CC_Minutes_2010_1213 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

501 Mr. Paschke advised that such a use would be designated Mixed Use, and that the southern 502 property was of limited dimensions and probably not suited for that type of development, as well 503 as reducing the required parking ratio that Har Mar Mall needed to maintain; and that an 504 amendment to the Comprehensive Plan designation would be needed to allow other uses not 505 within a Community Development zoning designation. 506 Mr. Draganowski requested that the land use designation remain R -1 for the southern parcels 507 adjacent to Har Mar Mall. 508 J. 0. Thompson, 2808 Asbury Street 509 Mr. Thompson requested that the zoning remain R -1, and provided his perspective on the history 510 of that designation for over fifty -eight (58) years, allowing for a buffer zone between the parking 511 area and residential properties. Mr. Thompson disagreed with staff's interpretation of the zoning, 512 adamantly opining that it was designated as a Special Use Permit for parking in an R -1 zoning 513 district, and remained as such today. 514 Mr. Paschke advised that staff would attempt additional research on those parcels. Mr. Paschke 515 noted that, if the Commission wished to recommend a change to the zoning designation, such 516 action would require a separate and distinct recommendation to the City Council to modify land 517 sue designations for the southern piece of Har Mar Mall. 518 Annette Phillips, 3084 Shorewood Lane 519 Ms. Phillips noted an error in the zoning map (dated May 2010) showing a lack of connection 520 near Snelling and Lydia onto County Road C -2. 521 Mr. Paschke noted the error, noting that it would be corrected on future printings. 522 Ms. Phillips questioned whether the building on the northwest corner at the intersection of 523 County Road C -2 and Lincoln Drive (former Edina Realty building) was owned and/or used by 524 Northwestern College and whether its zoning designation was correct. 525 Mr. Paschke noted that future use could be Community Business, not Institutional. 526 Cedric Adams, 556 West County Road C 527 Mr. Adams noted that he owned a parcel, not currently addressed (PIN 12- 29- 23 -22- 0003), and 528 zoned single family residential (R -1), and now appeared to be recommended for LD -1 or HD 529 zoning. Mr. Adams advised that he had owned the parcel for about ten (10) years, and had plans 530 to build a single- family dwelling, even with the topography of the lot and adjacent four -(4) lane 531 road and additional County easement restrictions. Mr. Adams opined that the parcel was not 532 suitable for high density due to grading for the driveway and addressing drop -offs on south and 533 westerly edges of the property, and asked that the property be reconsidered due to the 534 aforementioned hardships. 535 Mr. Paschke suggested that the Commission may choose to recommend that this lot be removed 536 for inclusion with the list of anomaly properties, even though not previously identified as such, 537 but needing further consideration for potential Comprehensive Plan Amendment due to the