PC 08/26/87 - Laserfiche WebLink

Minutes Planning Commission August 26, 1987 that there was not an attempt to change the land use designation of this properties in the 1986 General Plan. The public hearing was opened. Richard Glenn, Alexander and Associates, 205-F Main Street, represented the proponents and stated that when the purchase agreement was made it was done with the understanding the property was zoned PUD. It is now evident that the property was not zoned. Mr. Glenn, would, therefore, make his presentation based on this new information. Their proposal is to save all of the trees with flexibility concerning saving the house. Mr. Glenn presented alternative plans indicating the street can be on either side (considering the trees). Jerry Jennaro, 3727 Mohr Avenue, announced he did not receive public notice concerning this project and lives on the adjoining property. He suggested that perhaps certified mail should be sent. He acknowledged all of the time and effort given to the signage at the entrance of the City by the Planning Commission and asked for at least the same consideration with regard to changes to their residential neighborhood. Chairman Lindsey discussed with Mr. Jennaro and staff the development of the surrounding properties. Al Wiemken, stated he has lived in the Mohr-Martin area for over 20 years. Mr. Wiemken recalled that the subject property was changed to Low Density Residential. He had records of the Planning Commission minutes where there was a 5-0 vote for Low Density Residential for the 1.2 acre property. He didn't have an opportunity to review the Council minutes governing this action. This designation was given to allow a 'feathering' effect for the area. Herb Singleton, Mohr-Martin, congratulated staff on their staff report and diligent efforts of the Planning Commission over the years to protect the area. Mr. Singleton stated that the developer has probably put the cart before the horse and looked at some dollar value. Mr. Singleton urged the Commission to look at the zoning and protect the integrity of the area. Commissioner Berger asked Mr. Singleton how he felt about preserving the existing dwelling. Mr. Singleton stated he had no feelings about it one way or the other as there is no particular historical or architectural significance to the site. Rebuttal Mr. Glenn stated that rebuttal would not be appropriate at this time, but they are looking for direction. Mr. Glenn asked when this application would again be scheduled. Mr. Swift responded it would be heard again September 9, 1987. Commissioner Berger agreed with Mr. Singleton that the Sheffield house has no particular historical significance. It has been added onto in a piecemeal manner. - g _