PL MINUTES 05201986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-4- > 1 4. The three questions required by statute. to be answered in the affirmative • 2 had been answered -thus on the application and accepted by the Planning 3 Commission. 4 5 Motion ,carri.ed .unanimously. 6 7 At 8: 10 P.M. , the Chair read, the- notice of the hearing to consider a City initiated 8 -change'. n zoning to reclassify the Amerman property north of the former Clark 9 Station at 33rd and Stinson from C, commercial district, to R-3, townhouse 10 'residential district, in response to the development of the gas station property 11 to a townhome development .by Duane Fisher. 12 13 No one present indicated failure to receive the notice of the hearing which had 14 been mailed to all property owners within 350' f eet of the subject property and 15 published in the May'6th Bulletin -or objected to its content and the Manager said 16 the only calls he had gotten,-had been inquiries about just what type of housing 17 could be`developed under the zoning change. 18 19 The Planning Commission had indicated agreement with the..rezoning of this parcel 20 at their April 15th meeting and Mr. Childs told Commissoiner Bowerman a telephone 21 affirmation by Mr. Amerman would be. sufficient since the Council has the right 22 to rezone the property with or- without the .consent of the property owner. There- 23 fore, neither a formal application or his presence at the hearing would be 24 required of Mr. Amerman. , The- Manager also indicated the -lot in question was 25 large enough to support a. three dwelling townhouse project with the required 26 setbacks without a variance. • 27 28 Commissioner Jones recalled that about ten years ago, when the City's Comprehensive 29 Plan was being developed,. the Planning Commission, perceiving that commercial 30 zoning for this property was not in conformance with the surrounding residential 31 neighbor-hood; especially after't•he Clark station next .door, had closed down, had 3.2 recommended the Cou.nci.l change-.the zoning .' However, the Commissioner indicated 33 the Council at that time had .acceded to the objections of the property owner and 34 deferred action until such time as the vacant gas station property was developed. 35 36 When the Chair noted that the address on the house on that property was 3309 rather 37 than 3305 as'indicated in the -notice of the hearing, Mr . Childs told her the 38 latter number appears on the tax listings and is therefore the legal address. 39 I 40 There was no one present ,to speak either for or against the rezoning and the hear- 41 ing was closed at 8:16 P.M.. for the following: j 42 43 Motion by Commissioner Madden and seconded by Commissioner Bowerman to recommend 44 the Council . approve the change in zoning classification from C, commercial district, 45 to R-3, townhouse residential district, for the property owned by Derek Amerman 46 at 3305 Calso known as 330.91--St.inson Boulevard N.E. and described as the North 47 98.3 feet of the South 228.3 feet of the West T98 feet of the Northwest 1/4 48 of Section 6 T 29 R 23 Cexcept roadway). .Hennepin County, finding that: 49 50 1 . The City=s Comprehensive Plan recognizes a problem with the existing zoning 51 of this property; I • 52 i 53 2. There i,s sufficient land available in the parcel to construct an R-3 project 54 without variances; and 55