03/13/2002 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 eveni , : hick he felt were valid. However, he felt the City must be fair. Mr. Corson stated it was his understanding that zoni a °» s . "judicial actions by a city and was something that most Judges will not de with. stated zoning is an action by a city that will affect their future and their .. + F'' ow t ey want their city to grow. He felt if the City did not want seven ho e. `• to a small island, this was the time to stop it. He indicated a rezoning ction Id be required for the proposed development and he felt this was a discr onary cision by the City. Chair Schaps did not believe t greement could tie the hands of any of the City's Boards or the City C• . erwise, he believed there would be multiple sections of the Municip. ° • e olat as well as violation of the due process of law. He stated he understo+ nt of the settlement agreement but he did not agreed that it meant the City e • . er st p any development proposal. Mr. Lyden bel the Je understood he could not go beyond his jurisdiction by dictating to the . -° they should develop the island or whether the island should be developed. How giver, he noted there is often a difference between what is legal and what is ethical and he fat 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.