment of cash park fee at time of service hook-up. the Planner ex- plained that originally the cash park fee would be paid at the time of the building permit. In this case, it might be most appropriate to requirE it as part of the land divisi,)n. Pierce agreed to the cash park fee sum for the land division, comenting that they did not- feel that the City should waive the cash park fee--for F religious organizations. r3TION: Beaman moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the rezoning of the . 9 acres from PUBLIC to R1 -22 as per the material dated February 6, 1979 and the staff report of February 22 , 1979; revising staff recommendation no. 5 to read "That the Owners must remove the property from the Tax Exempt Status it now receives Lynch seconded , motion .carried unanimously. Levitt expressed concern that this would be a burden upon the church . Pierce explained that it would not happen in this case because they do have a good buyer. V. PFT IT I ONS AND REQUESTS L.- Outlot A Crestwood 73, by Alex Doreakemper and Richard Wilson. Request to rezone 2 17 acres rom Rural to R1 -22 and preliminary plat approval for 3 jots . Located. North �+�` Dell D„ve =id east 0f 76J9 De 11 A public hearing. The City Planner discussed the request, explaining that the staff has recommended denial because this area lies outside of the M.U.S.A. line as given to us 'by the Metropolitan Council and is not an area of planned - ur6anization. In addition , the plan being submitted for approval would c require variances on side yard setbacks , or minimum lot widos . 4 �'ATt #_.,...... 1.r'�.�♦ ..y ... .. "is, �. .�,,,'r �.. ..n"F'�+ ;.lsi_s1++„'.F�-�f� i. �+�. _ .. '�'�i t�i���'�'�.'RM.�wiliC'�::�.Re.4'. 'M'T• ••t': 1Apprwied Planning Coati ss i on Mf nutes • 5 - Febmry 26, 1979 A. Outlot A, Crestwood 73. .public hearing (coot d) Mr. Henry Berg, 8744 James Ave. So. , 81ooa:in9ton, am of the property to the south of the proposed plan, explained that the .coMftion of tbt road entwing the area was very poor and n-peded upgradf"g. Mrs. Richard Wilson, 9659 Dell Drive, second party 1 i sted as prvmxwnt of the request, commented that they favored resolution of this problem because they have been living without a clear deed for 6 years. They are 1 iving on 1,/3 of the parcel , and that as far as the County is cONXT 1 0 i the property has not been divided. Bentley felt that the project appeared to have already been divided. She Planner responded that it has not been properly divided. MOTION: Bentley moved to continue the item until the next Planning Commission meeting, and direct the City Attorney to review and give an opinion on whether there has already been a subdivision, and bring the item back for consideration. Retterath seconded. DISCUSSION: The Planner explained that the City has not taken action to subdivide and the County does not recognize a subdivision because the deed describes only 1/3 of the parcel . Both parties, Wilson and Dorenkeatwr. are requesting the rezoning. Wilson questioned why a building permit was issued if the land wasn' t sub- divided when the house wes built. The Planner responded that the :ctal par- cel was' entitled to one building pemit. The County goes by oarce i number . Bentley felt the request was not making sense because of the ownP -s-Mv pro- blew. The P i anner s ugges tea that according to t!:e City, there is erne cverd ' i parcel , and the request was to divide into three parcels, as Ooremkemper ow 2/3 and Wi1sons own 1/3 of the total parcel . VOTE: The motion was defeated 2-4-0, with Sundstrom. Bearamn , Levitt, and ynch casting the dissenting votes . MOTION: Searman moved t 1 � Q close the public hearing on t1�2 platting of Outlot A. Crestwood 73. Retterath seconded, motion carried unanimusly. M'OT ION: Beaman moved to recotoend to the Counc i 1 denial of the rezoning from Rural to RI -22 and orPlimimry p1 %••iZ3 of 3 lotio aj per the state . r.rr 11 report of February 22, 1979 eliminating nos. 1 , 5; e� noting "!*tro- l itar, Council " from no. 3; and addition of: Approval of tk* rudest would. in fact, provide the possibility df settirg a precedes; Retterath seconded % motion carried unanimously. .>M:i'x"�r�•�FG�(; ati'`�{+±!�:\i°' ,'Y .�-��7Sx"1+ai+r.-..'.r-...1 I'1btM�c..' n b�•va.csas y���. .,...+... .�..�.,, r• App ru}red - Planning Commission Minutes - 2 - February 26, 1979 IV. