CCMin_61Dec7_Special - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1683 Pilsen: Let's get back to the property between Fairview and Tatum. Firs. Jenkins: I feel that the map as suggested is misleading. $,~Fr. Anderson's point and my point are the same and I don't have any vested in- terest. Cartwright: I think the ?Tanning Commission vrould be guided by the recommendations of the University and change those zonings on University Property to P-l. They are P-1 which means we answer that cuestion when we answer your question. If we had listened to ?~Zrs. Herdie a month ago, we wouldn't have had this problem. I think we should complete the Hearing on this and then I would like to recommend to the Council that we establish another Hearing, within the existing ordinance, between ten and thirty days, for the adoption of the revised map showing the new P-I zoning for all University property, and that vrill answer rdr, Anderson. U1e didn't answer regarding... the change between Tatum and Fairview. The change involved a striti of land about 75' wide. The Planning Commission felt, that for uni- formity, we might as well move the line up. All the property ov~iners immediately concerned, t~~a± is those wher~~y the change of zoning would be made, requested that change. ~N'h~t, effect that minor change would have on your property is hard to say. Is there another lot between you and the next house dov¢~ on Fairview?' Anderson: To the North? Cartwright: To the South. Anderson: Sommers who are directly South of us. In =act, Sommers will be affected more than we are. Cartwright: I eras under the impression that Sommers were in agreement with this change. "a7rs. Sommers: No, we didn't know it. ti~Ie didn't know anything about that. Cartwright: tifiell at our la$t hearing, I understood, I don't know whether it was Nick or Art who gave me the im?~ression, that you agreed. ".4rs. Sommers: No, this is the first I heard of it. Cartwright: Then I can't answer your question. I'll have to think about it. ~.7aybe we'll have to get the planning Commission together. Shavors Is there one more residential lot South of Sommers? Nilsen: No, then you run into the Sipe property. I notice the peti- tion excluded. the Sommers and .Anderson property. Anderson: I don't see what advantage it would be to exclude those two properties, ours and Sommers', because it would put us practically on an is- land if you go ahead with the plan as it is paw with B-1 property to the front of us and Commercial property to the South. Just making a little island out of our tyro lots would make very little difference to Sommers and us. rJilsen: That's not contemplated as Commercial. It says R-3.