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 />• <br />Planning & Zoning Board <br />November 14, 2001 <br />Page 5 <br />Ms. Lane asked if he would prefer the 33 -foot easement, instead of the 66 -foot easement. <br />Mr. Racutt replied he would like a private drive and the neighbors to the east (1196 Main <br />St.) wanted their own driveway. <br />Mr. Powell stated when he had spoken with that property owner, they were concerned <br />about having to put a new driveway out to Main Street and the driveway they had been <br />using over the years would be blocked off. <br />Chair Schaps asked how would the neighbors get out of their property if they were <br />landlocked. Mr. Smyser replied that was a concern the neighbors had that they would not <br />be able to get out onto Main Street. <br />Chair Schaps stated it appeared this needed further work. Mr. tated with the 66- <br />foot dedication and 33 -foot dedication was acceptable. <br />Mr. Corson stated it appeared the issue was a 33 -foot o 6- t e ent. Mr. Smyser <br />replied that was correct. <br />Mr. Corson made a MOTION to approve the r est : Will d Morton, 7930 Lake <br />Drive, Minor Subdivision, subject to the followin:= tions: <br />1. A road easement shall be dedicated the Ciy that includes the 66' x 597' northern <br />parcel and the eastern 33 feet o fie here 1 -acre portion. <br />2. Park dedication of $1,665 <br />The motion was support a 's. L <br />Motion carried 6- <br />VI. DISCUSSIO <br />A. Lighting t Shirley Kaye's <br />Staff explained since the re- opening of Shirley Kayes, the Police Department had noted <br />that the parking lot was very dark. There was no exterior lighting proposed except <br />fixtures on the building. <br />Staff stated that during the review of the project, there was concern about bright lights on <br />the lake. Since there were only the building fixtures, there was not a problem. <br />Staff explained during construction, a contractor called to ask what kind of lights would <br />be allowed in the parking lot. Since no lighting was proposed or reviewed, and there was <br />concern about lights on the lake, staff said there was to be no lighting in the lot. <br />Staff stated the question of safety arose from the dark parking lot. The Environmental <br />Board discussed this and recommended that if lighting was added, the City ensured it <br />shined down and doesn't bleed onto neighboring properties or the lake. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.