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ` A. Saint Andrew Church, request to rezone 3. 5 acres from Rural to FUDLIC iur C.,imAruti.LJuii ui d cnurcn dui tiding. ine site is located within the Edenvale PUD , in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Valley V'ew Road and Mitchell Road. A con- tinued public meeting. Continue to '14arch 12th meeting . City Planner Enger explained that a letter has been received from the proponent requesting continuation to the March 12th meet- ing because they have been unable to work out details of the site plan as requested at the last Planning Commission in time to submit material for this meeting. MOTION : Retterath moved to continue the Saint Andrew Church rezoning request to the March 12th Planning Commission Meeting. Bentley seconded, motion carried unanimously. B. Olympic Hills , Sixth Addition, by Olympic Hills Corporation and The Preserve. Request to rezone P-:nroximately 67 acres from, Rural to P.1 -13. 5, preliminary plat approval of 89 single family lots and 7 outlots upon the entire Ill acre site, and approval of 1 Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The site is located wEst of the Olympic Hills Clubhouse, east of Sunnybrook Road, a;:d south, of Neil Lake. A continued public hearing. Continue to March 12th. The Planner discussed the revisions made in the grading plan by the proponent, elimination of the lower loop road. The staff is working with the proponent in establishing a phasing program if the project were to be approved in order to have an orderly lot system. MOTION: Retterath moved to continue the public hearing on Olympic Hills , Sixth Addition to the March 12, 1979 meeting. Bentley seconded, motion carried unanimously. C. United Methodist Church, request to rezone .9 acres from PUBLIC to - R -22 for an existing home at 15150 Scenic Heights Road. - A public meeting. The Planner referred to the request and to the staff report recommen- dation for approval , explaining that the area is currently serviceable by sewer and water. Mr. Tim Pierce, of pierce Associates, introduced Mr. Bob Hogie, representative of the Methodist Church. He briefly summarized the reason for the request, explaining that the Eden Prairie United Methodist Church has decided to give their Pastor a housing allowance for retire- ment purposes, and that the parsonage will have to be sold. They are therefore requesting a zoning change and .administrative subdivision on the .9 acres, and explained they they are adhering to all city requireme4b Approved j Planning Commission Minutes - 4 - February 26, 1979 i A. Gutl_ of AL Crestwood 73., . .public hearin (cont`d) Mr. Alex Dorenkemper, 18925 Pioneer Trail , proponent , presented his request, explaining that this preliminary plat was approved before there was a Metropolitan Council and Guide Plan , and the lots have been this wav since 1968. He stated they have :used R1 -13.5 setback requirements rather than R1-22, and that homes were set back 10' in the project because they were all the same and set up_ according to the City specifications in order to meet the ordinance regulations. Dorenkemper questioned item no. S of the staff recommendation regarding Dell Drive as presently i.n. excess of the lenqth of cul-de-sacs allowed by the ordinance. The Planner explained that the gravel road to the west is substandard and that there is only one access out to the south. He felt it was important to questicn whether it is appropriate for one-half acre platting without utilities outside of the M. U .S.A. line. Dorenkemper explained further that when he applied i,i 1974 for these- three lots , he signed the landholding agreement , but it cost him more than he anticipated for the cul-de-sac road improvement . He f„ithe. stated that this proposal was recommended for preliminary plat by the Planning Commission at one time and one lot was sold on this condition. Retterath questioned how the proponent proposed to provide access for Lot C of the plan, because the -cul -de-sac ended at Lot B. - Dorenkemper explained that the cul-de-sac currently ends at lot B and access to it for Lot C would have to cone through the public right-of-way. The cul-de-sac surfacing currently infringes on lot B and if the cul -de-sac were Extended and the right-of-way left the same, its rad d us would then infringe on lot C. Bentley asked for the history of the proposal in terms of the original Crestwoo(� whict: had been approved. The Planner explained that the M. U:S.A.