04-24-1985 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Little Canada Planning Commission 9 April 1985 Page Two • Establish an orderly transition between the Business District and residential neighborhoods through the introduction of either higher density residential or limited business commercial development. • Order the residential density patterns in a manner of decreasing density relative to the Business District and major retail areas. The R -B zone was created for these specific purposes. In addition, a small concentration of R -B property exists in the area. For these reasons, the rezoning is seen as being Comprehensive Plan directed and, as such, acceptable. Variance Minimum lot width requirements for the R -B zone is 125 feet. The lot is just 105 feet wide. Presuming approval of the general land use, the lot width variance is more of an administrative formality. While the lot is wide enough for either B -3 (100 feet) or R -1 (75 feet) development, neither of these would serve the Plan directive of providing transitional land uses. Therefore, the variance is viewed as acceptable. Conditional Use Permit • Fourplex development is a conditional use in the R -B zone. Land use transi- tion is the rationale for the CUP. This development serves as more of a transition between single family and commercial. Similar enough in housing type, it functions well near R -1 development, while intense enough to mix with the adjacent B -3 zone. With no conditional use permit, the most intense use in an R -B district would be two family, which would provide little transition. Subdivision The subdivision is viewed as acceptable in conjunction with the previously mentioned variance. While the width of the proposed lot would be substandard, the total site area would be well in excess of the 15,000 square feet minimum. City resolution allows single lot splits of this type without the formal, more protective, measures of a plat. Site Plan The proposed development conforms to all district setbacks and lot dimensions with the exception of the width. Information is missing, however, regarding the following review points: 1. Drainage and utility easements 2. Landscape plan and screening 3. Drainage patterns 4. Spot elevations of street, building and garage Planning Commission approval of this development should be conditioned upon the submission of these items for City review prior to the City Council's final approval. Y !1s v