11/28/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

--~ Mr. Lieuallen felt he was going to vote against the rezoning. He did not see any need for the proposal but did find a continuing need e for housing. He also noted the abundance of office space in the downtown area and was not persuaded there was a general guideline that property should be developed in a more economically efficient manner. He said that was not a requirement of the Code. The proximity of incompatible uses argument was not persuasive in line of the recent Mixed Use rezoning. Also, with the consideration that the City has housing rehabilitation money available for this area, he was going to vote to keep the housing available for that rehabili- tation. Mr. Bradley felt the public need had not been demonstrated and would like to promote the policy of the maintenance of housing stock. Mr. Delay noted he was also going to vote against it on the second reading. He felt by going to C-2 zoning at this time, it would establish a precedent. He said actual uses in the area are primarily R-3, and zoning C-2 would increase the pressure on more commercial and parking areas. He also noted the Whiteaker Refinement Plan was in progress and did not see any reason to support this rezoning at this time. Mr. Hamel expressed difficulty with determining what was the public need. He thought the area.should be looked at as there were four parcels in the immediate area zoned C-2. He said if those were going to be changed to R-3, he could understand a zone change. However, he said this was a request for change from R-3 to C-2 on a very small parcel in which it might be possible to develop only one single residential unit. He e felt it was unwise to have an island of R-3 on this one side of the street. He expressed having mixed emotions about whether there is a need, but felt he would vote in favor of the rezoning. Mr. Obie's impression regarding office space being available in the City was that it was not that easy to find, and certainly not easy to find at a price that was in competition and in a good location. He felt the need for office space that takes people out of the downtown area and away from congestion on a main artery was desirable. He felt having office spaces in the surrounding neighborhoods was desirable. Mr. Wi 11 i ams concurred with the idea of having office space on the outskirts of the downtown area where parking was available. Vote was taken on the motion which carried unanimously, and the bill was read the second time by Council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. Voting aye were Obie, Williams, Smith, and Hamel; voting no were Delay, Haws, Bradley, and Lieual1en; Mayor Keller voted aye to break the tie. The bill was declared passed and numbered 18085. I-B-2 4. Property located west of Highway 99N and south of Elmira Road (Miller) (Z 77-37) from RA to C-2 SR Recommended unanimously by Planning Commission October 4, 1977. e 11/28/77 - 9 87't