Laserfiche WebLink
-3- <br />Ma. Hanke aeked him if ne wae awara that we ar:e invulvad 1n a now <br />~/~, onmpreheneive plan, Their property has fallen into plann~ng District <br />~ 1 1 and for khis part;icule,x area. they had in mind multiple density <br />dwellinge (PUD). The community ae a whole seama to go along wtth <br />thiu. <br />Mr. Olaon etated that the problem ie twafold. No matter wtia~,: they <br />do with it it ie ueelees in ita present stato. They would 'r~upefully <br />work out, somathing tihat is compatible with the drainage p.ropoeals <br />end Mr. 0'Neil's use of the property. <br />Mr. Foes aeked if, an the na:th on Long Lake Road, wuuld that be <br />commercial also7 Mr. Olson replied, yea, imaginary lota 1-11 <br />would be R-2, the remainder would be 3. Ma. Burmeister inquired <br />ae t.o tha sixe of tihq lote and he raplied: 100 x 125, bixt we ar4 <br />Plexible. <br />Mri. Haake made a motion to deny Mr. 0'Dleil's requaec foc a rezoning <br />from B1 to D 3 of the property located at east of Long Lake Road, <br />North oE Co. Ad. ti2 and Southwost uE Highway 10 except 2400 Highway <br />10, beoause it is in conflict witi~ eu~ proposed comprenenaive plan <br />in which this aroa ia recomutended ~nr a deaignation of madium daneity <br />PUD. Thia motion was seconded by Nancy Burmei3ter. <br />Me. Rurmeieter sCated that oux plan has c~one to the Metropolitan <br />Council and they have approved it and tihia requeat is something ~hat <br />we have tried to avoid. We have tried to prese~ve it as rr:aidential <br />in bhie area. <br />Mr. Foss asked if there wore a pos~ibility of talking to MSdwest <br />P7,anning as he queationa ivhether thiu particular piece of land <br />!~ is euitable £~~r tha denaity we gave it. I peraonally feel this <br />~/ is a better way to use this. It ie more auitable and benefictal <br />in the long run to the city to hava it commercial, i feel it has eome <br />merit. <br />Me. Bumneiaters The pub:Lic did not want that to go aommercial when <br />we had tho public heariri.~e. They wera happy with the meditun denaity. <br />Hew can wa change i~ now? <br />Mr. Foae saiQ thay could have another hearlny. <br />Ms. 8umeieter sai3 it has only been a sh~rt time ngo that wa did <br />this. <br />Don MackAben called Ear the question. Tho motion carrier,. 7 <br />]. <br />Mr. L'oes expla.tn~d h1.s aba~ention: I Feel that tha ares along <br />Highway 10 will have to be rezoned to soma type of commercial <br />eventuslly. I thlnk we are going to be facing this. it ia not going <br />to be sn ideal aituation for residential development. <br />Me. Blanchard stated khat she woulfl be more incl±ned to go along with <br />it if we knew definitely what they plan to put in there. <br />The next item is Rol.and W. M111er - Property involved - 262Q ttighcrsy <br />10, Aeturn Item - Var.iance of new setbacks. Spacial Use Permit - <br />Indaor Tennie !.n 8-3 Zoning. <br />Ms. Haake aeked Councilman Shelquiet ~as holdinq up the adoption <br />of tha cott~prehensive plan. He replied that ha will mentlon thia <br />et the agenda meeting Monday evening. <br />Ms. Haake eaidt I undaretand, Mr. Miller, tl~at you are here with <br />a new aet bac!~. You have narrowed and lengthened your building and <br />the eide yard eetbacke are now 24', whi,ch ie a varianco needed of <br />26 Feet on the East and West eides. <br />I <br />ayasl <br />abet <br />~ <br />I <br />i <br />~ <br />