Laserfiche WebLink
City Council Minutes <br />May 17, 2004 <br />............................. <br /> <br />Page 9 <br /> <br />6.6. <br /> <br />Request by Jeffrey Roehl for Zone Change to Rezone Property. from Rlc (Single Family <br />Residential) to R3 (Townhouse/Multiple Family Residential), Public Hearing-Case No. ZC 04- <br />0A <br /> <br />Planner Chris Leeseberg submitted the staff report. This item was continued from the April 19, <br />2004 City Council meeting. Mr. Leeseberg stated that the applicant is requesting a zone change <br />from R1C (single family residential) to R3 (multi family residential). He stated that the R3 zoning <br />designation is used as an intermediate zoning district in order to buffer between commercial and <br />residential areas. He stated that the city is concerned about allowing spot zoning as this parcel is <br />completely surrounded by single family residential properties. <br /> <br />Mayor Kflinzing opened the public hearing. <br /> <br />Jeff Roehl, 20663 Ulysses Street-Provided a history of the property. He stated that the post <br />office and the phone company recognize the property as two different units. He stated that the <br />duplex should be allowed as a non-conforming use as it has been operated as a duplex for the <br />past 10 years. <br /> <br />Mayor Kflinzing closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Councilmember Tveite stated that due to the location of the property it should not be rezoned. <br /> <br />Mayor I43inzing stated that if this parcel were to be rezoned it may set a precedent the city would <br />not like to see happen. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kuester questioned what the criteria is for a legal non-conforming use. Mr. Beck <br />responded that if the use was lawful when established. <br /> <br />MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER TYEITE AND SECONDED BY <br />COUNCILMEMBER MOTIN TO DENY THE ZONE CHANGE FOR JEFFREY <br />ROEHL BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: <br /> <br />1. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DOES NOT ACT AS A TRANSITION <br /> BETWEEN SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY DISTRICTS. <br /> <br />2. "SPOT ZONING" IS NOT RECOMMENDED. <br /> <br />3. THE SITE CANNOT PROVIDE THE REQUIRED PARKING SO THAT IT <br /> FUNCTIONS PROPERLY. <br /> <br />4. THE EXISTING STRUCTURE HAS ONLY ONE ATTACHED GARAGE. <br /> THREE WOULD BE REQUIRED. <br /> <br />5. THE EXISTING STRUCTURE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH DESIGN <br /> STANDARDS OF THE R3 DISTRICT. <br /> <br />MOTION CARRIED 5-0. <br /> <br /> <br />