12-30-1987 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES Planning Commission Dec. 10, 1987 Van Guilder The Planner pointed out that the only way to process the proposal was Request with a rezoning as the Comprehensive Plan does not allow a mixed (Cont.) residential and commercial use. Durkin reported that when they first came in to the City in October, they received the indication that they had a 50 -50 chance of getting their proposal approved. Durkin was upset that he spent his time on the proposal as well as the time of his buyers and sellers, when it appears there was no chance for approval. The Planner reported that he informed the applicant of what was needed to process his proposal. However, in reviewing the proposal determined that it was not in the best interests of the City and, therefore, recommended denial. VanGuilder was concerned that the Planner never indicated that there was no chance for approval. The Planner replied that the purpose of staff hours is to gather information from the applicant and tell them the best way to process their proposal. The purpose of the staff report is to go through the proposal in more depth. The Planner also indicated that a portion of the application fees is refundable and the applicant can discuss this with the City Clerk. Davison pointed out that the proposal would require a policy change on the part of the City as the proposal is for spot - zoning. Davison pointed out that the Commission is only a recommending body, and it is the Council that sets policy. Davison noted that over the years the City has become more consistent in applying its Comprehensive Plan. Durkin pointed out that it was not that they were trying to propose something that was impossible, and from preliminary meetings with the City Clerk were of the impression that the proposal was feasible. Schweizer stated that she would like to see some guidelines established to inform applicants of what they are facing. The Planner noted that he has done this to the best of his ability during staff hours, however, he cannot presume to tell applicants what the Planning Commission or Council will do. The Planner reported that he has tried to give applicants some idea of whether the City will look kindly on an application. It was again noted that a portion of the application fee is refundable. Mr. DeLonais recommended denial of the Greg VanGuilder application for rezoning of 206 Little Canada Road from B -3 to RB as well as the variance for commercial lot size based on the recommendation of the City Planner as well as the fact that the proposal would constitute spot zoning and there is no hardship present to warrant granting a variance. Motion seconded by Mr. Perlinger. Motion carried 5 - 0. Page 4