My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
May 2, 2006 CCP
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
2000's
>
2006
>
May 2, 2006 CCP
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/19/2025 10:05:02 AM
Creation date
10/1/2019 3:19:20 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
296
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
Lake Elmo <br />Agenda Section: Planning, Land Use and Zoning <br />No. 9G <br />City Council <br />May 2, 2006 <br />Agenda Item: RR District Setbacks <br />Backaround Information for Mav 2 , 2006: <br />During a recent City Council Workshop the Planning Commission was requested to review the existing <br />setback provisions in the RR and RE districts. It was observed at the workshop that RE setbacks were <br />significantly larger (and adopted much later by the City) even though the development density of RE was <br />significantly larger as well — more dense. On that premise, it was suggested that the RR setbacks might <br />y <br />logically be as large as those of RE. <br />On April 24 staff presented the Commission with the RR/RE setback concerns, including a chart depicting <br />the current differences. Following substantial discussion of the matter the Commission adopted a <br />recommendation to the Council to not amend the setbacks in RR. The reasons given by commissioners for <br />this recommendation included the fact that no new RR parcels will likely be created in the City; current RR <br />property owners both acquired their properties knowing what the RR setbacks were at the time, and have <br />relied on those standards for years (thereby the City creating numerous non-conforinities with any changes <br />at this point); and, that the RE standards (including the setbacks) were specifically created by the City to <br />allow smaller parcel sizes that would still retain a rural character by greater prescribed structure spacing — a <br />"trade-off' of large setbacks for smaller (than 10 acres) lots. <br />Person responsible: <br />Action items: <br />No action required unless further Council direction on the subject <br />City Planner <br />is intended. <br />Attachments: <br />Time Allocated: <br />1. Draft Planning Commission Minutes of April 24, 2006 <br />2. Planning Staff Memo <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.