Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutgr00090_000042_pg341December 13, 1976 Page 7 Councilmember Baumgartner reviewed several sections of the Comprehen- sive Plan which indicated that residential neighborhoods must be protected from commercial and multiple dwellings. Mr. Gustafson stated that there was commercial and multiple property all around those single family homes. Mr. Rothgeber stated that they had gone before the Planning Commission with double bungalows on those lots, but the Commission wanted it to be under a P.U.D. so the rest of the property was included. Mr. Gustafson stated that because this proposal has taken so long and has still not been approved he will have to pay another $10,000 for next year's taxes. Mayor Pickar explained that the request was first denied because of the high density, then the fourplexes were denied because of density and now this proposal has an even higher density. Mr. Rothgeber stated that houses cannot be built in that area because mortgage companies will only give a commitment of 40% to 45 %. Usually they will give an 85% commitment. Helen Houley stated that she would like to see the minutes from the hearing held in May on the double bungalows. Mayor Pickar stated that the minutes were available at the City Hall. Councilmember Shelquist stated that he was serving on the Planning Commission when the comprehensive plan was being worked on and had moved up to the Council when it was adopted. He stated that he felt the City goofed on the plans for that property because they didn't look enough in detail at the recommendations made by Midwest Planning. Councilmember Shelquist stated that they did not consider the eight single family units. That area should not have been designated for multiple family. If it was all empty land it would be logical to have it R -3. The Council is not in a position that, because of the R -1 property, they would be creating a spot zone. Councilmember Shelquist stated that he did not see anything in the development plans being proposed that would entice someone to buy the R -1 located owner- occupied townhouses. If these buildings are built they would probably become renter - occupied because they will not be sellable. There are no swimming pools or tennis courts being proposed. These things probably cannot be developed either because of the density. The petition was entirely signed by people in that area with multiple or commercial property that had nothing to lose by the rezoning. None of the people affected by a rezoning signed. Councilmember Shelquist reviewed the approximate land valuations of different zoning districts and stated that the Council would be increasing the value of that land by 50% to 100% additional by rezoning to R -3. He stated that this could be done it if was raw land but the Council must consider the existing single family dwellings. Councilmember Shelquist stated that he felt the existing home owners would accept