1974.02.25 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

i F} 4. .4. Mr. Dale does not believe staying with the 20 acre district is practical for economic reasons. Twenty acres lower the land value. The city would have a great expense for legal fees. He. Suggested he be allowed another month or two weeks to develop a third plan. He suggested the followings - Staying with 20 acre only - conservan: . Oonservancy would be better defined and it should be put in the text that the conservancy can be continually defined. --Consider for the main agricultural area zone - 10 acres. People would have to pay premium prices for 10 acres than a developed lot in the city but it wouldn' t be as much as for 20 acres. - Five acre minimum in outlining areas where it is already chopped up. Five acres is still double what is necessary for on-site sewer system. • Five year improvement increment - one acre with the house situated so it wan further be subdivided. • - Ten year improvement increment - 3 acres. Cdr. Dale stated that if we stayed with the 20 acres with one and three acres there is nothing to change on the zoning map and there will be only a change in the text. He also stated we review and update the ordinance every 3 to 5 years and a public hearing be held. Mr. Dale suggested we allow them to come up with this alternative and schedule a special meeting of the Planning Commission and Village Council. Motion made by Peloquin, Seconded by Johnson, that the Planning Commission schedule a work session for February 28th at 8:00 P.M. Motion carried. Mr. Thomas LaValle requested to be put on the agenda for a mining permit renewal but did not appear. Motion made by Rosenquist, seconded by Leroux, that we adjourn meeting at 11:10 P.M. Motion carried. . Marie Jansen, Secretary lingo Planning Commission