My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
01/09/2002 P&Z Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Packets
>
2002
>
01/09/2002 P&Z Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/5/2014 12:56:51 PM
Creation date
6/4/2014 12:20:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Packet
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.
/
57
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
• <br />41 <br />10. The proposed development shall comply with the City's Infill Policy as outlined by <br />Resolution No. 92 -85. <br />The adopted "infill policy" relates to the location of new development and includes the <br />following criteria: <br />• All new developments must be located within the MUSA as established by the <br />Comprehensive Plan. <br />• All new developments must be analyzed for impact on utility and street system costs both <br />from the initial cost standpoint and operation and maintenance. <br />• New development shall only be allowed if: <br />a) The cost of utility and street extensions can be covered by immediate assessment, <br />and <br />b) The cost of operation and maintenance of the system will not exceed the normal <br />costs as projected by the water and sewer rate study, and <br />c) An upfront payment or series of payments by the developer would offset any <br />additional costs of installation and/or future operation and maintenance. <br />If the road, bridge, and utilities are private, these criteria don't apply. <br />11. Roadways serving the proposed development shall be determined adequate to handle <br />the additional traffic generated by the proposed development or a financial <br />commitment shall be made by the developer to upgrade said roadways. <br />The roadways will be sufficient to handle the additional traffic generated by the <br />development. However, a financial commitment would be advisable to restore the roads if <br />damaged by construction vehicles. <br />12. The MUSA is to be allocated in the following manner: 50 acres in 1996, 50 acres in <br />1997, and 50 acres in 1998. <br />As previously indicated, the City presently has 15.7 acres in the MUSA bank. Thus, the <br />requested 4.5 acres of MUSA will not exceed the City's present allocation. <br />Rezoning <br />As previously indicated, the applicant has requested the rezoning of the subject property from R- <br />X, Rural Executive to R 1X, Single Family Executive/PDO, Planned Development Overlay. <br />In consideration of rezoning requests, Section 2, Subd. 1.E. of the Zoning Ordinance states that <br />the Planning and Zoning Board must consider possible adverse effects of the amendment (to the <br />zoning map). Its judgment must be based upon, but not limited to, the following factors: <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.