My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-19-1983 CC MIN
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Minutes
>
City Council 1974 - Present
>
1980-1989
>
1983
>
09-19-1983 CC MIN
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:34:46 AM
Creation date
4/13/2005 3:29:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
CCM
date
9/19/1983
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />City Council Minutes <br />September 19, 1983 <br />Page Ten <br /> <br />COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM MOVED TO REQUEST THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO REVIEW AND CON- <br />SIDER A C-4 ZONE FOR THE PROPERTY SOUTH OF HIGHWAY fIlO AND WEST OF WACO STREET. <br />COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. <br /> <br />10. Planning Commission's Recommendation Regarding Commercial Foning on the North Side <br />~ <br />of Westerly Highway #10 <br /> <br />The City Administrator indicated that the City Council recently considered a zone <br />change request for property owned by Mr. Britt in the western portion of the City <br />adjacent to Highway #10 on the north side. The City Administrator indicated that the <br />zone change requested is from its current residential classification to a C-3/Highway <br />Commercial classification. The City Administrator indicated that the City Council <br />denied the zone change request by Mr. Baumgartner and Mr. Britt, but did at that time, <br />ask the Planning Commission to review the possibility of a larger commercial area on <br />the north side of Highway fIlO. The City iAdministrator indicated that the Planning <br />Commission considered the recommendation lof the City Council to review a larger area <br />and it was the consensus of the Planning ICommission that no zone change be recommended. <br /> <br />Mr. Don Britt expressed his opposition to the Planning Commission's recommendation. Mr. <br />Britt indicated that the City of Elk River gave Custom Motor's a conditional use per'" <br />mit to operate his junkyard business, a commercial business. Mr. Britt indicated that <br />he purchased the property when it was zoned commercial and by the City rezoning it to <br />residential he has lost $30,000 in value. Mr. Britt indicated that there are many <br />people in his area that are ~doing commercial business. Discussion was carried on <br />regarding the neighboring property owner$ and the fact that they may be operating com- <br />mercial busines es. <br /> <br /> <br />Councilmember S huldt indicated that the City would create more nonconforming uses in <br />the area should the property be rezoned from residential to C-3/Highway Commercial. <br /> <br />Discussion was <br />tial to C-3. T <br />of Mr. Britt's <br />R-lb zone. Dis <br />side of Highway <br />efit R"'-lb/Singl <br /> <br />arried on regarding a defined area that could be rezoned from residen- <br />e City Administrator indicated that the Planning Commission was aware <br />roperty and still made the recommendation to leave the zoning as a' <br />ussion was also carried on regarding the service drive along the north <br />#10. Councilmember Schuldt indicated that a service drive would ben- <br />Family zoning as well as Commercial zoning. <br /> <br />COUNCILMEMBER DUITSMAN MOVED TO REQUEST THAT THE ZONE CHANGE ISSUE FOR THE BRITT <br />PROPERTY BE PLACED ON THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FOR CONSIDERATION TO BE REFERRED TO <br />THE PLANNING COMMISSION. COUNCILMEMBERENGSTROM SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION <br />FAILED 2-3. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL, COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT AND MAYOR HINKLE OPPOSED. <br /> <br />11. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Regarding R-2 Principal Uses - Public Hearing <br /> <br />The City Administrator indicated that in the City's zoning ordinance, there is a wide <br />discrepancy in the number of units permitted between an R-2 and an R-3 zone, and <br />that the City staff felt that it would be appropriate to allow some additional type <br />of structure beyond a two-family dwelling in an R-2 zone and also to create a limit of <br />density units for the R-2 zone that provides for a gradual transition from the R-l <br />zone to the R-3 zone. The City Administrator indicated that the Planning Commission <br />considered a set of changes to the City's zoning ordinance that would create an R-2a <br />and R-2b zone. The City Administrator indicated that the R-2a zone would essentially <br />be the same as the City's existing R-2 zone and the R-2b zone would permit not only <br />two family dwellings, but also townhous.es that would not contain more <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.