- line was not in existence at that time and that the City was involved in a new zoning Ordi- nance and a Guide Plan. There was a final pl :t approving lots along the south and west side of the read, and, in 1973 the rest of the plat was approved along the north and Past sidE of the road , and that: these three lots were held out because they did not front onto Cell Drive. The area north and west are par- celed out in 5 acre lots . 82arfsian asked w;;ethcK the 1973 Metrupol i tan Development Framework Plan was to be used as guidelines or whether it was mandatory. The Pianner- resporded that Eden Prairie can choose not to follow the guide lines to a certa;n extent, but the Metropolitan Council determines whether Eden Prairie :rill receive any revenue back from the Federal goverment, Bearman asked whether Dorenkemper would object to completing the street up to City specifications. The Planner explained that if the 'lotsw ere approved, the staff mould suggest 6W right-of-way, and the road would have to be 28' . with all of the lots having full frontage on the street. One of the technic , pro3bl ems wi th the p1 an* was the I ack of a street to - serge the lots. Mr. Arthur Cavara, 9617 Crestwood Terrace, pointed out that approval of the lots would set a precedence, and that Ne : Ives. oQ 1; acme her360.,a of tz:A Mol ;0-4 of the City and Metro Council . Approved Planning Commission Minutes - 6 - February 1979 B. Cardinal Creek by Cardinal Creek Associates. Request for PUD Development Plan, rezoning of 53 acres from Rural to R1 -13. 5, preliminary plat annroval of 99 lots . and approval of E.A.W. A Public Hearing. Chairman Sundstrom called for a 5 minute break :n the meeting. Communications were received from Mr. John Westlund and Mr. Don Opheim in support of the Cardinal Creek project. The Planner summarized the project and the concerns of the planning staff with the proposal , explaining that this parcel is part of an original PUD, but that it does not hinge upon it in any way. Some of t;;e lots are within the shoreline area of the Nine-Mile Creek, but the staff suggests there is no environmental impact on the area. He explained further that there is no adopted policy or ordinance that states there should be no cul -de-sacs , but through Citv Council ' s directives in past meetings ,recommended the through roads , rather than. independent cul -de-sacs , noting maintenance problems and public safety concerns with cul -de-sac situations. Prior to application , he suggested a loop road or tr.rough street for the project , but the applicants chose to submit a cul -de-sac pattern. Mr. Gregory Gustafson , Attorney for Cardinal Creek Associates ; Mr. Billy Bye; and Mr. Lyle Folkestad,of Bruce Knutson Architects Inc. were present to dis- cuss the proposal . Bye summarized the history of the site, explaining that they felt the pro- ject was compatible with land to the west; they are within the City Ordinance with no variations at 1 . 1 units per acre. He explained further that it will be developed by a number of contractors , and that Cardinal Creek Associates will be selling land and lots but will not be a part of the build}ng program. He responded to the alternative suggested of a loop road rather than cul -de-sacs , and that it was their feeling that it would not be conducive to their projec&-:. Bye expressed support for the upgrading of Baker Road and agreed to do whatever the, could to accomplish this , noting that the straightening out of the road has been anticipated since the City was a Village. Folksestdd illustrated area location and explained that the open space area follow, Nine-Mile Creek and includes the flood plain aspect• somewl t. The lake has no surface water, but is all marsh. Lynch questioned whether homes would be built into the flood plain. The Planner responded yes, and that the Departmeni of Natural Resources has informed the City that this aria does not fall under public waters , but the. project must be reviewed by the Nine-Mile Creek Watershed District, particularly in regards to encroachment the flood plain area. Bye expressed their concern that the Planning Commission, City Council and City