Laserfiche WebLink
MIPlUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />March ~i, 19II1 <br />Mrs. Scalze pointed out that the Planning Commission voted 7-0 to <br />approve the R-2. PUD rezoning. Mrs. Sca1ze felt that the vacation of <br />Lake Street, the concern of off-street parking and the availability <br />of dividing the property later could be handled in the PUD developer's <br />agreement. <br />The Flttorney informed the Council that before they can resume consideration <br />of the P,-2 PUD rezoning request they must remove i1: from table. <br />Mrs. Scalze introduced the following resolution and moved its acioption: <br />RESOLUTION N0, 81-3-10~4 - REMOVING FROM TFlBLE MR. WAITF's <br />REQUEST OF JANUFlRY 13, 1981 FOR A PUD R-2 REZO~IING OF HIS <br />PROPERTY KNOWN AS LOTS 5 THROUGH 23 AND 36 ThiROUGH 48, <br />BLOCK 13, NORTH HEIGHTS FlDDITION <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Fahey, <br />/{yes (5) Scalze, fahey, Hanson, Forsberg, Nardini. <br />Nayes (0), <br />Resolution declared adopted. <br />This resolui:ion appears in Reso7ution Book No. 7, Page 65. <br />Mrs. Nardini suggested that Mr. blaite's property be a part of the work <br />session that Council has already scheduled with Mr. Schrier as Mr. Waite <br />is requesting three variances. <br />Mr. Fahey stated that under R-2 PUD zoning no variance would have to be <br />granted. Mr. Fahey stated that a PUQ agreement would be worked out <br />with Mr. Waite and the City and this agreement would become the zoning <br />for the property. <br />Fahey also stated that with the PUD the City has more control over what <br />the deve1opment will look like. Fahey stated that by rezoning to R-?. <br />PUD it wi11 not cost the City anything. <br />P9rs. Scalze introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION N0. 81-3-105 - REZONING THE WAITF PROPERTY KNOWN <br />AS LOTS 5 TFIROUCH 7_3 AND 36 THROUGH hII, BLOCK;1~, DIORTH <br />HEIGHTS ADDITION FROM R-3 to R-2 PUD ~~~ ~_ <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Fahey. <br />/{yes (5) Scalze, Fahey, Hanson, Forsberg, Nardini. <br />Nayes (0). <br />Resolution declared adopted. <br />This reso1ution appears in Resolution Book No. 7, Page 66. <br />Rezoning Of Mrs. Scalze pointed out that there was no one present from White Oaks <br />ulhite Oaks Builders-Serco, Inc, present at tonight's meeting. <br />Builders <br />Property The City Clerk stated that notices went out by certified mail. <br />On Viking <br />Drive <br />Page -12- <br />