Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING <br />JANUARY 12, 1996 <br />Pedersen suggested there would be no diminished value <br />in rezoning some of the properties along Rice Street to <br />high-density residential. <br />Fahey pointed out that rezoning will make some uses <br />non-conforming. <br />Morelan agreed that would be a tough situation, but <br />pointed out that the Development Guide is the City's <br />vision for the future. Morelan pointed out that it <br />will take additional residential development in the <br />area to support the commercial nodes. <br />Fahey suggested that the residential areas could be <br />rezoned PUD R-2 so that attractive townhome development <br />similar to that at the end of Minnesota Avenue could <br />occur. Fahey stated that he did not want Rice Street <br />to look like Robert Street. That is, commercial <br />development strung out with a few houses here and <br />there. <br />The Planner pointed out the Guide talks about <br />internally-oriented neighborhoods. <br />Fahey felt that owners of commercial property will not <br />agree to having their property rezoned to residential <br />unless it is high-density residential. <br />The Planner pointed out that R-3 is a high-density <br />residential district. Apartments are a permitted use <br />under the R-3 zoning. The City could make apartments a <br />conditional use. <br />It was pointed out that the R-4 District allows <br />mobilehome parks. However, the owners of the <br />mobilehome parks resisted rezoning to R-4 several years <br />ago. Therefore, the City's mobilehome parks are zoned <br />commercial. <br />The Planner suggested that the area be rezoned PUD with <br />some underlying land use. The PUD zoning would provide <br />the City with greater controls. <br />Fahey asked if property can be rezoned PUD with a B-3 <br />underlying land use. <br />The Planner stated that this was correct, and noted <br />that the zoning would provide the City control via the <br />5 <br />