CC Min 1986-04-21 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Item No. 4 (continued) Tom Jordan, 1 Odessa Court, Chairman of the Senior Affairs Commission, reported that consideration was given to creating a residential -yeti repent (R -R) Zone, and the Community Development Director provided an example of what can now be accommodated in existing R -3 and CP Zones. In response to question of Mr. Biagi as to whether it is possible to grant rezoning with conditions, Mr. Schri cker said it is not possible to do so. Mayor Claire invited anyone else present who wished to speak to do so. No one wished to speak. Stangel /Chandl er to close the public hearing. Carried unanimously by voice vote and public hearing closed at 10:20 p.m. In response to question, Bud Ogden (see above) said that it would take about a year to determine if the subject property could be economically developed for senior housing. Mr. Schroeter replied to questions relating to details of differences between the CP and CG Zoning and the location of each in the City. M/S : Chan dl er /Stangel to reverse the decision of the Planning Commission to deny the subject application for rezoning and to grant the appeal. The motion failed on the following roll call vote: Ayes: Councilman Stangel and Vice Mayor Chandler Noes: Councilmen Bury, Greenalch, LaBerge and Mayor Claire M/S : Bury /Stangel to uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and to deny the subject application for rezoning, based upon the following findings: 1) that the extension of the CG Zoning District further into the presently zoned R -3 area would permit commercial uses in closer proximity to residential properties that would reflect upon the value of those residential properties; 2) that the change of the zoni ng di stri cts from CP to CG woul d i ntensi fy the commercial use of the property in a manner inconsistent with residential zoning of properties in the area; 3) that the CG Zoning would directly or indirectly increase traffic circulation and a parking burden upon residential streets in the vicinity of the rezoned property; and 4) that most commercial uses proposed by the appellant would be allowed under current CP Zoning District regulations, but with the requirement that a use permit first be obtained to provide the City with a reasonable means to guarantee mitigation of adverse effects. Reg.Mtg. 4/21/86 Page 5 P1INUTE BOOK NO. 46 Page No. 233