My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3B - Rezoning from Residential to Rural Residential
Laserfiche
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Agenda Packets
>
2007
>
01-18-2007 Planning Commision Meeting
>
3B - Rezoning from Residential to Rural Residential
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2016 3:24:09 PM
Creation date
6/13/2016 3:24:05 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
Shoreline Residential near the shoreline with East Twin Lake and Rural Residential in <br /> �. the off-lake areas. <br /> 2. Rezoning to Rural Residential would be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan <br /> and Future Land Use Map as the map designates the majority of this area as Rural <br /> Residential. <br /> 3. The Shoreline Residential zone is compatible with the zoning of the surrounding parcels, <br /> which are zoned Shoreline Residential along East Twin Lake and Rural Residential to the <br /> east of County Road 107. <br /> 4. Rezoning to Shoreline Residential does not meet the compatibility requirement of being <br /> adjacent to the Water Resource zone as neither of these properties is adjacent to East <br /> Twin Lake. The DeWolfe property (290263401DB0009) is approximately 40 feet from <br /> East Twin Lake at the closest point, while the Stangler property is more than 500 feet <br /> from the lake. <br /> 5. Rezoning the two properties to Rural Residential would not be consistent with the <br /> previous zoning classification of Residential, as the minimum lot size and dimension <br /> standards would increase. <br /> 6. The properties do not meet the minimum lot size of five acres for the Rural Residential <br /> district, being 3.6 and 1.4 acres each. These lots would be considered non-conforming <br /> under this zoning classification. <br /> 7. Because of the odd shapes of the properties, neither one meets the minimum lot width <br /> requirement of 200 feet for the Rural Residential zone. Both properties, however, are <br /> more than 200 feet wide at their widest points. <br /> 8. Rezoning to Rural Residential would meet the compatibility requirements for the zone, <br /> as the zone would be established next to the Shoreline Residential zone and the Rural <br /> Residential zone. <br /> Planning Commission Direction: The Planning Commission can recommend that the City <br /> Council approve, deny, or table this rezoning. <br /> Staff Recommendation: Based on the findings of fact presented in this report, the Staff <br /> recommends that the properties be rezoned to Rural Residential. Because neither property <br /> adjoins a water body, they should not be rezoned to Shoreline Residential. The size of the <br /> properties and the lack of contact with the Water Resource zone limits the zones that would be <br /> suitable for these properties.A zoning classification of a higher, more urban density may appear <br /> reasonable to avoid creating non-conforming lots, but these classifications would be considered <br /> spot zoning and would not be compatible with the general pattern of development in the area. <br /> City of Pequot Lakes Staff Report 2_3 <br /> January 18,2007 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.