08/27/1986 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

1 1 185 2I AL JOINT HE_..T:iV'3 v H- s = ..ha._ r e c:c ..at feel this additional a_ cost shouted be considered _ "cost overrun", because this work as recteo by the task force although _r was :iot anticipated and thus J_ included in the original estimate for t ne project. . McLean asked Mr. Wuornos if Wuornos & Associates would be le_ .ng to guarantee the $3,000 figure to complete the project. first Mr. Wuornos said yes, if the project could be completed in two more meetings. Mr. .McLean.sa.id.four more meetings is what he felt would be necessary. Mr. Wuornos then agreed to guarantee -_•_e 53,000 figure to complete the project including up to four __e meetings of the task force. ..a w-cr Benson asked if the task force feels that they have diaested the report -from Net Council regarding services. Mr. McLean and Mr. Joyer stated that they do feel that the task force understands the tand taken by .the Net Council. Mr. McLean said that he feels that et Council is open to extensions of sewer in Lino Lakes. Attendees debated their opinions as to traditional planning versus non- traditional planning for development, one -acre lots versus larger acre lots, services and road maintenance, - °rowth pressure, e o. Mayor Benson asked whether or not the task force will look a: sewer extension possibilities in other parts of the City, spec_ - - c� commercial yV'.r. McLean said no, this is not • .� idly the .,. �nercra areas. .� . Le�__ sa�.� ..�, .. .cciuded in the scope of the comp plan review at this time. The C t'ZT Counci will take action on possibly amend. ng the comp plan budget at their next meeting. ;TILDING STANDARDS PROPOSAL ivir. Schumacher explained that the purpose of this portion of the meeting is to discuss the proposed building standards for com- arcial and industrial zones in Lino Lakes. Reference was made o R. L. Wuornos Associates' memo dated 7/9/86 on this subject. _r. S:.:umacher stated that one cf the ccntroveraial issues which has come to his attention is within (G)_.(3)(i), Page 3 of the referenced memo, wherein the proposal stat -mss "No building shall constructed with a wood frame or have an exterior wall surface s eet metal ." Me. ,ers of the P & Z Eoard stated that although the 'Inc wood =.came" aspect was not a specific requirement when the planner asked to draft a proposal, the Board did realize that the c wood frame" aspect had been included in the planner's draft. Several persons in t. e audience were opposed to the proposal tor the following rea.sons .