04-26-89 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTFS City Council April 26, 1989 RESOLUTION N0. 89-4-161 - APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR BINGO LICE~ISE RE~1FwAL AS SUBMITTED I~Y THE NORTN SUL~URf~FlN YOUTH ASSOCIATION The for•e~oinq r•esolution was duly seconded by Mr~. Collova. Ayes (5) Scalze, Collova, Fahe,y, Blesener, LaValle. Nays (0). Resolution declar•ed adopted. Matson reported that the ~ittle Canada Recreation Association has three member•s on the Nor•th Subur~ban Youth Association E~oar~d, and these members have been appr•eciated. for their• input. Frank Blesener reported that action was previously tabled b,y the Council on the Frattalone Frank Frattalone request for rezoninq to aive the City Planner an opportunity Rezoninq to meet with Mr•. Fr•attalone on the issue. Aqenda The City Planner reported that Mr. Frattalone is requestinq that his property Item P•lo. 9 be r•ezoned fr~om I-P to I-1 with the exception of the 233 feet of pr•oper~ty on South Owasso E31vd. The Planner reported that the Council was concerned about the possibility of a third lot bein~ split from the property that would not meet I-P standards. This is the area where Mr. Frattalone's outdoor storage is now located. The Planner reported that he has reviewed four different scenarios of the situation. The first encompasses retaininp I-P zonina alonq South Owasso to a depth of 253 feet. This would leave 2.3 acr•es of pr~oper•ty south of the site of ~9r~. Fr•attalone's existincr buildinq that could be split in the future. The second scenar•io moved the depth of I-P zonin~ on South Owasso to 353 feet, which would leave 1.7 acres of property that could be split into a thir•d lot. The thir•d scenario sugqests I-P zoning for• the entire parcel with the exception of the lot suqqested by the Planner for the existinq building. Thefour•th scenar~io sugqests leavinq the entir•e par~cel I-P, which is obiectionable to Mr•. ~r~attalone. The Planner• stated that Fr~attalone also objected to the third scenario since his storaqe yard would be located on I-P propert,y and would be considered non-conforminq. The Planner stated that the location of the south line of the I-1 zoninq really does not make a differ•ence since in either• case, a.s outlined in scenario 1 or 2, there is the possibility of splitting a third lot. The Planner pointed out that the proposal for a landsplit would have to be reviewed and acted upon by the City Council. Fr•ank Fr~attalone stated that he would be most comfor•table with establishinq the depth of the I-P zoninq at 253 feet. Scalze suqgested the 353 feet, since the potential third lot would already be zoned I-P and this miqht avoid some pr~oblems in the future. Page -15-