My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-18-89 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1980's
>
1989
>
04-18-89 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2025 7:22:30 PM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:14:34 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES A,PRIL 18, 1989 PAGE 4 <br />j by the Planner, coincided with the ordinance. If we should go with th RE <br />map prepared by the PZ, the proposed ordinance, prepared by the City <br />Planner, would need to be amended. Williams felt the recommended <br />ordinances submitted by the planner should serve as a sound basis of any <br />ordinance we would want to adopt. <br />and several_ others <br />Williams stated hegtook the time to read the Comp Plan carefully and <br />submitted a number of suggested corrections in the spirit that we all had <br />agreed to take the 1986 plan and rework it slightly and use the existing <br />zoning map ffor the LUMa on an interim co prom s . He asked Moe & Graves <br />why they Hid not su�mit Mitten comments. AAmmen e 4-24-89)* <br />If a Council worksession is to be held, Graves urged the City Admin to <br />consolidate what she would perceive to be a consensus agreement on what <br />the majority of the Council would agree on beforehand. This would be a <br />point from which we could start a discussion. Williams would like to see <br />in writing specific problems, that Moe and Graves, have with the plan. <br />Graves responded there are statements in the plan for no planning for <br />commercial development at all along I-94. With^�hat.typ� of statement in <br />the Plan, Graves felt we might as well restrict a�ni <br />er i g north of loth <br />Street and watch Oakdale and Woodbury fight over the properties. <br />A Council worksession on the Comp Plan will be held on Tuesday, April <br />25th, at 7:00 p.m. in City Hall. <br />B. Rezoning RR-R1, Packard Park 3rd Addition, Gene Peltier <br />C. PRD Concept Plan, The Forest, Morton/Engstrom <br />On March 7th, the City Council directed the PZ to review, on a city-wide <br />basis appropriate future R-1 placem ntithi h a review inclusion <br />and consideration of The Forestanda `Ic= s a� tad-e- 9_Vi-ew--of <br />-th'e-Paeka-r-d--Pmt-r -r-dAd ien, for consequent amendment of the Comp Plan <br />and return with their recommendation for the April 4th Council meeting. <br />The PZ discussed potential future R1 zoning in the City and made the <br />following motion: <br />"M/S/P DeLapp/Dick Johnson - to recommend to the City Council that "The <br />Forest" and "Packard Park 3rd Addition" be rezoned to Rl based on the idea <br />that this rezoning will have inconsequential. impact on the Comp Plan and <br />the PZ indicated they will consider other areas at a future date for R-1 <br />Zoning. (Motion carried 6-3: Dave Johnson: Packard Park 3rd Addn, is <br />already adjacent to R-1 Zoning and should be rezoned to R-•1. He <br />considered the Engstrom application as spotzoni.ng; Ann Bucheck: voted for <br />denial based on the water problem in the area; Steve DeLapp: submitted his <br />recommendations as referenced in Appendix B of PZ minutes). <br />Councilmen Williams was in favor of the concept plan, The Forest, in <br />concert with the 2 1/2 acre zoning proposal. He was not in favor of <br />voting for a rezoning because he wanted to see the PZ to look at the <br />entire City for R-1 areas, not just the two proposals. <br />Councilman Hunt would still stick by the CC decision on 3-7-89 and would <br />like to see RE Zoning in certain areas in the City. <br />Councilman Moe was willing to vote, now, on either development and amend <br />*Amended 4-2 - <br />Graves responded to Councilman Wms' statement that he made comments at the <br />4-10-89 Joint Meeting which are reflected in the minutes of this meeting. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.