06/13/2001 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • Planning & Zoning Board June 13, 2001 Page 25 processed through the City or Environmental Quality Board. There was a comment period currently in effect that runs until July 11, 2001. Until the process was complete and the City had determined that an EIS was not necessary the City should not take final action to approve the project. Chair Schaps asked what the staff's recommendation was regarding traffic flow on Lake Drive. Mr. Powell replied staff's recommendation would have been to have one access on Apollo Drive, but the developer has requested a second access. He stated the County still had to approve the access and as far as he knew, applicant had not submitted this request. With respect to the traffic flow, he had received a new site plan late last week, but had not had a chance to review it. Chair Schaps stated this was a major issue that the County had not acted on this yet. Mr. Wessel stated this was a key issue. He indicated right from the beginning applicant had been made aware this was an essential element. He stated this was normally dow but it would need to be acted on soon. He stated Target still intende completed by July, 2002 and if this was to be accomplished, this their July meeting. of things to do, the project ty Council at Chair Schaps asked if staff would support this second access Mr ° "'1 replied from an engineering standpoint, a second signalized was a bas . a.s state: his recommendation would have been that applicant made this request to Ano . ty some time ago. He stated applicant should pay for all costs of access, incl e+ m signa . Mr. Rafferty asked about the design issues • t ` ohl' building. He strongly recommended getting design criteria from Kohls. He • hat :` being proposed now was not acceptable. The bituminous pavement was not acce s .' ° . ted to see green space. He suggested Kohl's follow the Target design o rar �sls ot. He stated he was against the idea of another bank in the development. His c i as gr - n space within the parking lot, design criteria for the Kohl's building and fin • , • a • . eal with all of the other small developments to make them comparable with oth dev opments. Mr. Wessel replied K e adjustments per the City's suggestions and they were meeting with Kohls in e."uture to see what their new proposals were going to be. Mr. Rafferty stated he w ted to see heavily landscaped, treed facilities all of the way through the parking lots. He strongly recommended bringing trees into these areas. Mr. Lyden agreed with Mr. Rafferty regarding the issue of the bank. Aesthetically, he stated he had no issues with Kohls or Target. He stated the issue of green space in a commercial center was not a huge issue for him. His major concern was the traffic layout within the system and outside the system. He had suggested a two -lane in and a two -lane out which would serve the front business along Lake Drive versus bringing traffic all of the way in and then back through. He stated he expected to hear feedback from staff at some point regarding his suggestion. • Mr. Corson suggested tying in the theme from The Village. He stated how the project looked from Lake Drive was important. He suggested having pedestrian access to the area.