Planning Commission - 03/26/1979 AGENDA
Eden Prairie Planning Commission
14onday, March 26, 1979
7:30 PM, City Hall
COIMMISSION MEMBERS: Chairman Wi 1 l i am Bearman, Liz Retterath, Oke
Martinson, Matthew Levitt, George Bentley, Hakon
Torjesen, and Virginia Gartner
STAFF MEMBERS: Chris Enger, Planning Director; Jean Johnson,
Assistant Planner; Donna Stanley, Pl anri ng Secretary
Pledge of Allegiance - Roll Call
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE MARCH 12, 1979 MEETING
III. MEMBERS REPORTS
IV. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Hich�Trail Estates, by Countryside Investment, Inc. Request to rezone
40 acres from Rural to RI-I3.5 and preliminary plat 79 single family
hoaxes. Located north of Duck Lake Trail between Duck Lake Road and
168th avenue Test. A public hearing.
B. Meadow Park, by Faulks & Reynolds. Request to rezone 25 acres from
to Rural to R -13.5 and preliminary plat 44 single family lots. Located
north of Sunnybrook Road. A public hearing.
C. Olympic Hills Sixth Addition E.A.W. Request for approval. of E.A.M.
finding o no s gel. cant impact.
D. Hcwaarti Devela- t+" smt Siena a Amendment, request for signage
change or: ade ion to freestanding A sign, 1 "the movies" call
sign; and l ae ,,ional identification entry signs.
V. PETITIONS A:;,, ALQUESTS
=A. Bluffs West Third and Fourth Additions, by Hustad Development
orporat ion. equestfr-PU6 concept approval ; rezoning from P.ural
to R1-13.5, RM 6.5 and RM 2.5; orel iminary plat approval for approxi-
mbtely 640 units on 184 acres; and approval of E.A.W. finding of no
significant impact. A continued public hearing.
8. Hartford Estate C ,ny, request for PUD developwent; rezoning
fray Rural and -5 to Office and Cowmerctal Regional Service,
preliminary plat approval , and approval of E.A.W. finding of no
significant impact. Located West of Anderson Lakes, North of NortMarh
-Additions, East of Eden Prairie Center, and South of nest 78th Street.
A.pwblic hearing.
�!9}e.t ',a.N,�,.4 v +SM'� �i'�'�i`1�. '•*'Y� .�.,`�' 4s '`�-- .;� a �;v-1.� . }t' t' y N.�'e��T�'-,�.. .u,... ,.
1
1
1
Agenda-Planning Commission page 2
Monday, March 26, 1979
7:30 PM, City Hall
V. PETITIONS AND RE BESTS, continued
C. Cooptrative Power Association PUB, request for PUB approval on I-5
zoned landor exceeding O o? a use and for construction of a
tower. Located in the Southwest corner of TH #5 and Mitchell Road.
A public hearing.
VI. OLD BUSYNESS
VII . NEW BUSINESS
VIII . PLANNER'S REPORT
IX. ADJOURNMENT
..CDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COfMISSION
MINUTES
approved
MONDAY, MARCH 26, i979 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
COMMISVION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman William Bearman, Matthew Levitt,
Liz Retterath. Halton Torjesen, George Bentley,
Virginia Gartner
C"ISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Oke Martinson
STAFF PRESENT: Chris rnger, Director of Planning
Donna Stanley, Nanning Secretary
PLEDGE Or ALLEGIANCE - ROLL CALL
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The following items were requested to be added to the Agenda:
VI. A. Discussion of Joint Planning Commission and Council Meeting
VI I. A. 1teratur o Clean Air Amendment
" B. Setting Spgcia , Meeting Date on General Discussion Workshop
MOTION: Retterath moved, seconded by Bentley, to approve Agenda as
published and amended. Motion carried unanimously.
II . APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE MARCH 12, 1979 MEETING
Pg. 2, para. 2, delete last sentence, add "by the proponent and staff , and
also after discussion with Mr. Peter Gisselbeck, owner .of the condominiums
to the north. "
MOTION: Torjesen moved to approve the Minutes of the March 12, 1979
meeting as published and amended, Motion was seconded by Retterath, and
carried unanimously.
