07/08/1991 Council Minutes (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

256 COUNCIL MEETING JULY 8, 1991 the Council hold the public hearings this evening and take no further action until after the Metropolitan Council takes action. Mr. Miller explained that he had met with the neighboring residents and tried to inform them of the development planned for this area. One (1) question asked at that meeting was what would happen if the area were rezoned to Single Family Residential (R- 1). Mr. Boxrud estimated that approximately the same number of housing units could be located on the property, however the developer would not be able to meet all set back requirements and units would be lost. The developer must be able to develop the number of units that are proposed in the town house proposal to make the project financial feasible. Because the area is long and narrow and because of the ponds and shore land set back requirements, it is not financially possible to develop the area into single family lots. The Council must consider either the plan presented tonight or some other multi- family development or simply divide the area into two (2) 10 acre parcels. Mr. Miller noted that staff has met with John Steine of the DNR and a letter has been received from the DNR stating their official position. The set back from the lake shore is acceptable as shown on the current preliminary plat plan. Mr. Miller explained that by rezoning to PUD, the Council will be able to vary the shore land setback requirement. Mr. Hawkins explained that a separate variance will not be required since approval of the PUD means approval of all variances required to meet the specifications of the PUD. Mayor Bisel opened the public hearing at 10:30 P.M. He asked that a letter from Concerned Local Residents be accepted into the record as well a letter from Mr. Lee Jester, 6101 Centerville Road, the Sierra Club and Mr. Art Hawkins who are all opposing the development. Mr. Art Hawkins, 6101 Centerville Road stated that he was aware that local governments were required to prepare a Comprehensive Land Use Plan. He was also aware that the Lino Lakes plan was updated in October, 1990 and this update does not include the proposal that is before the Council this evening. He said he felt that since the most recent update did not include the Amelia Lake development, this development was a "spur of the moment" project and not in the long range plan. Mr. Hawkins referred to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan several times and noted that the Metropolitan Council has classified Lino Lakes as generally rural in nature. Mr. Hawkins felt this would mean that Lino Lakes could only develop according to rural standards which is four (4) housing units per 40 acres. He noted that any other development would be in conflict with the Lino PAGE 4 1 1 1