My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2009.05.14 PC Minutes
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Minutes
>
2009 PC Minutes
>
2009.05.14 PC Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2015 2:31:44 PM
Creation date
2/20/2015 10:53:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commissions
Meeting Date
5/14/2009
Document Type
Minutes
Commission Name
Planning
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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
Planning Commission Minutes — March 26, 2009 <br />Page 2 <br />dwelling or living space to the property. The ordinance would allow for someone to add a wash <br />sink or toilet. <br />Schumann stated that having a nanny or housekeeper in that extra space may not be a bad idea. <br />Rosenquist answered that when a nanny goes away the home owner may end up renting the <br />space out and having two families on the property. <br />Bryan mentioned that handyman quarters are allowed in agricultural districts and there are <br />ordinances that regulate accessory apartments and horse boarding facilities. If the Planning <br />Commission would like staff to look into this issue further we could do so. <br />Burmeister motioned, Rosenquist Seconded, to approve the text amendments. <br />All ayes, Motion carried. <br />2008 Comprehensive Plan <br />Bryan gave background and an update on the Comprehensive Plan status. He explained the <br />three main issues the Metropolitan Council had on the Comp Plan regarding stormwater, <br />wastewater and land use. The Met Council would like the City to change the density to 1 unit <br />per 10 acres or adopt their Flexible Residential Development Ordinance. Bryan gave the <br />Planning Commission 4 possible options: <br />1. Leave the plan as -is <br />— Make case for approval. <br />2. Change density to one unit per 10 acres <br />— Remove PUD density of one unit per 5 acres <br />3. Adopt Flexible Residential Development Ordinance <br />4. Request change in Diversified Rural category <br />— Permanent Rural, with no future sewers <br />Staff recommends option number 2. This would eliminate cluster development allowing 1 unit <br />per 5 acres. <br />McRoberts stated that the Met Council wants to reserve the land for development and thinks that <br />the topic would be too difficult to bring back to the public. <br />Schumann added that 50% of the property owners would like 5 acre lots however is not opposed <br />to option two being that it is the most similar to what we have now. <br />McRoberts added that if development comes to those areas they would be able to develop and <br />thinks that they should not close the door to that. <br />Rosenquist agreed that option two makes the most sense to him. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.