02/22/1983 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-.>. ._ .?.:_ . , . } ..., PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 22, 1983 PAGE 4 , Cuyahoga County and other previously approved office building- proposals, this proposal is not feasible at this time. 3) 1480 is an ideal boundry between Commercial and residential areas. 4) In 1978 Regional Planning Commission recommended retaining this property as residential, this is still appli- cable. 5) At a later date, if this property cannot be devel- oped residentially, such a proposal might be reconsidered. 6) This property was zoned.residential when developer purchased it. 7) If start rezoning, where does it stop. J. Burns moved that because of the abundance of commercial development north of 1480 and because 1480, itself, is a natural barrier between residential and commercial property, because of the traffic problems that may be created on Butternut Ridge Road in the future, because of the historical significance of the homes and the area surrounding the proposed development, and because we cannot be assured of what use this property will be put to if we rezone it, particularly in the Motorists Service section, I move that Planning Commission reject the rezoning plans submitted by Developers Diversified, seconded by J. Wixted, and unanimously approved. Mr. Gorris r•equest:ed the Law Department to research whether or not. -•, when a parcel of land is rezoned by Council to Mixed Use, which could be used as 14ulti-Family, a referendum would be required. (3) Jamestown Village Apartments Rezoning Request, located on the east side of Columbia Road, north of Brookpark Road. Three (3) parcels, 237-18-2, 237-18-3, and 237-18-4 pro.posed to be rezoned from class "C" Residence, Single to Residence, Multiple. Note: that this rezoning proposal was previously approved by Planning Commission and Council (Ordinance No. 76-159), but rejected on the Primary Ballot of June 6, 1978. Mr. R. Margolius explained that these are three residential homes which are surrounded by a multi-family distruct. This rezoning was approved by Council in 1976 but was defeated by the voters. This proposal will have to go on the ballot again because when the density of multi family units exceeds total dwelling units by 20%, the proposal must be put before the voterse The devel- opers plan to construct 4 buildings with 36 to 40 units each. J. Roberts moved to recommend that parcels 237-18-2, 237-18-3, and 237-18-4 be rezoned from Class "C" residential to multi- family based on the fact that all surrounding land is so zoned, seconded by J. Brown, and unanimously approved. V. COMMUNICATIONS: No Items VI. NEW BUSINESS: No Items