Laserfiche WebLink
<br />PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 13, .1990 PAGE 5 <br />If any of the property in the area would be suggest for rezoning to <br />Multi-Family a referendum would be required; however, the members <br />agreed that the property before them would logically be r4ixed Use. <br />Mr. Morgan 5uggested that the developer should present a detailed pro- <br />posal for this property similar to what was proposed for their property <br />that was rezoned on Brookpark Road. After some discussion it was <br />decided that perhaps the city planner, Mr. Hill, could look into the <br />rezoning of the entire area, even though he had been hired for another <br />specific purpose. Ms. Watts reminded the Commission that this specific <br />request was originally presented three years ago at which time the <br />- Commission had agreed to look at rezoning the entire area, and this <br />was never done. She further pointed out that if Multi-Family is <br />requested for any portion of this property, the entire proposal would <br />be held up until November. Mr. Thomas would like the issue. studied <br />in the next two weeks. J. Thomas moved to request Mr. Gorris to. head <br />a committee to ask Pir. Hill, the planner, to discuss the future of this <br />triangular area prior to the Next Planning Commission meeting and to <br />submit suggestions as to whether an additional study would,have ,to be <br />made before a proper decision has to be made, or if we can make a de- <br />cision based on the information that we will get within the next two <br />weeks. I would also like the developer to provide more detail for the <br />residents who live on Columbia as far as the developer's plans for <br />that area, seconded by M. Betts, and unanimously approved. Mr. Thomas <br />clarified for the developers that he would like them to supply more <br />details for their proposed development as they had done in the past, in order for the residents to see what is proposed for across the street. <br />He..assured them that these plans would not be set in concrete. PZs. Watts <br />pointed out that in requesting a change in land use they were not re- <br />quired to have detailed development plans, even though they have done <br />this in the past; and especially:since they are only talking about 1.7 <br />acres of a 50 acre development. She is not sure they can present any <br />detailed information other than the use would be for offices and hotels. <br />Mr. Thomas further clarified that after Mr. Hill reviewed this, he could <br />advise if the Commission could act on this intelligently at this time. <br />Mr. Gorris will set up a meeting with Mro Hill. J. Thomas moved to <br />_table this proposal until the next meeting, seconded by M. Betts, and <br />unanimously approved. <br />V.. COMMUNICATIONS: <br />No items. <br />VI. COMMITTEE REPORTS: <br />Mr. Betts would like his committee to meet before the next Planning Commission <br />meeting. He would also like to look into open space zoning or recreational. <br />purpose zoning.. Mr. Dubelko advised that the Law Director had attended a <br />seminar on new zoning concepts. <br />- VII. NEW BUSINESS: <br />No items.