06-23-1980 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

June 23, 1980 Page 3 soil tests and ~IT. Adolphson had not seen them yet. ~tr. Koshak had the tests there and had a circulation test rate of .8 per inch at a 24" depth. He said it should be sufficient for a standard septic system. ~IT. Koshak stated the grading in the residential area 1fould be minor, but cownercial would require fill because of the slope of the land. Some of the roads would have a standard grade of five percent. Commissioner Fox asked how many lots it could be sub- divided into for future sewer and water. }tr. Koshak said about 48 lots and also there was a change from 6 to 4 lots along the river. COID~issioner Fox asked about coordinating where the house was to be built on the lot so that these could be subdivided in the future. 9. Rick Foster, Proposed P.U.D. ~~. Foster presented a sketch of Ridgewood East 4th Addition to give the Co~mission an idea of his proposal. The residential homes would all have private driveways maintained privately. The P.U.D. is 17~ acres dividing into possibly 100 units. Each home o~mership association would have 20 families, operated separately. Commissioner Fox asked about storm sewer runoff. ~tr. Foster said he had done some testing in the area. Co~missioner Driessen said it would be natural for se1fer and water. Commissioner Zabee asked about the price range of such a system. ~IT. Foster didn't know the cost. CO~TI~ISSIONER DRIESSEN MO\~D TO RECO~wmND THE PROPOSED P.U.D. WITH THE COUNCIL NOTING TF~T THE ~~EA IS SHORT 2~ ACRES OF THE ALLOTTED 20 FOR P.U.D. IS. CO~~1ISSIONER Zft~EE SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION PASSED 4-0. 10. Informal Discussion with East Side Concerned Citizen's on P.U.D. '8 ~IT. Hipp and Estelle Gunkel of the East Side Concerned Citizens appeared and asked to get some answers to their questions about P.U.D. IS. urr. A~ton Hipp asked the Co~mission to explain what a P.U.D. is and what stages the development proceeded. If the co~mercial area could be developed right away before the tovmhouses and apartments, then residential so there would be no buffer between co~mercial and residential areas for several years. The Commission stated that it could be dictated so that the cOID~ercial and to~mhouses had to be put up at the same time. He also asked about what the procedures was for getting a P.U.D. approved. P~so, if a person buying a house in a P.U.D. area could expect that plan to stay the same and not change. Cow~issioner Fox said he could not speak for future Co~missions or Councils. ~tt. Hipp asked if there were any proposals before the Co~mission to develop his area. Commissioner Fox said he knew of none. Mr. Hipp also asked about the procedure for notifying residents of a proposed development. Est~lle Gunkel also had some questions on the P.U.D. issue. She said she was not notified of this ordinance change. At one meeting she asked Zack Johnson if there were any proposed changes for her area, but was given a vague answer and two weeks later read in the paper, the land was to be a P.U.D. She asked about if it has to have sevTer and water. Ms. Gunkel also stated in the ordinance on Page 11, ft~ticle 7, it says a P.U.D. should not adversel:l effect existing schools and she did not see h01'T that 1'ras going to be possible. She was also concerned as 1vas ttr. Hipp about the time plan on the construction of a development. Commissioner Fox said it was hard to predict as to the completion time of a P.U.D. It could be done in two years or take up to five years. She also wanted to know if it was possible to approve the shopping center (citing George Dietz's proposal as an example) and not do anything about developing the rest. Co~missioner Fox said in a P.U.D. the entire