Planning Commission_1964 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

t'jJb.4~Ci i:].Lskit~-~.1'u(,z l~'~' 1i"i::, i~~hiJ(it,i~ 11Lr1.~i1'11J Y~riui2.l.lt~ ~ilii:'liri.~~s=i1L~LV September b0, 1~~64 r'~~~;~vT: Plant, riinuermann, Libby, t)liman, Otis, Be-rzie axed Trustee tila.ck Tile nleetir~g vas caviled to order at t~:00 p.m. ir~r, Plant opened trle meeting vdtl~ a statement teat this wds to be a public hearing on ~i a~aplication .and petition for rezoning frovi ri-1 to r:-~ c tJ:at real estate described as "the nortri 53.51 feet of the south .~~55.51 feet of Lot 5, Bloch 2 oi° Lindig addition.n i~ir °' Lindig explained txs.t the rezoning was requestea so that a 17 unit apart- men~buildi.i~lg could be built. 1~ithout file rezoning tixere v-auld only be room f oz° an 11 unit buila.il~g . . __ Tds. Cleon Carley explained tine tentative plans for the apartment building. ire pointed out that as there was no alley the ~}arking area must be on the sine or' the building instead of beiiiild it. Tine rJarici.nb lot is p7.arned be:weexx the building and the south edge of tine lot. It ~rould still be 14U ~ f`rom La.rpenteur. (~1r. Lindig ~ s dome is between trle proposed apartment axzd Larpenteur.) _A recreation area is planned behind tixe building. Palr. t lant asked if' anyone ~varlted t speak in favor ol" t~ rezoning, ax,ci ric cne did. lair. i?lant read s. letter in opposition to file rezoning prom IU;r. r'1.orian Lauer. iBir. Lauer opposed tre rezox;ii;g for five f~ollowi.ag reason; : 1. trlere app-years to be no va,:iid reason for exterdillg tYle cur~~ently zoned. n-3 area beyora i-ts preNeilt boundaries, as that area is un~uestioru~.bly suited. #'or i~,-1 coning, ~) the area presently zoi~led t~-5 is dde~uate for builcirlg multiple units, a.nd 5) ii true rezoning is perriitted it vai.l. lead to more re-zc:ning ~uu vr~ill uriderruirie the ccn- fiaellce of tide property ovrners in the zoning ordinance. Others erilo spoke age.ilst the rezoning- we~_e Ivir. anc tvir.s.~r~i ~nderscll, i~ir. Joseph Bia.nciu., i~ir. I~'lorian Lauer, and airs. John iai. ~a.eGregor. i~;rs..bxrderson pointed out that if tale rezoning is permitted so that an apartment builcrixlg can be built in that locs.tion witrl a house between it and Larp~enteur the whole idea of the n-3 buffer zone vaould be defeated. NIr. Bianchi sumn;ed up the fee:i.ing o' ttlose in opposition when he stated that the reason for tree rezoning was to peru7it a larger apartment banding then could be built on trie present available space. The answer, .instead of rezoning, could be td build a smaller building. Tile Ylearing was then adjourned. i~r. Libby moved, seconded by c,r. `rlindermann, that the Plallnir~g Com~>;issi.on recomruend to tree Village Council ta&t the epplication far rezoning ttie north 55..51 feet of tale south ;53.51 feet of Lot 5, ~tlocx ~ of file Lindig XccitCyll be denied. The motion -was carried unanirciously. The meeting ve.s adjourned. t~espect ull,~ submitted, • ~ v~-Qi vss . Ita.Lp11 F'. nerdie, uecretdry