Laserfiche WebLink
1 W4. 1jVW~ V VVVVjjj R l.l~~' --,,~~, ril.lA! r1v11GC1 r1GJJ GUlLUlliil I'IlUay, JLLIIC L/ <br />rage b oI LL <br />~ j <br />> You?need to read Code 1011 regarding use of non conforming land uses, and <br />their <br />> limitations.? Since the master plan shows Twin Lakes as a B-6 zone, any other <br />> use is non conforming. <br />> I note your last e mail was sent at 3 AM this morning. Neither you or John <br />> Kysylyczyn must sleep. <br />> ~ <br />> Al Sands <br />> -----Original Message----- <br />> From: _ . _ -. . ~:==t <br />> Sent: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:07 am <br />> Subject: Re: Howt o Govern a City --St. Paul Pioneer Press Editorial Friday, <br />> June 27 <br />> A1, <br />> I read the whole packet for the June 26, 2001, meeting, and the meeting <br />> minutes.? All it says is that they took out scenario la from the Master Plan, <br />> and accepted the AUAR. <br />> ? <br />> The 4-concept map is right in the Twin Lakes Master Plan that you get when you <br />> pull it up via the City web site? It is referenced in the Table of Contents <br />(as <br />> "Map 3"), so it IS part of the Master Plan. <br />> ? <br />> John Stark did not make that map up.? It is in the copy of the Master Plan <br />that <br />> I have from my days on the Twin Lakes Stakeholder Panel, before John Stark <br />even <br />> worked for the city. <br />> ? <br />> <br />> Dan <br />> ? <br />> -------------- Original message <br />-------------- <br />> From ~s ~`; rS _ :~:~m <br />> Please read the council packet pages 199 and 200 dated June? 26, 2001 as you <br />> still insist map four is relavent.? It is not.? Scenario 1 is the only <br />amendment <br />> to the master plan in effect.? Zf you still have doubts, please confer with <br />Mr. <br />> Scott? Anderson.? He should have learned by now from a careful reading of the <br />> 6/26/01 council packet, and the actual minutes of that meeting.? You need to <br />> follow the history of this designation, and what the intent of the Council was <br />> on 6/26/01 to know that map four wasn't even a part of the 6/26/01 council <br />> packet, and was superceded by the master plan back in January 2001.? John <br />Stark <br />> tried to re-invent it.? I repeat it is not a part of the existing <br />http://webmail.aol.com/29047/aol/en=us/MaillPrintMessage.aspx 8/7/2007 <br />