Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/14/1990 P&Z Minutes• • • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING March 14, 1990 Vice - Chairman Al Robinson called the regular meeting of the Design Review Board to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Lino Lakes City Hall. Members present were: Vice- Chairman Al Robinson, Board Members Monika Slatten, Robert King, and John Bergeson. Also present were: Mayor Harold Bisel, City Planner, John Miller; Building Official, Pete Kluegel; City Engineer's Dan Boxrud and Darryll Schneider; and Planning Secretary, Laura Elken. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES Page 2 under the variance motion. Robert King seconded the motion. That was added in the minutes. Robert King moved to approve the February 14th minutes as corrected. John Bergeson seconded the motion and the motion was approved. MINOR SUBDIVISION FOR WAYNE AND CHERYL NELSON, APPLICATION #90 -12. The applicants own a residential lot located in Ulmer's Rice Lake Addition. The lot is the site of their single - family residence which fronts on Rice Lake Drive. Sanitary sewer and water will be available on Second Avenue this year. Nelson's lot is an interior lot. The applicant is requesting a minor subdivision to divide the 45,000 square foot lot into four city -sized lots. The two parcels adjacent to Second Avenue will be 75 x 145 feet covering an area of 10,875 square feet. The parcel on Rice Lake Drive is the location of the Nelsons' house measures 80 x 155 and covers an area of 12,400 sq. ft. The lot is an extra five feet wide to give the garage the required five foot setback from the side lot line. The Nelsons' builder located the house too near the center of the property. The same condition exists on the lot immediately north of the applicants. The second lot on Rice Lake Drive will have only 70 feet of frontage but will be 155 feet deep providing an area of 10,850 square feet. At present no sewer or water is available to residents on Rice Lake Drive and the Nelsons will not be able to hook -up to the utilities. As a result parcel B will not be buildable. The Nelsons understand this and will combine it to the lot with their residence for tax purposes. When utilities eventually become available the lot can be sold - not before - and the Nelsons are cognizant of this. MOTION: John Bergeson moved to recommend to the city council approval of Application #90 -11 to permit a minor subdivision of land for Wayne and Cheryl Nelson for land on Rice Lake Page 1 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING March 14, 1990 Drive. Approval to be contingent upon payment of a $1200 park fee and combination of parcels A and B for tax purposes. Mr. King seconded the motion and the motion was approved unanimously. MOTION: Mr. King moved to recommend to the city council approval of Application #90 -12 to grant a variance to Wayne and Cheryl Nelson permitting creation of three residential lots with frontages 70 and 75 feet based upon findings as required in Section 5, Subd. 7 of the city's zoning ordinance. Mr. Bergeson seconded the motion and the motion was approved unanimously. REVIEW PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PINE RIDGE, RICK CARLSON, APPLICATION #90 -13 AND REZONE APPLICATION, #90- -14. Rick Carlson addressed the board. He is proposing development of two parcels of land known as the Soukop property and the Barrott property. Shenandoah Addition is just north of this property. Carlson is proposing 188 lots, the density is approximately 1/3 of an acre per lot, or 14,000 square feet per lot. The plat did receive approval from the park board to incorporate a 5 acre parcel for park land within phase 2 of development, and a cash park dedication for approximately 60 lots within phase 1. Trail systems are designed to loop through the area. Ted Mahtke, the Landscape Architect stated that there are problems with the plat. The water table is high, and water has to be stored on - -site and released slowly. Three ponds are planned for the subdivision to help alleviate this problem. The applicant is also requesting to rezone the land from its present R -1X Single - Family Executive zoning to R -1 Single- - Family. Carlson stated that the construction of the preliminary plat has exposed problems that make it virtually impossible for me to market R -1X executive homes. He stated that preliminary grading plans indicate high water tables and shortage of on - -site fill material that limits full basements construction to scattered areas of only 10% of the development. Carlson is proposing development in two phases. Phase 1 has access to city sewer. Once sewer is available within phase 2 development will begin. John Bergeson asked if phasing was discussed at park board level. Mr. Carlson said that initially when he presented his plat to the park board he was proposing an 8 acre park. There was a pond within this park of close to three acres. Page 2 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING March 14, 1990 The park board did not want to accept the pond as part of the park dedication, but the park board is aware that development will occur in phases. John Bergeson asked about the trails going through the plat. He wanted to know if the property owners would own all the way back to the trail, or will the developer or city have ownership of the trails. Ted Mahtke stated that Lino Lakes City Attorney is being notified regarding this issue. Ted Mahtke stated that he hopes the city will maintain the liability of the trails. Robert King asked about the swales within the