My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
11-28-2022 City Council Packet
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2022
>
Searchable Packets
>
11-28-2022 City Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/14/2022 9:36:01 AM
Creation date
12/14/2022 9:30:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Packet
Meeting Date
11/28/2022
Council Meeting Type
Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
383
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 />DRAFT <br /> 4 <br />housing market since 2016 when these plans were proposed; the villa product has become 126 <br />expensive to develop. The representative added that the villas don’t serve the families 127 <br />well that they are hearing from and who are interested in the Forest Lake school district. 128 <br />The 45 foot lots would be limited to 13 in number. Planner Larsen pointed out that some 129 <br />of the requested changes are not related to lot size. 130 <br /> 131 <br />Mayor Rafferty noted that he isn’t necessarily supportive of more townhomes and he 132 <br />doesn’t see how they fit better for a family. 133 <br /> 134 <br />Councilmember Lyden said he concurs with the Mayor on the townhomes. He likes the 135 <br />villa product that the builder has already produced. He asked the developer 136 <br />representative how Lennar feels about the staff recommendation. Councilmember Lyden 137 <br />noted that the back yards of some of their product built already have a very sloped back 138 <br />yard; will that continue with the new homes? The developer representative explained that 139 <br />a slope usually relates to water and grading needs. 140 <br /> 141 <br />Points made by the developer in support of the changes: 142 <br />- The staff recommendation would not fully meet what they feel are good changes; 143 <br />- The townhomes they’ve built sold very well; 144 <br />- The townhomes added would be about half what is proposed/built on the east 145 <br />side; 146 <br />- Price point for townhomes is approximately $350,000; 147 <br />- The proposal includes more open space. 148 <br /> 149 <br />Staff summarized that the council isn’t supportive of smaller lot sizes but there may be 150 <br />support for swapping out some of the housing styles (from villa to Heritage and Venture). 151 <br />The council discussed the possibility of allowing 50 foot lots instead of the 45 foot lots 152 <br />proposed. The developer suggested that would limit them to no two car garage option. 153 <br />Council asked if all the 50 foot lots would be right next to each other and heard that the 154 <br />planning and what fits where will dictate locations. Councilmember Cavegn said he 155 <br />would be more open to the idea of a 50 foot lot if they were disbursed. 156 <br /> 157 <br />The council was divided on the change to townhomes. They will give the developer an 158 <br />opportunity to come back having received the council’s comments. 159 <br /> 160 <br />4. Pavement Management Report (PMR) Update – City Engineer Hankee 161 <br />reviewed her written staff report that included information on: 162 <br />- PMR provides valuable information to guide the City’s street work programs; 163 <br />- A quarter of the City is inspected (out of 105 miles total); 164 <br />- Condition map is created based on data collection; 165 <br />- City’s overall condition is 75, a good number however there have been some steps 166 <br />taken to improve conditions that are just 10-15 years effective; 167 <br />- Marginal roadways should be watched because if ignored they can slip into a 168 <br />much more expensive fix category. 169 <br /> 170
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.