My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
11/07/2011 Council Packet
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
1982-2020
>
2011
>
11/07/2011 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/13/2014 2:03:23 PM
Creation date
1/31/2014 11:24:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Packet
Meeting Date
11/07/2011
Council Meeting Type
Work Session Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
107
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
product) would have a negative impact on the surrounding homeowners. <br />Additionally, fencing may fall short of a visual screen if adjacent properties are at <br />a higher elevation. <br />3. Aesthetics — the first impression of the city is often drawn from the perspective of <br />35W and 35E. A long expanse of fencing will not allow visitors and residents to <br />see the strides taken by staff, boardmembers and council in enforcing stricter <br />development standards and raising the bar on industrial and commercial <br />development. Outdoor uses along freeways may lead to high quality <br />developments avoiding those portions of the city. <br />4. Temporary Uses — the need for storage of both product and raw materials is <br />clearly an indication that the use does not fit on the site. This is not a temporary <br />use for an established business, it is a business that either requires outdoor <br />storage yards permanently, or a larger building permanently. <br />5. Economic Conditions — it is bad policy to raise or lower standards based on <br />economic conditions. The city should be developed to a set of performance <br />standards based on the desired outcome of the city, not on how much money is <br />available in the market. Consider all the businesses that have invested in Lino <br />Lakes and have complied with these standards. Also consider that once a <br />standard is lowered, as is being proposed, it is very difficult to reinstate. <br />City staff therefore recommends adoption of Resolution Number 11 -109, denying <br />the Zoning Amendment request. <br />Attachments <br />1. Resolution Number 11 -109, Denying the Zoning Amendment <br />2. Ordinance Number 21 -11, Approving the Zoning Amendment <br />3. Applicant's narrative <br />4. Industrial Storage Maps <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.