Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />SEPTEMBER 9, 1999 <br />porches. Therefore, he felt consistency was needed. Knudsen <br />pointed out that it is possible to move the property line for the park <br />back to meet the rear yard setback for the park. Knudsen asked if <br />the City wanted the 120 -foot width, if that would give a reason to <br />grant the setback variance. <br />The Planner felt it would. However, even with a 120 -foot width, it <br />is still possible to develop this property without the need for <br />variances. <br />Keis asked if the City would have more control under the R -2 or <br />PUD zoning. The Planner recommended R -2 zoning rather than <br />PUD because PUD zoning infers the right to some other land use <br />and this is not intended to be a mixed -use project. The Planner <br />stated that the R -2 zoning while utilizing the PUD process would <br />allow the City to deal with the internal design issues as it feels <br />appropriate. <br />Montour asked the amount of parkland the developer is required to <br />donate. The Deputy Clerk reported that the ordinance requires a <br />dedication of 10% of the land. The Planner pointed out that the <br />park proposed is actually 17% of the land, therefore, exceed the <br />ordinance requirements. <br />Keis recommended approval of the rezoning of the subject <br />property from B -3 and R -1 to R -2 to allow for the development of <br />townhomes. <br />Motion seconded by Knudsen. <br />Motion carried 5 — 0. <br />Keis recommended approval of the townhome concept as <br />requested by Mr. Howe with the indication that more work is <br />needed on the lay -out to eliminate the need for variances and with <br />the indication that the Planning Commission supports the extension <br />of Bryan Street all the way through to Little Canada Road <br />Motion seconded by Duray. <br />Motion carried 4 — 1. Mr. Barraclough voted against. <br />Page 34 <br />