Laserfiche WebLink
<br />MinuTes of Special Counci I Meeting <br />Page fl ve <br /> <br />May 19, 1975 <br /> <br />R. Anderson, 1357 Floral Drive, said he does not believe this driveway, <br />opposite Floral Drive, will be a safe location for the school children - <br />school bus stops at this point; also noted that traffic cannot go <br />west on 1-694 from Hamline Avenue and east on 1-694 from Hamllne <br />Avenue is a "death trap"; suggested that al I Industrial traffic enter <br />and egress onto County Road F, which has traffic controls at <br />Lexington Avenue and better access onto 1-694. <br /> <br />Burow explained that the parking lot and access road from Hamllne <br />wi II have "low" use In the future; bulk of parking Is proposed to <br />the east, with access from County Road F and Fernwood. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />L. Roberts objected to looking at a parking lot from his home on <br />James Circle and suggested it be relocated to east portion of the site. <br /> <br />Feyerelsen noted that the zoning has not changed In many years - <br />most houses In the area have been built since the zoning was <br />effected; therefore, ,the prime question .is whether this industrial <br />use of the property is desirable, and whether a quality building <br />is proposed. <br /> <br />Drainage was discussed and Burow Indicated that pondlng of surface <br />water on the 9 acre site is not proposed - capacity of ponding area~, <br />both north and east a,re cons I dered to be adequate for anti ci pated run <br />oft from this 9 acre site. Burow stated they do not propose to <br />re-direct natural dralnage._ <br /> <br />The number of employees anticipated in the "stage one" bui Iding was <br />estimated at 300. Fredlund advised that proposed parking meets <br />Ordinance 99 parking requirements. <br /> <br />L. Roberts stated he Is pleased with the entire proposal, except <br />the parking lot location so near to the Hamline Avenue property <br />I'ne - asked that this parking lot be re-Iocated; otherwise he <br />welcomes the development. <br /> <br />Burow suggested that a berm could be Installed to partially screen <br />the parking lot, which Is already obscured by the heavy growth of <br />trees. <br /> <br />Schwalm stated he considers this location for the office parking <br />lot as the ~ost functional for Cardiac Pacemakers - no deliveries <br />wi II be made to this portion of the building; they i5re to be made <br />from County Road F. <br /> <br />Roberts a.ked that Councl I consider the residents, as well as <br />Cardiac Pacemakers. <br /> <br />In discussion, Burow explained that the 3-package Building Permit <br />request is advantageous to the developer because it wil I save 6-8 <br />months of construction time, and .portlons of the work Ci5n be bid as <br />work prc.gresses. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Fredlund Indicated this route Is taken on occasion, and he sees no <br />problem in It - risk Is on the developer, once the footings are In. <br />F'-edlund indicated thi5t the Village's concern Is the final site <br />pian and grading plan, Including berms, drives, lighting, land- <br />scaping etc. <br /> <br />Schwalm referred Counci I to survey he just received"of the site, <br />and Burow said that grading plans and the final site plan wi II be <br />prepared from this survey, indicating they can be completed by the <br />next Council meeting on May 27th. <br /> <br />Feyerelsen offered to meet with a representative of Cardiac Pace- <br />maker's, Inc. In an effort to negotiate the park dldlcatlon require- <br />ment, prior to May 27th. <br /> <br />Crichton noted the resident concern re the parking lot and access <br />road at Hamline Avenue, and asked Cardiac Pacemakers to give par- <br />ticular consideration to possible relocation of the road and parking <br />lot. <br /> <br />-5- <br />