SP-031 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

DATE :.April 21, 1970 CASE NUMBER: R-58 APPLICANT: Jacob Leier, et al. LOCATION: Lots 76, 77, 78, and al I that part of Lot 75, lying southerly of .Trunk Highway 100 Auditor's Subdivision Number 79 REQUEST: Rezone from. present R-3 District to a B-3 District PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: The property described has been reviewed in the enclosed document entitled "LAND- USE AND ZONING REPORT" prepared by a consultant for the petitioner. The pro- vided documentation is not clear as to whether or not all of the nine parcels concerned in the tract are under a single ownership or other form of unified control. This should be clerified prior to any rezoning consideration. Under the current zoning, R-3 the maximum. number of apartment units which could be developed would be eighty-five efficiency units. One, two, and three bedroom apart- ments would allow fewer total units. The documentation indicates that the current traffic volumes on Highway 694 and Long Lake Road render the site somewhat less than desirable for residential development. There is a strong case here in that the site is probably not well suited to the present single family development, however, this does not necessarily apply to the case of multiple development for which the property is presently zoned. The availability of access to Highway 694 is convenient for commercial development, however, some difficulties already exist with the Long Lake Road- Highway 694 inter- change. It is difficult to see how commercial development would in any way alleviate their existing problem. In terms of transitional use, apartment dwellings are generally considered to be more closely related to single family housing. The properties across 10th Street are presently developed as single family residence. Strong consideration should be given to the effects that a zoning change on the subject property would have on these homes. The document action suggests that a "convenience commercial development" would be a proper use for the property in question, however, the rezoning request is fora "B-3" zoning classification. It would appear that if a "convenience development" is the appropriate use for this property an "R-2" classification would be a more appropriate zoning.