09-14-83 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MSNU'CI?S C.ity Counci.l Sept. 11s, 19£33 Schrier ~4r. Fahey ~o~i.nted out: Chat ~i_n Apri.l of. 1.979 the Council went on record R.eaoni.ng that its intention was that the propet~ty be developed es low densil.y (Cont,) res:idential.. Atr. Lennon shou~Ld have been put on noti.ce o£ the City's Comprehensi.ve P].an, Mr.. I~ahey stated that:. the Council skioi.ild Cry to protect the impact of: thi., property on the s~.ingle f.ami.l.y homes i.n the area, S~!rs. Scalze comment:ed t:l~at thi.s triangul.ar piece of: property came about when County Road C was :i.nst:aJ.lecl and t:his pi.ecc of: P-3 properCy wa, cut of.f: f.rom the l.arger porti.on of. R-3 property that caas located :i.n the area< PSr, Daubncy stated thlt the confi.~;uraCi.on ot tk~e l.ot mal<es s~i.n~l.e fami.l.y housi.ng di_ffi.cult and expensi.ve. Daubney stat:ed that thi.s type of. housi.ng could not be developed and marlceted on the part~.icular property. Mrs. Scalre stated t1~aC under R-2 zoriiTin therc-; are vari.ous tqpes o:f: Chings that could be negoti_ated wi.th a special. use permi.t. Mr.. ;c)tri.er Pointed out tnat previously the Council tried to downzone thi_s property to 1t-2, but the moti.on f.rxi.led for lack of a second. Mr< Pahey stated t}teit :i.f rlr. ichrier had not Cransf.err.ed Citle on this property and it: had come 1.n as parC of hi.s ctevel.opment, tkle Council. woul.d never have approvect an apartment bui.l.ding ,for thi.s propeet.y. 24r< Pahey L'el.t that R-2 zoning should be somethi.n~; that T4r. Schrier could l.i.ve c~i.th an<t matce a Qood deve].opment. Mr. Fahey di<l not feel. the City oras aslcin~; Mr. Schr. i.er f:or too mur..h i.n tilis regard. Pal,ley stated that he w~s :interested i.n the R-?_ zonin~ 1nd Ckie bu-ilder. could then app'1y for a conditional use per.mit and sec ~rhat happens. Mr.. llaubney stated that PAr.. Schri.er does not u~ant to have to come baclc and submi.t to resCri.cti.ve conditions that he cannot li.ve tai.th. `4r•s, Scalze poi.nted out that the City downzoned the Ruth Street property and the developer> di.d not f'eel they had lost Coo much. Mrs. ScaJ.ze poinCed out that tl~i.s Z~roperty i.s in the same nei.ghborhood. icalze Ielt that the downzoning of t:hi_s property Y:o R-2 woul.d achievc the same Ching as ~ohen the RuT,h Street property was downzoned. ~lr. Schrier fielt that his damages would be qu~ite spec:ific i_n a downconing, Mr, Porsberg ,taCed that he did not f.eel the issue o'i topogcaphy of. the property w~s a valid one, P1r. Schrier. stated that Che si.te is not an :i.dea7. sin;lc family si.te. Page -4-