Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mayor Pro Tem Elvig concurred. He indicated he is not in agreement with six units on this site, <br />but there is a responsibility for the City to find the best use and highest value for this land. <br /> <br />Councilmember Jeffrey asked how many single family lots will fit on this site with R-l zoning. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Geisler replied the site is 244 feet long along Ebony Street; minimum lot <br />width in R -1 zoning is 80 feet. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cook stated he does not know that this neighborhood will be happy with three <br />small lots on this site now that sewer and water is there if they are sitting on big acreage and big <br />houses. Three little lots at $250,000 each will not be good for the development or the <br />neighborhood. He also agrees it would not a good deal to leave the land zoned commercial. <br />This situation was created by bringing sewer and water in and assessing this property, which has <br />encumbered this piece of land. <br /> <br />Councilmember Strommen asked if this sewer and water was brought in due to a petition. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski replied the sewer and water was initiated by petition of 35% of the <br />property owners; three property owners signed the petition, and that is all that were assessed. <br /> <br />Mr. Murphy stated these twinhomes would be of substance and quality of the houses directly <br />around it; they will not be located on the river. <br /> <br />Mayor Pro Tern Elvig indicated there are things he supports about part of this. Any time there is <br />a spur off the river the lots will be different in demographics, size, scale and value. Also, the <br />Suberbowl will have impact on this parcel. He cannot disagree more that crime will go up <br />because of these housing units. The types of units that are being suggested are for empty nesters, <br />which is something the City has been looking for, but he does not know that six units will fit well <br />on this lot. <br /> <br />Mr. Murphy stated this lot will provide a nice transition. The lot is nice and wooded and this <br />would be an appropriate use for the lot. They would not build $400,000 homes in this location <br />next to the parking lot, which would be needed to make anything with the amount of money into <br />the lot. They are proposing upper end $275,000 twinhomes. This will appeal to buyers that want <br />independence, to still have a little help from the association, and might not be as picky about <br />being located next to Superbowl as individuals that would purchase a $400,000 home. <br /> <br />Councilmember Cook commented this is a tough lot. Because these townhomes are at a higher <br />price point it will have empty nesters and people looking for less maintenance on their yard and a <br />better place to live. This will not necessarily bring crime up. Six units mayor may not be right <br />here, but the neighborhood will not be happy with three single family units either. <br /> <br />Councilmember Pearson commented as much as he does not necessarily like townhomes, <br />business zoning does not fit in this location. The proposed use would probably be the lesser of <br />two evils, and with the mini-storage on one side and Superbowl on the other side it would be a <br />good transition. <br /> <br />City Council / September 26, 2006 <br />Page 31 of 39 <br />