III . MEMBERS REPORTS
None.
IV. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. High Trail Estates , by Countryside Investment, Inc. Request to rezone
40 acres ram Rural to R1-13. 5 and preliminary plat 79 single family
_ 1. LOcatPd north Af i�t�k I Akio Tr�4l I�a�rsen Lhick Lake 0-ad anal
- 168th Avenue West. A public hearing.
Mr. Cliff Swenson, representing the proponent, discussed the revised
plat distributed this evening, indicating the modification of Honeysuckle Lane
to intersect with the existing Honeysuckle Lane on the east side of 168th
Ave. , west.
• The City Planner discussed the staff report of !larch 22, 1979 in re-
lation to the revised plat. The tot lot is still included, with the 45'
frontage on the northern cul-de-sac; 60' night-of-way easement; requirement
of a lift i tation to the norte to ser,tice lots to the north; lots are con%is-
approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 3 - March 26, 1979
B. Meadow Park. .public he (continued)
.Mr. Don Buteyn representative for the pro-
ponent, explained that the surrounding proposals , Lake Heights Addition and
Olympic Hills Sixth Addition have received Planning Commission approval , and
that they are currently negotiating with N. S. P. on
land to the west, and they feel it will not present a problem. There is an
N.S. P. easement, on the land. This property will contain middle and upper
income hones.
Mr. Jerry Sundeen, land surveyor for the proponent discussed the site as
rolling, agricultural land, with all lots cuietorminQ to the zQnina ordinance.
They are negotiating wit', N. S. P. for right-of-way for Homeward Hills Road
and the outlot that would be created between placement of the lots.
Bentley asked what alternatives were available if there was difficulty in
the negotiation of the right-of-way from N.S.P. . Sundeen responded that the
plat would have to be re-designed and explained that the City staff favored the
extension of Homeward Hills Road. The Planner added that this project would
need the approval of the Riley/Purgatory Watershed District,and the
Department of Natural Resources would have to make a determination on fill
in public waters . If fill is necessary, a permit will be requ i red. tit
explained further that an alternate plan was running Homeward Hills Road through
the middle of the plat.
Bentley asked what, the time schedule was for this project. Lundeen responded
they would like to proceed at the best reasonable rate on the project.
Levitt questioned no. 9 of staff report, and requested an evaluation of these
two cul-de-sacs to see whether there was a way to alleviate them. He comrmented
that there have been several proposals recently in the Neil Lake area, and that
the Shoreland ,'Management Ordinance was in tfie• piroces� of being adopted. The
City favored Neil Lake as a"general development` classification, rather than a
"natural environmental" . The Planner explained that the Shoreland Manaopment
Ordinance has only received first reading approval from the City Counc:i1 , and
that the City will have tc petition the DNR in order to change the classification.
and this shoud be done prior to the final adoptiop of the Ordinance. He explained
further that the City has talked with OUR representatives regarding the Preserve
as far as densities , and has been told to honor previous comittments .
The pedestrian syatem, which according to the staff report, was designated to
run around Neil Lake, was discussed and the Planner explained that the original -
pl an has been md-;f;ed along Hopn.eeward Bills Road and tha: the near yard path
E
has been- eliminated.
Levitt asked whether it was agreeabl3 to the developer that the sidewalk
leading from Outlot C he placed within right-0-way of Homeward Hills Road. _
Sunken responded affirmative, it is contemplated For the project. - F
Mr. Dion Buteyn, representing the proponents . requested information on the pro-
lem of assessments on upgrading of Sunnybrook Road. The Planner explained the
three methods of hmndiinj the problem; as developer installation, request for assessment - heating, and 0� ,- petition for improvements .
r�
iapproved
Planning Commission Minutes - 2 - March 26, 1979
A. High Trail Estates. . . . .public hearing (Continued)
tent with the Shoreland Management Ordinance.