development. Could the pipes freeze up and cause flooding? Mr. Mahtke stated that if the pipe does become plugged, then the water will go through the swale. Dan Boxrud stated that he is confident that this can be worked out, keeping basements 2' above flood level. Dan said that all of the lots are buildable, it will have to be determined what style of home can be built on which lot. Monika asked if the Corp of Engineers or Rice Creek Watershed District have been notified yet. Ted Mahtke said that it has • not gone before those boards yet. The problem is that the RCWD asks for approval from the city before it is brought before the RCWD. • After further discussion a motion was made. MOTION: John Bergeson moved to recommend to city council approval of a rezone from R --1X to R -1 of the Barrot Soukop property, application #90 -14. Monika Slatten seconded the motion and the motion was approved. MOTION: Mr. King moved to recommend to the city council approval of the preliminary plat for Pine Ridge, Application #90 -13 as stated in the plans. Monika Slatten seconded the motion and the motion was approved. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR THE UNITED POWER ASSOCIATION, APPLICATIONS *90-03 AND #90 -02. Doug Uhrhammer, from Anoka Electric, presented a map to the board that shows the land use plan for Anoka Electric. He stated that in Lino Lakes there will be a considerable amount of Light Industrial businesses going up around the 35E corridor. This will create a bigger demand for Anoka Electric to supply power to Lino Lakes. Mr. Uhrhammer explained that Anoka Electric Cooperative is a distribution cooperative, they install power to individual homes, and supply electricity. the United Power Association is the company that provides the power lines, and builds Page 3 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING March 14, 1990 them. UPA also supplies electricity to Anoka Electric Coop. John Gazol, Manager of Engineering and Planning for the UPA spoke to the board and explained to them why a substation is needed. He stated that the region is served by three substations. One in Hugo, Vadnais Heights, and Circle Pines. The UPA is proposing a substation on property next to Schwing America, about a quarter mile south of Lino Lakes in White Bear Township. This substation will pick up areas along 35E. Gary Ostrom, Senior Field Supervisor from United Power Association stated that he is in charge of finding a place for the substation and finding a home for the power lines. He said that he looked at a number of areas for the site. He feels that on Centerville Road and County Road J is the best spot for the poles. He said that the substation has found its home, now they need to find a site that will work out the best for the power poles. Mr. Ostrom showed the board an artists conception of what the power lines will look like. He stated that it is the UPA's intent to replace two poles with three poles. Each pole would be 55 feet tall, The third pole will be a tap pole to hold the tension created by the transmission line. Adjacent to the tap structure would be a wood pole. The UPA needed to maintain a 55' height in order to comply with the state code. Mr. Ostrom stated that it is a fairly minor proposal to the city. UPA has to have that substation. Mr. Ostrom went through Section 5, Subd. 5 of the zoning ordinance addressing procedures in dealing with conditional use permits. He stated that in his opinion the changes are insignificant, in fact, a good reliable transmission line will be necessary for Lino Lakes. He said its inevitable, as the city grows, more power lines will have to grow with it. In Mr. Ostrom's opinion the power lines will not decrease property values. John Miller addressed Section 5, Subd. 5 of the zoning ordinance in dealing with conditional use permits. In part it states: The Planning Commission shall recommend a Conditional Use Permit and the council shall order the issuance of such permit only if it finds that such use at the proposed location: (A) Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, comfort, convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. Page 4 • • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING March 14, 1990 (B) Will be harmonious with the general and applicable specific plans and policies of the Comprehensive Plan of the city and this ordinance. (C) Will be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing and /or intended character of general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area. (D) Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems, and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of the proposed use. (E) Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. (F) Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. (G) Will have vehicular approaches to the property which are so designed as not to create traffic congestion or an interference with traffic on surrounding public thoroughfares. (H) Will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of a natural, scenic, or historic feature of major importance. (I) Will conform to specific standards of this ordinance applicable to the particular use. Section 5, Subd. 7 of this ordinance deals with variances. In brief, it states that in granting any variance the city must make six findings of fact. They are: 1. That the property in question can not be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. 2. That the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the land owner. Page 5 • • • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING March 14, 1990 3. That the hardship is not due to economic considerations along and when a reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. 4. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that would be denied by this ordinance to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. 5. That the proposed actions will not unreasonably diminish or impair established property values within the neighborhood. 6. That the proposed actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. In addition, the city council passed ordinance 12 -89 on January 8, 1990. That ordinance limited the height of utility poles to 45 feet in residential districts. It stated: The location, appearance, and height of utility poles, towers, and other electrical appurtenances shall be considered a conditional use within each of the city's zoning districts. John Miller spoke about yet another issue. When the power line was built in 1965 the UPA bought a 35 foot easement from the Hawkins. However, the electric coop took a "blanket easement" on the Hawkins land. It was only when Hawkin's daughter and son -in -law wished to build a house on part of the farm did the lending agency discover the easement. The UPA removed the blanket easement, but kept an easement for 50 feet of land, not the original 35 feet. The landowners were not paid for the additional 15 feet. Patrick Cairns, Land and Land Rights for the UPA stated that this issue is between the Hawkins and the UPA. Mr. Kens stated that Mr. Miller has raised a lot of issues. The Hawkins and the Donlin's (Mr. Hawkins' daughter), have been very conservation oriented. Presently they are attempting to reestablish osprey to the area and the work they've done with Lake Amelia has greatly enhanced its wild life capacity. It is now part of the local waterfowl flyway extending to other lakes south and west of Lake Amelia. Birds coming north across County Road J are gliding to land on the lake. The wires from the power line present an obstacle and have resulted in the loss of birds especially in the spring with increased deaths of young, inexperienced waterfowl. A heightened power line certainly will not lessen the hazard and will probably increase it. From a wild life Page 6 • • • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING March 14, 1990 point -of -view the power line is in the wrong place. Art Hawkins, property owner where the power lines are now sitting addressed the board. He stated that he has met with UPA representatives four times. All the proposals presented to him would add taller, bigger poles adjacent to our property. In fact, Mr. Hawkins feels the power line sits in the nicest area of the property. Every time he met with UPA they were not willing to admit that the land value would decrease. They played down and minimized the fact that there is a health issue. Mr. Hawkins stated that it has become a civic duty as a property owner that he play a game of bargaining. Mr. Miller brought up the fact that eventually County Road J will be improved. Mr. Miller felt it is a good probability that additional right -of -way will be required. Mr. Miller asked should a power line be rebuilt in an existing right -of- way only to be removed within less than five years? And, who pays for it? Patrick Cairns stated that if and when County Road J is widened, that State Aid funds may be available. Mr. Kens went on to say that moving the line 1/4 mile in order for it to be in an industrial area in White Bear Township would be a substantial cost. The UPA has to conduct business in an economical way. He said that he cannot justify moving the power line to White Bear Township. Anoka Electric Cooperative is a cooperative that if the cost to them goes up, the cost to the resident with AEC will also go up. Dan McConna, Manager of Environment and Land for UPA discussed the health issue due to living near the power lines. According to Science, the UPA is being told that there is no evidence that the power line possesses a threat to owners living near the power lines. Although he did admit that the media has painted a bad picture. He went on to say that it is presently unclear what type of affect it may have on you being near any magnetic field and electrical devices. The UPA can only tell you what the studies have shown. Studies have been done with both animals and humans, and no adverse affects have been shown. Mr. McConna said that it may even be harmful to be in the council chambers with the amount of light in the room. No one is sure of its link to cancer. The main problem is the media has a tendencies to dramatized this issue, and that does affect the market value. The New York Supreme Court had a case involving 60 land owners. The land owners said that their property value was reduced, and asked that the power authority pay the Page 7 • • • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING March 14, 1990 difference. The land owners lost the case. The Supreme Court stated that science dictates no problems, but perception is a problem. He also discussed bird strikes. Mr. McCollin said that the UPA is only talking about modification of an existing line. There will be no more conductors, and the poles are only going to be three feet higher. In his opinion the number of bird strikes should not change. Mr. Uhrhammer stated that he is part of a utility company. Whatever costs occur to the utility company are passed down to the resident. Pat Cairns stated that the UPA has met the intent of the zoning ordinance, modifications are minimal. He stated that we believe we have met the requirements asked of us and respectfully ask for your