05/24/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Councilman Bradley questioned the appropriateness of high-density development next to industrial. He said he recognized the housing shortage but didn't think it a panic or crisis situation calling for packing more people next to an M-2 zone. He wondered if medium-density would be better here, then looking to other loca- tions where high-density would be more suitable. Mr. Saul didn't see this rezon- ing recommendation as a panic response in light of the lengthy hearings before both the Commission and the Council with regard to the density level in this area when -the General Plan was amended. And consideration at that time, he said, was not so much the need for housing as it was the location of this par- ticular area. While it was close to a freeway and industrial zoning, it was also the best area in terms of proximity to park areas and downtown with bus service and immediate access to bike trails. This zone change, then, in a sense, was carrying out the basic decision to develop high~density housing in this area when the Plan amendment was adopted. Councilman Murray took exception to the statement that this could be a "crisis" or "crash" program after the time taken on the General Plan amendment with re- gard to this area. In addition, he said, a careful increase in density would lead to some property improvement and provide a firmer resistance to industrial encroachment in an area like this, especially important when it happens near apark. Vote was taken on the motion for adoption of findings and second reading as stated. All Council members present voted aye, except Councilman Bradley voting no, which would hold the bill over for second reading, lacking unanimous consent. Mr. Bradley, recognizing that his "no" vote on second reading would only cause a two-week delay, asked for the vote to be recast. There were no objections. ..e Vote was recast on the motion for adoption of findings and second reading as stated. Motion carried unanimously and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved second by Mr. Hamel that the bill be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All Council members present voting aye, except Councilman Bradley voting no, the bill was declared passed and nubmered 17636. 1-8-4 .-e 4. Area between Madison and Jefferson south of Southern Pacific tracks _ From t:-2 to SD-Special District (Jefferson Elevator)(Z 76-7) Recommended by the Planning Commission on April 13, 1976. Jim Saul, planner, noted that this was the second application (the first - 5th between Pearl and High) for the Special District zoning adopted in 1973 with intent that it be used sparj 'gly and only when certain criteria was met. Findings were made, he said, with regard to the unique quality of the area and the old grain elevator that would merit special recognition (itemized in staff notes); no other standard zone designation was found to be appropriate; and certain elements, all contained in the Planning Commission report, covered a description of the district, uses permitted, and development standards. Mr. Saul continued that the owners intend to place primary emphasis on manufacture and sale of craft articles as well as education relating thereto. Also proposed are restaurnats and other functions serving the larger community. Because of a concern with available space for parking, the Commission recommended an automatic review process which would permit 32 on-site parking spaces with the initial development (first floor). Later development would require review through the conditional use process with particular emphasis on the parking experience and the type of parking to be pro- vided for additional development. He said it was hope later to convert the silo into office or residential use, and that would be permitted under this district with review through subsequent hearings. .:2..70 5/24/76 - 9