My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
02/23/2000 Council Minutes
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2000
>
02/23/2000 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/3/2015 2:30:27 PM
Creation date
2/3/2015 10:19:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
02/23/2000
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.
/
6
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
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION FEBRUARY 23, 2000 <br />COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE, BRIAN WESSEL/JEFF SMYSER <br />Staff advised they are waiting for the opportunity to go through the numbers in the Plan at <br />a special Council work session. <br />Staff requested Council Members advise them regarding available dates to schedule <br />another special Council work session to review the proposed Comprehensive Plan. <br />MAJESTIC PINES COMMUNITY CHURCH, JEFF SMYSER <br />Staff advised Ms. Cindy Sherman of Northwest Associated Consultants has prepared a <br />new report. The latest submittal includes a site plan, building elevation, and landscaping <br />plan. No grading/drainage or utility plans were submitted. Staff cannot make a <br />recommendation without complete information. If the Council is comfortable with the <br />revised plans that were submitted, the applicant can proceed with the additional drawings. <br />This project received a recommendation of approval, with conditio <br />and Zoning Board. It last came to the City Council on Decem <br />extended 90 days with the applicant's agreement. The 90 d <br />19, 2000. The March 13, 2000, Council meeting would <br />Council could act on the application before it expire <br />the Planning <br />2 99 • It was <br />it to March <br />e" mg when the <br />It may not be possible for the grading plans t. co � . etedand still allow enough time <br />for a full engineering review in time f.� "e .' 000, work session. If the Council <br />is prepared to recommend approv . ension likely will be needed. <br />Mayor Bergeson advised t <br />Monday. Action can th <br />from residents for <br />the past relating to <br />The City Attorney <br />uld "'- main on the regular Council agenda for <br />the item can be tabled. Letters have been received <br />the project. He noted that discussions have been held in <br />. The questions possibly went beyond the scope of zoning. <br />dvising Council regarding that issue. <br />Mr. Gary Nordness, Developer for the project, came forward and thanked City staff for all <br />their help. He stated the applicant has requested not going forward with the drainage <br />plans because the run-off has been reduced due to a smaller parking lot. The plan can be <br />approved subject to the City Engineer signing off on the drainage plans. Considerable <br />thought has gone into the revised plan. The revisions are based on comments from all <br />City Boards and the neighborhood meetings. <br />Mr. Nordness reviewed the plan noting the revisions include the following: a realigned <br />path, information regarding the septic system, and a reduced parking area. All lighting <br />issues have been addressed. The footprint of the building is the same. Elevation studies <br />have been conducted. A bermed area has been designed to change the view from the <br />road. All setbacks have been exceeded. The plan can retain two (2) 100 -year floods. <br />When the project is fully developed, 23% will be impervious or building surface. <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.