Laserfiche WebLink
2181 <br />2. The area. presently zoned R-3 extends a sufficient <br />distance to the north from Larpenteur Avenue for <br />building of R-3 multiple residential units. <br />3, The present zoning plan was only recently adopted. <br />If this petition were granted, a precedent would <br />be set for circumstances of a similar nature. <br />~., Depreciation of property value is a certainty, It's <br />no secret that one family residences wi11 be <br />depreciated. <br />Emil Anderson I agree with all the points that j~ir. Lauer has raised. <br />1707 Fairview: He has presented his case fairly and justly,. Further, <br />if i-~is rezoning were permitted so that apartment house <br />can be built, it wi11 now lie bet~reen two family <br />residences - it would, in effect, do away with the original <br />intent of the zoning law, which was to allow a buffer bete~een <br />Larpenteur Avenue and R 1 zoning. If this were done, I can <br />see another line of apartments down Lindig Street on the <br />other side and there would probably be no reason why this <br />should not be done. <br />Arthur Lindig <br />The original plan was actually 500 feet and we bacl~ed <br />drn~n to 200 feet. <br />Joseph Bianchi: I feel that there was special consideration given this <br />property at the time of the re-zoning of the Village. <br />Perhaps too much was given and we wouldn't have this <br />problem now if we had stuck to the same line on the east <br />as on the west. At this time to ask for more would only <br />ask for more people wanting re-zoning of their property. <br />If the Village is going to maintain a zoning ordinance, <br />the Village has an obligation to maintain the plan, <br />James Tarbox - I have just looked at a map which has been handed to me. <br />Attorney for Lindig: I find on examination of the map that none of these <br />objections are from people adjacent to the property under <br />discussion, host cf' them are quite a distance from them. <br />T cannot see that they have very much interest in the <br />matter. Idir. Bianchi's property is at a distance of 135 <br />feat north of the property. R+sr. Anderson's is over 23$ <br />feet from the nearest point. ~Ir. Dowdell is 250 to 275 <br />feet away, None of these gentlemen will in effect be <br />influenced in any appreciable way, Perhaps they don't <br />realize how far away this little piece of land is. It is <br />on the back end of the lots of these property owners. I <br />think it is highly probable that sooner or later the <br />gentlemen who own these long lots wi11 in fact reconsider <br />what was their original opposition here and want to join <br />into this improvement by selling off the back end of their <br />lots. The other people here that have not signed are a <br />long distance away. ~'fr. Lewis is over 200 feet away. T <br />submit to you gentlemen that little things must yield to <br />larger things. The little objections must yield to the <br />great advantage of improving the property for the benefit <br />of all the people. The apartments wi11. be a definite <br />benefit. It is contemplated there will be no children. <br />Permission should be granted for this slight variation <br />from the code for the propose of building this apartment. <br />1 <br />1 <br />!1 <br />