Laserfiche WebLink
~7LNU'P1.S <br />Oi.ty Counci.l. <br />Jan. 23, ].9£35 <br />Ander.son/1-lowe ^1r. Gocdy Howc ~ppeared be£ore tlze Counci.l. reqi.~est~ing the rezonir~g <br />Rezoninp., of. the Ed Ancferson nro~ert:y Lrontin; on i?ark StrFet .Er.om 13-3 to <br />Pz-oposal R-2. A1so a condiCional usa permiC i_s requested for tk~c <br />desi~nat::ion of a;Pl.anned !Init Devel.opanent ancl construction of two <br />Agenda 4-plexes witli detzched p,ara~es. Zn ~dc(iti_on a 1ot widt:h vari.ance <br />Item No. 4 i.s rec~uested as the lot. i.s 105 Leet wicle and the Code requi.res 125 <br />FeeC. P4r. Anderson would also lilce to subdi.vi.de thc: propc:rty. <br />PQr,. Narclini. reported that sh<a received a calJ. ~Pro~ri a KaCh_y Vaclnais, <br />a propert:~ owner ~in Lhe area ~.aho stated that. sh~ is in favor oE t:he <br />proposa'1. <br />Mr. .Ji.m ~Ii.lleaux, anot:.her ~roperty owner in t.Pte asea, stnted tlaa[ he <br />i.s i.n Lavor. of the r.ezoni.ng. Howeve.r, ne i_s i.nCeresCecl in how Lhc <br />drainas;e ~ai.11 be han<I'Led. <br />^Ar.s. Peterson stziCed that she. is i.n f.avor of tha~~ rezoni.ng and ~:aould <br />pref.er a residentiral use i_n t:he area rather than a bus:Lness us~. <br />!~"~r. Pahey staCed that he was tcoubled by a17.ow~i.ng Mr. Aowe to build <br />on th~ baclc of l:he property with only a 30 foot e~zsement for ~,i.ngress <br />and ep,ress t:o the ,i.te. <br />i1r. Vi.lle~iux scatecl that tie has no prob7.em with che 30 Eoot access. <br />Peter.son, too, had no pr.obl.em ztnd stated that i_L morc nroperty were <br />needed, she would be w~i.1.li.ng to sell. some to ~1r. klowe. <br />P1r. Fahey reporta~d th~t tI'~e ,Planner has suggESted C11aC the 30 Eoot <br />access be oii the oCher sl.de of the proper.ty and then if thc property <br />to the norti~ devel.oped, addit:ionat properCy could be ~pid<ecI up f.r.om <br />Chst side, <br />Mrs. S~alze commented Y.hat the Ci.t:q has Yiad s:imilar r.eqi.iests ~.Cn the <br />p~st wh~ich ~oere denied as Code requtres a 1ot to liave 75 feeC of <br />road frontage. <br />P1r. L~i.cl'iC sCated that about a year ago hi.s o.[fice submitted a sup~gesCe~,i <br />pol.i.c.y Ior private sCreeCS and t:he Council Coolc no act:ion on t4is. <br />'Che '?lanner pointed out tliat. i.n Chis case if half. a str,eet were <br />declicated Co thc C~ity there woulc.t rernain ~30 feet Y:o develop and if <br />seCbaal<s wc:re adhered to ther.e would only bc room Yor a 20 f:oot ~vi_de <br />bui-ld~i.ng. <br />'Ctir 7?l.anner al.so sCat.ed thaC. the lof: may present probletns to commerci.ul. <br />development because of. p~rtci.n£; requir.ements. <br />r~trs. Scal.ze asl<ed ~if. a deve~l.opmrnt wo~il.d f-i.t better. under the code <br />if only one duple;x were ~l.anned raCher than two. <br />The ]?].anner sCaited t1~~aC Chi.s i.s why a PUD i.s bein~, requested and pointed <br />out t:l,iat. ~~leatkier Oalcs developccl under a PtJD. <br />17a~;e -2- <br />