07/08/1986 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

? PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 8, 1986 PAGE 4 Mr. Tim Quinn, the owner, corrected the name of the subdivision since this property is not in the companyis name and is owned privately by him. The lots are vacant and conform to the "B" residential requirements. They were originally.part of the Bretton Woods subdivision. Commission has no problem with the subdivision, R. Bierman moved to approve the proposal to realign parcels-234-22-15 and 234-22-16 and create two sublots fronting on Hastings Drive, seconded by E. Traczyk, and unanimously approved.=--.• 3) Great Northern Parcel B Assembly Plat Proposal is to assemble the following parcels: 236-16-4, 236-18-15, 236-18-115, 236-18-7 and 136-18-1._ Parcels are located_south of Country. Club. Mr. Carl.isle of Biskind Development explained that this property is the site of the proposed Business Park previously approved by Planning Commis- sion. Two of the lots involved are Resfdential, two are.partially Mixed Use and xesidential and_one is totally Mixed Use...As.sistanf Law Ditector - Dubelko - advised' that it1was not advisable - to combine parcels=-and create-- one parcel;in wfiich there-are two zoning classifications.--Mr. Carlisle-•= again stated that two of the parcels already have two zoning classifica- tions. He also pointed out that the Business Park master plan did not include the residentially zoned land.and there are no. definite plans for this property as yet. Councilman McKay viewed the plans and stated that the Mixed Use district allows retail stores and there is. residential property across the street. He believes that it would be easier to get the property rezoned if there were mixed zoning on one lot. Mr. Carlisle stated that he had been advised to r.equest the assembly of the property prior to requesting: rezoning. and stated .that.-he -would =withdraw -the request- if the Commission-has problems with it. The prop.osal-was explained to Mr. - Anderson--and Mr: Carlisle--stated that- property -would not be- used for re- --- tail stores. Mr. Dubelko clarified his position by advising that if the City was a party to an assembly and created a zoning line crossing a single 1ot that, perhaps, if the city then subsequently denied a rezoning of a portion of_that newly created lot, it might put the city in an awk- ward_position. Mr. Carlisle withdrew the request. V. COMMUNICATIONS: No items. VI. NEW BUSINESS: - Mr. Bierman questioned if there was a time limit for submission to the Building Department for proposals to be presented to Planning Commission, since twice he heard the comment that the Building Commissioner had not had the opportunity to review plans. VII. OLD BUSINESS; Mr. Morgan will report on proposed changes in the ordinance pertaining to curb cuts at a later meeting, VIII. COMMITTEE REPORTS: