My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1985/04/22
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1985
>
Agenda Packets - 1985/04/22
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/24/2025 8:50:20 AM
Creation date
3/24/2025 8:50:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
4/22/1985
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
98
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
�� Ig <br />MEMO TO: Clerk -Administrator and City Council <br />FR('M: Director of Public Works/Community Development <br />DATE: April 11, 1985 <br />SUBJECT: PLANNING CASE. 146-84, M. H. ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION <br />MAJOR SUBDIVISION, SILVER LAKE WOODS, BLOCK 4, <br />LOTS 1-8 (COUNTY ROAD H-2 AND SILVER LAKE ROAD) <br />Attached please find Planning Commission Resolution No. 129-85 on <br />the subject major subdivision. Also find attached a drawing of <br />the proposed subdivision. <br />City Code requires that an an interior lot zoned R-1 have a <br />minimum frontage of 75 feet. The Code also requires that a <br />corner lot zoned R-1 have a minimum frontage of 100 feet. The <br />developer requests a variance (based on density) from the <br />requirements because there will be 14 dwelling units in the <br />proposed R-1 zone instead of 16 dwelling units in the existing <br />R-2 zone. <br />The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed cost of housing on <br />the smaller lots. Staff and the Planning Commission believe that <br />the cost savings for purchasing a house was not much different <br />than buying a typical house on a larger lot. <br />The Planning Commission told the developer that he could apply <br />for a planned unit development and receive density bonuses per <br />the Code. Under the planned unit development, the developer said <br />he could only install 11 single family lots and that he did not <br />want to proceed under the planned unit development procedures. <br />RECOMMENDATION: Staff and Planning Commission strongly recommend <br />denial of this request. <br />SWT/bc <br />Attachment <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.