My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1994-02-23
Public Access
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Plan Commission
>
Minutes
>
1994
>
1994-02-23
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/11/2005 5:01:17 PM
Creation date
4/27/2011 11:03:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning
Document type
Minutes
Planning - Date
2/23/1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />" <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />2-23-94 Plan Commission Meeting Minutes Page 7 <br /> <br />of Olive is zoned "GC" at Midland and at Hanley, with a strip zoned "MR" in between. The <br />plan of the proposed development is inadequate and he can not determine the feasibility of the <br />proposed rezoning without an adequate plan or other documentation to support the rezoning <br />application. The current zoning is appropriate for the site and should not be changed unless the <br />applicant demonstrates that the proposed zoning change is appropriate for the site. He <br />recommends that the application be denied. <br /> <br />Mr. Foxworth asked what would become of the graveyard. Mr. Thomas stated that it would <br />remain. Mr. Thomas pointed out that the developer would not be asking for tax abatement. <br /> <br />Martin Spizman, current owner of the property, stated that he has seen many different <br />redevelopment plans for the property and this is the best one. He wants the Plan Commission <br />to recommend approval. <br /> <br />Ms. Ratner stated that she would like to see this project succeed but agrees that the plans need <br />to be more refined before she can recommend approval. <br /> <br />Mr. Goldman stated that he prefers this residential use to a commercial use on this lot but needs <br />more details before he can recommend it. <br /> <br />Mr. Foxworth moved that the Plan Commission table the matter in order to give the applicant <br />a chance to revise the plans and to address the concerns discussed at this meeting. The motion <br />was seconded by Mr. Solodar and passed by a vote of 6 - 0, with Mr. Foxworth, Mr. Solodar, <br />Mr. Kahn, Ms. Ratner, Ms. Peniston and Mr. Safe voting "aye." <br /> <br />Text Amendment of Zoning Code 134-90 dealing with the Family Definition and Zoning <br />Code 134-26.2 dealing with Occupancy by more than one family <br /> <br />Mr. Goldman reviewed his January 20, 1994 memo that proposed a change in the family <br />definition combined with a change in Zoning Code ~34-26.2. <br /> <br />Mr. Safe moved that the Plan Commission recommend approval of the text amendments as <br />follows: <br /> <br />34-90 Def"mitions <br />Family: An individual or married couple and/or the children thereof. <br /> <br />34-26.2 Occupancy by more than one family. <br />No dwelling unit shall be occupied by more than a single family, plus not more than two <br />other persons, all living together in the dwelling unit as a single housekeeping unit. <br /> <br />The motion was seconded by Ms. Peniston and passed by a vote of 6 - 0 with Mr. Safe, Ms. <br /> <br />m-2-23.plc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.