My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-26-1982 PC MIN
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Minutes
>
1980 - 1989
>
1982
>
04-26-1982 PC MIN
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:35:58 AM
Creation date
4/25/2006 2:33:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
PCM
date
4/26/1982
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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 /> <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />April 26, 1982 <br />Page Fourteen <br /> <br />COMMISSIONER GUNKEL MADE A MOTION TO TABLE THE ZONE CHANGE REQUEST BY MR. <br />CHIP MARTIN UNTIL THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS MORE FEEDBACK ON THE 1) <br />HRA PLAN AND HOW FAR WEST IT WILL BE LOOKED AT, 2) THE PARKING, 3) SANITARY <br />Sm~ER SYSTEM, 4) CONFORMING OR NONCONFORMING OF THE FEEDMILL. DOROTHY FRED- <br />ERICKSEN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 5-0. <br /> <br />Mr. Martin asked if he could get on the Planning Commission special meeting. <br />The Planning Commission indicated that this could be put on the agenda for <br />May 10th. <br /> <br />10. Spot Zoning <br /> <br />Discussion followed and <br />relating to spot zoning. <br />no motion was needed. <br /> <br />Rick Breezee gave the Planning Commission a memo <br />This was only for the Planning Commission's review, <br /> <br />11. R~2 Spot Zoning - Discussion <br /> <br />Commissioner Pearce indicated that the whole problem sterns from a typographical <br />error. <br /> <br />Rick Breezee stated it was and further stated that the reason for the memo was <br />only to verify the R-2. <br /> <br />Gary Santwire indicated that he still doesn't understand the R-2 zone. He asked <br />how a developer would know what the density units per acre would be. <br /> <br />Rick Breezee stated that that has been established and the question about density <br />units has always been there. It was only a typographical error. The density unit <br />is 8 per acre or 30% of coverage. <br /> <br />Discussion followed regarding density units. Rick Breezee explained the standards <br />for R-2 zone as stated in the ordinance. This involved the items of o\vuership <br />and rentals. If the builder informs him they have a 60' wide lot and it will be <br />ownership, the builders would go through an Administrative Subdivision to get <br />the lot line dO\Vll the center. If the builder indicates it will be on a rental, <br />Rick Breezee then takes the word of the builder. Although if at a later date, <br />they have the type of construction that it could possibly become ownership, they <br />will have to apply for an Administrative Subdivision. <br /> <br />Rick Breezee also indicated that a duplex is allowed in an R-2 zone. If a duplex <br />is rental, it is only one principal structure with 2 rental units. If it is in- <br />dividual o\vuership, it is 2 principal units. Rick Breezee also stated that if a <br />person wanted to get an Administrative Subdivision for four lots or less, only <br />the City Council approval. is needed. If it is five lots or more, the Planning <br />Commission approval and City Council approval is needed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.