Laserfiche WebLink
~,^1:[~1U`fS~ S <br />City Council. <br />Sept, 7_f3, 1983 <br />hlcCumbei Mrs. Scalze astced ~.i.E the C_ity ever got a lan~lscape plan i'rom }4r< <br />Fence (Cont.) P7cCumber. The Clerk commented ChaC P~e remembc~~~is seein~; such a <br />plan. <br />The Planner su;gested that the iliiil.di.ng ~Inspector. ancl he ~;o out <br />and ].ook at Cite si.te i.n the morni_ng. <br />~Gahey su~gested thaC McCumber be informed that should he; he~;in <br />outtin~ up a cyc7.one fenc~ bef.ore the rnatCer i.s resol.ved, it: coul.d <br />be red-ta;~ed. I~ahey sup4,ested that Che m~CCe,r be disci.issed when <br />tlie ,f'ul.l Couricil i_s prc>ent:. <br />Scalze al.so commented that the landscupe pl~~n snoul.d be locrated an~ <br />revi.ewea. <br />7'wi.ri i ake t2d. C9r. Li.cht ieport:ed t;hat CarlsburF; D4~nagema:nt: Gompmny in Cali.forni.a <br />Peop~~~rty has submi.tted a concept pl.an for extending the ~^ive Star ?~tob~i_,te <br />Home Park ~mCO the T~vi.n Lalcc Road property owned by the Ci.ty. <br />k~gen~la 7'he Planner reported thmt the comptiny had sug£;ested single ti'ai.7.ers <br />ICem No. l.1 on rhis prop<~rty, bi.it the I'lanner has suggested to them that <br />doublewides would be more accentabl.e. The Planner poi.nted out Ci1at <br />the P1_anni.ng Commissi.on h~is found the concept accep9:able, <br />'Che Ylanner suggested t1~at the. City consi.der the <br />properCy to provicle for this proposal and a publ. <br />neceesary Co do ttiis. The nl~nner reported Chat <br />Che mobileL~ome parlc could be intc~nsel.y screened, <br />should the property develop as s~i.n~;le family. <br />rezon:ing oL this <br />i.c hearing would be <br />the expAns,i_on oi <br />even betCer than <br />i4rs. Scal.ze asked t1~e status of the Cit1e on the p~roperty. 'Cl~ie <br />Attor.ney repli.ed t_hat 1'~e i.s r.evi_cwing thF exami.nor's ref~or.t on the <br />t~itle, Scalce asked i_C~ a public tieari.no could be~ held at th~is pol.nt <br />on rezontin~,. 'Che Attorney replied Chait ~i.t could. <br />Mr. ~ahey suggested tl~iat: the reverse musC be Cru~ tt1a1:. the proparty <br />coul.d dev~lop as R-1 and be screei~icd from the trai.l.er. parlc. <br />1'he ]?lamier commeni:ed Chat this is tk~e fir.st i.nterest thae t:he Oi.t:y <br />has hacl in thi.s property. `1rs. Scal.ce po~i.nted out: tl~zit tl~e City <br />has riever ~dverti.sed the property. <br />Scalze staCed thlt sk~c ~aoul.d not be oai.lLing to rezone the pr_ooerty <br />to mobi].ehome use iml.ess there was no chance of. .>~i_nvle Eamily <br />devel~ping. <br />Mr. ~'orsberg suggested Chat the Planner do a report on the pot.ent~f.al <br />ot this ~?roperty ,f.or develo~~menC as ;~i.ngle tamily. Sca.lze sCated that <br />once t:hi.s reporC is recei.ve<I the Cowlci.l. can c~a11 ci publi.c hear;i.n~; on <br />rezoni.rig oE the properCy i_f so desi.red. <br />%?a;,>e -1~~- <br />