know their toal building plans , noting that an outlot can become somethit other than what it was originally designated for. PlanningCommission Minutes -A7�roved February 1 y 26 , 979 B. Cardinal Creek. . . . public hearing. (cont'd) a Bearman questioned the 4 lots that would lie in th4 flood plain area , noting that there have been 2 years of 100 year rains . Folkestad ex- plained the soil v.ould have to be excavated and graaed. Bearman asked how, the residents would respond to living next to the gra- vel pit occurring to the south. Gustafson responded that they have contacted the owners of the gravel pit and were assured that it is just ab^ut used up and they would comply with the Reclamation Ordinance . lie explained further that they will try to direct their project so as to end ;gyp wit" 58 lots , and that they are trying to decrease the original high density PUJ in order to crake the project more acceptable to the people to the west. Bea naan inquired to what extent they were going to landscape. Gustafson explained that they intended to be very generous with landscaping and will try to achieve a boulevard concept. The proponents were not in favor of the trails directly through the residents ' yards and felt it led to problems among neighbors . The increase of 34' right-of-way was discussed and the proponents expressed willingness 1.o work with the County on that issue, although they would have to lose one lot. Levitt inquired about the north road , and the possibility of a prcblan with people moving in with the impression that it was a cul -de-sac. Gustafacr explained that north road will be dedicated to the City. The Planner responded that signs marked "tenpora-y deadend" would be used to inform the public of the road status. Mr. Mike Best, 6885 Rosemary Rd. , Realtor, expressed support for the plan submitted. He felt that Eden Prairie was not unique in the use of cul-de-sacs , and that he felt the loop road would destroy ::he nature of the character and integrity of the area and requested that tte Commission aprrove the plan with the loop road. The Planner responded that the staff does reccxjnize the reason for platting with cul -de-sacs , but they did not ;pant to leave the City with an increased maintenance situation. Mrs. Elaine Renier, 13895 Holly Road, Realtor, expressed support for the cul-de-sac pattern,, commenting that houses on cul -de-sacs are far trare saleable { and also feels that taxes will compensate the City for maintemn e. Gustafson e;;-►lained that th::y had researched the staff recommendation of the loop road extensittely, but prefer the cul-de-sac pattern. t Levitt asked" Nether the proponents would be in agreement' with the road rigirt of. way reco mendQtion ii the County and City require stafson re.; nod that at- this times, they are in agreement. �,, } • u1 Approv,,A - Planning Commission Minutes - 9 - Feb. 269 1979 VIII. PLANNER'S REPORT (cont'd) -A B. Upcom4og Projects .a — 1 . Bluff' s West, Third and Fovrt;i r: Y 2. Hartford Insurance Co. - are r lanni ng to submis t. their plans on March 8 for March 26th meeting. 3. High Yf-3ii Estates - located west of Coach Light Manor. 4. alpine Estates IX . GUIDE PLAN UPDATE The following changes and com ants were suggested: Pg. 6-1 , par. ? ; delete "stimulated" , add "5a:anced". (also change in para. 5) Pg. 6--1 , 2nd to the last para; add "Investigation in using Guide Plan in reviewing general pro-ject reviews" . Pg. 6-1 ; last parts ; eliminate the paragraph. Pg. 6-2; add after para 2 = "f. Utilize atoctern record retrieval , i .e. expansion of computer (Logis systm) . Pg. 6-2, eliminatc ►-o. 2. Pg. 6-2; no. 3a; el im ..iate last sentence and itemize as 3.b. reading "Adopt zone frr interim property use" . Pr. 6-2; delete itero 5; add no. 5 "Provide the opportunity through the P.U. D. process to provide middle and low cost housing" . Pg. 6-3; change no. 7 to read "Aflopt a new residential zonir9 district with a 20,000 sq. ft. mir:;murr which would allow for a mix to he utilized when interspersed with single faiily detached in P.U.D. " . Pg. 6-3; item no. 9; delete "in advance of" ; add "in step with" . Pg. 6-4; item no. 1 ; dele'-e "oeriodir-01y" , add "cwetinuing" an6 "with a oaximm of S years" after "relevance" . Pg. 6-15; delete no. 4. delete "such as : parks , utilities , airports, and transit". - WT 