My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
04-13-2006 Charter Packet
LinoLakes
>
Charter Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1981 - 2021 Agenda Packets - Charter Commission
>
2006 Packets
>
04-13-2006 Charter Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/13/2022 7:23:10 PM
Creation date
5/13/2022 9:42:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Charter Commission
Meeting Date
04/13/2006
Charter Meeting Type
Regular
Charter Document Type
Packets
Retention Until
Permanent
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
104
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
COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 23, 2006 <br /> APPROVED <br /> 269 project at completion will add$5 million to the City's tax bill, which will be a great help for Lino <br /> 27o Lakes. <br /> 271 <br /> 272 Ms. Lindahl indicated they have held 60 meetings and open houses with the community, and have <br /> 273 received great feedback from those meetings that they will incorporate into the plan. She stated she <br /> 274 thinks they have a concept plan they can move forward with, and they look forward to bringing back <br /> 275 more detailed plans. <br /> 276 <br /> 277 Councilmember Reinert advised that two years ago they started discussions on master planning and <br /> 278 the obvious benefits to that type of development in providing infrastructure for the city. He indicated <br /> 279 they have done an AUAR of the area also. He stated that while they all passed the Comprehensive <br /> 280 Plan,he was never happy with this area. He indicated that there is a lot of industry planned here, and <br /> 281 he has never been in favor of high-density residential in Lino Lakes. He stated he would prefer that <br /> 282 there be a not to exceed of 4.5 units per acre rather than an average of 4.5 units per acre. <br /> 283 <br /> 284 Councilmember Reinert also commented that the change to the growth management policy seems <br /> 285 redundant, and he feels it does expose the City to setting a precedent, and asked if that portion of the <br /> 286 Comprehensive Plan Amendment could be removed. <br /> 287 <br /> 288 Councilmember Carlson asked about funding for the interchange, and the breakdown between the <br /> 289 parties involved. Community Development Director Grochala advised that it has not been <br /> 290 determined. He stated they have received approximately$1 million federal funding for pre-design <br /> 291 work. He indicated that other funds have been applied for,but nothing has been determined. He <br /> 292 advised that with Hardwood Creek they have a large development that would benefit from the <br /> 293 improvements, and who will look at contributions to the project. <br /> 294 <br /> 295 Councilmember Carlson asked about timing of the housing, and City Planner Smyser indicated that <br /> 296 would be determined during the PUD review, which would require a staging plan for housing and <br /> 297 roadways. Community Development Director Grochala stated that he believes five to six years for <br /> 298 the total housing project, depending on the market for housing stock and site improvement schedules. <br /> 299 He noted they would be looking at six months to one year just for grading on the site. <br /> 300 <br /> 301 Carlson asked about the maximum number of housing units allowed, as she believes there is a <br /> 302 conflict with the Staff report and the resolution. Community Development Director Grochala advised <br /> 303 that the count is a not to exceed number of 1150 units, or 4.5 per acre, but they do not know at this <br /> 304 time exactly how many units there will be. <br /> 305 <br /> 306 Ms.Lindahl stated that currently 58% of the units are single-family detached units. She indicated that <br /> 307 in response to Councilmember Reinert's comments,with the right language they would be willing to <br /> 308 go to two-thirds low density and one-third medium density, as well as agreeing to say a maximum of <br /> 309 4.5 units per acre. She stated that as to the conservation development, they would like to see the <br /> 310 specific language, but if the language is clear that as long as Hardwood Creek comes in with a <br /> 311 Conservation Agreement they will be able to exceed 147 units per year it would be acceptable. <br /> 1101N 312 Community Development Director Grochala indicated they can add verbiage to the resolution. <br /> 313 <br /> 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.