Laserfiche WebLink
3. The subject property is adjacent to properties that have been rezoned to Rural <br /> �. Residential to the north,Agriculture to the west, Recreation to the northwest,and Forest <br /> Management to the south. <br /> 4. The property to the east has not yet been rezoned, but the City has proposed to rezone <br /> this property to Agriculture.The property to the southeast has not yet been rezoned,but <br /> is proposed to be rezoned to Forest Management. The larger properties to the north are <br /> proposed to be rezoned to Transition Residential,but have not yet been rezoned. <br /> 5. The Agriculture Zone is compatible with the Forest Management, Rural Residential, <br /> Recreation,and Transition Residential zones. <br /> 6. The Rural Residential Zone is compatible with Forest Management, Recreation, <br /> Agriculture, and Transition Residential zones, although cannot be surrounded by <br /> Forestry and Agriculture. <br /> 7. The property was zoned Forestry under the previous Ordinance, which required a <br /> minimum lot size of 10 acres. The Agriculture zone has a minimum lot size of 20 acres, <br /> while the Rural Residential zone has a minimum lot size of 5 acres. <br /> 8. The rezoning to Agriculture would be a down-zoning from the previous zoning <br /> classification. <br /> 9. The property meets the minimum lot size for both the Rural Residential and Agriculture <br /> zones,being roughly 4o acres in size. <br /> 10. The property meets the minimum lot width for both the Rural Residential and <br /> Agriculture zones,being over 1,300 feet wide. <br /> Planning Commission Direction: The Planning Commission can recommend that the City <br /> Council approve,deny,or table this rezoning. <br /> Staff Recommendation: The Planning Commission has the latitude to zone this property. <br /> While the Agriculture zoning conforms to the Future Land Use map in the Comprehensive Plan, <br /> it would technically be a down-zoning,which the City has sought to avoid. The property used to <br /> be zoned Forestry, and retaining that classification in the new Ordinance would not be <br /> incompatible with the development pattern of the area. <br /> There are no development plans for this property that have been submitted to the City. There <br /> does not seem to be any compelling reason to vary from the Future Land Use map and the <br /> findings of fact in this report. We recommend that the City contimue to maintain a large-lot <br /> zoning classification and establish the zoning as either Forestry or Agriculture. <br /> City of Pequot Lakes Staff Report 1-3 <br /> April 20,2006 <br />