My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1984/02/13
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1984
>
Agenda Packets - 1984/02/13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2025 2:07:11 PM
Creation date
3/17/2025 2:07:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
2/13/1984
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
104
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mayor and City Council <br />February 16, 1984 <br />Page Two of Three <br />Staff then formulated a listing of all parcels the Planning Commission <br />recommended for rezonings. This list is attached for your review. <br />You should have already received a map which shows which parcels the <br />Planning Commission is recommending for rezoning and to what zone they <br />are being recommended. On this listing, please note column one which <br />identifies the type of notice staff is recommending for that partic- <br />ular rezoning. There are three different types (Letters A, B and C) <br />of notices which would be sent to the affected property owners. The <br />different types are as follows: <br />Notice A - Parcels which are identified as receiving a notice <br />type A are those which staff, along with the City Attorney, <br />considered being non -controversial. These parcels include <br />those that are being rezoned to bring the zoning into confor- <br />mance with the use which presently exists on the property or to <br />bring the zoning into conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. <br />Many parcels included in this category are those that were <br />rezoned by motion of the City Council but no ordinance was ever <br />drafted and adopted which officially rezoned it. In other <br />words, the rezoning was not completed at the time of develop- <br />ment approval. On parcels in this category that are being <br />recommended for rezoning where the new zone would make it <br />inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the Planning Commis- O <br />sion is recommending a revision be made to the Comprehensive <br />Plan. No notice would be sent to the property owner, only <br />publication of the hearing date and time in the official news- <br />paper. <br />Notice B - Parcels which were identified as receiving notice <br />type B are those which staff, along with Attorney Meyers, <br />considered being controversial. The rezoning may create an <br />inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan (in this case the <br />Comprehensive Plan should be amended) or the rezoning may make <br />the existing use non -conforming. The type of public hearing <br />notice that would be sent would be a notice to the affected <br />property owner in addition to all property owners within 350 <br />feet. A majority of the controversial rezonings would make the <br />existing use non -conforming. Should the building he destroyed, <br />the same use would not be allowed to be reinstated. <br />Notice C - This notice type would consist of those parcels <br />which will be rezoned to its existing use but, because the <br />rezoning would be considered a "down zoning" staff is recom- <br />mending that a letter be sent to these affected property owners <br />on which the owners wuuid be asked if they object or do not <br />object to the proposed rezoning. If they object, the rezoning <br />automatically falls under and is handled as a controversial <br />rezoning. If they do not object, it would be handled as a <br />non -controversial rezoning. in some cases, the Comprehensive <br />Plan may be amended as a result of rezonings in this notice <br />type category. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.