1989-12-05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. Minutes - Plan Commission Page 2 December 5, 1989 . Chairman McCauley asked Mr. Ollendorff to explain his latest proposal and highlight for those present the specific changes. The Chairman explained that Commission members have a sense that they have twice tried to adopt Plan language which achieves the often-conflicting goals of attracting economic development and maintaining valuable residential neighborhoods. If the newly proposed language reflects discussions between residents, neighborhood groups and the City administration, the Commission would like to understand those discussions. Mr. Ollendorff explained that several concerned residents whose properties or subdivisions border the Olive Boulevard commercial corridor had suggested some further limiting language for Part I-Growth Management of the 1986 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed language had been negotiated and agreed to by the City administration for submission to the Plan Commission. Basically, the residents and the City Manager were proposing language which limited commercial expansion to only existing commercial districts in order to prepare for large-scale development of more than one acre. Most importantly, existing multi-family zoning districts bordering Olive Boulevard should not be considered for accommodating commercial expansion. The City's policies regarding preservation and maintenance of its residential neighborhoods should continue. Specifically, Mr. Ollendorff believes that the proposed prohibition on expansion of commercial zoning into existing multi-family areas would protect several neighborhoods bordering Olive Boulevard. Chairman McCauley asked if any Commission members had questions of the City Manager. Ms. Kreishman asked city staff to point out on the Zoning Map the areas currently zoned multi-family along the Olive corridor. Al Goldman, Director of Planning, pointed out two areas, one in the 7300-7400 blocks on the north side of Olive and an area between Eastgate and Westgate Avenues on the south side of Olive. Some Commission members believed that the limitation on expansion into the multi-family area between Midland Boulevard and Hanley Road was quite different than that pointed out between Eastgate and Westgate in that it could involve encroachment into and separation of an established single family subdivision. On the other hand, there were other cohesive subdivisions bordering the Olive corridor such as Roth Grove which would not be afforded the same protection by the proposed language. A specific discussion ensued, in response to Mr. Marsh's question, regarding the Shell Oil property at Hanley and Olive. Mr. Don Wylan of 7354 Melrose Avenue contended that this property would not be a candidate for expansion since it consisted of less than one acre and abutted a multi-family zoning district. Various scenarios were discussed regarding commercial expansion on that block and the zoning status of the two single family homes adjacent to the Shell property, one of which is partially zoned in the "GC"- General Commercial District. Mr. Goldman reiterated that the 1986 Plan, in its original form, did not preclude rezoning of property in order to expand areas available for commercial use; the rezoning would not be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. However, amendment of the plan was desirable in order to make it clear that there was no unresolved issue of consistency. Mr. Goldman expressed his skepticism with the currently proposed language, indicating that the proposed prohibition on commercial redevelopment of existing multi-family zoning districts bordering Olive would apply uniquely to the Musick Subdivision and would constitute what could be termed "spot planning." He felt that such a proposal could encumber unanticipated, yet desirable development in the future.