Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />October 12, 1989 <br />his investment. Krienke felt the problem was with the <br />Steneroden property and getting that strip developed. <br />Krienke felt that rather than develop the Steneroden <br />property as residential, there should be a denser <br />zoning of the Steneroden property, which would still <br />provide a buffer zone for the Iona Lane property. <br />Krienke felt there should be a buffer zone between the <br />B -3 property and the R -1, and that the buffer should <br />occur on the Steneroden property. Krienke reported <br />that he was in favor of the back 135 feet of the County <br />Road C properties remaining B -3. <br />Suchy again stated that he would rather his entire <br />parcel be rezoned to R -1 to make a better residential <br />neighborhood. <br />Pierce stated that he would like to see the property <br />remain B -3. <br />Suchy indicated that Mr. Kukk at 83 W. County Road C <br />would rather his property remain B -3. <br />Pierce stated that the rezoning would downgrade the <br />value of the property, plus the assessment for the <br />street on the back 135 feet would force the property <br />owner to sell the back lot for little or no profit. <br />Krienke did not feel that County Road C could be <br />considered as a nice, residential area. <br />Boosalis reported that when the second phase of the <br />retail center was proposed, the Council requested a <br />master plan for the development of the back property, <br />including the Steneroden property. Boosalis reported <br />that he proposed medium - density housing, however, the <br />Iona Lane neighborhood came in force opposing that <br />proposal. Iona Lane indicated that they wanted to see <br />the area developed as single - family residential, and <br />that is proposal that Boosalis came back with. <br />Boosalis questioned Pierce's position at this time <br />supporting commercial zoning across the street from <br />R -1. <br />Boosalis pointed out that it took 18 months to develop <br />the plan, and now there are a few property owners again <br />opposing it. Boosalis reported that a great deal of <br />time was taken trying to develop a plan that would work <br />for everyone and one that was the best solution. <br />Boosalis felt that the back 135 feet of the County Road <br />Page 13 <br />