approval. Any Donlin stated that she feels the UPA and AEC are brushing off all the health hazards. She said there is a real fear with the residents living near the power line. She said that a person from every house on the block has had cancer. The fear is real. Monika stated that she appreciates all the work and thought that went into the presentation by the UPA and AEC. She is on the board to look at Lino Lakes and how she would like to see it improve. She stated that this is a city entrance. She would like to see the power line moved. Monika stated that in her opinion property values would be lowered. We, as a board, can look at studies and time is the only proven factor. If there is even a hint that there was danger involved - there would be fear. Robert King has not heard about the other possible locations for the power line. He would like to see more options discussed. John Bergeson asked about how many customers are served by AEC in Lino Lakes. Doug Uhrhammer stated that approximately 1 /3rd of the city is served by AEC. John Bergeson said that if the substation is in White Bear Township, you should also locate the lines there. Health concerns also affect Mr. Bergeson. Gary Ostrom approached the board one last time. He said that he feels this is the best site. There is already an existing power line. We are only proposing to change the corner structure. If we go away the line will still be there. He cannot justify moving the line. Why would we want to go somewhere else, this is just a minor adjustment. Page 8 • • • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING March 14, 1990 John Bergeson asked about the road improvement at County Road J. He said that someone must know when the proposed improvement may happen. Doug Uhrhammer stated that the road will be improved within a 10 to 15 year period. He thinks that the county will improve the road with the same right -of- way. Gary Kosterlicki lives north of this area. He stated that the whole purpose of this is long range planning. He feels that spending money to relocate the power line now will be a lot cheaper than if it is done ten years from now. MOTION: John Bergeson moved to recommend to the city council denial of application #90 -03 for a conditional use permit by the United Power Association based on the opinion that another route could be found. Monika Slatten seconded the motion and the motion was approved unanimously. A public hearing will be requested at the council meeting on the 26th. The public hearing will go before council on the seconded Monday in April. Patrick Cairns presented the secretary will the official request to be put into the record. This is attached to the end of the minutes. MOTION: Robert King moved to recommend to the city council denial of application #90 -02 for a variance on the height of the permitted power poles. Monika Slatten seconded the motion and the motion was approved unanimously. The reasons for denial of the conditional use permit are as follows: 1. The power line has not been shown to promote the public health and general welfare of the neighborhood and city. 2. The power line will not be harmonious with the general and specific plans and policies of the comprehensive plan of the city. 3. The power line will not be designed and constructed so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing and intended character of the general vicinity. 4. The power line will create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. 5. The power line will result in continued destruction of natural and scenic features. Page 9 • • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING March 14, 1990 6. The power line will not conform to the specific standards of this ordinance applicable to the particular use. The reasons for denial of the variance is as follows: 1. The variance request is due to economic considerations of applicant alone. 2. The variance request would grant to the applicant special privilege that would be denied by the zoning ordinance to other structures in the same district. 3. The proposed actions would unreasonably diminish or impair established property values within the neighborhood. 4. The proposed action is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the zoning ordinance. 9:28 p.m. MINOR SUBDIVISION FOR DARLA LOWELL, APPLICATION *90 -09. Darla Lowell said that when they purchased this parcel it was because they liked the area and that they called the City of Lino Lakes and they purchased a ten acre parcel that was zoned for possible subdivision of 2 1/2 acre parcels. The applicant purchased the parcel with his brother and sister -in -law, with the intention of building homes next to each other. They are located on Elmcrest and their property is adjacent to an easement on the north side of the parcel. The applicant petitioned the city for the street to be constructed. The petition was signed by 50% of the residents, but once the costs were discussed, many of the residents decided they did not want the road. John Miller stated that the parcel that the Lowell's own has 332 feet of frontage of 24th. It has a depth of almost a quarter mile. The Lowells wish to divide the land into parcels 332 x 656 feet. Only one of them would have frontage on 24th Avenue. It is proposed for the other lot to have a driveway from 24th following a road easement on the north side of the first parcel. This parcel is located within the MUSA boundary. Sewer will be available long before 2010. Residential development with sanitary sewer and water will start in 1991 on the city's east side. Page 10 • • • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING March 14, 1990 The applicant has the feeling that once construction starts in this area that the street will not be developed. They would like to put in a road giving access to the lot. They feel they are being penalized. They feel that if they subdivide and four houses are built on this parcel, that will give the city more money, rather than just building one house on the parcel. The neighbor across the street is now using the easement for his driveway. Jo Tomillo, Darla's father, is also a Realtor. He said that in the area of Centerville, Vadnais Heights, and Lino Lakes there is a great need for development, but it may be a long time before those lots are sold. He feels it is a shame that this is happening to the Lowell's. John Miller said that he empathizes and is sympathetic to the plight of the applicant. He feels that if they would like access to the lots, they will have to put in the road up to city standards. Al Robinson stated that the board cannot set precedence on this issue. He said the Lowell's could build a road, but it would have to be a tar road with curb. The Lowell's said that Elmcrest is an awful road. A nice gravel road would look better than Elmcrest. Dan Boxrud said that improvement of Elmcrest is proposed for the near future. John Bergeson suggested tabling this item, let the applicant think about the possibility of putting the road in themselves. Darla Lowell asked that the city look at the petition again and start a feasibility report. John Miller said that the city still has the petition. The city charter states that it has to have 51% of the residents to start a feasibility report. Unfortunately, they had 50 %. If the applicants could get one more person to agree with the new road it would work. MOTION: Mr. King moved to table the request for Minor Subdivision from Mark and Darla Lowell until the April Design Review Board meeting. Monika seconded the motion and the motion was approved unanimously. REZONE REQUEST FROM PAUL HOWARD FOR MOBILE HOMES, APPLICATION *90 -11. Bill Chapman is the planner for Mr. Howard. He stated that one year ago Mr. Howard requested a rezone from R -1 to R -6, so that he could expand his mobile home court. The council action was denied. There was a two to three vote to deny the rezone. Majority rules. Page 11 • • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING March 14, 1990 State statues allows for council reconsideration after a year. Mr. Chapman created a new sketch adding approximately 20 mobile homes in a 7.2 acre parcel of land to expand Baldwin Lake Court. The parcel is 1500 feet long. Mr. Chapman stated that Baldwin Lake Mobile Home Court is 20.7 acres of land and is the only parcel zoned R -6 in the entire city. Mr. Chapman stated that trails can be added near the lake, and open space can be provided. Chapman spoke with Tom Hovie from the DNR and talked with the Corp of Engineers and received a good response from both. The Watershed District said that if he can satisfy the Corp of Engineers than you probably can satisfy the RCWS District. There is a lift station on Laurene Street. There will be a need for a ditch in this area, and this will have to be worked out with the city engineer. During a work session held March 6th the design review board looked at this sketch plan and came up with some ideas on how to improve it. The board discussed the following changes. 1. Adding additional frontage along highway 49. 2. Adding screening and buffering from the R -1 zone to the north of Baldwin Lake Court. 3. Adding additional landscaping. 4. Connecting the new street with the existing long cul -de -sac in order for two accesses to the court. 5. Resolving the problem with the lift station. John Bergeson is also a member of the economic development committee. He said that the EDC does not see a need for further development of this kind, but Bergeson feels that a R -1 zone does not lend itself well to this site. He feels that it is best to rezone this property. The long cul -de -sac was a concern by all the board members. Also was the frontage from highway 49. Darryl Schneider discussed the lift station at Laurene Ave. He said that there is a two or three year capacity yet in this lift station. Screening of the lift station is also a concern to Mr. Schneider. The comprehensive plan will be Page 12 • • • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING March 14, 1990 brought before the Metro Council in the near future. There will be a need for a gravity main in this area. Bob Leicheidl approached the board. He lives 200' from the proposed mobile home court. He stated that it will devalue his property. Density is also a concern to him. MOTION: Mr. King moved to table the rezoning request for Paul Howards Baldwin Lake Mobile Home Park, Application #90- 11. Mr. Chapman will work out a new sketch plan to present to the board next month. Monika seconded the motion and the motion was approved unanimously. REVIEW OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR DISTRICT 1 -4. John Miller stated that the City of Lino Lakes presently has three tax increment finance districts. They are ( #1) Rice Lake Estates, ( #2) Sunrise Meadows, and ( #3) Main Street Shops. A draft tax increment financing plan was submitted to the board that would include other areas where there may be a need for TIF activity. These include land near the proposed outlet mall site at the north east quadrant of I -35W and Lake Drive. The townhome site, and land near the Rice Lake Plaza commercial site near Lake Drive and Hodgson Road. The legislature is in session, and