05-11-83 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

D7INtJ'CT'S Ci.ty Counci.l. A4ay il, 19~33 North Mrs. Scal.ze poii~ted out that Stat:e 1aw on7.y ~tddresses subdivi.sions Suburban wiCh regard t.:o parl< cha r~;es. This would i.nc7.ude only >chri_er's R--1 Concept prop erty. ~trs. Scalze state.d that the Ci.ty cannot I.e ~;al.1y ta(ce }?lan (Cont.) any of the R-3 proper.ty for a parl<. Mrs. Scalze al.so stated that the Partc Co mmiss~,ion is Callci.n~ to M r. Frart~lone about parlc l.and. The residents of the ar.ea d~is~~reed w~i.th the 1oc~ition ot Mr. Scl~~r:i.er's R-3 properCq and f.elt thaC ehere was R-1 property located at the top of. the R-3 property. 'Che I:n~ineer stnted thnt the sect.i.on ma~P cannot be used ~in mal<i.ng tl:iis de.termi.nati.on and that ~[n revi.ewing t:he survey of. the property, the R-3 property is as presentecl by T~tr. Schrier< rir. Paliey stated that when the City was consideri.ng th:is ;ite for seni.or ci.ti.zen housi.ng, i.t saas determined that the R-3 property di.d e:~Cend to the l.alce. ~irs. ~ar<I3.ni agreed. Mr. Schrier commentsd thaC in the past the concern coas the number of a~artments uni.ts that coul.d be constructed on the R-3 pr.operty. 'Cherefore, in d~*velopi.ng this proposa7., the trans~i.ti.ona7. zoning concept was developed. P1r.. Schrier al.so pointed out that t4r. Prattal.one is concerned abot.rt the tra[fi.c s:i.tuation that lte 1~as to cle~al. w:ith when he devel.ops hi.s property. Schr:ier reported ti~at t~1r. I~'rattalone has i.ndicated to hi.m thaC ~ahen he ctevelops his property he cooul.ci ].ilce to deal ai.th the situat.i.on wi.Yh a cul. cle sac. T4r. Schri.er commented that this is the LirsC he has seen o£ the Pl.anner's proposa].. ~1r. Schrier pointecl out that i.t is the C:i.ty who sets the rules for. density an<t he is acvare Chat he must contorm to these rules. Mr. Schri.er. state<t that i.f the City ctoes not li.ice h~is concept, that is f.`ine. t9r. Schri.er pointed out Y.hat under the concept he would be giving up 50 apartmenC units. Mr. Schri.er stated that he c~.in talce hi.s zoni.n~ as i.s and bui.l<1 aparCments. Mr. ,Tohn Dobney, Mr. Schrier's aCtorney, appeared bef.ore the Counc:il, Mr. Dobney stated that. pondi.ng would be presented in final plans. Dobney po~inted out that the Ci.ty pl.anner £eels Mr. Schrier's concept idea is a goocl one. 'I'he only dif:ference in the Pl.anner's proposal and Mr. Schri.er.'s is the number of uni_ts proposed. P1r. nobney pointed out that they are onl.y astd ng for concept ap~roval. Dobney also pointecl out that the proposal meets all City Codes. Mr.. Dobney poi.nted out that in 197A, the judge stated i.n a memorandum th~t the two ye~r morattorium on bu~ildi.ng apart:ments ~aas reasonablc due Co t;he C4.ty's tivater system bein~ :Lnadequate. 1-lowever, :i.n tkiat same memoranclurn ttae judge staCed that ~ir. Schrier had Che ri.ght to assume that once the water si.Cuation ~:aas taken care of he could proceeclcvtith his proposal. Page -5-