Laserfiche WebLink
4. Rezoning to Recreation would be compatible with the surrounding land uses as <br /> �— the Recreation district is allowed, and encourage, to be established wherever <br /> recreational resources exist. The zone is not incompatible with any zoning district. <br /> 5. The subject property is adjacent to properties that have been rezoned to Shoreline <br /> Residential to the north and south, and Urban Residential to the east. <br /> 6. The rezoning to Recreation would be consistent with the previous zoning of <br /> Public. <br /> 7. The property meets the purpose and intent of the Recreation district by <br /> maintaining a land use district for existing uses of land that allows public and <br /> private recreation facilities, as these properties are publicly owned with recreation <br /> facilities located on the northern parcel. <br /> 8. Neither property meets the minimum lot size of 10 acres for the Recreation zone, <br /> being 2.5 and 5 acres in size. However, the compatibility requirements state that <br /> any property that meets the purpose and intent of this zoning classification may be <br /> zoned Recreation. <br /> 9. Both properties meet the minimum lot width of 500 feet for the Recreation zone, <br /> with the northern parcel being over 600 feet wide and the southern parcel being <br /> roughly 575 feet wide. <br /> All members voted"aye". Motion carried. <br /> ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO AGENDA: <br /> None. <br /> OPEN FORUM: <br /> None. <br /> NEW BUSINESS: <br /> Appoint Representative to the Alternate Route Discussion Group: <br /> Mayor Malecha explained that a group had come to the City Council requesting the City <br /> sign a Resolution to discuss the alternate route. The City has been contacted by other <br /> groups that would like to be part of the discussions. The Council would like to form a <br /> discussion group with a representative from the various interested groups attending. <br /> MnDOT postponed the December 13 meeting as they needed to gather more information. <br /> The Planning Commission suggested that the Planning Commission meet with the City <br /> Council in a workshop to discuss the alternate route. The Planning Commission would <br /> be pleased to lead the group if that is acceptable with the Council. It could be held at our <br /> regular meeting dates from possibly 6:00 to 8:00, with our regular meeting following. <br /> A motion was made by Dean Williams, seconded by John Derksen that the Planning <br /> Commission requests to take on as a task to conduct workshop meetings with the City <br /> Council on the alternate route development and to conduct these workshops at our regular <br /> meeting times, based on our agenda, with the time to be determined. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes 11 <br /> December 14, 2006 <br />