Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Ms. Miller stated this is a difficult issue since the animal hospital <br />does provide a needed service. The University holds much of the land <br />in that area and much of the residential use of the land is for ~ <br />student rentals. She stated there is a definite need for refinement ~ <br />planning in the East University neighborhood. She realizes that <br />vacant property is not necessarily available property. There is a <br />need to work with the businesses, the University and the neighborhood <br />to determine where residential and commercial areas should be. She <br />hoped the animal hospital can remain until a refinement pl an can be <br />done. <br /> <br />Mr. Lieuallen moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to deny the appeal and <br />adopt the Planning Commission's findings. <br /> <br />Mr. Delay agreed with Ms. Miller. In a zoning request there must be a <br />demonstrated public need. The private need factor could be bolstered <br />with the University's needs and the swap which would constitute a <br />public need. All of this does not necessarily make a strong need. He <br />feels this should remain status quo until a refinement plan is finished. <br /> <br />Mr. Obie agreed the refinement plan is needed but thinks a decision <br />should be made now about this particular request. He thinks the <br />Planning Commission decision may not best serve the city in this <br />instance. When the Planning Commission varies from the General Plan, <br />they should make their case. It should not be up to the applicant. <br />He thinks generally that the hospital would be better on the south <br />side rather than the north side and will oppose the motion. He also <br />feels that medical and dental services should be available in that <br />area. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Mr. Delay stated he agreed with the need factor but this is a quasi- <br />judicial procedure rather than a legislative format. Zoning would be <br />for the property rather than for the business that would be located on <br />it. <br /> <br />Roll call vote; motion carried 5:1, with Mr. Obie voting no and <br />Ms. Smith abstaining. <br /> <br />B. Council-Initiated Improvement Project Resolution (memo/map distributed) <br />Mr. Henry stated thlS concerns the proposed pavlng of Martin street <br />between Center Way and West Amazon Drive. This is a council-initiated <br />improvement and was before the council in 1973. There are very strong <br />reasons for proceeding with this improvement. He introduced Dave <br />Reinhard, Public Works, to give background information. <br /> <br />Mr. Reinhard indicated that the staff memo attached to the agenda <br />summarizes the reasons for the proposal. At the time the council <br />first considered this project they decided not to proceed primarily <br />because of the large assessment that would be levied each property <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />6/9/80--4 <br />