My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
10/27/1997 Council Minutes
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1997
>
10/27/1997 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2015 12:54:29 PM
Creation date
1/29/2015 12:12:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
10/27/1997
Council Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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
COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 27, 1997 <br />Mr. Schumacher added that historically business expansions have resulted in requiring utility <br />connection due to intensified utility use. <br />Tom Ramsden of Lino Lakes Blacktop stated that the proposed addition would enhance the <br />property as well as the Lino Lakes Industrial Park, and that they plan to connect to utilities either <br />from Lilac Street or Apollo Drive, whichever is most feasible. <br />Mayor Landers asked at what point sprinklers are required. Ms. Wyland indicated that the limit <br />is approximately 3,000 square feet; and that the fire chief reviews all submittals, making the final <br />determination. <br />Council Member Kuether verified that the reason for the expansion is for storage and office <br />space. <br />Council Member Kuether moved to approve the Lino Lakes Blacktop, Inc. conditional use <br />permit. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. <br />Consideration of a Minor Subdivision Request, James Speiser, 441 and 453 Birch Street - <br />Ms. Wyland explained that Mr. Speiser and his daughter, Jill Paulus, are requesting a minor <br />subdivision that would allow for a 1.2 -acre parcel containing the existing homestead to be split <br />from a 21.4+ acre parcel at 441 Birch Street. The 21.4 acres is currently farmed by Mr. Speiser. <br />The property is currently zoned R-1 and indicated as residential on the Comprehensive Plan; <br />however, it is not currently within the MUSA and Mr. Speiser has indicated that he is not <br />interested in development at this time. The 21.4 acres, however, could be developed residentially <br />at some future date. Utilities are available from Birch Street to serve a future development. <br />Ordinance No. 93 - 18 provides: <br />Habitable single family homes constructed prior to July 13, 1992 may <br />reduce their lot size to a minimum of one (1) acre if the balance of the <br />property results in a parcel of ten (10) acres ... <br />Staff recommended approval of this minor subdivision, but commented that the existing <br />outbuildings will be considered preexisting nonconforming uses and, therefore, if destroyed by <br />more than 75% will not be allowed to be rebuilt. As a 1.2 -acre parcel, the newly created lot <br />would be allowed a total of 2,020 square feet of accessory buildings. The site currently contains <br />4,300 square feet of accessory buildings. <br />Ms. Wyland stated that there will be no park dedication fee, as no new dwelling units are <br />proposed. Should the larger parcel ever develop, park dedication will be required at that time. <br />Council Member Bergeson asked if the portion on Birch Street not containing a residence <br />contains sufficient frontage to accommodate a residence in the future. Ms. Wyland indicated that <br />sufficient frontage exists for a residence or a roadway. <br />Council Member Lyden asked how much larger the parcel would need to be to make the <br />outbuildings consistent with the ordinance requirement. Ms. Wyland stated 10 or more. <br />However, the property is zoned R-1, so that provision is not applicable. She added that the back <br />of the lot is heavily screened with trees, and should not pose a problem for future development. <br />Council Member Lyden clarified that at this time the Council is only being asked to consider a <br />minor subdivision under Ordinance No. 93 - 18. Ms. Wyland responded in the affirmative. <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.