01/07/1981 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• Planning and Zoning Page Four. the Council meeting to he held on Jan. 12, 1981, he would file a law suit on Jan. 13, 1981. IIIHe suggested to the Planning and Zoning Board that = forward a recommendatio to the Council that the zoning ordinance be amended. The present form is unenforceable and unconstitutional. He felt this land should be rezoned. Mr. Johnson asked MR. Locher if this Board should be considering a special use permit? Mr. Locher said the special use permit was issued under Ord. #6 allowing this, then Ord. #56 was written - the question is whether the land has lost the special use permit by not conforming to 6.21, paragraph 2 in Ord. #56. because the project was not 50% completed within three years. Mr. Reinert asked Mr. Talle if he and Mr. Locher werei'orking together on this special use permit - he felt this was a proper question - that the public should be aware of any collusion. Mr. Talle replied that he had not spoken to Mr. Locher since the court hearing and Mr. Locherecaffirmet E this. Mr. Hook said he felt that both Attorneys had acted in a proper manner and did not feel there had been any improper acts from either man. Mr. Johnson asked Mr. Locher if a special use permit rather than a rezone was the correct way to handle this and Mr. Locher said, Yes, this had been the Judges direction - to consider this application as it relates to Ord. #56, 6.21, paragraph 2. Mr. Locher felt this direction gave some premise to the Original special use permit. There was discussion on the Judge's instructions and what this entailed - Mr. Hook had one version and Mr. Talle presented another version. Mr. Benson restated the Home Owner's position and objections to the constructio of the quads. Mr. Klaus said she had been told that this multi- family use of the land had been planned at the time of the platting. Mr. Johnson gave her a history of the area, noting the things that had been promised at the time of the sales and had never materialized. Mr. Bathke asked Mr. Blackbird the selling price of the units and Mr. Blackbird said approximateld $55,000.00 per unit. Mr. Johnson moved to deny the application for a special use permit for Lakes Add. #7 based on the project is not in conformance with current zoning, nor in conformance with the proposed comprehensive plan which has been given preliminary approval by the Planning and Zoning Board and forwarded to the Metropolitan Council by the City Council for their review relative to single family homes in this area; 24 quads, 96 units on approximately 20 A. would average 2 or 3 bedrooms create a density of 14.6 per quad for a total of over 350 people. This density coupled with the use of only 225 feet of lake- shore would have a detrimental effect on the lake and on the entire natural enviornment of the area. The water table of the proposed site averages 0 to 2 feet, construction could only compound the drainage problems that already exist in the area. The water table at the propsed site would make construction without basements necessary, the building would tower over existing homes, IIIinvading the privacy of these residents and destroying the natural sight line for all home owners. Construction of this type would lower the property value of the area residents. Project of this type could only be a financial burden to the residents of Lino Lakes. Seconded by Mr. Heath.