Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />June 17, 2024 <br />Page 14 <br /> <br />APPROVED MINUTES <br />Chris Grimes, 7906 Henry Lane, Lino Lakes, MN 55014. Mr. Grimes said the reason why <br />a moratorium is needed is because change happens every year. <br /> <br />(Inaudible) Hussein, 11357 Lincoln Court NE, Blaine, MN 55434, Ms. Hussein strongly <br />opposes the proposed moratorium as it would hinder progress and growth. She <br />questions why it was not proposed for the two other applicants for the same location <br />for similar use. <br /> <br />Louis Jungbauer, 679 Andall Street, Lino Lakes, MN 55014, Mr. Jungbauer was <br />concerned about what goes into making the decision for the moratorium and was not in <br />favor of the moratorium. <br />Mr. Laden moved to close the public hearing. Motion seconded by Mr. Vojtech. The <br />public hearing was closed at 9:44 p.m. <br /> <br />Mr. Root addressed the questions that were asked by the speakers. He said the only <br />thing that has been submitted thus far is a concept plan. Input is submitted by the <br />Boards and if the developer decides to proceed there are many agencies that work on <br />the approval process. He requested Mr. Grochala answer some of the questions <br />regarding traffic and water runoff and other impacts that may occur. Mr. Grochala said <br />tonight is about implanting a moratorium to further study a specific area. He said we <br />are not at a point with either development proposals where there are any specific plans. <br />He explained the application process and what is expected during that process. <br />Mr. Root said there were many questions about why this location and why now. Mr. <br />Grochala said the comprehensive plan suggests we do this. We have never approved a <br />project in this location, and we are guided by the Master Plan to complete the study <br />here. <br />Mr. Root wanted to know who was responsible for wetland delineation. Mr. Grochala <br />said any mitigation is the cost of the developer. <br />Mr. Root said there were questions about what the project would look like and said the <br />plan is available online. It was asked why an EAW was not sufficient for this project and <br />what do you get from an AUAR that you would not get from an EAW. Mr. Grochala said <br />the AUAR is a more in-depth study and EAW is project specific. There was a question <br />about road expansion to which Mr. Grochala said it was part of the county review. They <br />look at projected traffic in a specific area. Mr. Grochala also said the mosque is a <br />religious use which is allowed as conditional use permit. It is permitted everywhere <br />except an industrial district. <br />Ms. Guthmueller asked if the items that were found in the EAW for Promenade would <br />be addressed now. Mr. Grochala said they would be addressed.