Bentley ;-jes ti oned whether there were any significant changes in lot sizes
and also whether the city park property that the storm sewer drained out
onto is developed The Planner responded there are ni significant lot size
changes , and that the park land is undeveloped. ;fie stressed the importance
of the Park and Recreation Department working with the proponent on the park
issue.
The required lift station was discussed , the cost to the City, and whether
it would solve the problem. The Planner explained that the City does pay the
cost of a lift station , maintenance and continuing operational costs
although the developer pays for installation.
MOTION No. l : Levitt moved to close the public hearing on High Trail Estates ,
seconded by Retterath. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION NO. 2: Levitt moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the
Environmental ,assessment Worksheet finding of no significant impact , seconded
by Bentley. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION NO. 3: Levitt moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the
rezoning from Rural to R1-13. 5 as per the plans dated 2/8/79, as modified by
plan submitted 3/26/79, and per staff report of March 23, 1979 with the follow-
ing modification to the staff report:
Addition of No. 11 : That the Council considers the cost effectiveness
of the lift station. Torjesen seconded, motion carried unanimously.
MOTION NO. 4: Levitt moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the
preliminary plat dated 2/8/79 , as modified by plan submitted 3/26/79, and per
staff report of 3/23/79 with above listed modification . Retterath seconded ,
motion carried unanimously.
B. Meadow. Park, by Faulks b Reynolds. Request to rezoria 26 acres from Rural
to - 3. 5 and preliminary plat 44 single fami:y lots. Located north of
Sunnybrook Road. A public hearing.
The City Planner discussed the staff report of March 20, 1979 explaining that
one of the main concerns was access to the property, and that the planning
staff does not Feel that Sunnybrook Rd. west is a viable access for the devel -
opment because it is a gravel roae and has a hazardous intersection at U.S . 169.
He outlined several alternatives for access through the construction of Home-
ward Hills Road extension as well as a secondary access through Olympic Hills
Sixth Addition or an access to Creek Knoll Road via direct connection between
Sunnybrook Road and Creek Knoll Road.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 4 - 4arch 26, 1979
B. Meadow Park. . . . public hearing (continued)
Mrs. Libby Hargrove, 126-40 Sunnybrook Rd. , presented two concerns : increased
traf`ic on Sunnybrook with increased housing, and would like assurance that
the Homeward Hills access would be undertaken. She asked whether Sunnybrook Rd .
would then be cul-de-saced? The Planner responded
that the staff rec „ endation
would be to cul -de-sac Sunnybrook Road to Highway 169 at time of second access .
Hargrove expressed favor for the cul -de-sacing of Sunnybrook Rd. She inquired
further about the improvement of Sunnybrook Rd. and who would pay for them.
The Planner responded that improvements would include sewer and water for
the residents of Sunnybrook Road lying east of Homeward Hills Road.
Torjesen questioned whether it was appropriate to recommend approval with so
many items being unknown. The Planner explained that there are three other
subdivisions in the area that will provide the necessary access , and it is
advantageous to be able to consider them all at one time.
Mrs. Betty Trouth , '12005 Sunnybroc.. Rd. , asked where the high line was located
on Sunnybrook Rd. The Planner located the placement on the map.
Benley requested- continuance of the project until adjacent land had been negotiat
and felt there were too many contingencies .
Mr. Dean Faulks , one of the owners of the development, assured the Commission
that the N.S. P. property would not be a problem. He commented that they were
very close to are agreement on the land.
MOTION: Levitt moved to dose the Public Hearing on Meadow Park, seconded by
Gartner. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION #2: Levitt moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the re-
zoning from Rural to R1 -13. 5 for 26 acres as per the material dated March
1979 and based upon the staff report of March 20, 1979 and adoption of FINDINGS
AND CONCLUSIONS of the staff report , with the following modifications to the
staff report:
12. Approval by the Riley/Purgatory Creek Watershed District.
13. Elimination of one of proposed street namesof "Larkspur Circle" .
14. Provision of two accesses excluding Sunnybrook Rd. west.
15. Elimination of Outlot B from the plat.
The motie+i was seconded by Gartner and the motion carried 5-l-, 'with Bentley
voting "nay" .
