Laserfiche WebLink
Chairperson Nixt stated that based on the denial, there is no reason t° proceed with <br />5 and 6. <br /> <br />Mr. Sacco stated that they have certain obligations with the property <br />would like to fulfill and requested that the Commission address those <br /> <br />they <br /> <br />71 <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br />:1 <br /> I <br />:1 <br /> I <br /> I <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik stated that the use of the is not tied <br />the sub&v~smn so the Comm~ssmn could a t on Case 5. ~t~, . <br /> <br />Case #5: Request for Sketch Plan Review of a ~f Sii'~i~ision, Holiday <br /> Acres; Case of Lyndale Terminal C°~~ :~*"~' ' <br /> <br />Community Development Assistant Wald stated~;~7:Zyndale Te~al Comply has <br />applied for sketch pl~ review to replat Outl~;~:~:~;~7~?~C ~d G?~f:~v, er's Bend 3d <br />Addition into ~o co~ercial lots, generally ld:cated e~. ~'~:~,H. ~7 ~d <br />~m° S~eet. ~e prope~ consists of.appro~mately 6. 86 'a:, f~:~?and is proposed to .be <br />plaUed into ~o lots. Lot 1 will be approximately 1.40 acres a~:TE~t 2 is 5.40~a~es. ~e <br />prope~ is cu~ently zoned B-1 Business. ~e proposed p~c~ eet~ ~:~'half acre <br />minimum lot size requirement,~..:~;~lO0rfoot wid~ ~d 150 fo }equirment <br />establjshed in the Business m~'~X'~)¢i')~esult of a prior ageem~i"::Sith respect to <br />~ver s Bend Park and the~:R~m'~ver -~s pa~diar ~ea h~ been <br />exempted ~om any p~k dedicatio~/feq ~' approval of ~e <br />sketch plan contingent upon compli~ with reGe~'2~er dated December 1, <br /> <br />Motion by~C¢~erS°n~'7 Nixt,~, .:: ..,. seconded ;ioner Wivodk to approve the sketch <br />plan for Hol~day Acres~d Council g~t fm~ plat approval <br />contingent'~Upon compli~de with CiW StaffT~e~i~W le~er dated December 1, 2000. ' <br /> <br />Mo i'6 ?C ed. Yes:.... Cha r "& Nixt, Co~issioners Wivod Ohmths, <br />Komscak, and Reeve,. 'Votmg ~o': ;~one: Absent: Co~ms~oner Jonson. ' <br /> <br />Case ~6: Request for S~te Plan Review; Case of Lyndale Ter~al Company <br /> <br />Motioh.~Y Chaicers°nN:~t'} seconded by Co~ssioner Kociscak, to reco~end ~at <br />Ciw Coug~ deny site~b~:~ approval of the proposed site pl~ for Holiday Acres b~ed on <br />~e denial ofthe rezofi'ifig. <br /> <br />Motion Cd~d. Voting Yes: Chai~erson Nixt, Co~i~ssi~Oners Kocisca~ Gfiffit~, ' ...... <br />Reeve, and'Wivoda. Voting No: None. Absent: Co~issioner Jonson. <br /> <br />Case ~7: Proposed Ordnance to Amend Park Dedication Requirements <br /> <br />Public Hear~g <br /> <br />-259- <br /> <br /> <br />