03/13/1990 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 13, 1990 PAGE 2 could be no guarantee that the court would uphold the city`s rejection of such a useo A deed restriction disallowing commercial use could be placed on the property; this is not necessarily good planning, but could be war- ranted in some cases. He warned the Commission that if the character of the neighborhood did change, the courts might rule that some retail use was necessary in order to serve an office/hotel area. Mr. Betts pointed out that the only uses mentioned for this quadrant have been office, multi-family, and cluster and a classification limiting to those uses could be conceived. Mr. Mize, representing Great Northern Properties, stated that their request is to rezone this property to the existing Mixed Use classification. Mr. Thomas pointed out that the Commission can initi- ate rezoning the property to a revised Mixed Use classification and that they are agreed there should be no retail use on ttiese three lots facing Columbia Road. Mr. Mize responded that they are working with office ten- ants,for this property; there is not sufficient traffic for a retail use;. and that this 1.7 acres parcel would be zoned to a different catagory than the abutting property. Mr. Bierman believed that secion 1149a02(a) of the Zoning Code would allow the city to prohibit retail uses on these lots, but Mr. Dubelk.o is not sure this would stand up in court if the rejection was not based on a sound criteria. He further believes that, if these parcels are to be joined to the adjacent ones, that the enti.re parcel should be zoned to the same classification to avoid split zoning. The owner could challenge the rezoning of the entire parcel on the basis that it would hinder economic return on his property. Mr. Mor.gan stated that in tliis case, since the property across the street is Mixed Use, a ,,deed restriction would be the most logical solution. Mr. Dubelko pointed - out that a high rise building is possible in the present Mixed Use District. Mr. Mize did not believed that putting a deed restriction on only 1.=7 acres made much sense and could not state definitely that they would agree to a deed restrictiono Mr. Thomas stated that the entire area could be restricted from a retail use.. Mr. Morgan would be concerned about rezoning the pro- perty without the restriction. Mr. Scholis, president of the Park West Home Owners Association, Mr. Lamneck, a resident of Columbia Road, and Mrs. Diver, a resident of Park West, all spoke against the proposal on the basis of the impact on the area surrounded by Lorain,.Butternut Ridge, and Clague Road. They requested that the Commission project the problems of sewers, drainage, traffic, polution, noise, crime, etc,that rezoning to commercial uses will have on the city; are questioning where this creeping rezoning will stop; believe that the impact of the proposed exit ramp sheuld not be considered until it is a reality; and would like all rezoning stopped now. Mr. Morgan pointed out that previously when rezoning was denied and developers took the issue to court, the city lost control over the use of this property. The Commission is trying to look at the total picture, the impact on the residents and the city. Mr. Thomas stated that they did not want office buildings and dilapidated houses across from "A" residential homes, or an exit ramp in their backyards, so they are looking for a more diminished impact on the residents. Mr. Gorris pointed out that the Commission has only approved three rezonings in the past 10 years, the rest have been disapproved and twice the courts have overturned these rejections, one of which was a 43 acre parcel behind Butternut Ridge Rd. He stated this area has changed and has to be addressed, it is not feasible to think it will remain residential. Councilman McKay stated that this rezoning will create many complaints, noise lights, etc, and requested that, if_the property must be rezoned, that it be delayed until the more '