06/27/2001 Env Bd Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • • Planning & Zoning Board June 13, 2001 Page 25 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 wanted a second access. He stated the traffic study was that both accesses would function sufficiently, but they would need to be signalized, as well as the interchange being redesigned. 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 down the list of things to do, but it would need to be acted on soon. He stated Target still intended on having the project completed by July, 2002 and if this was to be accomplished, this had to go to City Council at their July meeting. Chair Schaps asked if staff would support this second access. Mr. Powell replied from an engineering standpoint, this was a very bad idea. He stated his recommendation would have been that applicant made this request some time ago. He stated applicant should pay for all costs of the access, including the signal. Mr. Rafferty asked about the design issues for the Ko getting design criteria from Kohls. He stated what The bituminous pavement was not acceptable; he wan Kohl's follow the Target design on the parki lot. He bank in the development. His criteria was gre the Kohl's building and find someway to deal them comparable with other recent d- , . ment building F strongly recommended bear '. propo ''d now was not acceptable. o see green space. He suggested d e was against the idea of another the parking lot, design criteria for e other small developments to make Mr. Wessel replied Kohls had made meeting with Kohls in the n Mr. Rafferty stated he wan the parking lots. He strongly er the City's suggestions and they were hat their new proposals were going to be. avily landscaped, treed facilities all of the way through ended bringing trees into these areas. Mr. Lyden agreed with Mr. Ra erty 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. Mr. Lyden stated he did not see this as a pedestrian friendly plan and had no issues with the site plan, other than the traffic and the specifics of the bank within the plan. Mr. Corson replied they needed to make the determination as to how they were going to integrate it with The Village.