My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5.2. PCSR 11-23-2004
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Packets
>
2000-2005
>
2004
>
11-23-2004
>
5.2. PCSR 11-23-2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/12/2013 2:45:26 PM
Creation date
9/12/2013 2:43:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
PCSR
date
11/23/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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
Message Page 1 of 1 <br /> Mcpherson, Michele <br /> To: Pmotin @aol.com <br /> Subject: RE: Tonight's Planning Commission Meeting <br /> Paul: <br /> I will answer your first item and pass the rest on - the ordinance currently allows an unlimited <br /> number of accessory buildings on parcels 40 acres or greater without a maximum square footage. <br /> Our amendment would limit the square footage to 2% of the lot coverage. <br /> Michele <br /> Original Message <br /> From: Pmotin @aol.com [mailto:Pmotin @aol.com] <br /> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 11:52 AM <br /> To: mmcpherson @ci.elk-river.mn.us <br /> Subject: Tonight's Planning Commission Meeting <br /> I do not know whether I will be in attendance at the Planning Commission meeting this evening (If I do, I <br /> will likely bring my daughter, leave at 6:50 to drop her off at basketball practice, come back, then leave <br /> at 8:20 to pick her up). <br /> I reviewed the packet for tonight and have a few general thoughts/questions which I ask be passed on <br /> to the Commission: <br /> 1. (5.1)Why are there to be an unlimited number of agricultural accessory structures if 40+ acres? <br /> 2. (5.1) Evaluation of a waste removal plan already is required for a CUP. Wouldn't that be a type <br /> of manure management plan? If so, why should the submission of the manure management plan give <br /> rise to an increased number of animals? Given the ultimate elimination of A-1 zoning in the City, is it a <br /> good idea to encourage more agricultural animals per acre? The applicant can have 15 horses without <br /> any changes. Why are 25 horses needed, if there are only 8 sessions per day (and only 2 at any <br /> one time)? <br /> 3. Have there been several instances where#1 and 2 have been an issue, or are we trying to change <br /> the ordinances to help out the Equestrian Learning Center(5.2). Can it backfire under other <br /> circumstances? <br /> 4. (5.4) - Is the old True Value Hardware store an adequate location for a middle school? I know a <br /> Montessori school had been there, but those were much younger kids and a tot-lot playground was <br /> available. For many parents, it acted as a daycare. I question whether it makes sense to have 11-13 <br /> year olds in that location with no outdoor field area. How many students will be in the school? -this is <br /> not covered in the memo. <br /> Sincerely, <br /> Paul Motin <br /> City of Elk River <br /> City Council Liaison to Planning Commission <br /> 11/23/2004 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.