pf_00541 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

� � (This case was fiabled at the applicant's request at the October lst Meeting. Fol lowing is a copy ot the report prepared for that hearing. ) December 3, 1969 CAS E NO: APPLICANT LOCATION: 541-69 8ristol Company, lnc. Cleveland Avenue South of Wilder Sfireet (See Sketch) ACT10N RE�UESTED: Rezoning from "R-1" to "R-3�" and Specia! Use Permit for Developm�>nt Plan PLANhING CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The property i,� question was considered for rezr�ning and developmen� approval approximately a year ago, ot which time it was denied prir�cipally because inac�equate space had been left betweeri the existing singie family development to the north and proposed apartment units. You will recall perhaps,ai� the time of the previous proposai�an open s�ace had been left for the extension of the cul-de-sc�c ta terminate �Vilde� Str�Qet, but that development had been propos�d immediately south af Lot 8(the nearest single family lat fronting on Clevelanr� Avenue). 2. The applicant now� proposes to leave a continuous ppen stri� 170 feet in width across the northerl y th ird of the property > You wi I I reca II that, under the 701 Plan, it was suggested fihat the multiple area iaegin at a point south of the Wilder Street development leaving approximately enough distance i� complete the cul-de-sac on Wilder Stree� with single family houses. If such single family housing were to be built, the distance involved would approximate 250 feet, The quesfiion then becomes one of �vhether or not tl�e 170 feet of open space (assuminc� tf�at it is properly har�dlecl) carries out t{ie spirit and intent of the decision in tf�e 7p1 plan. We suggest that if ±he 170 feet is properly handled, that this area of land could successfully make the transition between Phe single fomily housing and the apartment� propnsed. You w.ill recall that ther� are occasicx�s in the Village,such as on Hamline Averiue across from Foodtown, or on Rice Street east of Woo�bridge,wliere the appropriate handling of a narrawer lanu�scaped open spacE �vas successfully useci to create tfie transition between the single f�mily housing and the proposed cpartn�ents. In each of those cases, the space invol ved wa, considerabl y I ess �hc;n the 170 feet suggested here. The principal cbjection, you �r�ill recail, to 1he pre��ious d�evelopment was one of inconsistency in the handl ing of space across the �ntire width of the property itl CjU@Stlnn,