Laserfiche WebLink
September 14, 1977 <br />Pege ^ <br />~ allowad, Lhey ~aould not only lower the cost par resident buL also pro~~ide a buffar <br />for tiie area. Mr, Peyne presented e drawing of what the proposed duplEx wouid look <br />11ke, poinCir.g out that it's appeerance was very much that of a sin~le family dwell- <br />1ng. <br />MSP (1laake-Blanchard) to recommend to the C1ty Council that tha north 1ot on County <br />Road I und Silver lake Road and the lot to the south be rezoned to R-2 from the <br />present R-1 zoning. The re~cummendation for zoning the proparty to R-2 is becausa <br />of the hiyh traffic volume S11vsr Leke Road generates, the forseeable development <br />of the land north of County Road 1 and east of S11ver Lake Road into a comr,erciai <br />development and the zoning oF the property across the street from two lots ittto a <br />mlxed PUD davelopmenl, which could range from 1ow density to comeercial. Th1s <br />rezcning is atso conttngent upon the deveToper coming in and subdlviding the tot <br />directly to the south of the one on County Road I and S11ver Lake Road and that <br />the dev~toper would enter into a development agreemenC before permits woutd be <br />lssued. Also, the Planning Commissioh is wQ11 aware of the drainage and utility <br />services problen~s that wi]1 have to be resolved. 4 ayes <br />1 nay <br />Cortmissinn Member Mackeben stated that he was against the rezoning as 1t did not <br />fol7ow the Comprehenslve Ptan. <br />Chatrperson {iaako asked that it be noted that the Plenning Comnissio had seen the <br />~ plan's;fc* a suggeated duplex from Mr. Payne and they tiked the pTan~because,it <br />appeared as a single dwelling but sti'11 was a doubte dwe111ng. The reason foi• <br />-_, pointing this out was that the Planning Cormnission would prefer having a dwe111ng of <br />~ that type built that looke~ as much like a singie family dwe111ng as possibte. <br />J ~ommission Member Foss refoined the meeting at 9:67 PM. <br />REZOMTRG REQUEST OF STEVEN lOEFFLER - 7659 ~OODLAWN DRIVE <br />Officipl Rosa reported that Mr. Loeffler has requested to develop his cut-de-sac <br />lot zoned R-4 w9th a duplex requlring an R-2 zonin~. <br />Planning considerations include that the 1ot has substandard frontage (95' tn <br />buildable area) but has the required square foota~e of'12,500. ioning and Land <br />Use denckes the area as high density, and the duplex should meet all setback require- <br />~ents due to the type home style be1n~ anly 54' in length. Mr. Loeffler has pro- <br />vided 35` on the east side anA onty 6 on the west side. Retocation to the east <br />would assure proper minlmal setback of 10'. Both the front and rear nre in excess <br />of 30', 6eing 37' bofih. A deveTopment agreement would be hequfred Lo insure lend- <br />scaping and paving. <br />Chalrperson Haake steted that the razoning would he consistant with what is uccurring <br />on the south and ~ast sides of Woodlawn Drive and stated that she felt it was a good <br />requast and development that the City would en~oy in the area. <br />MSP (Zepper-Foss) to downzon~ the property~at 7659 Woodiawn Urive from R-A to R-Z <br />to permit duplex construction for Steven Loeffler. 6 myes <br />~ <br />~ Cheirperson Haake askad that it be inciuded in the the minutes that titey would like <br />the CiCy Council to know thaC it is the Planning Commissions lnterpretation that' <br />under R-4 zoning, all permitted uses that are 1n R-3 are a1lawEd in R-4 and it states <br />