Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992 12-15 PC MINUTESDAVID K. GARDNER 1399 EAST COUNTY ROAD E GEM LAKE, MINNESOTA 55110 December 15, 1992 Mr. Paul R. Emeott 3960 Scheuneman Road Gem Lake, MN 55110 Dear Paul: The Gem Lake Planning Commission met Monday, December 14, 1992 at 7:30 p.m. in the Tousley Ford conference room. Present were Gardner, Bemis, Spreck, Noble & Emeott. Scott, Dick & Ray Tessier presented their survey for the subdivision of their property on Goose Lake Road. The Commission voted to recommend that the City Council approve this minor subdivision on the condition that Tract B (the newly created small triangle on Goose Lake Rd. to the west of the proposed driveway) be deeded to the adjacent property owner, Tom Estrom, and be combined with his current property (1570 Goose Lake Rd.). Further, the Commission recommends that a variance from the frontage requirement of the zoning ordinance be granted Tessier to 30 feet from 100 feet on the condition that the 30 feet constitutes a private driveway for single family use and that the property shall not be further subdivided in the future. The Council may delay action on this item until the Tessiers submit all of the required paperwork, including the deed. Bob Noble submitted a request from Steve Parenteau, and the Commission voted to recommend to the Council, that the bond for improvements (roadway and plantings) to Heritage Garden Estates be released, as substantially all of those improvements have been completed and inspected. The Commission then commenced a public hearing on the request by Richard M. Hansen to re -zone his property at 3538 Highway 61 (or 3538 Hoffman Rd) to GBII from Limited Business (L-B). The Chairman testified that he mailed notices of the meeting to the neighboring properties and that two were returned marked "Vacant," those being #3524 and #3540. The meeting notice was also published, Mr. Hansen testified that the current use (residential rental) is inadequate and inconsistent with the neighboring uses and that he wishes to convert the property to an automobile rental and sale facility. Deb and Pete Oswald, owners of #3516, testified in favor of the rezoning as they feel that they are unable to sell their property as residential. Vince Johnson, acting in his capacity of personal representative of his late sister's estate (#3524) , also testified in favor of the petition on the same basis. John Birkeland, who owns #3540, the floral business, and the property behind (east) #3524, testified that he does not want any more car lots in the area and requested that the area be zoned Retail Business (R-B). His mother, Lorraine Birkeland, who has resided at #3542 for 43 years also voiced her disapproval of an open sales lot and requested rezoning to R-B. During the discussion, a map was presented, and another map drawn, showing that the LB district consists only of #3516, #3524, and the area behind (east) #3524. This is an uncertain conclusion, as some believe that all of the residences were zoned L-B, and that the zoning map is in error. The Commission voted to recommend to the Council that the Hansen petition be denied on the basis that it would constitute "spot zoning and would be detrimental to the peaceful existence of at least some of the current residents. As the adjacent area to the north is zoned R-B, and there is some significant sentiment for maintaining a retail area in the city, and limiting the further encroachment of automobile sales lots, the Commission recommends that the L-B zoning be discontinued, and that area be rezoned R-B (retail business). This rezoning would be accomplished by a revision of the zoning ordinance to eliminate the L-B zone, expand the R-B zone, and include in the R-B zoning a provision for single- family dwelling as a permitted use. As this action will require another public hearing, the Council need take no formal action at this time. Also in attendance were Lynn Glaser and Laura Studer who operate a motorcycle and automobile customizing business and have evidenced some interest in acquiring #3524 as a personal residence and using the garages as their paint shop. The Commission feels that the proposed use could be allowed in R-B as a special use provided it could be inoffensively integrated into the area. Again, no action required at this time, as they will need to apply for a special use permit after the area has been rezoned. The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Respectf Ily submitted, D i ardner, Chairman ,,t`em L , e Planning Commission cc� Manning Commission \\- 'Noble