My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
02/24/2003 Council Minutes
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2003
>
02/24/2003 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/6/2015 1:57:51 PM
Creation date
2/6/2015 1:15:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
02/24/2003
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.
/
38
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 FEBRUARY 24, 2003 <br />APROVED <br />• 1 so, what zoning district would be most appropriate and what conditions and standards should <br />2 apply to the proposed use. The City Council, Planning and Zoning Board, or property owner, <br />3 on receipt of the staff study, may initiate an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance consistent <br />4 with Section 2, Subd.1. of this Ordinance to provide for the particular use under consideration <br />5 or shall find that the proposed use is not compatible for development within the City. <br />6 <br />7 City Planner Smyser indicated this may seem like a minor point, but was much needed. He explained <br />8 that it is being proposed that the site and building plan review process be entirely an administrative <br />9 function rather than going through Planning and Zoning and City Council review. He indicated if <br />10 there is a variance request or appeal of the administrative decision by the applicant, it would be <br />11 brought through Planning and Zoning and Council (page 2-22). He stated this is similar to making <br />12 minor subdivisions an administrative review. He indicated if a site or building plan does not meet the <br />13 ordinance, Staff would deny or ask them to make changes. <br />14 <br />15 City Planner Smyser explained that another change is that planned unit developments (PUDs) <br />16 normally will be addressed with conditional use permits. He indicated a new set of requirements for a <br />17 PUD is at Section 2, Subd. 10, page 2-39, and provides for rural clusters as well as urban residential <br />18 PUDs. He stated any mixed-use development will require a PUD rezoning. <br />19 <br />20 City Planner Smyser advised that they have reduced the number of categories for accessory building <br />21 size maximums and provided an increase in the amount of accessory space for small lots, less than 1- <br />• 22 1/4 acres, to be raised to 1200 square feet from the previous 1120 square feet. He explained that the <br />23 landscaping requirements have been clarified and updated, and tree preservation requirements for <br />24 commercial and residential building have been added. <br />25 <br />26 City Planner Smyser explained that the Central Business District will become General Business, and <br />27 the CB zone deleted from the ordinance. The Shopping Center district will be deleted, and shopping <br />28 centers will be conditional uses in the business districts. He added a new single-family residential <br />29 zone has been created. R -EC, Single Family Estate Conservation, which allows for `clustering' in a <br />30 single family zone, but requires that any space saved by using smaller lots must become open space. <br />31 (page 6-12) <br />32 <br />33 City Planner Smyser stated that Section 2 addresses the processes for rezoning and Conditional Use <br />34 Permits (CUPs). He indicated the language just developed will be placed on pages 2-6 and 2-7, and <br />35 noted that they have clarified a lot of housekeeping items. He stated they have added a CUP <br />36 revocation process, which did not exist before. He noted that if a project gets denied, it cannot be <br />37 resubmitted for a year. He stated Staff was going to take that out, but the City Council wanted it left <br />38 in. He indicated this would apply for building site improvements and rezoning as well. <br />39 <br />40 City Planner Smyser noted that in the Interim Use section on page 2-12, there are now clear submittal <br />41 requirements, and they have added the process for appeals. He explained that in the case of <br />42 administrative decisions, this new section explains the process to appeal the decision, making the City <br />Alk 43 Council the Board of Appeals. He indicated if the City Council approves making site and building <br />1111. 44 plans an administrative function, then the appeal process is important. <br />45 <br />18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.