MOTION 03: Levitt moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the
preliminary plat dated March , 1979, based upon the staff report of March 20,
1979 , including the FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS in staff report along with the
additions listed above. Gartner seconded, motion carried 5-1 , with Bentley
voting "nay" .
approved
Panning Commission Minutes - b - March 26, 1939
C. Olympic Hills Sixth Addition E.A.W. Request for approval of E,;A.W.
finding of no significant impact.
v.n#-m^"Ar% 1 ♦n n.1.ne-+z n1%.- o%n ♦ 6e% r A 1.1
1 IIG 1 1111111G! 1 GJ'.VIlua.0 MV yI/VJ 1. .V'.J v11 N11\. a.•.1•!.•
MOTION: Retterath moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the
E.A.W. finding of no significant impact. Gartner seconded , motion carried
unanimously.
D. Homart Development Company Siana a Amendment , request for signage change
Tor: addition to freestanding UA sig^ , the movies" wail sign ; and
2 additional iden' ification entry signs .
The Planner discussed the request: by the Homart Development Company and
United Artists Cinema explaining that the request is for a revision to the
original Signage Program approved through the P.U.D. process.
Mr. Rich Robey, Eden Prairie Center Manager, summarized the request as
"three requests in one". He explained that when the signs were originally
installed , it was their intention that the signs would be seen readily from
Highway 169 , and they feel the signs do not serve this purpose at this time.
They feel a distinct need to advertise the Eden Prairie Center , and that is
the reasan for the request for the "topper" . Tha t :o cntr; s gr:s rr a b:. n7
requested because of topographic change , making one sign invisible from the
other sign placement. The purpose of the request for the "Movies" exterior
sign is to clarify the exact door location of the movies because of numerous
complaints received from movie patrons who have parked a long distance from
the entrance.
The Planner asked the Planning Commission to consider whether the additional
identification warrants another 4' of height on top of the present UA sign.
Robey explained that the present UA sign was designed primarily as a movie
marquee, and they are looking for providing identification for the Eden Prairie
Center.
Bearlman felt the additional identification sign would not solve their pro-
blem.
Levitt did not feel the identification sign was necessary, and questioned
whether they had considered the small road signs along Highway 169 designating
turn offs into the Center. Robey responded that they have received complaints
that patrons cannot find the Center , because it is not marked. He explained
they have researched the question of a pylon sign for the Center, and of the
total number of Centers we are involved in,: all have the type of sign that is
being proposed.
Beaman inquired what the status of the Sian Ordinance for Eden Prairie was
presently. The Planner responded that the staff has, found that the Sign Ordinance
has workedfairly well within the last two ,years.
.approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 7 - March 26 , 1979
A. Bluffs West Third and Fourth Additions. public nearing
(continued)
Mrs . Lorraine Lhr,stopher, 10550 Riverview Drive , expressed opposition to
the large amount of homes on small lots , commenting that they had moved to
this area for some "elbow room" . She isked how this was allowed . Bearman
explained that under City Ordinance , through the P .U. D. process , certain
trade-offs may be allowed if it is to be of benefit of the overall City.
Mrs . Jeanne Brandt , 12300 Riverview Rd. , questioned how many people this would
bring in , acid expressed concern with the impact on the schools and city ser-
vices such as Public Safety. Putnam responded the project would involve abcut
4,000 people, explaining that people as,e not going to wart to buy expensive
lots overlooking a cornfield. If you want to slow down the populatiu- ni Coming in
large lots is one way to d3 it. He commented that they have "read" the City as
wanting to grow.
Mrs . Brandt inquired how close the Sinitary Landfill came to the apartment site?
