Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />Planning Commission <br />May 12, 1988 <br />Wright <br />Property <br />Division <br />(Cont.) <br />prior to the Commission taking any action on the property division. <br />DeLonais recommended that the Wright property division be approved <br />as proposed subject to the dedication of a 20 -foot road right -of -way <br />easement for Noel Drive on the land behind 2995 Vanderbie and <br />contingent upon compliance with the recommendations of the City Planner <br />as contained in his May 5, 1988 report with the exception of deed <br />restrictions as outlined in Recommendation #1. <br />Motion seconded by Perlinger. <br />Motion carried 4 - 0. <br />Proposed The Commission reviewed proposed Ordinance No. 298 which was tabled <br />Ordinance at the last meeting and provides for residential apartments for certain <br />No. 298 businesses in the B -3, General Business District. <br />Perlinger expressed concern that the proposed ordinance does not limit <br />the number of apartments a business could have and felt that such <br />apartments should be limited to one per business. <br />Davison also suggested that the residents of such apartments be limited <br />to the business owners and that employees not be allowed to reside in <br />the apartments. <br />Schweizer agreed. <br />Herkenhoff asked for some history behind such a proposal and how this <br />type of development has worked in other cities. <br />Davison asked if the ordinance was put together from a model ordinance. <br />Roberts replied that he has not dealt with such a proposal with the <br />other clients of his firm. The ordinance was put together by his <br />firm in an attempt to provide reasonable controls over such a situation. <br />Roberts stated that the Commission will need to decide whether it wants <br />to allow apartments in a business district. <br />Schweizer felt the Commission needed more historical data on this <br />situation before it could make a decision. <br />Davison pointed out purposes of business districts, and felt the City <br />would have to be careful so that the apartment use did not outstrip <br />the business use. Davison stated that he did not want to see a business <br />sitting empty, while the apartment use was going strong. Davison agreed <br />that he would like to see how this situation has worked in other areas. <br />Perlinger noted that the ordinance stated that the business has to be <br />in operation in order for the apartment to be occupied. If there is <br />no business, there can be no occupancy of the apartment. <br />Page 2 <br />