My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
04-14-2010 Council Minutes (2)
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2010
>
04-14-2010 Council Minutes (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/7/2014 12:18:04 PM
Creation date
3/8/2013 10:16:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
04/14/2010
Council Meeting Type
Joint
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
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
CITY OF LINO LAKES <br /> JOINT MEETING <br /> CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING &ZONING BOARD MINUTES <br /> DATN, April 14,2010 ; <br /> TIiMIE STARTED : 7:25 P.M. <br /> I'I\TE ENDED : 8:25 P.\I. <br /> COUNCIL, PRESENT : Mayor Jeff Reinert„Kathi (lallup,Jeff O'Donnell, <br /> Rob Rafferty,Dave Roeser <br /> ABSENT None <br /> &Z BOARI) PRESENT : Elizabeth Brady, Michael Hyden, Perry Laden, <br /> Robert Nelson,Brian Pogalz (Vice Chair), 1lichael <br /> Root, Paul`l'ralle (Chair) <br /> ABSENT : None <br /> STAFF PRESENT : Dan T'esch,Jeff Sm yser, Dawn Bugge <br /> foutt <br /> qVilk <br /> City Council and P&Z Board Members discussed the a oath of the council to consider <br /> amending the zoning ordinance regarding accessory stru res. Council and board members <br /> • <br /> agreed that a variance was not appropriate for the recent a lication that was reviewed, as the <br /> request was too varied from the allowances in the existi city ordinance. In addition, the issue <br /> of leased land posed a unique situation, as well as the fact that the structure would be somewhat <br /> temporary. Council and board members agreed with the use that was proposed,but that a <br /> variance was not the rAt approach to allow the use. <br /> Abe <br /> Members discuss. to s ess substa and properties within the city. One suggestion was <br /> to adopt a reg on that:any b ''ng that has been vacant for a number of years could lose its <br /> grandfather status. taf xplaine: `.t under state law, a non-conforming use loses its <br /> grandf. her status if use ceases for one year. However,the same use can reopen as long as <br /> they me a ent city •rements. If the use changes, however,the state building code may <br /> require u• o meet ent requirements. <br /> Members di °i ssed pAsible improvements to the city's gateway areas. It was noted that one <br /> issue with the A•/J area is the presence of multiple property owners involved in future <br /> • <br /> development. a '`er problems with this area include the size of proposed users,road issues, and <br /> access issues. <br /> Members discussed the idea of the city purchasing certain properties in order to improve the <br /> sites. It was noted, however,that this is currenity not a financially feasible option for the city. <br /> Members added that land within the Legacy at Woods Edge needs to be addressed as well. <br /> Members discussed options of what could be done with the property. It was noted that other <br /> communities sometimes offer financial grants or partnerships in order to improve properties or <br /> building façades. <br /> APPROVED MINUTES <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.