HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-03-05 Evironmental Quality Commission Meeting MinutesENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING
March 5, 1973
5:30 P.M.
Conference Room, Edina Village Hall
Chairman Robert Sandilla called the meeting to order with the following members
present:
Robert Sandilla
Ron Hays
June Schmidt
Clifford Johnson
Carol Beim
Jim Bentley
Don Johnson
Earl Carson (entered late)
Staff present: Gary West
Greg Luce
Robert Dunn
Harold Sand
The chairman called the meeting to order extending his apologies to those
persons who had come to the Village Hall for the special meeting of February 28,
which had to be cancelled due to the lack of a quorum being available.
SPECIAL BUSINESS
Karl Krahl Hill. The chair advised the Commission that the proponent had been
requested to supply several types of information for this meeting, and that it
was hoped that some determination could be made prior to the Council's hearing
on the project at approximately 7:00 P.M., March 19, 1973.
Mr. Stan Taube, attorney for the proponent, stated that they had been unable
to prepare much of the detailed information that the EQC had requested at its
last meeting due to the cost and lack of time. However, the proponent had
reviewed the typographical.maps and had hired a firm, which specializes in
reviewing projects for their environmental impact, to evaluate the proposal
and supply the comments to the EQC.
Mr. Mike Winer, architect for the proponent, stated that the elevations which
were shown on the material given to the Environmental Quality Commission were
taken from 1937-39 WPA field surveys. He did state that there were no major
errors in the topography that had been presented to the EQC which would result
in major changes in the location or require redesign of the building. Mr. Winer
went on to review the projected tree removal and slope cutting, retaining walls,
etc. which would be required of the project.
Jim Bentley asked the amount of slopes which would be cut into. Mr. Winer
answered that less than approximately 15 percent of the hill would be used,
and none of the very steep slopes of 28-35 percent at the top of the hill
would be disturbed.
EQC SPECIAL MEETING Page Two
MARCH 5, 1973
Clifford Johnson questioned the tying in of retaining walls and suggested that
wooden posts driven into the ground could be used to disturb fewer trees.
Mr. Winer agreed that this was a very distinct possibility that they would be
investigating at a later stage. Several other questions were asked by various
members of the Commission and the audience as to access to the recreational
building and construction of the apartment building, i.e., whether it would
require masonry construction for the above ground floors in that approximately
four stories would be above ground level.
Mr. Winer introduced Jerry Allen, who gave a slide presentation of their environ-
mental impact evaluation. Mr. Allen presented his firm's recommendations for
construction on the site along the lines proposed by the developer. They offered
various suggestions for this development to lessen the environmental impact on
the surrounding neighborhood.
Several questions were asked about the concepts proposed by Mr. Allen. James
Bentley inquired of the architect if the developer was intending to follow the
recommendations of the environmental impact statement. Mr. Winer replied that
they had not had an opportunity to fully evaluate these proposals, but they
would certainly give them consideration.
Bob Sandilla expressed considerable concern about what the building would look
like from the single family residences adjacent to the property and expressed
concern that a front elevation had not been provided.
A member of the audience expressed concern that the proponents had not provided
calculations on the cut and fill which would be required as the EQC had requested
at its earlier meeting. Mr. Greg Luce, Village Planner, commented that the cut
and fill delineation was part of final development plans under the PRD zoning
ordinance, and that they would be required at that time.
Mr. Sandilla inquired of Mr. Luce exactly what concept approval entailed. He
replied that concept approval concerned the size and location of the building,
whether the structure would meet existing codes and whether it is an appropri-
ate land use. Mr. Luce further discussed some of the reasons behind Planning
Commission granting concept approval and some of the requests that they had
made of developer prior to his bringing the proposal back to them for final
development plan approval. Mr. Taube restated the developer's request for con-
cept approval and stated that the 12 units per acre was necessary to make it
economically feasible to protect the site, that a lower density would be feasible
if they were not required to protect the hill.
Further discussion ensued on this matter.
Clifford Johnson moved, Earl Carson seconded that the EQC recommend concept
approval to the Village Council provided, however, that the density be reduced
EQC SPECIAL MEETING Page Three
MARCH 5, 1973
to ten units per acre and the EQC be permitted to examine all plans for cut
and fill, the removal of trees and placement of retaining walls prior to
final development plan approval. Motion was denied by vote of one aye and
five nays.
Further discussion ensued centering around the requests that the EQC had made
for various data and their inability to realistically evaluate the proposal
without this data.
Ron Hays moved and James Bentley seconded that the EnvironMental Quality
Commission recommend to the Village Council that concept approval be denied
as the EQC is unable to fairly evaluate the proposal due to the proponent's
refusal to supply (1) a front view elevation, (2) a certified topographical
survey (3) delineation and computation of cut and fill be made and a preliminary
interview of the trees to be removed from the site. Motion was approved with
four ayes and two nays.
The time being late, the chair decalred the meeting adjourned.
GLW/hd