My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-20-76 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1970's
>
1976
>
01-20-76 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/18/2025 7:16:00 PM
Creation date
10/1/2019 3:51:29 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
urban planning • design • market research <br />2101 hennepin avenue south minneapolis <br />minneaota 55405 (612) 871- 2661 <br />MEMORANDUM <br />TO: <br />Donald Raleigh <br />Lloyd Shervheim <br />Otto Bonestroo <br />FROM: <br />David Licht <br />DATE: <br />27 January 1976 <br />RE: <br />Lake Elmo - DeMontreville Highlands Plat <br />Based upon the City Councils directive, we have formulated proposed conditions <br />for preliminary plan (plat) approval to be incorporated in the Council motion <br />made on 20 January 1976. The major concerns are that we have sufficiently <br />covered all aspects of the matter plus have an acceptable format. I would <br />appreciate your comments in this regard by the end of this week. This rush <br />is being dictated by a meeting with the developer regarding the park situation <br />on Saturday, 31 January. Please contact either Barbara Senness or myself. <br />In addition to the general concerns raised above, special attention should also <br />be directed to the wording relative to the park dedication provisions. Further- <br />more, I believe an issue revolves around the requirement to require a resubdivision <br />layout. While I realize it has been standard procedure for the City to require this <br />information, it is a discretionary provision of the Subdivision Ordinance. and a <br />mandatory provision of the Zoning Ordinance. I question the jurisdiction of the <br />Zoning Ordinance in this regard as well as the implication of contract zoning. <br />These factors should be viewed in the context of preliminary plat approval being <br />based partially on the proposed development conforming to the character of the <br />Tri-Lakes area. This was also one of the major points made by Ken Sovereign. <br />Consequently 1 question the advisability of 'opening the door" to future reduction <br />in lot size. Consequently, would it not be better to vary the Zoning Ordinance <br />requirement and eliminate the implication that a different character of develop- <br />ment is passible in the future? I would appreciate your comments in this regard. <br />cc: City Project File <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.