My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
01/09/2002 P&Z Minutes
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Minutes
>
2002
>
01/09/2002 P&Z Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/13/2014 10:41:35 AM
Creation date
2/13/2014 10:33:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Minutes
Meeting Date
01/09/2002
P&Z Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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 />January 9, 2002 <br />Page 24 <br />APPROVED MINUTES <br />Chair Schaps asked if neighborhood meetings had been held regarding this development. <br />Mr. Smyser did not believe any neighborhood meetings had been held. <br />Chair Schaps requested information regarding the FEMA flood plain and noted <br />properties only one-quarter of one mile west of his property require flood insurance. Mr. <br />Powell stated it was not uncommon for the FEMA maps to be inaccurate. <br />Mr. Lyden stated the concerns brought up this evening regarding the proposed <br />construction were legitimate concerns. He stated he has dealt with construction traffic in <br />his neighborhood and agreed the traffic can be ominous, particularly for children. He <br />noted a suggestion had been made that the construction traffic be brought in from the east <br />and he asked if this would be possible. <br />Mr. Powell indicated this would result in those streets potentially being damaged and <br />safety concerns for the children in that neighborhood who play in the street. He did not <br />believe moving the construction traffic to another street would alleviate all the concerns <br />of the proposed development. <br />Regarding concern for damage to streets by the construction traffic, Mr. Powell indicated <br />the City would have to monitor the damage to the roadway and require compensation <br />from the developer for those repairs. <br />Chair Schaps asked if this has been the same expectation for other developments in the <br />City. Mr. Powell could not recall a situation in the past where a new development was <br />brought in through the end of an established development. <br />Mr. Lyden stated any time there is development there is potential construction impact. <br />Mr. Powell agreed but noted there have not been many developments within the City that <br />involved the construction of a bridge. <br />Mr. Lyden expressed concern for the legal history involving the subject property and he <br />felt the City must be reasonable and not single out this particular developer. Mr. Powell <br />did not believe the applicant was being singled out and indicated that he was relying on <br />the City Attorney’s interpretation of the Court ordered agreement. <br />Mr. Corson felt the island was suitable to be developed with as currently zoned with one <br />home. He noted the Department of Natural Resources has recommended denial of the <br />requested variances to the shoreline setbacks, and he indicated that he takes this <br />recommendation very seriously. <br />Mr. Corson believed approval of the proposed development could leave the City open to <br />potential litigation if damage is caused to the nearby homes by the vibration caused by <br />the bridge construction. <br />Mr. Corson noted when Quail Ridge had been developed sand had been placed under the <br />road due to the poor ground conditions. Howe ver, he noted near Mr. Groff’s property
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.