My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
08/03/2000 EDAC Minutes
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Economic Development Advisory Committee
>
Minutes
>
2000
>
08/03/2000 EDAC Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/5/2022 3:34:47 PM
Creation date
7/11/2017 4:09:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EDAC
EDAC Document Type
EDAC Minutes
Meeting Date
08/03/2000
EDAC Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Smyser said the actual design standards will not be in place until the zoning amendment <br />process is complete, which includes a public hearing. The standards remain a draft until <br />the process is complete. <br /> <br />Mr. Milbauer asked how the YMCA would view the standards and what control the city <br />has over the Tagg land. Mr. Smyser said unless the city goes through eminent domain and <br />buys the property, the city cannot require the Taggs to get off their land. Nobody is <br />intending to do that. The Taggs can stay there as long as they want. Ms. Schwartz <br />questioned if the city attorney had explored the issue of inverse condemnation because <br />the city has put restrictions on the land. Mr. Wessel said the city attorney has looked at it. <br />Mr. Chase said it would be hard to prove that because the city has made the land more <br />valuable through its actions. The city is not forcing them into selling or staying. Ms. <br />Schwartz said improvements to the land cannot be considered under the rules of <br />condemnation. Ms. Divine said the land is currently zoned Limited Business and is going <br />to a PDO, which actually has much more flexibility. <br /> <br />Ms. Divine said the YMCA likes the concept and the goal, but they don’t want it to cost <br />more than the standard YMCA. They don’t like two entries. The architect doing some <br />spec work thought the double entry was workable. The city has made a significant <br />contribution, the city should be able to ask for this. <br /> <br />Mr. Jensen moved to pass the endorsement. Mr. Juni seconded the motion. Ms. Schwartz <br />reiterated her concern that these standards could limit the market for the land and thus <br />devalue the land. She believes there should be more flexibility that could change on a <br />situational basis. Mr. Jensen said flexibility is good, but the Town Center is supposed to <br />be special, and it is time to make a decision, and there is a price to pay. Eventually we <br />will get what we want. He said he is voting on a concept, not hitching the vote to the <br />Fefercorn plan or the grant. <br /> <br /> Mr. Chase said all developers are different. This development asks for a special <br />developer and many won’t do it. We are limiting who will do this kind of project. Mr. <br />Smyser said this has more flexibility than a standard ordinance, which creates boring and <br />dysfunctional developments. These standards regulate things that standard ordinances <br />don’t, and don’t regulate many things standards ordinances do. Our current ordinance is a <br />very large document and would create strip malls. Mr. Smyser said the fact that the usage <br />boundaries are flexible would never be considered under standard ordinances. <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson said we might have to do trade-offs to get some things we really want. Mr. <br />Chase said it would be good if we say what the intent is, with the development agreement <br />getting to the specifics. <br /> <br />Motion passed with Ms. Schwartz voting no. <br /> <br />Meeting adjourned at 9:00 a.m.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.