Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> ------------ ---. <br /> , <br /> Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission Meeting, July 1, 1987 . <br /> Page 6 <br /> CASE 1/87-22; (Cont'd) The Planner, after briejly reviewing the landscape and <br /> trash enclosure plans submitted, stated his opinion was . <br /> that both are adequate. <br /> Moved by Martin, seconded by Savage, that Commission <br /> recommend to Council approval of Case #87-22, Amended Site Plan Review for <br /> Perkins restaurant at Red Fox Road and Lexington Avenue, Perkins/Construction <br /> 70, conditioned upon the applicant constructing-the trash storage area and <br /> accomplishing the landscaping as proposed in the respective plans submitted <br /> this date. Motion carried unanimously. (7-0) <br /> COUNCIL REPORT Councilmember Winiecki reported on recent Council <br /> actions on items of interest to the Commission. <br /> PRELIM. DISC. The Planner reported that he had been contacted by <br /> REEVES PROPERTY a representative of SISA Homes, regarding the 4.5 acre <br /> SNELLING & HWY 96 parcel of land on the southwest corner of North <br /> Snelling and Highway 96. He explained that in 1985 <br /> application was made to rezone this parcel to R-4 for a 48-unit apartment <br /> building; Planning Commission recommended approval, by a split vote, and <br /> Council denied based on the fact the area is identified as an R-3, lower <br /> density district, by the comprehensive plan. <br /> Miller stated the proposal presented contained construction of four 8-unit <br /> buildings, reducing the density to 32 units. These buildings would have <br /> approximately a 100 ft. x 48 ft. building footprint, with an interior <br /> tuck-under garage; owner occupied with amenities in each building (sauna, . <br /> laundry facilities, etc.). The Council suggested R-3 may be acceptable; this <br /> would fall somewhere between the R-3 and R-4 density permitted. He noted that <br /> this proposal would still have to be rezoned to R-4; if this development were <br /> not constructed, the R-4 zoning wo~ld remain with tne land. <br /> Commission disclosed the possibility of a Planned Unit Development. <br /> Miller commented that, in his opinion, the PUD approach allows the Commission <br /> and Council to maintain control and place conditions on the development; he <br /> stated the Village Attorney may disagree with this opinion. <br /> After discussion, Commission consensus was that they would favor a Planned Unit <br /> Development approach, with the lessor density as discussed this evening, rather <br /> than a straight rezoning application; also commented that an application for <br /> this parcel should be carefully planned for compatibility with the development <br /> of the adjacent Church property. <br /> ADJOURNHENT Moved by Savage, seconded by Martin, that the meeting <br /> adjourn at 9:05 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. (7-0) <br /> Chairman Robert Curtis <br /> . <br /> ------------- <br />