04-27-88 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES City Council Apr•il 27, 1988 Foyt And The for~egoing r•esolution was duly seconded by Mr•. LaValle. Rindelaub Ayes (5) Blesener•, LaValle, Collova, Scalze, Fahey. Lot Split Nays (0). & Var•iance Resolution declared adopted. (Cont.) This r~esolution appear~s in Resolution Book Dlo. 19, Page 161. Boosal i s The P4ayor• opened the publ i c hear~i ng on the r•equest of Sher~man Boosal i s CUP for• a conditional use per•mit to amend the Boosalis PUD Agr~eement by Amendment an additional development, var•iance for~ sideyard setback, subdivision and r•ezoning of the west 213.52 feet of Par~cel 06-29-22-33-0021 fr•om Agenda R-1 to B-3. The pr~oper•ty is located at 2650 Rice Str~eet. Item No. 5 Fahey summar•ized the Planner~'s r•epor~t dated Apr•il 12, 1988 as well as the Planning Commission's r•ecommendation for~ denial. P4r. Nick Boosalis appeared before the Council and presented a site plan for• the additional str•ip center• that Boosalis would like to develop on the pr~oper~ty in question. Boosalis r~epor~ted that he had a neighbor•hood meeting at which concer•ns wer•e discussed and as a r~esul t the si te pl an has been amended to pr•ovi de for• a~40 foot setback fr~om the nor•ther•n pr~oper~ty 1 i ne. Ther•e i s al so a fence proposed for• scr~eening fr~om the nor~th as well as heavy plantings in this ar•ea. Boosalis r~eported that he has no pr•oposal for~ development of the easter~n pr~oper~ty at this time. The only pr~oper•ty that is being r•equested to be r~ezoned i s the pr~oper~ty al ong Ri ce Str~eet. The pr•oper~ty to the east would remain R-1. Fahey stated that he agr~ees with the concer~ns expr•essed at the Planning Commission meeting. Fahey noted that this is a cr•itical ar~ea given its impact on a small r•esidential neighbor~hood. Fahey did not feel the City should be r•ezoning the pr~operty on Rice Str~eet until such time as ther•e is a pr•oposal for the development of the pr~oper•ty to the east. Otherwise; Fahey for•esaw a r•ezoning request for• the pr~oper•ty to the east sometime in the future. Fahey stated that he would like to see a plan for• development of the pr~operty to the east so that he is comfor~table with the impact this ar•ea will have on Iona Lane. Fahey agr•eed that it was not r~ealistic to believe the pr•oper•ty along Rice Str•eet would develop as R-1. However•, stated that he would not vote on r~ezoning the Rice Str•eet pr•oper•ty until he saw a plan for• the development of the easter•n pr•oper•ty. fahey commented that the entir•e package may need assistance fr~om Tax Incr~ement Financing to make it feasible. Scalze agr~eed. However•, Scalze stated that she was not in favor• of the impact the pr•oposed strip center• would have on the Tim Townsley pr~oper•ty and felt that cr~eative designing could be used to r~educe that impact. Scalze pointed out that when Townsley pur•chased his pr•oper~ty it was with the under•standing that R-1 pr~oper~ty abutted his pr~oper•ty. Scalze did not feel it fair• to change zoning at this time. Paae -6-