|
Case Noo 62-94
<br />i'etitioner:
<br />Location:
<br />April 49 1962
<br />Tusler L�dge No, 263 A,F, and A,M,
<br />North of Sto Christophe:r's Church, east
<br />of Hamlir�e Avenue Esee s1eeL�h}
<br />�' Action Reque�ted: Rezoning of psoperty f•rom "R-i" �o "B�1"
<br />:s
<br />PL�htMING CON5ID£RATIONS ;'
<br />-: � -=
<br />l, The Tusler Lodge has requested a reaonin� of the sub�ect
<br />pxoperty �o the ''B-1" category �o allow construction �f a
<br />'rMasanie Tem�le"o The proposed stru�fiure is zpproximately
<br />50' by 18a� in Ier�gth. The p�operty eo�sists of two Iots ;
<br />}�� as indicated on the sketch totaling approximatel}v 1.65 acres, ''�
<br />Ttie praperty would have I4�' of fronta�e �n Ha�mline A�renue
<br />and 104,5' af fr�ontage on Delc�ood Street. The groperty
<br />'- descripti�on; hawev�r, makes reference to the 30 ° r�asem�nt
<br />` for future road construction along the sou�h line of the
<br />'"�Y: suhject property, Thuts� the net are� of land will be approx�.mately .�;
<br />1,, 25 acx�es a The �ronta�;� wou].d th�n c�nsist a�' 113 °�if �
<br />�t�:: Iine�l length along Har..�.iine Avenue e
<br />,,,,; ; _ _ ;
<br />� i - � �-
<br />�' � Z e The property aI.ang Hamline Avenue �ppeai�� to have be�n "a �;�
<br />��' ' • • • ` �`
<br />,: single lot with 22 8 d 0 5° of frontage o Thus , z�t w�ould app�ar ,�,
<br />;� tha� a lot of 85° w�s le�� �o accommoda.�� a single fami�.y � y�
<br />f ;� �,
<br />P t�; - � . . _ ,
<br />� :, Strueture o : '��
<br />•„7
<br />�'t . . . . .. J.,�
<br />,_ ,; . 3, The property across the s�reet to the west on Ham�.ine Av�nue ��,#
<br />�;�� is dev�lo ed as a olf eourse and the ro ert to -��e eas� - 5��:�
<br />!.� p g , ' P P Y , , f�t;�
<br />��" across Del.wor�d Str�et is , of course y the Ramsey S�nzor �i�,gh ,,x, �
<br />�;�, - Schoole There wc�uld be left �outh of the eas�erl� lnt in ;�
<br />�;`= gtt�stiQn a tract of some 2, 43 acres now zon�d "R�1" o Thi� :;��
<br />�'�Tt ..- fir�c� inorthwest corner of D�lwood and Hi hraa 36) would '%�
<br />�� : � Y �
<br />�;� thus be cut off from the singie �'amzl� d�velopment to the' '°��
<br />`�� nc�rth and would appeam appra�ri.a�e for o�her use�o �zf;
<br />�'r' `
<br />t�,; ,�;
<br />r� 4,' No plot plan was submitted with �he applieation and �thus no `y
<br />� < � � . � �:r�
<br />'°�4; analys�.s can be ma�1e of the �dequacy of th� property a�n t�sms ,�;v
<br />�`� of parking 4 set-back a accomm4da-�aon of bui lding' etc o : _r,
<br />��€: , -,;;�
<br />�y 5 o There is a real question in our mind as ' to �the adequacy pf '-� `.
<br />; ,; ,
<br />,,: the property in terms of p�rking capacityo �`he applicatican ;�3
<br />�� makes reference to a-possible join.t pax+ki.ng arrangement wi�h ;.;=�
<br />' the S� e Chris�apher C`hux�cYi o This pracedure is valid under the ' �`}
<br />„ terms of the or�dinance 6 but we are not aware of any such a�reemen� `�
<br />>t,.
<br />' having` beer� reachedo
<br />..
<br />f`� 6, In terms of compatibili�ty of contiguous uses and the �en�ral ��'
<br />1=� ar+ea developmen�, there would appear to be no great risk in
<br />;'t; the use of the pro}�erty as pr�pased. 'There is however� the
<br />�uestion of the ad� uac of the property in terms of sufficient
<br />, a�3 tQ aecommodat� the structure and the vitally important �
<br />-: a�
<br />�' " - garking facii.ities o
<br />� � � � � � �� � � � � � ` ���,
<br />; ';
<br />���
<br />`j
<br />, , , ��
<br />,, .,_ .
<br />..�F. < _ .., .
<br />
|