My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
07/06/1998 Park Board Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Park Board
>
Park Board Meeting Packets
>
1998 Park Board Packets
>
07/06/1998 Park Board Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/14/2021 3:15:29 PM
Creation date
7/23/2021 10:52:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Park Board
Park Bd Document Type
Park Board Packet
Meeting Date
07/06/1998
Park Bd Meeting Type
Regular
Park Bd Publication Type
Other
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
174
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
Planning&Zoning Board <br /> May 13, 1998 <br /> Page I I <br /> Ms. Wyland stated that the City cannot enforce conditions regarding a rezone. The City <br /> can, however, stipulate conditions for a plat. She explained that this is why the Board is <br /> hesitant to approve the rezone. <br /> Mr. Dunn noted that it is customary to rezone with a plat. Mr. Menkveld indicated that <br /> was not true in most cities. He stated that during the platting process of Highland <br /> Meadow I, the neighbors were told the property would be used for multi-family housing. <br /> Mr. Wessel noted the importance of the Comprehensive Plan. The City is not directing <br /> North Suburban Development to build multi-family housing. The Comprehensive Plan <br /> only suggests the idea of multi-family housing. He advised that the Comprehensive Plan <br /> has not yet been formally recommended. <br /> Mr. Dunn stated that he felt a 30 day tabling of the issue was appropriate to settle the <br /> issues before a decision can be made. He believes that June 1, 1998, is a self imposed <br /> deadline. He encouraged all of those involved to work with the City. <br /> Mr. Menkveld asked if the Board would consider the rezoning without a detailed plan, or <br /> if the Board would continually delay the property owners. <br /> n Mr. Dunn stated that zoning and a site plan are different issues. If the City requires both <br /> a problem will occur. He indicated he has no problem with the zoning being independent <br /> of the site plan. <br /> Mr. Schilling asked if the Board would be able to vote on a proposed rezone at the next <br /> meeting. <br /> Mr. Corson stated that if the Board approves the rezone to R-3, the site plan could not be <br /> denied if all of the requirements were met. The issue has been addressed before and a site <br /> plan was required for other developers. He would like the City to be consistent. <br /> Mr. Dunn said that occasionally exceptions are made. If an unacceptable site plan was <br /> proposed after the rezone, the Board would be faced with a policy decision. <br /> Mr. Trehus stated that exceptions should not be made. All information should be <br /> presented before a decision is made. <br /> Mr. Dunn said that developers will not spend money on a site plan without the desired <br /> zoning. <br /> Mr. Corson stated that two citizens of the City have concerns that have not yet been <br /> ,—� resolved and if the City approves the rezone an unacceptable plat could be forced on <br /> them. Ms. Wyland explained that if the front of the property remains R-1 and the rear of <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.