Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds V1aw Planning Comnission May 6, 1981 <br />Regular Mesting. Page Two. <br />..--------°--------°----°-~------° ~-°-^-----°°------------------.... ----- <br />The applicant's father, George Engberg, was in <br />attendance. 6. John Engberg - 3032 County <br />~ The Comprehensive Pian designation for this erea <br />was discussed. Zero lot itnes were dlscusaad. <br />Comnissloner Warren stated that she is very hesi- <br />tant to rezone to R-2. Commissioner Glazer s!nted <br />that he feels that 1f the request is eFproved, the <br />zero 1ot line concept wauld almost be obllgaLed ta <br />pass. <br />~ • Breske/Mountin moved to epprove the <br />rezon ng from R-1 to R-2, to epprove the subdivision <br />of one 1ot into two and to adopt Resolution No. 14-81 <br />as written (Resotutian 1s attached). <br />tiscussion on the Motion: <br />Gtazer: Is apprehensive of a zero 1ot line Ordinance. <br />Ae`~eels thet if the request is approved, they will be <br />lacked •into it. <br />8reske: Is 1n fevor of the subdivisAon~.and rezoning <br />ec3use there are otV~er lots in the area, atleast onR in <br />Mounds V1ew and across Caunty Road J that have duplexes <br />on them. Also, he has no problem with zero lot 11nes. <br />~ Off1c1a1 Rose stated that by approvinc~ this rezoning, <br />that the City would not be obligated into epproW ng a <br />zero tot iine Ordinance. Discussion took place on <br />zero lot lines. <br />Vote Nas taken by calling of the rall. <br />Road J - Resolution 14-81, <br />Rezoning R-1 to R 2) - <br />Minor Sub ivisiqn - (1 Lot <br />into 2) Two Fem11y Dre111ng <br />Cese No. 78-B1 <br />4 ayes 2 neys (Glazer and M111er v~ted nay.) Motion Carried <br />Glazer steted thet he Chlnks as he <br />s at earl9er that 1t's aimost e passive <br />comnttment on zern lot lines. Also, that <br />he doesn't feel that becau5e there are other <br />RL2 in the v1c1n1ty 1s reason entiugh for~,the <br />rezoning. <br />M111er: Is in favor of the subdivision but <br />woufdlike to see the rezuning as e separDte <br />lssue. <br />The sppttcant, Roger Lamni, was in attendance. 7, Rnger Lammi - 7980 Groveland <br />OfPiclai Rose revlewed the proposal. Rtlad - rezoning I~l,to B-1 <br />Barbershop, Case No. 76-e1, <br />Cortmtss}oner Warren asked if Mr. Lemni was aware that Resolution No. 15-81 <br />this neighbophood is primarlly single fami~y. Mr. <br />Lamni said thnt he was. She also stated that this <br />lot on the Comprehensive P1an is designated as <br />residential. <br />~ Mr. Lemm1 ssated that hp feels that a barbershop would <br />be a tbt better for the neighborhoad than the exlsting <br />hause. Further thet it would be a smell shop. <br />