Laserfiche WebLink
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 19, 1998 <br />Al explained that the City could establish a lesser growth rate but then the amount of <br />MUSA would also be less. That means that there would be less MUSA available in 2010 <br />and the City would have to go back to the Metropolitan Council and ask for additional <br />MUSA. This would give the Metropolitan Council too much control over the future of <br />Lino Lakes. <br />Caroline said she felt that there is a strong possibility that the City would have to amend <br />the Plan by 2010 because things change. She would like to be conservative until that date. <br />Caroline said she was concerned about the number 147. She felt some growth should not <br />equate to 147. The City is putting too much emphasis on residential growth and should <br />concentrate more on commercial/industrial growth. Kim felt the key should not be the <br />147 but rather a population of 20,500 in 2020. <br />The Council took a five (5) minute recess at 8:10 p.m. <br />John felt that land use decisions should be much more important that the rate of <br />residential growth. He said he would rather work with no defined number. John said that <br />he was "OK" with 147 but felt the market should define the number. <br />John noted that the "baby boomer" statistics are huge. He felt as "bubbles" go through <br />any community, the household size is affected. He said he did not disagree with Chris' <br />math, but did feel that the MUSA is not in the right location. John did not want to loose <br />another goal which is infill. He felt the "banking" concept was a good tool. It gives the <br />local government control and flexibility. He felt that this was one of the most important <br />parts of the Plan. This concept will work well in the future and it is up to the elected <br />officials to work within the Plan. <br />John referred to the location of "greenways" and asked where should they go and what <br />should their configuration be? Al explained that they would be built around wetlands and <br />areas that are not buildable. There were comments from the public that there are <br />inaccuracies in the wetland designations. Others were concerned that once the <br />"greenways" were approved by Metropolitan Council, they could not be changed. Al <br />agreed that the wetland inventories were inaccurate. He would like to put in the Plan, a <br />statement that inaccuracies do exist and will be addressed after the environmental study is <br />completed. Kim stressed that the "greenways" are not just wetlands. Al said he will give <br />more details on what "greenways" are. He will also add another paragraph on Page 57 <br />clarifying that "greenway" areas are conceptual. <br />John noted that there is a five (5) acre parcel on Lake Drive that does not fit the zoning. <br />He expressed concern about the development of the lots and others with similar <br />situations. Al explained that every city faces those problems. However he felt that this <br />particular site may need additional attention. Kim suggested that guidelines for planning <br />be established for such lots. She noted that the Council has to do their job based on <br />PAGE 6 <br />