12/11/1972 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Hoffman felt denial of this development on the basis of high density wouid I put the Commission in an awkward position in consideration of all planned unit developments. He suggested too that the PUD ordinance should probably be revised . to include some criteria for lesser densities to establish a basis or guidelines on which the Commission could approve something less than 8 units per acre. Manager said that staff concerns on this project were not so much the densi ty as such. It was the configuration of the property and arrangement of buildings : on the property which would result in something less than desirable living con- I ditions. Comm 11/29/72 Vote was taken on the motion as stated. Motion carried, Mr. McDonald voting no. Pub Hrng .l!ayor Anderson assumed the Chair from Council President Mohr. , -... . .- -...~...- " '._.'~_".__ _.._,~_. _.. ~. .., ._. ..::"-,,,w..._._ .._: Council on November 27, 1972 referred this item to joint session of Planning Commission and Council (November 29,'1972 - see minutes above). Planning Commission on December 11, 1972 - after reconsideration of its recommendation for approval of preliminary plans and in light of concerns expressed at the hearing on October 10, 1972 and joint session with the Council, especially with regard to density and need for relocation of build- ings and open space - recommended that the Northland PUD be referred back to the Plan- ning Commission for hearing on a revised preliminary plan. Receipt of letter from Kr1.imdieck Brothers, developers, concerning the proposed develop- . ment was noted. Discussion resulted in understanding that the letter could be forwarded to the Planning Commission for consideration in hearing on a revised plan, should the Council refer the PUD back to the Commission. In that event, the letter would not be taken into consideration by the Council unless another appeal is filed. Councilman Williams questioned whether any testimony should be accepted in light of the Council's action to sustain the appeal at the committee meeting. Further discussion resulted in understanding that if the matter is not re-referred to the Commission, this particular preliminary plan approval would no longer exist. Another development design would have to be filed with the Planning Commission. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mrs . Campbell to re-refer the Northland PUD to the Planning Commisson for consideration of a revised preliminary plan. Motion carried unanimously. C. Rezoning, R-2 to RP PD, southwest corner Coburg Road and Cal Young Road (Citizen's Bank) Planning CommissIDon recommended denial on October 3, 1972. Rezoning Request, R-2 to RP PD, southwest corner Coburg and Ca1 Young, Citizen's I. Bank - Referred by Council to joint meeting with Planning Commission at request : of applicant for opportunity to discuss in work session. e Councilman Williams noted that he could not vote on the issue because of conflict of interest. He wanted however to state his opinion with regard to the requested RP zone. He questioned the concept of buffering heavily used streets with housing, saying a clean, professional type development would seem more satisfactory. Mr. Williams also wondered why zoning this corner Residential Professional would not conform to the residential character proposed in the 1990 Plan since the use of the term "residential" in defining the zone would seem to be indicative of its belonging in a generally residential area - if not, he continued, the term should , be changed. Another concern was the approval of a sizeable number of apartment uni ts in the general Willakenzie area. He compared the number of renter-occupied units completed and in various stages of development, with single-family units , , . f and expressed concern with wha~ is happening to the Wi11akenzie area ~n.terms 0 i apartments. Mr. Williams said;,he felt the requested RP PD zone was ent~re1y ! appropriate, that it would not:~reate the same traffic load as multiple-family , housing, and that it does confdrm to the 1990 Plan for solving the area's prob1ems-: Councilman Mohr added that it should be noted that the first definition for per- missi ve uses in RP zones is banks. ! :,P1.~iEg CommisE!ion ~rn1?~~ Bonn~tt ~ef! the meeting. - -~".-'--~_.- .... ~~- '- .....~ . :In answer to Mrs. Beal's question whether other banks had requested rezoning 'for the corner under discussion, Jim Saul, Planning staff, summarized previous - . applications for rezoning the property beginning in 1954 with a request for commercial zoning to allow a service station. Similar requests were denied juntil 1968 when the petitioner for zoning to allow a service station said I :.alternative use for a bank would be acceptable. Denial of that request was (appealed, the Court upholding the City's decision, saying basically that the I 1 Ci ty had the right to mi;ike its decision denying the zone change. However, the ...- - ---'.._~-'----~---''"'''''-:-..~~-'--~---........_-- _. ".-- ~'''-~'-'.:;::::r:-~--~.'...,....~...::-- -.--~--.-.-...~_.--:--- ~.~;-- '35'"' .- "To;;." 12/11/72 - 3