Putnam explained that after the landfill is complete, the units will be backed
up to the edge of the landfill . He added that these would be the same type of
multiple housing as in Bloomington ' s Countryside West Area
Mrs . Ellen Kosheniro , 10541 East Ri�,-rview Drive, was opposed to such variances
and the density of t;iese lots . Their intention in moving into their present
area was to be in a single family residential area. They are opposed to the
quads .
Toriesen asked whether the proponent was saying that the trade-offs made on
the earlier projects binds the City to what can be done with this project?
Putnam responded negative, and explained how the trade-offs on the former
projects occurred.
Levitt felt the Bluffs West Third and Fourth should be looked at apart from
..ne other additions.
Bentley asked whether these units would be as closely spaced as Prairie East
8th and 9th Additions located on Co.Rd. 18. Putnam responded negative, they would
be 70 feet apart as a minimum.
Levitt requested addressing the airport situation , extention of the run-way,
and the impact on the river and creek in the area as part of the staff report.
Levitt questioned the Landfill situation. Putnam explained that they are talking
;with the Pollution Control Agency people and Browning and Ferris.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 9 - [arch 26, 1979
B. Hartford Real Estate Company. .public hearing (continued)
Bentley, referring to neighborhood meetings held, the suggestion was made
for a buffer strip unzoned. Ketcham responded that if this area is not
zoned, the owners of the buildings cannot take credit for it in terms of
ground coverage. This can be written into the developer' s agreement.
Retterath asked what was planned for the additional traffic on W. 78th St. ,
and the concern expressed by residents. The Planner responded that the scheduled
merge of W. 78th Street east bound with the off-ramp from 1-494 to Co.Rd. 18,
in 1980 would be helpful .
The fol1owlnq concerns were expressed and requested that they be included in the
staff report: the amount of impervious surface; DNR recommendation on water
quality; impact on the City sewer system; and future building plans through
the P.U.D. and precedent in the past.
TorJesen asked what the preference of the residents was , speaking to the neigh-
borhood meetings , as far as what is being proposed. oentley responded that the
preference was office park over medium residential .
Mr. Bob Dunbar, 11270 Lanewood Circle, commented that the residents were pleased
with the proposal , but questioned the distance of the nortn arm of Lanewood
Circle to the proposed site. Ketcham responded 415' , at the closest.
40 MOTION: Levitt moved to continue the Hartford Real Estate Company request
to the April 9, 1979 meeting. Tor.iesen seconded . mntinn rirriPd unanimously.
C. Cooperative Power Association PUD, request for PUD approval on I-5 zoned
an or exceeding SG . office use and for construction of a tower. Located in
the Southwest corner of 'H #5 and Mitchell Road . A public hearing .
Mr. Oon Brauer, Brauer and Associates , LTD. Inc . , rode the presentation explain-
;ng that the comoany was an association of rural electrical cooperatives and
they are requesting- PUD approval on I-5 zoned land for use as a site for their
headquarters . He introduced Mr. Jerry Kingrey, Land Use Consultant and Engineer
for the project.
Brauer discussed why they had chosen the P.U. D. method , because it is second
ownership ( they are purchasing land from Eaton Char Lynn Co. ) with a sma l i build-
ing site; 60! office-40.4 non-office; and will be control center for 19 coopera-
Mr. Lloyd Berquist, BWBR Architects , discussed the plan further, explaining
that the entrance road would be built to City standards .
Dearman read the letter received from one of the adjacent landowners , Mrs.
Schultz, 8100 Mitchell Road, expressing concern with the proposed road.
approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 11 - March 26, 1979
B. Setting Special Meeting Date cn General Discussion Workshop
It was agreed by the Commission to meet on April end at 7 :00 in the
conference room for a general discussion workshop.
VIII . PLANNER' S REPORT None.
IX. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Retterath moved to adiourn at 1 : 15 AM, Levitt seconded. Motion
carried unanimously.
