Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 02/19/1987

Home

size and meets the minhnum size requirements for a total of 6 lots. The ~im is reluctant to even ~onsider the plat as proposed without input fr~m the Co~mty ~gineer. The Ccmm~ission r~d that Mr. Menkveld redrm~ the plat with a .cul-de- sac configuration and if the County Engineer is approached, inquire as to the appropriate amount of right-of-way that should be acquired in the event of upgrading to Cty. Bd. 863. The ~ion also requested input fr~m Police (~ief Auspos regarding this particular stretch of Cry. Rd. #63 and his opinion with respect to allowing 3 more accesses onto it. ~ l~eview R1-U Besidential Zoning.. Case Of Mr. Sidney Schaumber9: Mr. Schaumberg was present and stated that in 1981 he specifically purchased a sufficient amount of land to develop as an ingress/egress with additional one acre lots to access his 80 acre parcel to the east, which was zoned Urban Residential and required a minimum lot size of one acre. With the city's recent rezoning, the larger parcel was designated to R1-U and developable with (me acre lots; the strip of property accessing the 80 acres was designated R1-R with a minimum lot size of 2-1/2 acres.- Mr. Scha~berg is requesting that the city rezone that strip of property to R1-U in order that he can develop that and the 80 acre parcel as originally inter~ed. Chairman Peterson inquired if the Commission should give consideration to rezoning just Mr. Sch~rg's property or rezoning all property within the general urban area, not just the 1990 urban area, to R1-U. Motion by C(mmtissioner Shu~way to proceed with appropriate processes to rezone that strip of property owned by Mr. Sidney Schaumberg and located outside the 1990 Urban Area but within the Urban Area from R1-R to R1-U. Further Discussion: Chairman Peterson noted that rezoning for Mr. Sc/hatnfmrg's case only or rezoning all urban areas to R1-U, will require a public hearing. Consensus was to address Mr. Schaumberg's property only at this time. Oa~missioner Deemer noted that the property would still not be developable until it fronts on a public street. Cxmm~issi~er Zi~merman seconded the motion. Further Discussion: Commissioner Deemer stated that he feels it is incorrect for the city to go through the expense of rezoning a ~all piece of property based on speculation when historical data backs Mr. Schaumberg's claim to develop that strip of property with c~e acre lots. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairman Peterson, Commissioners Shumway, Zimmerman, ~endriksen, ~_nue and Howell. Voting No: Commissioner Deemer. It was noted that in the historical reoords no specific mention of one acre lots was made; it was suggested that Ms. Norris get input fr~m the Council P & Z/February 3, 1987 Page 7 of 10