06-22-1988 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES Planning Commission June 9, 1988 Boosalis The other two lots on County Road C are zoned R -1. The Council feels Proposal that eventually the rear of these lots will develop abutting the proposed (Cont.) residential street and it is Council's feeling that the lots should be rezoned to R -1. Mr. Boosalis has control of the westerly lot. The Planner reported that at last night's Council meeting the Council set a public hearing for July 13 to consider the rezoning of the rear of the County Road C B -3 properties to R -1. Mr. Boosalis is petitioning for the rezoning of his property and the other rezonings would be Council initiated. The Planner reported that he has discussed this matter with the City Attorney who feels that only the rezoning of the property controlled by the developer should be considered at this time until there can be further study done of the rezoning of the other properties. Davison questioned rezoning of the one lot when the City would not know about the others. The City Planner pointed out that when the street is improved, the benefited properties would be assessed for the street improvement. The Council would only allow single - family development on this new street since it is being constructed to residential standards and the City does not want commercial property fronting on a residential street. The other option to the property owners would be to not develop the rear of their properties. The Planner stated that the City Attorney did not recommend the City initiate a rezoning at this time since there are too many issues with existing uses to be investigated. However, the Attorney was comfortable with the rezoning of the parcel controlled by Mr. Boosalis. Davison pointed out that the commercial properties are paying taxes and asked if they could demand access to the new street. The Planner reported that the City could deny access, but then the potential for single - family development on these lots may be lost. The Planner pointed out that the City can say that the rear of these B -3 parcels must be used in a fashion established by the Comprehensive Plan, which in this case would be single - family due to the uses of the adjoining properties and the fact that the street would be a residential street. However, at this point the City is not comfortable with initiating the rezoning. Herkenhoff asked if the Iona Lane residents have reviewed the plan. Boosalis reported that numerous meetings have been held with the residents of Iona Lane and they have no objection to the plan and are happy with the single - family home development proposed. However, Tim Townsley is not completely satisfied with the buffer proposed to his property and would prefer either a larger buffer or the property adjacent to his developed as single - family. Page 7