J
til • W N i . All, ■w it ■. 1116 W ri"liAL0, Ai� A wall A.l`I A I ill J LW O!i L Ilw:4k,I J u I,�IW��IuW ���. �W�7�i Wi a J�i13V uM+q��� a I lf� rl I�MII �iAyV Vu �4�I��Y IVI4 d�.�'i11��
approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 6 - March26, 1979
D. Homart Development Company Signage Amendment. . (Continued)
MOTION: Bentley moved to approve the "topper" sign upon UA Movie
Mari► loc ae rnnllAc' oi k+o �nA iin4+eNA
. .... .'....... .w.r . �.'.. ... .....v .v� . v.- .... .. ✓ . • �. .Vr/n...1. .. V VUM *Allj %Aa a" V 1. 1 bbM I%a b 1 J bJ
Cinema as per staff report of March 20, 1979. Retterath seconded ,
Motion carried 3-2-1 Bentley, Retterath and Levitt "aye"
Torjesen , and Beaman "nay"
Gartner "abstain"
MOTION moved to approve the location , but not the design of the two
entry signs as per staff report of March 20, 1979 and per proponent' s
request. The motion died for the lack: of a second.
MOTION: Bentley moved to approve the UA Wall sign for "The Movies" ,
as part of the six allowable signs as per March 20, 1979 staff report and
per proponents' s request. Levitt seconded , motion carried unanimously.
V. PETITIONS AND REQUESTS
A. Bluffs West Thirt4-1 d Fourth Additions , by Hustad Development
Corporation. F. �; >r for P11D concept approval ; rezoning from Rural
to R1-13. 5, RM f . , _ •-.J RM 2. 5; preliminary plat approval for approxi -
mately 640 units onln8. 5acres ; and approval of E.A.W. finding of no
significant impact. A continued public hearing.
Mr. Dirk Putnam, Hustad Development Corporation , referred to their letter
dated March 19, 1979, in which they have tried to address some of the con-
cerns expressed by the staff and Planning Commissions .
Bentley questioned the rationale for the extremely large number of variance
lots in the project, (60l explaining that some are only 1-700 sq . ft. in
size, and some of the quadraminium lots are only 17 ,000 to 26 ,00 sq . ft.
in size. Putnam explained the relationship of the Bluffs West and Bluffs
Test Second Additions to the Third and Fourth. Through the long process of
solving the neighborhood park site problem, they Intended purchasing land
for a thirty acre park and are also paying the cash park: fee. He explained
that this amount has to be picked up somewhere, and they are proposing puttin
in more lots to spread the cost around.
Bentley asked whether smaller lots bring about loweer cost housing? Putnam
responded that if Orrin Thompson Homes cannot purchase land for a certain
price, they will not build. Rapid development will not happen in the mere
expensive homes.
Bentley inquired whether the Planner had all the necessary information
needed from the developer for a staff report. The Planner responded
that a grading plan at 2' intervals is necessary for review. and the pro-
ponent has only provided a mass grading plan. He emphasized that this is
a large sc.)pe project.
:.......-.o...�.-✓..."1.r�.^,.r..L.. rN�. .sw —.rn - -.""v :.w.w�w�.r.LUJL ..Y �r�L.�.WhrilS'.il..�'..nw .a:e4ra�"ti.""J'.r17tf
approved
Planning Commission Minutes - 8 - March 25, 1979
A. Bluffs West Third and Fourth Additions. . (continued)
Additional information was requested by the rianner regarding the pos�i
bi 1 i ty of methane .:us dangers , and the question of liability , noting - "•a t
B. F. 1 . may apply for an additional fill permit.
Torjesen requested that the following questions be addressed in the staff
report on this project: land use concept for this area , airport expansion ,
and density in this type of application.
Bentley stated that the Joint Airport Zoning Board should have input into tl�e
zoning around the airport.
MOTION: Bentley moved to Continue Bluffs West Third and Fourth Additions
to the April 9th meeting. Retterath seconded , motion carried unanimously.
B. Hartford Real Estate Company, request for PUD development ; rezoning from
Rural and I-5 to Office and Commercial Regional Service , prelimincry plat approval ,
approval of E.A. W. finding of no significant impact. Located West of Ander-
son Lakes , North of Northmark Additions , East of Eden Prairie Center, and
South of West- 78th Street. A public hearing.
