1975_1229_CC_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

� '� October 1, �975 PLANNING REPpRT CASE NllMSER: APPLICANT: �.QCATION : ACTION REQUESTED: PLANN�NG CONSID�RATIONS: 926-75 Ray Kroiss East of Cleveland Avenue, South of Wilder Street (see sketch) Appraval o-F �reliminary Plat and Rezoning fram R-3A to R-2 �. Yau wi 11 r�ca11 that Mr. Kroi ss recer�t7y pl at-�ed the property immediately north of the prop�rty in question into nine single famiZy Iots (Whiie Oalc Hills). At that time the remainir�g property �o the south (the property in question) was appl�ed for rezoning from R-3A (multiple family) to I-i (l�ght industrial}. This request was t�rned down by the City due principally to the poter►tia3 encroachment of industrial zoning on 'this and cor�tiguous properties, and prab�ems of access to future contiguaus properties. 2. At this time t�r. Kroiss proposes to deveIop the subject praperty with duplexes rather than as apartrnents as currently zoned. For this purpase, th� appl i cant has fi i ed a prel i mi nary pl at whi ch co�tsi sts of tv�ael ve { 12 } lots �ront�ng on proposed Brenner Avent�e as shawn on the sketch a� the left. 7he applicant would have pre�erred to deveiop the property wiih a simple cca�-de-sac, but has agreed to extend the street ia the easterly property line so as to provide fu�ure aecess to the praperty to �he east as suggested by the City staff. 3. You will note on th Ulhich wau7d o�fer a east to the subject circulation system to County Road D. e sketch the projectio� of a street in'dotted lines means of tying the residentzal properties to the property i n a r�anner whi ch provi des and ef�'i ci eni for residential deveZopment from C�eveland Avenue � 4. You will no�e tno, that there are two long narrow pieces of pronerty immediately east of the property in question, each with a widti� of 275 feet (frontage on County Road D). A contrac� purchaser af the easter7,� property of these two has indicaied a desire to develop the land for sing7e fami7y purposes. The street as sho�ln an the ske'tch i n the dotted 7 i nes t•roul d accomp� i sh thi s tyi ng i n to the property in question �8renner Avenue). ��de have also reviewed ��is proposal wi �h the owner of the ti•�esterly property through vr1�i ch Brenner would pass near the south end, we have indicated to these ot•rners {the Schulze Fam�ly) the manner in which this proposed extension of resident-ial stre�ts would apen up their property for single far�ily development at such �ime as they propose to do so. b1e have sugca��ted that representatives of �he Schu]zQ family be at the P�annzng Commissian meeting io express their views on this proposa�.