My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
08/11/2003 Council Minutes
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2003
>
08/11/2003 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/9/2015 1:29:02 PM
Creation date
2/9/2015 12:39:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
08/11/2003
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.
/
13
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 AUGUST 11, 2003 <br />APPROVED <br />382 City Planner Smyser summarized the staff report, indicating it is Staff' s recommendation that this <br />083 resolution be approved. <br />384 <br />385 Councilmember Carlson asked what type of road this would be. City Planner Smyser stated it would <br />386 be a 32 -foot width, shown as a minor collector road, but the same as most of their local roads. <br />387 <br />388 Councilmember Carlson noted they were showing the property the city bought for the Athletic <br />389 Complex, which the residents paid for, and the road is taking a jog out of that property. She asked <br />390 why it is not all on the developer's property. City Planner Smyser stated there is a lot of wetland on <br />391 the subject property, and to make the remaining land developable, they had to jog the road slightly to <br />392 the north. <br />393 <br />394 Councilmember Carlson asked how much developable land will be left. She noted the DNR <br />395 regulations say you have to have a certain size lot, which she believes is 80,000 square feet, or 40,000 <br />396 square feet if on a recreational lake. City Planner Smyser reminded the Council this lot is already <br />397 there; they are not creating it or platting the land, it is on record already, so the lot size is a moot <br />398 point. <br />399 <br />400 Councilmember Carlson asked if City Planner Smyser was saying anyone could build on a lot less <br />401 than 80,000 square feet and put in a well and septic system as long as the lot already exists. City <br />402 Planner Smyser stated he was not sure where the 80,000 square feet came in, but if someone has a lot, <br />403 they have to have reasonable use of their property. The owner of this parcel is proposing to use it for <br />404 a house, and needs access to it. Staff feels a road is better than a private driveway. <br />405 <br />•06 Councilmember Carlson indicated she knows it is 80,000 square feet because it was brought up at the <br />407 Environmental Board meeting, so this remains a concern for her. She noted another concern is the <br />408 city bought this property and paid interest on it, and calculating the 30 feet, they are giving away <br />409 about a half -acre of city land. She added someone did bring up the fact that the person who sold tract <br />410 A to the city sold the other three tracks to a developer. She noted they had a developer in here two <br />411 weeks ago saying his undeveloped land was worth $50,000 an acre, so they are giving up quite a bit <br />412 of city owned land. <br />413 <br />414 Mayor Bergeson stated he has a different view. He commented the City is not land poor in this area, <br />415 and giving up a half acre of land for someone else to build a road that would provide southern access <br />416 to the city property seems like a good deal for the city. <br />417 <br />418 Councilmember Dahl indicated she had a question on reason #1 on the Staff report. It says they <br />419 require full road frontage on new lots, and these are existing but the owner is addressing them as new. <br />420 But then they go back to the fact that they are existing lots when it comes to sewer and water. She <br />421 asked how the developer was able to flip-flop like this on whether they are new lots or existing lots. <br />422 City Planner Smyser stated perhaps it is the way he worded the report. He explained the developer <br />423 has chosen to provide these lots with full access on a public road, rather than the less desirable <br />424 alternative, even though it is not required. The wording was his, not the developers. <br />425 <br />426 Councilmember Reinert moved to adopt Resolution No. 03-121 accepting easements for street, <br />427 drainage and utility purposes. Councilmember O'Donnell seconded the motion. <br />428 <br />•29 Motion carried unanimously. <br />9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.