Mr. Frank Sparicio, Hartford Real Estate Company , made the presentation ,
using slides to briefly give the Planning Commission samples of the various
types of projects they have done around the country. The first proposed � .
building was scheduled for construction in 1930. They felt the
M. C.A. concept was good and viable , and the constraints are in keeping with the
beauty already there. He mentioned meetings with the residents , and one of the
concerns was the linkage between residents and the office park. There would
be no connection of Center Way, and the relationship of office traffic and
residential would be separate. The screening of parking would be accomplished
through the use of rolling bernis ; building height - 5 stories , or 75 ' maximum
soft lighting; no more than 50w coverage in hard surface of the 159 acres - re-
maining part of the site would be natural .
Sparicio addressed Hartford ' s concerns : water quality, the hard surface cover-
age, platting and rezoning approval , and traffic.
Mr. Herb Ketcham, Architectural Alliance , through the use of a project model
and other graphics outlined the first phase and sight lines . He explained that
47 acres of the 159 acres would be in scenic easement.
Levitt inquired what the width of the scenic easement was. Ketcham responded
the widths vary at different points up to 200. feet.
Ketcham discussed the drainage plans , explaining that the commercial zones area
We 'll drain into storm sewer , while the lighter use will drain through a retention
}pond into the lake. Parking would entail 4 cars per 1 ,000, while the ordinance
requires 5 per thousand. In addressing the traffic , Ketcham explained they are
anticipating 14,000 A.D.T. with signalizatien at they time of ultimate
development.
.-_- ..._ .�Sc.�'.r" ..AKJf��Y�nr�.:c "��l•.r'L�r.T.�DAiC�.r".a.• ?_.
M
PlanningCommission Minutes _ 10 _ approved
March 26, 1979
C. Cooperative Power Association P� pubjjL hearing (continued)
Bentley questioned whether Outiot D was presently owned by the pro-
nnnsnf QW150I^ 1 -%4"..,4 &&. .& 11 aS it A.r. �
f.V..�_.. M. ... $Av- �.n•r I III%—%A 66 iu %, %.IIrj UI C VI CJGi1� ly iICUV 1. IQ 61119 I.CIC VU1 -
chase or Outlot D. The right-of-way is curreptly owned by the proponent.
Brauer responded to questions on the micro wave tower; it compared
with the tower at P. E . I . ; the tower is below flight path of the airport ; _
on question of safety, Brauer referred to a reeort recently published b_.• '
the Federal Government on safety and interference of micro wave towers .
Gartner inquired about the width of the tower. Brauer responded that the
bottom was about 3 ' and the top 1 ' .
Levitt requested that the question of safety and interference be addressed
in the staff report.
Mr. James Sabako, 14254 Chestnut Drive, stated that his property- looks t
riaht into C. P. T. and this building. Brauer explained how the buildina
sits into the hill .
The Planner read the letter received from Mr. Crowley, 8303 Sheridan Lane ,
expressing opposition to the tower.
Other points were briefly addressed such as number of trips by service
vehicles and storage vans (approx. 24 , service , 6 storage ; location of
the parking lot - north side of building and west side of building would
Em be storage.
=� MOTION: Gartner moved to continue the Cooperative Power Association PU0
to the meeting of April 9. Retterath seconded , motion carried unanimously.
VI . COLD BUSINESS
A. Discussion of Joint Planning Commission and City Council Meeting
z The following items were suggested for discussion: narrowing down the
scope of specific ,,riteria for developers ; discussion of limitation of
notification of residents ; to what extent does the City need a lot of
development; and to what limits do we allow our developments to push our
transportation system. (To be added to suggestions from former meeting)
YII . NEW BUSINESS
A. Literature on Clean Air Amendment
= Bentley briefly discussed the information on the Clean Air Act Amendments
and dunce^n by the FollutiorlControl Agency that coninunities are not taking
air pollution planning seriously.