Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION <br />February 12, 1992 <br /> <br />page# <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />Presentation <br /> <br />Shardlow presented the background on the case including the details <br />of the proposal, the consistency with the comprehensive plan and <br />the characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood. Shardlow also <br />discussed the details of the similar rezoning request on Parker <br />Avenue which was previously denied. <br /> <br />DISCUSSION <br /> <br />Issues discussed included whether the applicant had knowledge of <br />the zoning when he purchased the property, the potential effect on <br />the neighborhood, the definition of family, the difference between <br />this case and the Parker Avenue case, the need for property <br />maintenance standards, the need to address the issue of rezoning R- <br />1 zoned property to R-2 on a comprehensive community wide basis <br />rather than on a site by site basis, and potential change of the <br />economic well being of the neighborhood over time. <br /> <br />One resident, Erica Plagemann, 1955 Cleveland Avenue, spoke in <br />opposition to the proposal because the rezoning would set a <br />precedent, would adversely effect the quality of life in the <br />neighborhood and could result in an absentee landlord situation and <br />develop maintenance problems. Mrs. Plagemann stated she would <br />rather see Mr. Ho just rent a room instead of rezoning the <br />property. <br /> <br />MOTION <br /> <br />Wietecki moved and Harms seconded a motion to recommend denial of <br />Franklin Ho's request for rezoning from R-1 to R-2 at 1935 <br />Cleveland Avenue because the rezoning does not fit into the <br />character of this newer stable neighborhood and could lead to <br />deterioration over time. <br /> <br />Roll Call: <br /> <br />Ayes: <br /> <br />Thomas, Roberts, Wietecki, Harms, <br />Goedeke, Stokes <br /> <br />Nayes: <br /> <br />DeBenedet <br /> <br />DISSENTING OPINION <br /> <br />commissioner DeBenedet stated that in his opinion R-2 is not <br />different from R-1. DeBenedet pointed out that the comprehensive <br />plan and City lot size requirements do not make a distinction <br />between the two. DeBenedet added that this type of rezoning <br />promotes the healthy balance of housing types consistent with the <br />comprehensive plan. <br /> <br />Planninq File 2426 <br /> <br />Roger Kolstad (Professionals Inc.) request for rezoning, <br />preliminary and final plat south of County Road C-2 and lying <br />