10/08/1979 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ done from the alley only, not from Alder, and that that provision could . be applied to the property no matter how many times the property would be sold. He suggested specifying site review procedures. Mr. Haws said e he did not attend the original meeting or the joint meeting and did not review the record, so will abstain from voting. Mr. Haws left the meeting. Ms. Schue said it was her understanding that the zoning would cover the entire lot. What Mr. Lieuallen is suggesting does not seem possible, she said. Mr. Saul responded that the rezoning would cover the entire lot. In an earlier discussion, the question had been raised about the possi- bility of additional commercial development should rezoning occur. However, site review does involve a question of access. Council can designate that access shall be limited to the alley. Mr. Delay had earlier been concerned about division of property. Mr. Saul said a division of property would create a number of problems. It woul d create two substandard lots and there are other problems as well. Mr. Delay said the issue, as he sees it, remains whether it is desirable to commit that block to commercial activity. It is of record that the owners to the south would be inclined to want this type of activity themselves. The question becomes whether Council wants to set in motion the conversion of this block to that much commercial activity and, if so, whether having all alley access is wise. Mr. Lieuallen thought it would be safe to rezone this area provided that access be only from the alley. He said that there would probably be limited requests for commercial development because few businesses could function effectively with that limited access. Mr. Delay and Mr. Obie both felt, however, that a mix needs to be retained. e Mr. Lieuallen wondered about future liability should Council rezone this particular piece of property, but deny another's request. Mr. Saul said the court would look at the code or the statutes. Mr. Lieuallen feels Council would be providing a community benefit by adding the necessary amenities to the area. He does not see the inevitability of a domino effect. Mr. Hamel did not feel it would hurt Alder any more by allowing an extra 60 feet of commercial activity, and Mr. Delay felt that it would be unwise to bind future Councils to keeping access strictly through the a 11 ey . Ms. Schue said that people from many areas of town, not just that immediate area, stop there to shop. She fears a larger regional develop- ment would occur if more commercial activity is allowed. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, that findings supporting the rezoning as set forth in Planning Commission findings and conclusions of April 3, 1979, and reaffirmed August 27, 1979, be adopted by reference thereto, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion failed, Mr. Hamel and Mr. Lieuallen voting aye, and Ms. Smith, Mr. Delay, Ms. Miller, Mr. Obie, and Ms. Schue voting no. e 10/8/79--10 555