Laserfiche WebLink
-3- <br /> Motion by Mr. Sopcinski and seconded by Mr. Jones to recommend the <br /> Council rezone Lot 12 , Block 1, Penrod Addition Ramsey County from. <br /> R-2,- two family residence, to R-3 , townhouse residence, finding that: <br /> the land usage resulting from this rezoning will prove beneficial as <br /> a buffer between the residential and commercial developments; will <br /> allow owner-occupied housing; will improve the ratio of townhouse, <br /> apartment and single famil'e homes in the City; and will provide low <br /> cost housing and an attractive land density between the family homes <br /> and commercial area. <br /> Before. voting on the motion, Mr. Jones moved. and Mr. Bjorklund seconded <br /> the motion to add to the findings: In addition, having only one curb <br /> cut off Silver Lake Roadwill permit a much safer and .more effective <br /> traffic pattern than would be feasible under R-2 zoning; the proposal <br /> conforms to the proposed City Comprehensive Plan; the zoning change <br /> will result in the formation of a homeowner's association which will <br /> likely exercise greater control over the maintenance of all the units; <br /> and under R-3 Zoning, better landscaping planning is required by <br /> ordinance than- might be developed for duplexes. <br /> These additions were accepted unanimously as was the amended motion. <br /> At 8:55 P.M. the Public Hearing to consider the variance necessary . <br /> for siting the build*ings as proposed by Mr. Ames on the rezoned <br /> parcel was opened by the Chairman who read the Notice of. Hearing. <br /> Staff confirmed that all notification and application requirements for <br /> the hearing had .been met and no one present reported failure to <br /> receive the notice nor objected to its contents. <br /> Mr. Ames told those present, only the two side units will encroach <br /> into the required 30 foot front yard setback and require a variance. <br /> This was only necessitated by his desire to accommodate the residents <br /> of the east side of Penrod Lane by moving the entire complex closer <br /> to Silver Lake Road, thereby leaving 36-1j2 feet as a rear yard <br /> setback where only 30 feet is required by c,:cdinance. If the variance <br /> is denied and this is still to be accompli--had, it will be necessary <br /> to eliminate the three bedroom units planneO for the side buildings . <br /> The architectural configuration of the build--*Lng3 was prompted by the <br /> desire for a project which will be more aethestically pleasing than <br /> buildings placed in a row. Mr. Hedman agreed, that moving the building <br /> forward will be definitely appreciated by the Penrod residents. <br /> The Public Hearing was closed at 9 : 12 P.M. <br /> Motion by Mr. 'Sopcinski and seconded by Mrs . Makowske to recommend <br /> the Council grant a front yard setback variance of 8 .5 feet (21.5 <br /> proposed vs . required 30 feet) which will permit the construction of <br /> twenty-two townhouses as per Exhibit A, dated May 2, 1980., finding <br /> that the proposal, -as presented, affords a harmonious blending of <br /> commercial with. residential via townhouses. It is further recommended <br />