Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />Planning & Zoning Board <br />April 13, 2005 <br />Page 21 <br />Chair Rafferty invited applicant to make comment. <br />Greg Schlink, applicant, 3564 Rollingview Road, White Bear Lake, stated they had met <br />with the neighbors and some of them expressed concern about continuing the trail, but <br />from the developers standpoint, they had found a lot of homeowners did not like trails in <br />their backyard. He noted the plan for the City showed the trail along Stagecoach Lane <br />and they supported the City's plan. <br />Mr. Pogalz stated he agreed they might want to wait for the Church to sell their property <br />and asked for an update on those negotiations. Mr. Schlink replied they had made an <br />offer to purchase the property, but the offer was rejected. He indicated they had also <br />made an offer to realign Stagecoach, but the Church did not like that proposal either. He <br />stated after working with the Church for many months, they had not made any progress <br />and he wanted to continue with this process and not wait for the Church. <br />Chair Rafferty asked if the Church wanted to sell. Mr. Schlink stated the Church was not <br />looking to sell their property, but they had looked at his proposal. <br />Chair Rafferty believed the Church was moving in this direction. Mr. Schlink stated he <br />knew the Church was looking at an expansion of their facility, but he did not want to <br />speak for the Church. <br />Mr. Laden asked if there was any discussion about doing this project as a conservation <br />development. Mr. Smyser responded every development possibility that came in was <br />looked at as a possible conservation development. He noted the part to be conserved was <br />along the lakeshore with much of that area being wetland. He indicated much of that area <br />was already being required to be conserved. He noted the conservation area was not <br />public land and the conversation easement the City took on a conservation development <br />was only to ensure the area was conserved, but it was not public land. <br />Mr. Nelson asked if the City would need to get permission from all of the properties <br />north to put in a trail. Mr. Smyser responded he did not have the specifics as to why the <br />City had decided to abandon the trail, but the plan now was to have the trail run along the <br />road. <br />Mr. Houchins stated at the time the Comprehensive Plan was discussed there was a <br />concept of the trail running along the lake, but the homeowners north of the property <br />were opposed to this, so they were going to run the trail where it was and then connect it <br />to Lake Drive. <br />Mr. Nelson asked if the road could be replatted to where it should be for when the Church <br />sold its property. Mr. Smyser replied there was nothing to connect to, so they did not <br />know if the road would ever go through and the road easement they had now was already <br />owned by the City and unless something changed they had to plan where the existing <br />easement was. He indicated they could not require this developer to replat property they <br />had no control over. <br />DRAFT MINUTES <br />