PC 02/28/96 - Laserfiche WebLink

. . . The applicants feel the City has further taken away their ability to sell the property by taking away the likely uses for the property. The surrounding areas haves heavier commercial uses than those proposed for INS. INS would be very satisfied to have the same zoning as that of the adjacent property (Dunkley property). Mike Furay, 201 No. Civic, Walnut Creek, clarified that the rezoning to PUD-C-C, not PUD-C-SIO will greatly inhibit their ability to sell the parcel. Merton Murray, 470 Mavis Drive, owner of condominiums next to the parcel. He is seeking to keep his property values up and agrees with staff's recommendation for rezoning. Juanita Bianchi, 4105 Walnut Drive, stated she wants the property rezoned to something compatible with the surrounding properties. Ms. Bianchi was advised by the applicant's representatives that the building should be completely demolished within a month. Commissioner McGuirk asked if any study or analysis was done to see how marketable this property would be with a C-C zoning. Mr. Iserson stated they did not speak to persons in the real estate profession, but they did consider the uses allowed under the proposed PUD-C-C. Staff feels that the variety of uses allowed in the proposed PUD-C-C district would allow the property to be marketed. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Commissioner Barker voiced her opinion that everyone is anxious to see the resolution of this business. She inquired if a combination of C-C and C-S/O uses would be acceptable. Staff stated it could be, but they feel there are uses of the C-S zoning that the neighbors would have concern with. Under a PUD, the Commission can pick and choose what uses they would like. Commissioner Wright would like to see the zoning as PUD-C-S/O, and believes this zoning would be fair and equitable to INS. Would also like to add Conditions 7 and 8 of Exhibit A to Exhibit B. This would mitigate some of the neighbors' previous concerns. Further, the conditional uses would always come before the Commission for approval. Commissioner Hovingh feels it is awkward to put a PUD-C-C on a finger of land between the railroad and MDR. He concurs with the recommendation of Commissioner Wright to go to PUD-C-SIO. Commissioner McGuirk would like to restrict this property to C-S/O uses with some limitations . Chairman Lutz agrees with the Commission but asked for discussion if Conditions 7 and 8 would be restrictive enough, Commissioner Wright feels that the uses are primarily pedestrian-oriented businesses, Planning Commission Minutes Page g February 28, 1996