creating a district now will allow Lino Lakes to follow current laws and will allow the city more latitude in using TIF money. After adoption, the plans can be amended so attention to content at this time is not a real priority. The plan was drafted by Ron Batty from the Holmes and Graven law firm. Ron prepared the plans for TIF districts two and three. MOTION: Mr. King moved to recommend to city council adoption of Resolution #90 -01 finding that the TIF plan is consistent with the city's comprehensive plan. John Bergeson seconded the motion and the motion was approved unanimously. DISCUSSION OF REZONING OF THE I -35E CORRIDOR. John Miller stated that in 1989 both the economic development committee and the planning and zoning board made recommendations to the city council to rezone a large area adjacent to the I -35E corridor from a "Rural" to a "Light - Industrial" district. Late in January the city council held a public hearing on the request and several persons spoke in opposition. In a nutshell there were two reasons for this: Page 13 • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING March 14, 1990 A. The Light Industrial zoning would leave existing dwellings and farm structures as non - conforming structures, i.e. if they were destroyed by an act of God they could not be replaced. B. Concern over the effect of the industrial uses on adjacent properties. The worst type of industrial development was feared. Since the public hearing there have been three informal meetings on the issue, two with city staff people present and one between interested persons themselves. At this point in time Mr. Miller believed that everyone was in agreement that there were problems with the original proposal. The meetings served the function of identifying specific problems and looking for methods of resolving them. He believed they got to the point where most of the land owners within the proposed rezoning area were satisfied. The same holds true for adjacent property owners. Mr. Miller's recommendations were as follows: 1. Create a "Rural- Business Reserve" district. The new zoning district would have residential and rural uses as "permitted uses ". This would allow their reconstruction if destroyed and it would permit construction of additions and accessory buildings. The zone would also preserve the land in its present rural state until urban development became reality. 2. Begin business development in the current light industrial zoning district. Establish a "trigger - mechanism" that allows development to move north only after a certain percentage of the current industrial area is developed. This process would continue providing phased, sequential growth proceeding from south to north. 3. Reduce the size of the "R -BR" district. Do not rezone any land north of 80th Street and west of I- 35E. (See attached map). In addition, do not rezone any land north of the Beatrice Salberg parcel and one - quarter mile east of 20th Avenue. 4. Study the feasibility of creating a Rural- Executive zoning district from the east shore of Peltier Lake to 20th Avenue. Originally about 90 persons signed a petition opposing the industrial rezoning. With the four recommendations above we may have only a half a dozen to ten unhappy persons. Any time you get this close to unanimous agreement in a land use Page 14 • • • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING March 14, 1990 issue you're in good shape. The design review board received a new proposal written by the Justice group. Ron Marier stated that it is basically the same proposal that the Justice group presented in January. Ron Marier stated that they poled all the residents and they want to go with this new proposal. The new proposal asks for rezoning of 11% of the proposal initiated by the city. A woman in the audience said that at the last meeting with property owners and John Miller that he surprised them with a new proposal. She said she feels misrepresented. John Bergeson said that the board cannot make a decision on a proposal that they just received tonight. John Miller said that he has not yet heard why they are opposed to the proposal. Rezones are not meant to be popularity contests. Ron Marier stated that one of the biggest reasons we are against it is the way it was presented to us. Harold Bisel discussed the issue with the members of the audience and the board. He said he feels like we are in a wrong start here. The whole thing got out of kilter. He said look at Forest Lake's freeway corridor - commercial and industrial, He said look at the freeway corridors going just further south. It's the same thing. Commercial and industrial. This is bound to happen to Lino Lakes. The land proposed for rezoning is rural, it will not be disturbing very many people, you will be able to farm your land, do what you are doing now, until someone approaches you with an offer, then only you decide if you want to sell your land. The city is not pushing you at all. You people complain about your taxes being too high. This is why we need commercial and industrial development in the city. Ms. Thiltgen said that she thinks the city and the residents are talking about the same thing. She said that we needed to meditate on this for a while and that it does make sense to her now. After a considerable amount of discussion a motion was made. MOTION: Mr. King moved to table the proposed rezoning of the I -35E corridor until citizens and staff can discuss this further and come to an agreement. Monika Slatten seconded the motion and the motion was approved unanimously. Meeting adjourned at Midnight. Page 15