My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-22-1999 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1999
>
11-22-1999 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/28/2012 11:08:24 AM
Creation date
8/28/2012 10:56:40 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
97
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
NOV-19-1999 11:15 <br />NRC 612 595 9837 P.02/06 <br />N NORTHWEST' .A.SS.OIATEHD C.O.N 5 U LTANte, <br />INC COMMUNITY PLANNING. 17E810,11 - MARKET RESEARCH. <br />MEMORANDUM <br />TO:; Little Canada Mayor and City Council <br />FROM: Stephen Grittman <br />DATE: November 19, 1999 <br />RE: Little Canada - McCumber/BuetowZoning Issue. <br />FILE NO 758.10 <br />At the direction. of the City Council, staff has been working an developing a zoning <br />approach which will address the issues raised by the inconsistency between the current <br />zoning district (1 -1, light Industrial) and the land use plan (10V/density residential) for the <br />Buetow and McCumber properties at County Road D and Edgerton Street Staff has met <br />with the Buetows and McCumbers, and prepared a draft zoning amendment intended to <br />address the inconsistency. The zoning amendinent'utilized a PUD•Zoning designation, <br />with specific uses allowed Within the district. A modifled 1 -1 setback requirement was <br />proposed in the first draft <br />After meeting with the McCumbers and their representative, three primary aspects ofthe <br />proposal were raised to which the property owners objected. The McCumbers specifically <br />objected to the PUD District (rather than a business, or industrial designation), the fact that <br />industrial uses labeled °manufacturing; compounding, assembly, packaging, treatment, or <br />storage of products and materials" were listed as conditional uses rather than permitted <br />uses, and the fact that the setback provision imposed setbacks adjacent to residential <br />property which were greater than the Industrial district standards. <br />The original. draft included these three provisions as a part of the overall intent to avoid <br />conflict between the zoning and the land use plan, and protection of the existing residential <br />neighborhood. The PUD approach was applied because it allowed the City to include a <br />statement that future land•use within this particular PUD'district would be encouraged to <br />convert to residential,, even though the currently allowed uses were industrial in nature. <br />The uses which are more industrial in nature were established as Conditional uses rather <br />than permitted uses in an effort to manage the potential' impacts of industrial use on these <br />5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, ,SUITE 555 ST.. LOUIS PARK, . MINN,ESOTA 55416' <br />VAS <br />PHONE 612- 595 -9636 PAX 612.595 -9837 E-MAIL MAC.® WINT.ERNET,COM <br />Page 47 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.