My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
03/14/1994 Council Minutes
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1994
>
03/14/1994 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/13/2015 3:19:23 PM
Creation date
1/13/2015 11:56:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
03/14/1994
Council Meeting Type
Work Session Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
112 <br />COUNCIL WORK SESSION MARCH 14, 1994 <br />Council Member Bergeson asked how many lots per acre after streets, <br />ponds and other easements are taken out can be developed. Mr. <br />Brixius explained that in the concept plat for Trapper's Crossing <br />the figure is about 1.6 per acre. It was noted that most of the <br />good and easy developable land has been developed and the plats <br />with 100 lots per 40 acres are now a thing of the past. <br />Mr. Schumacher explained that the biggest concern of the staff at <br />this time is that building permits for new homes remain consistent <br />each year. Staffing becomes a problem if there are 400 permits <br />issued one year and then 75 the next. Budgeting will also be a <br />problem if this situation is allowed to happen. <br />Mr. Schneider noted that Metro feels that each municipality should <br />have a 10 year supply of lots. At this time this City could not <br />identify more than one to two years lot inventory. <br />Mr. Brixius explained that the City Council should identify the <br />rate of growth with which the City feels comfortable. Does the <br />City want to develop 75 lots per year or 100 or 200? The current <br />process identifies the MUSA area and the people in the MUSA area <br />feel they have a right to develop although services may not yet be <br />available. Additionally, these people are actually paying higher <br />taxes and in effect purchasing rights in the MUSA area. If the <br />City continues to develop by exchanging one MUSA area for another, <br />the City is taking away a right from the people who are being <br />dropped from the MUSA. This will cause conflict in the future. <br />Mr. Brixius suggested that the City adopt a "land bank" concept. <br />Although the concept is not popular with Metro it makes sense for <br />Lino Lakes because of the many problems unique to Lino Lakes such <br />as the City Charter, wetlands, physical divisions and the Anoka <br />County policy of applying higher values to lands located within the <br />MUSA. The "land bank" concept does not set the location of <br />specific MUSA areas but rather a specific amount of MUSA acres is <br />allocated to the City based on demand and the City determines where <br />the MUSA lines will be extended by approval of subdivisions. <br />Mayor Reinert noted that in effect the City does have a "land bank" <br />on the west side of the City since there are many one acre lots <br />with septic systems. Mr. Brixius said it would be appropriate to <br />keep these lots in the MUSA because in the future there will be <br />septic failures. He also noted that MUSA looks at these areas as <br />developable however, they are not aware of the Lino Lakes City <br />Charter and do not understand the effect of the Charter. <br />Council Member Bergeson asked if other cities were "land banking". <br />Mr. Brixius said that Lakeville has done this since 1981. They <br />experienced some of the same problems as Lino Lakes is <br />experiencing. Some plats were denied by Metro because the cost to <br />PAGE 2 <br />1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.