Loading...
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.