08/09/2000 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board August 9, 2000 Page 3 those uses and stated they would be changed to Highway Commercial on the map since those uses were similar to the uses designed for vehicle access rather than pedestrian access. Mr. Zych asked about the Rehbein property which is also identified to be added to the Highway Commercial District. Mr. Smyser pointed out the Rehbein property located to the south of the bank and clinic which would be changed to Highway Commercial since it abuts the highway and would likely be designed primarily for vehicle access.. Mr. Zych asked if the County wants additional access for the highway. Mr. Smyser stated the County will not allow another access to Lake Drive. Mr. Zych asked if the plan indicates there will be limited access to these Highway Commercial parcels. Mr. Smyser pointed out the access locations from Lake Drive, noting this is under County jurisdiction. However, access from City Streets is a City decision. Mr. Schilling asked what the next step is if the standards ar ± dor . Mr. Smyser stated it would be presented to the City Council with a reco �E ''`da£ they approve the same endorsement statement. Public hearings woul with the Board in September and then returned with a recommendati Council. He stated the commercial areas were highlighted by most as < one ° s and he believed the residential areas would be easier to revise s a a�, less design and access issues. Mr. Smyser stated they will still need to r 'iew public streetscape issues to assure there are not too many restrictions or ectations. He stated the official rezoning process would then follo Ms. Lane asked if Mr. Fefer the Town Center. Mr. S the Town Center idea exit ramp with a doubl Town Center. M negotiations have uraging direct access from the interstate into ained that Mr. Fefercorn had suggested "stretching" the freeway entry ramp to align with the northbound ose being served to either enter the freeway or enter the ted staff has debated that option with MnDOT but those ded. Mr. Rafferty comme ed on the need to assure, as the City grows and the needs of the citizens are met, that the correct foundations are laid so a mistake is not made. He stated staff and the consultants deserve a lot of credit for the documents they drafted. However, while staff is comfortable with the standards and funding is being requested from the Metropolitan Council, he thinks the City is trying to put a stamp of approval on a document that is not, as yet, complete. Mr. Rafferty stated it may cost some dollars to assure the document is properly completed but he would support a continuation until all issues are "wrapped up." He stated he still has questions and does not believe he has been given enough time to raise those questions or debate the issues involved. Mr. Smyser stated staff's concern is funding of $1.5 million and if the opportunity is lost, it would be a large impact. He stated staff is not requesting formal adoption but, rather, an endorsement. Mr. Smyser stated it is very clear this is in no way a final stamp of approval but the indication would be support for this direction and concept. He asked if the Board would like to revise the language of the suggested endorsement. Mr. Smyser