02/13/2002 P&Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • • Planning & Zoning Board January 9, 2002 Page 27 Mr. Lyden felt if the issue of construction traffic and noise was the deciding factor for whether developments are approved, there would obviously be no development in the City of Lino Lakes. He stated for him the real test was whether there was anything positive in the development for the neighborhood, which he felt was not the case with the proposed development. However, this did not mean a person does not have to be rational and fair and look at the facts and make a judgment based on the facts. He stated his primary issue was the zoning and the PDO, which must pass the real approval test. He noted PDO's have been granted to many developers within the City, such as Trapper's Crossing. He stated the only trade -off Trapper's Crossing got for the PDO was a substandard fence and he questioned whether Mr. Vaughan was asking for more or for less. He stated the City must be fair and reasonable and he felt that a PDO made the most sense for the development of an island. Mr. Lyden stated he heard the concerns expressed this evening, which he felt were valid. However, he felt the City must be fair. Mr. Corson stated it was his understanding that zonin city and was something that most Judges will not by a city that will affect their future and their p1 He felt if the City did not want seven homes cr time to stop it. He indicated a rezoning a. n wou development and he felt this was a discreti ons are judicial actions by a e stated zoning is an action ow t ` want their city to grow. on to a small island, this was the required for the proposed on by the City. Chair Schaps did not believe the City's Boards or the City Counci sections of the Municipal c He stated he understoo it meant the City must rub ement could tie the hands of any of the , he believed there would be multiple well as violation of the due process of law. e settlement agreement but he did not agreed that any development proposal. Mr. Lyden believed the Judge understood he could not go beyond his jurisdiction by dictating to the City how they should develop the island or whether the island should be developed. However, he noted there is often a difference between what is legal and what is ethical and he felt the Judge, in the spirit of his direction, was clearly looking for what is ethical. Mr. Lyden stated he was looking for a reasonable, rational, fair and ethical outcome. Mr. Rafferty agreed a PDO would enhance the ability to develop the island. He questioned how tabling the application would affect Mr. Vaughan in attempting to find solutions that may work for all parties. He noted the residents did not oppose the use of the land but were concerned that the applicant only be able to develop one lot based on the size requirements of the R -X Zoning District. He questioned what the new Comprehensive Plan showed for the development of the subject parcel. Mr. Smyser stated the new Comprehensive Plan guides the property for single family, sewered development.