Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />March 12, 1997 <br />Page 6 <br />Mr. Brixius stated that the exchange would have to be in equal amounts. The <br />area is zoned General Business (GB). The reason for the exchange is that the <br />applicant believes that the land southwest of County Road 14 and I -35E has <br />more immediate development potential because of traffic visibility. In 1992, the <br />City adopted a policy that allows new development under the following <br />conditions: <br />1. The Cost of utility and street extensions can be covered by <br />immediate assessment. <br />2. The cost of operation and maintenance of the system will not <br />exceed normal costs as projected by the water and sewer rate <br />study. <br />3. That all up front payment or series of payments by the developer <br />would offset any additional costs of installation and /or future <br />operation and maintenance. <br />Mr. Brixius stated that staff is recommending approval of the MUSA exchange on <br />a 1 to 1 ratio. The applicant is aware of the requirement and will make the <br />necessary adjustment in the plat. <br />Acting Chair Robinson asked if sewer service will be provided by Centerville or <br />Lino Lakes, as there is a Centerville sewer on the edge of the property. <br />City Engineer Ahrens responded that Centerville would require a lift station to <br />service the property because it is shallow. Lino Lakes has a trunk line that can <br />be extended under the highway to the property. <br />Acting Chair Robinson noted this would put the sewer line on the west side of 1- <br />35E for future development. <br />Mr. Wessel affirmed economic interest in the southwest quadrant of I -35E and <br />County Road 14, and until the Comprehensive Plan is completed MUSA will not <br />be extended. Mr. Rehbein is making arrangements for the land exchange. <br />Acting Chair Robinson declared the public hearing open at 7:20 p.m. There was <br />no comment. <br />Mr. Dunn made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 7;21 p.m. and was <br />supported by Ms. Dahl. The motion carried unanimously, 5 -0. <br />Mr. Dunn asked if there is an alternative that would allow the transfer of the <br />entire parcel to MUSA, rather than 15 percent not included because of the ratio <br />requirement. <br />• <br />