Laserfiche WebLink
Page 2 <br />typically would not operate at the late hours and involve the noise and <br />disruption typically produced by a C-1 use, including a bar. <br />5. The reduced setbacks allowed in the C-1 District, when compared to the RS <br />District, are not compatible with surrounding land uses and anticipated <br />development patterns. Specifically, the C-1 setbacks of 10 feet on the front, <br />and zero feet on the side yards, reflect an intense urban development pattern, <br />as opposed to the 30 -foot front and side yard setbacks for RS zoning, which is <br />reflective of a less dense, suburban style development. <br />6. Approval of C-1 Zoning on this property will likely lead to requests from <br />other property owners to the north of this site for the same zoning designation, <br />thus exacerbating conflicts between residential properties lying to the east and <br />the properties immediately adjacent to TH 61. <br />7. It is reasonable to expect the property to develop under the existing zoning in <br />a number of uses which are complimentary to the site and adjacent <br />neighborhoods. Under the prevailing zoning, these uses may include daycare <br />facilities, public services, offices, clinics, professional services, and retail <br />uses. <br />8. The existing zoning is compatible with the neighborhood, and is adjacent to <br />other property that is also zoned Residential Service. <br />9. The Residential Service District is the appropriate zoning classification for <br />this property. <br />ADOPTED by the City Council this 19th day of December, 2 <br />r <br />M yor <br />ATTEST: <br />Mary reager, City Clerk <br />