Laserfiche WebLink
John Simpson, 3083 Mt. Ridge Road, asked for clarification regarding <br />parking easements and restrictions. The PUD is recorded at the County <br />with the deeds. Mr. Simpson asked the Schreiers what their reluctance <br />was with proposal #2 (uncertainty). <br />Mr.Schreier wanted flexibility and the option to live in and sell the house. <br /> In the future Schreier could purchase additional land. Proposal #2 <br />(Hearing 2) is a viable option. <br />No further questions and comments were offered by the public. <br />Chair Harms closed the hearing on Proposal #2. Member Rhody noted <br />that Roseville seeks to attract and retain business and families similar to <br />theSchreiers. <br />Motion: <br /> Member Rhody moved, seconded by Member Klausing, to <br />recommend approval of: <br />1) A comprehensive plan amendment for the two parcels owned by Jim <br />andDebSchreier (Charles Cabinet parcel and residential parcel to the <br />north) from Low Density Residential to Business. the Comprehensive <br />Plan, for the purpose of providing an owner instigated method of <br />changing current and future land uses from residential to a small <br />business center and creating neighborhood buffer strip. <br />2)A concept plan for a planned unit development (and rezoning from R-1 <br />to PUD-B) on the two parcels owned by Jim and DebSchreier <br />(Charles Cabinet parcel and residential parcel to the north, based on <br />the findings outlined in Section 3.1 of the project report and conditions <br />as listed in Section 4.1 of the project report. The approved use is <br />defined as a 10,000 s.f.building to be used for office, showroom, and <br />cabinetry manufacture space and supporting parking spaces. Spray <br />and hand painting and sealing, metal stamping and grinding, auto <br />mechanics (major and minor) and restaurants shall not be allowed on <br />this site. Other uses permitted within a B-1 zone shall be considered a <br />permitted use within this PUD. <br />Chair Harms explained the responsibilities of the Planning Commission to <br />look at the big picture. <br />MemberMulder stated that he felt this was a spot rezoning. <br />MemberKlausing argued that the west side of Cleveland is already <br />business and this is an extension of the business zone. <br />Member Cunningham explained the current proposal was a win-win <br />proposal for both the city and the applicant. <br />5 <br />