1 o_- 6ea rq;1n moved _to recrn m cnct try tt,e City Council , the written and JIMM14:1.1 Guide plan lVdate. Levitt seconded, a*tion carried unanimously. - earmall moved tn adjourn at 12:0-1 P.M. . seconded by Lynch. Mutiov� t;errip.d umnimusiy. I - l February 26, 1979 Eden Prairie Planning Commission Eden Prairie City Council Eden Pray i ei e, Mai Attention: City Planner Chris Enger Ladies and Gentlemen: I first moved to Eden Prairie in 1963 and lived in the King's Foresi area on Kingston Drive at that time. I moved back to Eden Prairie a fear years ago after living in Florida for some time. I have always enjoyed living in Eden Prairie and particularly the section which is King's Forest and Forest Hills. I now live at 13730 Theresa Place. received a notice of your public hearing Y*garding a proposed development on Baker Road. I air, very pleased to endorse this develop- ment and its plat. I am very pleased that this single family develop- _ anent is going in, and we hope it will bring fine neighbors to our community. It surely is the best plan I have seen -- compared to other proposals. Sincerely, oh��n 0. ides t1 and - F l 'I • .' _ _.r .� - - .0 - - 4. ot�.•`K•. -�'.R.~ � _ .t►f `....I'r' -- .. ..�•t^'.' „^c -v-..- .. uw.�T.,..,. .,..._�..�.... ._-. _ _-__ .. �Y��'�'-'�w�r�:i��7.i+iAs.,rs r i k• W .�I ..Dui t,. •, .. .�p�, �y�.,� _• .,:, , .. . .. .. _ a._ .=��'lLt ..biw..#':�"���1rS�gr ° r w�iC/l`i.SiGS'h J`; �1 ..t'��.S/:.n'f v\��i'Av`M/. � '__y*•;,-_ f r i i jUrw C)CV -y4 rwtj ppib t 1 1 _ ant gh-, I& WV wI IW IrlSl9 "N MIY�n.tlu 9AI .. 0 -A • r Approved Planning Ca=ission MInutes - S - February 26, 1979 8. Cardinal Creek. public hearing (cont'd) Levitt inquired whether the proponents had any objections to a. . side- walk along the road. Gustafson responded that a sidewalk would be more desirable than a pathway. MOTION: Lynch raved to close the Public Hearing on the Cardinal Creek preliminary plat. Beaman seconded , motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Lynch moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the rezoning of approximately 53 acres from Rural to R1 -13. 5 for Cardinal Creek based upon the plat dated 2-22-79 and the staff report of Feb. 22 , 1979. Levitt seconded, motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Lynch moved to recornnend to the Council approval of the preliminary plat as per the staff report of 2/21 /79 with the following exceptions : eliminate "b" , add "To conform to City Engineer' s Staff Report" . Bearman seconded, motion carried unanimously. MOTION: Lynch moved to recommend to the Council approval of the draft Environmental Assessment Worksheet for Cardinal Creek finding no signifi- cant impact. Bentley seconded, motion carried unanimously. VI. OLD BUSINESS - None VII. NEW BUSINESS - None VIII. PLANNER' S REPORT -�tw '----spo rtation Plan A. Review or Hennepin �.uu�� . , ..,� briefly summarized the basic discrepancies of the Plan between `he County proposed system and t!.e road system anticipated by Eden Prairie in its 1979 Guide Plan Update, The fol 1 owi ng comments were added to the Plan by the Planning Commission: Eliminate no. 3. Add "Signatization and improvement of site line distances" . to no. 6. Add no. 10: Signal at Co. Rd. 18 and Anderson Lai Parkway. Add no. 11 : Signal on Co. Rd. 1 and Highway 212. ^Y Motion: Bentley moved to recommend to the City Council approval eft e Hennepin County Transportation Plan as per 5t3ff report of February 229 1979 with the additional comments as listed above. Retterath seconded , motion carried 5-0-1 . Bearman abstaining because Beammn requested that Mr. hurt Lear be eliminated from the petition suixnitted - by Rowland Road residents dated 2/14/79, as that resident has moved from the - area recently. Agenda-Planning Commission Page 2 9: 15 B. Bluffs West Third 8 Fourth Additions , by Hustad Dev. Corp. Request PUD concept. approval ; rezoning from Rural to R1 -13. 5 , M• A P J A r C 1 i�i ....,..• .1 �♦ �. RNA.r�1 �n.w �..n.r.nV�P111+O�V W'1 4..7 Ulu IMI U. J FJf Ci 11111110 a FFI Vr%A6 1 VI urpl W^8......... ., 640 units on 184 acres;and finding of no significant impact, EAW. A public hearing. VII . OLD BUSINESS 9:45 A. Discussion of Meeting dates and time VII1 . NEW BUSINESS IX. PLANNER' S REPORT 9:55 A. Discussioh of Residential Mortgage Bonds 10:20 X. ADJOURNMENT IF