08/27/1973 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

community and vacancies in that area exist. He said rezoning this property does. not measure up to criteria to which the Council is obligated by law under the Fasano :_- 8" decision. - Mayor Anderson urgently recommended staff preparation of material for consideration at some future meeting which would place both the petitioner and the Council in the position of knowing the proper.:,procedure to follow in rezoning issues. Betty Niven, Planning Commission member, recognized that the Council is not going to hear exactly the same testimony heard by the Commission on any issue. However, she felt in this instance it was a matter of degree. Commission members felt that what was presented to the Council was beyond what would usually be expected. She said .the applicant's reluctance for rehearing before the Commission was significant because it meant inevitably it would be a question of wasting the Commission's time because the hearings would be held at the Council lev.el. Assistant Manager noted the issue automatically will be considered at a joint meeting of the Council and Commission, and that anyone wishing to know when that meeting will be scheduled should contact the Manager's or Planning Office. A short recess was taken. I F. Planning Commission Recommendations - July 10, 1973' ** See page 18. l. South of Barger Avenue between Echo Hollow and Belt Line - From C-2 SR and RA . to C-l SR (Steinmuller) Planning Commission recommended approval~ Minutes of Planning Commission meeting and staff notes were previously distributed to Council members, and Council viewed the property on tour. ~ Jim Saul, planner, displayed a map of the area to distinguish between two parcels I I involved, both part of a larger tract in one ownership. Pre-preliminary plan for RA PUD has been submitted for the balance of the property. Slides of the property were shown, and Mr. Saul noted that findings of fact and recommendations of the Commission were set forth in the Commission minutes. Also, staff notes give a resume of Commission action with negard to this property from 1966 to the present. Public hearing was opened. Jim Hosey, 2560~ Inavale Street, architect and agent for the property owner, noted that approval of the recommendation would effect "down-zoning" on the six-acre parcel now zoned C-2, and "up-zoning" for the three-acre parcel now zoned RA. He called attention to the rapid development of residentially-zoned properties in the area and slow development of commercial uses. He displayed a graph illustrating the changes since 1969 and expressed concern about decline of business even though there is indication of population growth. He felt a contributing factor was the -- lack of commercial parcels to accommodate larger commercial needs. Mr. Hosey showed a map on which available commercial areas were marked and noted that the majority of'!hose were too small to accommodate the needs of proposed commercial establish- ment s . He also drew attention to a survey of vacant C-2 properties and noted the number of residences be~ng used for student housing. He said the new building in progress within a two-mile radius of the intersection of Belt Line and Barger re- flect the need for'a'shopping center in that area, an~ the neighborhood center proposed would be more desirable from thl? standpoint of less traffic generation than depending upon regional centers farther from that area. . . ~ Herman Hendershott, attorney, described the parcels involved and the proposed de- velopment, and noted the Commission's recommendation for C-l zoning because of the integrated development proposed. He showed plot plan of the pr9posed development, described surrounding properties, and said the proposal would not have an adverse effect upon those surrounding properties. He added that there were no opponents to the rezoning when the matter was heard by the Planning Commission. Eric Haws, 564 Sierra Street, speaking for the Active Bethel Citizens, spoke in favor of the zone change. However, he did express concern with the recommendation to rezone the strip on the southern portion for commercial use. He said he could see no reason for nor was there information showing any public need for extending - the commercial zone to the south. There was also some concern with additional traffic on Echo Hollow. He wondered if all access to the commercial area would be only from Echo Hollow and none from Barger Drive. He said the Bethel School District and ABC group, while they do agree with the zone change on the parcel originaily designated C-2 and the western portion of the property, could see no reason to designate the southern 80-foot strip for commercial use. "Lb3 8/27/73 - 6