My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
03/28/2001 Environmental Board Minutes
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Environmental Board
>
Minutes
>
2001
>
03/28/2001 Environmental Board Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/19/2016 12:08:47 PM
Creation date
6/5/2014 4:22:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Environmental Board
Env Bd Document Type
Env Bd Minutes
Meeting Date
03/28/2001
Env Bd Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD -MEETING MARCH 28, 2001 <br />Chair Lanyon stated the Metropolitan Council forecasts the numbers the City <br />Council may report. <br />Trehus noted an inconsistency on page 64 of the framework with the number <br />7,900, while on page 65 the number was 7575. <br />Chair Lanyon urged the Board to make specific recommendations. On page 25, <br />number 9; limit growth needed a not to exceed clause, otherwise the City could be <br />built up in 5 years and be finished. Trehus agreed there had been more than 150 <br />homes in four months before the Board. <br />Asleson reviewed the concerns of the Board already stated were inconsistent <br />numbers, and the need for a "not to exceed" clause. Chair Lanyon urged a <br />number be proposed for the latter. <br />Donlin mentioned the projected cap from the 20/20 was 20,507:77d be a <br />cap for the year 2020. Chair Lanyon indicated the cap 20,500 for the year <br />2010. <br />Donlin noted the above quote was a typographical error. <br />Grundhofer addressed community growth as describpd'onpag e 3,wpri 259, but in <br />reality added up to 288. Trehus agreed the math wdni?',incoriect t <br />• <br />Donlin offered the number 20,500 people as the maximum -carrying capacity for <br />the City, and suggested a moratorium may be Chair Lanyon suggested <br />the number 180/year. <br />eTwit,p, <br />AO '414; <br />Trehus mentioned the number should decrease the year to compensate <br />for the higher growth in the previdikyear. Chair Lanyon added that it should not <br />exceed 300 in a two-year period. <br />445 If <br />Donlin asked how the,Fity*gibligtO respond when the maximum population <br />is reached. Chair Lanyon inquired if it ever stated a maximum population. <br />s1,4" <br />Trehus respond.1;1141.ere was never a maximum number given, and there was <br />no statempritor vision AOr 2010 or 2020. In addition, no maps were given to the <br />Board with the Comprehensive Plan. <br />4*'13 <br />Donfm-qqcsItypedIhe urgency to give recommendations within the month on the <br />Comex when there are no fmished maps. Trehus indicated the <br />Councilwas planning to proceed without comments from the advisory boards. <br />Asleson stated the comments needed to be written down. Chair Lanyon reviewed <br />there was no cap for any given year, 180 was suggested with 294 in a 2 -year <br />period. He also noted the presence of a policy plan with growth management, but <br />8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.