My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes PC 09.21.1976
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
1976
>
Minutes PC 09.21.1976
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/27/2015 11:50:11 AM
Creation date
1/19/2015 2:07:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
9/21/1976
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
Mr. Richard Cooper, 3908 Macalaster Drive, indicated he too was <br />against the Hedlund proposal. <br />The Public Hearing was closed at 8:55 P.M. <br />Motion by Mr. Cowan and seconded by Mr. Letourneau to recommend to <br />the Council denial of the request to rezone the west 187 feet of Lot <br />10, Block 6, Mounds View Acres for the Gold Tiara Beauty Shop because <br />it would result in spot zoning from the present residential to service <br />office usage. <br />Mr. Marks wanted the motion amended to reflect the Board's feeling <br />that the entire undeveloped property owned by Mr. Hedlund should be <br />planned for on a unit basis to provide a proper buffer between the <br />residential area to the east and the commercial development across <br />Silver Lake Road. Mr. Cowan said he would not accept that amendment <br />to his motion since he did not feel it was up to the Board to prede- <br />termine the disposal of Mr. Hedlund's property. Mr. Letourneau agreed <br />that a denial of this specific request was all that was necessary. <br />Mr. Johnson felt there should be some stipulation made to indicate the <br />City's willingness to work with Mr. Hedlund to develop that particular <br />parcel in a manner which will be to the advantage of both the City <br />and the developer. He wanted the City staff to make themselves avail- <br />able to work with Mr. Hedlund on such planning. <br />Mr. Cowan then called for a vote on the motion. <br />Voting whether to vote on the motion: <br />Aye: Johnson, Letourneau, Hiebel, Bowerman and Cowan. <br />Nay: Marks and Rymarchick. <br />Motion carried. <br />The motion to deny Mr. Hedlund's request then carried unanimously. <br />A debate on whether it is proper to involve the City staff in the de- <br />velopment of private property and whether such services are not normal- <br />ly available to any resident who needs help in formulating a request <br />dealing with the development of such property resulted in the following <br />motion: <br />Motion by Mr. Johnson and seconded by Mr. Marks to recommend to the <br />Council that the City staff be made available to Mr. Hedlund, at his <br />convenience, to provide reasonable City input into the comprehensive <br />development of his property consistent with existing zoning ordinances <br />and responsible land use. <br />Voting on the motion: <br />Aye: Johnson, Bowerman, Rymarchick, Cowan and Marks <br />Nay: Hiebel and Letourneau <br />-4- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.