My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
02-05-2018 Council Work Session Minutes
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2018
>
02-05-2018 Council Work Session Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/15/2021 12:47:11 PM
Creation date
2/28/2018 10:33:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
02/05/2018
Council Meeting Type
Work Session Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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 COUNCIL WORK SESSION <br />APPROVED <br />February 5, 2018 <br />46 2. Winter Property Land Use, Comp Plan — Community Development Director <br />47 Grochala reviewed his written staff report that provided a recap of the action of the city's <br />48 advisory boards and the council's previous review of the property owner's (Mr. Winter) <br />49 request to change the planning guidance for his property to allow for some residential <br />50 development. Based on the council's previous direction, Mr. Winter did submit a <br />51 concept plan. However Mr. Winter's submitted plan does not follow the council's <br />52 direction on the maximum residential percentage and density. <br />53 <br />54 Mr. Winter's representative explained that they have submitted a plan developed by <br />55 Westwood Engineering. He explained why the plan makes sense and is realistic (i.e. <br />56 road development, flexibility in residential areas) and how the residential percentage in <br />57 the concept plan is actually in the range of 50%. The concept is to spread out the <br />58 residential. The representative said this plan is something that will be realistic for the <br />59 future. <br />60 <br />61 Mayor Reinert expressed his support for 4-6 units per acre density for the residential <br />62 element; with that density range he is comfortable with the 50% range for residential use <br />63 total. He's less interested in calling it mixed use because it's not specific enough. <br />64 Mayor Reinert said he isn't supportive of an apartment development on the land. <br />65 <br />66 Mr. Grochala explained that the guidance is provided up front and the council would <br />67 ultimately be considering approval of a more specific planned unit development proposal. <br />68 Mr. Grochala asked how much flexibility a developer would have in clustering the <br />69 density. Council Member Maher suggested the goal is for the Winters to be able to sell <br />70 their land and for the city to end up with an appropriate development; that the plan she <br />71 wants to see. <br />72 <br />73 The council concurred with gung the Winter's property as mixed use with up to 50% of <br />74 the land designated for residential at 4-6 units per acre. <br />75 <br />76 3. Water Tower Siting Update — City Engineer Hankee introduced Greg Johnson <br />77 of WSB and Associates. He reviewed the staff report and the council's past direction to <br />78 analyze four sites for possible siting of a city water tower and the results of the analysis <br />79 including the suggestion to add two possible sites. Mr. Johnson responded to the <br />80 council's questions about: water main locations, sea plane airport location, and concerns <br />81 about the impact Site Five could have on the improvements already planned in that area. <br />82 Mr. Johnson recommended that the council consider the additional costs attached to some <br />83 sites as they consider which site(s) should be further explored. He explained that water <br />84 towers typically take about two years to design and construct. <br />85 <br />86 The council expressed concerns on the possibility of building in the middle of a fully <br />87 developed area, the implications of moving on privately owned land and the <br />88 unwillingness of the school district to work with the city. The council indicated that their <br />89 preferred site is Birch Street and Centerville Road which is located on city property and <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.