Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes <br />Orr Lot <br />Split <br />Absence <br />Of <br />Applicants <br />At Meetings <br />MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />LITTLE CANADA, MINNESOTA <br />August 13, 1987 <br />Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a regular meeting of the <br />Planning Commission of the City of Little Canada, Minnesota was <br />held on the 13th day of August, 1987 in the Council Chambers of <br />the City Center located at 515 Little Canada Road in said City. <br />Acting Chairman Gene DeLonais called the meeting to order at 7:30 <br />P.M. and the following members were present at roll call: <br />MEMBERS PRESENT: Gene DeLonais, Acting Chairman <br />Bill Davison <br />Art Herkenhoff <br />Thomas Perlinger <br />Peggy Schweizer <br />Sharon Timmons <br />MEMBERS ABSENT: Peter Costa, Chairman <br />ALSO PRESENT: Steve Grittman, City Planner <br />Kathleen Glanzer, Recording Secretary <br />There being no corrections to the minutes of the July 9, 1987 <br />meeting, the Acting Chairman declared the minutes to stand <br />approved as read. <br />Mr. Orr appeared before the Council requesting the division of his <br />property located on Lake Gervais into two lots. Orr reported that <br />he has reviewed the alternative division suggested by the City <br />Planner, and he is agreeable to that division. <br />DeLonais asked if the property division suggested by the Planner <br />met all ordinances including the Shoreland Ordinance. <br />The Planner replied that it did. <br />Mrs. Timmons recommended approval of the division of the Orr property <br />into two lots as recommended by the City Planner as shown on page 1 <br />of the Planning Commission agendas. <br />Motion seconded by Mr. Herkenhoff. <br />Motion carried 6 - 0. <br />Timmons pointed out the direction to the Commission to act on matters <br />even though the applicant is not present at the Commission's meeting. <br />Timmons pointed out that action was not taken at the last Commission <br />meeting on the Orr property division because the Planner was suggesting <br />an alternative and the applicant was not present to comment. Timmons <br />Page -1- <br />