02/25/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Councilman Williams was satisfied with "significant opposition," saying he felt six of those contacted in opposition seemed a significant factor. Mr. Murray moved to change the motion to "some opposition" rather than "significant opposition." There was no second. Councilwoman Campbell wondered whether the applicants had made, an effort to find a new location within the urban renewal area after the building previously occupied was demolished. Mr. LaBranch 'explained the structure at 1143 Oak Street was their first choice but after learning of the Christian Church's oppo~i~ion they looked at other locations. Alternatives in the downtown area, he said, ,were available but did not meet their needs for the type of operation they wanted. He felt the proposed location, even though across the street from a church, would still be appropriate because it was .in the downtown area. Steve Hessel, another partner, noted their real "first choice" was the building on West Park Street but their offer to buy the building was denied by the Urban Renewal Agency. Vote was taken on the motion as stated. Motion carried unanimously. B. Rezoning area south of 1-105, north of Kins Row, east of Centennial Boulevard from RA Suburban Residential to R-2 PD Limited Multiple-Family subject to planned unit development procedures (Earl Green)(Z 73-37) Manager revIewed history of the rezoning request leading to joint Council and Planning Commission session on January 21, 1974 at which the Planning Commission reaffirmed its previous,recommendation to deny the request. All public hearings on the issue are a matter of record and minutes and staff notes of Planning Commission action were previously distributed to Council members. Manager added that there had been no neighborhood opposition to the requested rezoning, only staff recommendation for denial. Councilman McDonald arrived at the meeting. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mrs. Campbell to uphold the Planning Commission recommendation for denial and adopt by reference thereto findings supporting the denial as set forth in Planning Commission minutes of October 2, 1973 and January 21, 1974. Councilman Murray noted that the applicant had given written promise that the number of units constructed on the property would not be more than 145. Also, that number 'of units would not be excessively greater than that allowed under the current zoning. He added that the services available to the area were sufficient to serve that level of development and the zone change would be insignificant and one which should be supported. Councilman Wood said the proposed use seemed proper for the area and the increased density was not significant. ,He noted its location on a good transportation route which would accommodate mass transit. He said he didn't understand opposition to the rezoning unless it was felt a study of the area was necessary, and he didn't think that was the consensus of either the Councilor the .Planning Commission. Councilman McDonald could see no reason not to rezone the property. Manager explained that an ordinance effecting the rezoning had not been prepared (usual in cases of recommendation for denial). He suggested that if the motion were defeated staff be instructed to prepare findings supporting the rezoning and an ordinance for presentation at the March 11 Council meeting. Also, that rather than developing the property under contract the proposed zone carry the numerical suffix "3.9" which would designate density for the property at 145 units. Vote was taken on the motion to deny the rezoning. Motion defeated, Councilmen Williams and Campbell voting aye; Councilmen McDonald, Murray, and Wood voting no; Councilman Hershner abstaining. . Councilman Murray moved seconded by Mr.- McDonald that staff prep~re an ordinance which would rezone the property south of 1':105, north of Kins Row; east of 'Centennial Boulevard to R-2-3.9-PD and findings supporting the rezoning for presentation to the Council at its March 11 meeting. Motion carried, Council-= men McDonald, Murray, and Wood voting aye; Councilmen Williams and Campbell voting no; Councilman Hershner abstaining. . - C. Appeal, Zoning Board of Appeals denial of nonconforming fence at 2233 West 28th Avenue (Peter Hafner - Zoning Board action January 31, 1974) Permission was requested by Peter A. Hafner to retain a six-foot fence within the front yard setback at 2233 West 28th Avenue, and partially within the street right-of-way. Copies of letter of appeal addressed to the Coupcil from Peter A. '!;)1 2/25/74 - 2 133. :1360 1361 -- 1384 . e> 1431