Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Motion: Member Mulder moved, seconded by Member Rhody, to recommend <br />demal of the single parcel proposal (alternative #1) as described as the property <br />occupied by Charles Cabinet at 3090 Cleveland Avenue North, as originally <br />requested by James and Deb Schreier. <br /> <br />Motion carried 7-0. <br />Ayes: 7, Harms, Cunningham, Klausing, Olson, Mulder, Rhody, Wilke <br />Nays: None <br /> <br />Member Klausing explained his concern about longer term use of one parcel. <br /> <br />Member Cunningham expressed his concern regarding the longer term uses of <br />one parcel. <br /> <br />Member Mulder stated that he felt this request was spot zoning. <br /> <br />Member Klausing argued that the west side of Cleveland is already business and <br />this is an extension of the business zone. <br /> <br />Member Cunningham explained the current proposal was a win-win proposal for <br />both the city and the applicant. <br /> <br />Member Wilke supports. <br /> <br />Proposal # 2 (Hearing #2): PF3022. Expanding the Comprehensive Plan <br />amendment and planned unit development to include the property occupied by <br />Charles Cabinet as well as the two homes to the north of Charles Cabinet which <br />are owned by James Schreier at 3090 Cleveland Avenue North (proposed by <br />Roseville Planning Commission). . <br /> <br />Chair Harms opened the hearing and asked for clarification of the staff report. <br />Member Olson asked for clarification of the parking needs through cross parking <br />easement, PUD, and proof-of-parking requirements. <br /> <br />Member Cunningham asked for clarification of the residential use on the site (to <br />remain as long as additional parking or building space is not needed). <br /> <br />John Simpson, 3083 Mt. Ridge Road, asked for clarification regarding parking <br />easements and restrictions. The PUD is recorded at the County with the deeds. <br />Mr. Simpson asked the Schreiers what their reluctance was with proposal #2 <br />(uncertainty), <br /> <br />Mr. Schreier wanted flexibility and the option to live in and sell the house. In the <br />future Schreier could purchase additional land. Proposal #2 (Hearing 2) is a <br />viable option. <br /> <br />No further questions and comments were offered by the public. <br /> <br />3 <br />