04/25/2001 Env Bd Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

APPENDICES: Appendix 1: City of Lino Lakes Handbook for Environmental Planning and Conservation Development (hereafter referred to as the "handbook" or the "HEPCD "). It has been agreed to append this document to the comp plan, but this idea will not yield the appropriate results, since these documents are not consistent with each other. In these places the framework will by law have precedence. To adequately provide for greenways and the protection of our natural resources, and as a result maintain some of our rural character and open space, our current development practices must be reevaluated as per the handbook as soon as possible. The proposed Comprehensive Plan must be made consistent with the handbook prior to comp plan adoption. Appendix 2: This chart was a part of the Aug 1, 2000 memo from Alan Brodus (NAC) to City Administrator Linda Waite - Smith. The data in this chart should be updated where needed and included in the framework. A huge discrepancy exists between the 359 additional acres the framework states are needed to accommodate growth through the year 2010 (see page 67) and 2,504.55 acres in the 2010 growth area shown in the chart. Another discrepancy is that our stated annual demand for Commercial and Industrial is 20 acres per year (page 66), or 200 total acres through the year 2010. Yet the Appendix 2 chart shows 46725 acres being added as part of the 2010 growth area for C &I when we already have 450.42 undeveloped acres available inside the MUSA. A total of 917 acres is set aside by the framework for C&I urbanization through 2010, 717 acres (or more than 450 %) above and beyond this calculated land use demand. To be accurate in the projected MUSA expansion calculation for the year 2010, the 200 C &I acres and the correspondingl9% overage should be removed from the land demand calculations, as this is more than covered by the 450 we already have set aside. Subtracting the 238 acres from the 359 acres the framework is asking for on page 67 leaves us with a need for only 121 more acres to get us through 2010. This also leaves us a 200+ acre excess for C &I. The relatively small 121 acre land demand should be taken from the C&I excess or out of the 19% overage, eliminating the need for MUSA expansion. Moreover, all these calculations assume that no homes will be built outside the current MUSA line, which certainly won't be the case. Bottom line: Unless the intern is to disregard a controlled growth approach, there is no justification for urban growth area expansion until sometime after the year 2010. So why would we add another 2,504 acres right nova Appendix 3: These announcements made by the city in the Quad Community Press in • September 1998 indicate the information that was distributed by the city during the comprehensive plan's development. Here a picture of Lino Lakes at "full growth" is depicted, with 12,530 acres of open space (year 2010 ?) and a population of 20,500 (year 2020). Lino Lakes, the eighth fastest growing "city in the state, had a census population of 16,791 on Jan 2, 2000. This population is achieved with a MUSA of 4,321 total acres (appendix 2), much of this as yet undeveloped. The two growth areas proposed more than double our current MUSA with an additional 4,626 acres, half now and half in 10 years. If you double the urban area, how can you limit population growth to 22 percent? Why double the urban growth area when no more than a 22% increase in population is to be allowed? The "proposed land use" map on page 75 shows that by 2020 there won't be much of any open • Page 3