Laserfiche WebLink
~~z~~uTrs <br />C,i i:y Counci 1 <br />Pnarch 1?, 19~6 <br />Goff Fa.hey annoi.inced that the E',off development anci. rezonin~ requE~st is no~~~ <br />#2ezoning befor~ the Council in a scal~d-dovrn version o~P i:he original proposa1. <br />(t~q~.iest 6off originally requested 114 s~x-pler, un~its on pr~perty abutting <br />Coun~ty Road D and~ Arcade Stree~ anrl no4~i is r~quFStirig 8~ six-plex <br />Agenda uni~s anc! s4x sinc~le-family lots. <br />I~tem b~.o, 4 <br />r~ahey point:~d oi.it ~rhat a public Piearinq was held on the ori,c~inal <br />nrooosal and Counc~l 9ias tabledaction on t:he reqi~iesf:. <br />~~is. RlarcPini i~ntrociured the ~Fol1oaaing resoli.ition and moved ii:s aco~~ion: <br />°ES~LUTIO~~ `,+.Q. £3E-3-99 - RG~90VThJG Ff20P1 TA`?LF <br />Tflr c,pcr. pEVFLOP~.1~:11T o20POSAL A~ID R':70`:~lI~:!G <br />RF.QUf_S7 <br />The fore~7oinc~ resolu~ion ~.aas <lt.ily seconded ;~y ~1r. ."ahey. <br />llyes (5)~Nardin4, Fahey, Co~llova, E3lesener, Scalze. <br />~iays (.rl). <br />Itesoli.ation tleclared adopted. <br />This reso1ution appears in P,esolution i3ook ~~-lo. 13, Pa~e 100. <br />Mr. P~t Goff of 1?7R ras1; Co~.int~/ Road C ~n ilapleHrooci, appeared b~fore <br />the Council. Goff explained 'n~is neva proposa~l which inc~liad.es six <br />single-fa:.~~ily lots alonn P,rcade ~trert and 1~! six-plex buildinns on <br />~thc reif~aining property. Sof~F expl~ined the location of ~:he property <br />as v~e~l1. <br />Goff reporteci t;hat i~P ~the property ~o~ere devel oped as R-1 anc! al l the <br />property coul d`ua uti 1 i zed, Coc.ie +~aoul d al 1 oev 80 si ngl e-fami 1 y ho;nes. <br />Gof~f ooint?d oi.it ~t'n~~ he is renuesting °0 i,~nits. <br />(]of~F requ~astecf thai, i:h,a Counr,il rezone 9:h~ property R-'L in oreier that <br />he cnuld develop wii;h six-pl~x units. <br />Goff reported that i~ the Council has a pro~lF~m s•~it:~ his d~ns~ity, he <br />4aoulci. then reques~t the six single-family lots and a total o~P 7'L six-plex <br />units. Total units svould b~ 7:3, ~r~nich is be1ovr the rJensity nermit.ted <br />if I?-1 developed. <br />(,off felt that ~he nronerty could support a~transitiona1 developinent <br />frorn the f~ig'n densi~y develop~nent on County Roac D, to tne 1a;~ densitv <br />develoE~rnent in the area. <br />PQr, i31 ~sener poi ni;ed out that a si x-n~l ex i s not a prrmi t~ted i.ise i n <br />R-I zon~ n!~. A vari ance e~oul d have to ha gran~:ecl, and there i s no <br />hardsh~p. <br />C~off request;ed. that ~he property bc rezoned to ~~rhatever zoni ng svo~.~1 d <br />allo<<i six-plexes. Goff felT, that the six-plex 4vas an alt2rnative to <br />a large apartment builc'in~ ~.ind single ~family. Soff stated t'iat there <br />are a lot of people intier25ted in six-ple.xes. <br />n~ne ~-?- <br />