My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL MINUTES 04031984
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Minutes
>
1984
>
PL MINUTES 04031984
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 6:05:06 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 6:05:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
21
SP Folder Name
PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1984
SP Name
PL MINUTES 04031984
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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).
View images
View plain text
-7- <br /> 1 Mr. Drusch said he could .commend the restaurant owner for his efforts <br /> 2 to expand his business and. for removing some of the bushes on his <br /> 3property which had interfered with visibility from the alley . However, <br /> 4 he said he anticipates , with the return of the warm weather, it would <br /> 5 quickly become evident that the handling of the cafe' s garbage was <br /> 6 still inadequate , especially since, "every time the cans are serviced <br /> 7 they seem to end up closer to the adjoining neighbors" . <br /> 8 <br /> 9 .Mr. Drusch said he had noted that neither the plantings or fence, <br /> 10 recommended at the last hearing, to screen the cafe activities from <br /> 11 the residential neighborhood, had been depicted in the new drawings <br /> 12 and the resident indicated he would strongly oppose -the rezoning of <br /> 13 any more property near Pahl for commercial use because he perceives <br /> 14 the residents would lose the only cushion they had between their homes <br /> 15 and what is an ever-expanding commercial development -in that area. <br /> 16 He asked that the City reject the rezoning request. <br /> 17 <br /> 18 Mrs . Blackfeldner reported the trucks, which service the cafe, often <br /> 19 block the alley and said she is unable to remain outdoors when fish. <br /> 20 is being prepared in the restaurant. Neither she nor Mr. Drusch had <br /> 21 attended the February 19th meeting at the cafe and neither had -an <br /> 22 explanation for the absence of other neighbors from the meeting that <br /> 23 evening, although, Mr. Drusch said conversations he had with two of <br /> 24 them, had led him to believe that, in spite of the notice sent by the <br /> 25 Manager, they were confused as to just exactly when the request would <br /> 26 be acted upon. <br /> • 27 <br /> 28 The Manager had, 'in his March 30th memorandum to the Commission, <br /> 29 indicated that because the request to rezone the residential portion <br /> 30 to commercial to permit the expansion would not be in keeping with <br /> 31 the Comprehensive Plan, which recognized the conflict of land use in <br /> 32 that area and recommended mid-density residential , the staff had <br /> 33 recommended the rezoning be denied which would, in effect, prevent <br /> 34 expansion. <br /> 35 <br /> 36 There was no proponent present, although. the Manager reported telling <br /> 37 Mr. Kwong about the meeting. <br /> 38 <br /> 39 The consensus of the Commissioners was .that the opposition they had <br /> 40 demonstrated July 19th to the first proposal would still be valid <br /> 41 since none of the concerns raised during that meeting appeared to have <br /> 42 been addressed in a satisfactory manner with the new proposal.. <br /> 43 <br /> 44 Motion by Commissioner Bjorklund and seconded by Commissioner Hansen <br /> 45 to recommend Council denial of the request from Iain Lun Kwong for a <br /> 46 conditional use permit, the necessary .parking space variance, and the <br /> 47 rezoning of Lot 2 , Block 6, Murray Heights Addition (.2700 Coolidge <br /> 48 Street N.E. ) which would permit the expansion of the Good Luck Cafe <br /> 49 from a 765 square foot structure to a 2 ,440 square foot sit-down rest- <br /> 50 aurant, as proposed, finding that the conditions which typically must <br /> 51 be satisfied for a conditional use permit, a variance to the Zoning <br /> 52 Ordinance, or for rezoning the property, had not been met in the <br /> . 53 Proposal, and for the following additional reasons : <br /> 54 <br /> 55 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.