Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />PAGE 6 <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />November 25, 1986 <br /> <br />Mr. Rohlf stated that staff does not have a recommendation either for or <br />against this request. he noted that reasons in favor of the zone change <br />would be increased tax base, value of industrial property, and also, that <br />the land use map shows light industrial as being planned for this area in <br />the future. Mr. Rohlf also noted reasons for objection to the zone <br />change. He stated that often it is hard to find buffers for industrial <br />uses adj acent to residential uses in this area, County Road-n would- <br />act as a buffer if the property in question were to remain residential. <br /> <br />Chairman Wilson stated that he agreed County Road #1 would be a good <br />natural buffer, but that he was not sure the property was appropriate for <br />residential and may be better suited for industrial use. <br /> <br />Chairman Wilson questioned the size of Mr. Talbot's property. Mr. Jerry <br />Hofmeister stated that the property was 5.75 acres. <br /> <br />Discussion <br />question. <br />Road 111 up <br /> <br />was carried on regarding the exact location of the property in <br />Mr. Rohlf stated that this piece of property runs from County <br />to the dirt road, 193rd Avenue. <br /> <br />Commissioner Temple expressed her concern for what may be planned for the <br />adjacent properties. since the zoning is residential. <br /> <br />Chairman Wilson opened the public hearing. <br /> <br />Mr. Bob Jacobs stated that he and his wife owned property in the area and <br />that he was concerned what kind of use is being proposed if the zone <br />change to light industrial is approved. He also expressed his opposition <br />to the zone change. <br /> <br />Mr. Rohlf stated the uses that would be allowed in the 1-1 light <br />industrial zone. <br /> <br />Discussion <br />who would <br />notices. <br /> <br />was carried on regarding the type of business being proposed. <br />own the business. type of structure. and the public hearing <br /> <br />Mr. Bill Brady. property owner to the north of the subject property, <br />expressed his objection to the proposed zone change. He stated that this <br />same issue has come up at least once before and he feels there is a need <br />for stability in zoning. He stated that although there are no houses in <br />the immediate area that doesn't mean there won't be any in the future. <br />Mr. Brady further stated that there are plenty of industrial sites <br />available in the industrial park that should be developed first. <br /> <br />Chairman Wilson closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Mr. Rohlf stated that it was correct that there is industrial property <br />available both in the Elk River Industrial Park and the McChesney <br />Industrial Park. He also stated that the City has recently given <br />preliminary plat approval for the "Rail 10" project which consists of <br />seven one-acre industrial lots. <br />