My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08 - Planning and Zoning Monthly Report
Laserfiche
>
City Council (Permanent)
>
Agenda Packets (Permanent)
>
2006
>
11-08-2006 Council Meeting
>
08 - Planning and Zoning Monthly Report
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/11/2016 1:51:45 PM
Creation date
7/11/2016 1:51:44 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
#290224100000009,Francis Razidlo,property owner; Parcel#290224100DA0889, <br /> Lloyd Wass,property owner; Parcel#290224100DB0009,Minnesota DNR,property <br /> owner; Parcel#290224100FA0889, Gregory Seils, property owner; Parcel <br /> #2902243041100009,Edward Larsen,property owner. <br /> Ms. Barajas explained the Staff Report. These parcels were not part of the city-wide <br /> rezoning. Charlene Seils stated that their residence is approximately 1,000 feet from the <br /> OHW and that the proposed 500-foot Shoreline Residential area was not deep enough. <br /> Lloyd Wass stated that his residence is approximately 600 feet from the OHW. Ms. <br /> Barajas stated that if the backage roads are constructed with the H' way 371 project,the <br /> dividing line could be reevaluated at that time. Keith Anderso that he owns <br /> property on the south side of Blueberry Lane and that 500 fe okay,but 1,500 feet of <br /> Commercial might be too much. The landowners were r t what their property <br /> is zoned has nothing to do with real estate taxes. <br /> Due to the depth of these lots,the Planning Co sion would like to where the <br /> residences are located on the lots. <br /> A motion was made by Mark Hallan, seconded by ein,to have sta determine <br /> where the residences are and to reco . end the distanc the Highway that should be <br /> commercial. All members voted"aye tion carried. <br /> ADDITION OR DELETIONS TO AG D <br /> ADD: <br /> 6.b. December Me g Date. <br /> 7. e. Downtown <br /> NEW B <br /> Sign mance Discu <br /> Ms. explained th f Re She stated that the Planning Commission would <br /> need to the questio t th end of the report. It was the consensus to make it a <br /> larger sign esidential velopment a Conditional Use Permit. That would allow the <br /> Planning Co . n to r iew the size and landscaping. Thirty-two square feet and 8- <br /> feet high as meas the ground was not excessive. Lighting should be downward, <br /> not spotlights. Setba from lot lines was discussed— 1-foot required in Ordinance but <br /> sight-lines should not be obstructed. Total signage cannot exceed 32 square feet and can <br /> be split up if more than one entrance. <br /> December Meeting Date: <br /> Due to the regular meeting date falling so close to the Christmas Holiday,the December <br /> meeting will be held on December 14, 2006. Mr. Hallan has a conflict on that date and <br /> may not be able to attend. <br /> Planning Commission Minutes 4 <br /> October 19, 2006 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.