1978-08-09 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

August 9, 1978 Page 3 ~ MSP (Burmeister-Fossj to recomnend to the ~1+y Council approval of the request uf Midway Industrtal Supply Co., lnc, and NASCO Co subd~vide 3.53 ecres inta two parcets, being 1.56 nrid 1.97 acres 1n s1ze, for the development of lighC industrial buildings. Drainage and roadway easements must be granted to Lot 2 from Lot 1 because the,y wiil be sharing the access and dreinage to Mustang Road. Lot 1 must grant utility ease- menCs for the instellation oP sewar service for Lot 2. A maintenance agreement should be f11ed for the upkeep of the ~oint entrance off 01d Hlghway 8 and the roadway connection to Mustang Lane, with a park dedication and development control egreement ~ith the City. A curb cut that exists on the New Brighton property must remain closed until the owner of the property gets right-of-way to access onto Old Highway 8. The Planning Caimissl~n approves the request provided the Council passes the nea ordiiiance change giving a maximum of 36' curb cuts. However, if they do not pass the ordinance, a variance is granted far the curb cut nn the submitted sketch p1an, 6 ayes REZONIN~ kEQUEST - MAYNARD JURGEN5EN - 2291 KNOLL ORIVE Officlal Rose reported that the applicant lias remodeted his home, providing basic facilities in his basement which met the dwelling unit definition. He presently has a boarder who 1s not a family member, which requires him to make the rezoning request. Official Rose stated that the existing land use and zuriing designation is R-1 single family distrlct, and the imnediate neighborhood area has exclusively single family dwe711ngs. In cansidering the zoning amendment from R-1 Co R-2, the Planning Comri7ssion shoul~ consider the retatiunship ta municipal canprehensive plan. the geographical area ,ry involved, whether such use will tend to or actually depreciaie the area in whtch it is ( J proposed, the character of the surrounding area and the demci:strated need for such use. ~ Mr. Jurgenser~ stated tha~ the bnsement living area was originally meant for his child- ren, and that he has now rented it aut since the children are no longer at home. Commission Member Foss stated that under code, one boarder is alTowed. Camnission Member Burmeister replied that the appllcant has more than one dwe171ng unit, which is nat allowed under R-1 zon9ng. Mr. Jur~ensen stated that the area co~isists of a bedroom, bathroom, kitchen, living area and separate entrance. Officiai Rose stated that the home fa71s under the definition af a renter, not boarder. Chair~person Haake stated she had drlven by the home and it definite7y appeared to be singie faml7y but that it would reGuire a change in zoning fror R-1 to k-2, to allow the boarder, and that the Planning Comnission as a rule will noC approve spot ~~ezoning. MSP (HA.ake-Burmeister) to recommend ~o the Council that they do not grant the rezoniog of the property from R-1 to R-2 as it is not consis~ent with the Compret~ensive Pian and would be spot rezoning and it is not compatihle with th~ neighborhnod, and the petitioner has aot demonstrated a need for this to be rantal property. 6 ayes Commission Member Foss stated he felt the applicant would not be vioiaL7ng the zoning as he was anly renting to one person. Cortm+ission Member Burmeister stated that t.lie ,request 1s definitely defined as rental property, which is not allowed under R-1. ~ Chairperson Naake stated she would like more of an interpretation of the ordinance regardir.g renters and boarders and so forth. Comnission Member Glazer added that he would like an opinlon fram the attorney.