09/26/1979 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

55 Page 3 Planning and Zoning Commission September 26, 1979 traints, but felt that there were other favorable considerations that made it advantageous for the City to allow for industrial in suitable areas, and to protect it from other uses to give it a chance to develop. The question was how long the City shoJd. wait fot .that development. . However, the City should not overzone for industrial and commercial uses; for example, the land zoned industrial in the Metro area four times what could possibly develop. He felt the land use plan should remain flexible, and if a developer proposed something for the area east of County Rd 23, it should be considered even if it was not designated in,the land use plan. Mr. Gourley noted that the planwould be revised, in 5 to 7 years, and also it had been discussed that areas could be traded; if industrial developed on the east: side of County 23, then other uses could be allowed on the west side. He felt the northwest corner was the best of the two locations, however, since Lilac Street was already a ten -ton road, and any intensive use on the east side would have to build a road. ,The southeast corner of theintersection was discussed, and Mr. McLean in- dicated it already had a sandblasting operation, and although it was presently being litigated in court, it would probably stay that way. Mr. Gourley felt it would be better as commercial than as industrial, but it could be handled when the actual zoning was done. Mr. Short had also indicated use south of the Main Street/ 35-E interchange. Some of this area was already zoned commercial, and Centerville presently had: industrial proposed adjacent to that area. Because the property was locked inbetween this and the interstate, industrial would be the most suitable land use for the area. Mr. Short asked if Cedar would provide an appropiate.division Tine between industrial on the north and resi- dential on the south; Mr. McLean felt that Cedar and Elmcrest up to Main Street would provide a complete perimeter for the area. There had already been an application by land and Oaks, Inc. for industrial in the area east of the present Action and north of Main. There was also a forced main running down Cedar, with the possibility that it could someday be used. Mr. Doocey suggested the area south of Cedar for Multifamily, but Mr. Short indicated that multifamily was dependent on sewer, and probably should not be planned until there were some committ- ments made on sewer service. Mr. McLean suggested rural residential for the area:, which would leave it open for rezoning later; however, Mr. Short felt, it might develop as large single-family lots. Mr. Reinert suggested the intersection of Highway 49 and Birch as an ideal location for multifamily because of the sewer, road access, and the heavier traffic would not run through the whole city. Also, the area was over 40 acres of open farmland, and there would be no conflict with adjacent land uses. Mr. Short noted that most of the areas des- ignated. multifamily in the 1974 land use plan had developed single family, and the City should be looking at other areas. The location dis- cussed at the previous meeting had been between County Rd 23 and Marshan Lake and Rice Lake. This, however, wouldbe influenced by the air park and whatever safety zone occurred aroung the seaplane base. Mr. Gourley indicated the land there was not suitable for the airpark to expand any further, the use was Tight, and the dry -land base was limited as to what type of plane could use it, due to size and water problems. Mr. McLean asked if the corner of 49 and old highway 8 was indicated as commercial, because the west corner was being discussed as the site for the new corporation coming in. Mr. Short indicated that commercial was shown to the east and to the west of 49 south of 23.