Laserfiche WebLink
o�ta��� �, ���6 <br />�LA�NI�G REPORT <br />CASE P�L'��1BER: <br />FiPPL ICAPJT : <br />LOCATI�N: <br />ACTIO��J tc��r�ESTE�� <br />PLAPJ�IP•�G CONSID�RA�IDPJS: <br />i016-76 <br />Cal Garley <br />Nort}� of Cou�ty Raad C, East of <br />Oxford Strnet <br />App��o�a1 of Pre1�n�1rary �'1at ��:� <br />R�z�ning frcm R-3a �o {2-2 <br />1. Several years ago, Mr. Garley proposed and the City agreed to rezone <br />the properiy in ques�ian and ihe prop�rty to the north flccupied by <br />t�e iwo condominium struc��res known as Parkview Terrace. The zon�ng <br />was very contraversia7 and was objected to by persons in the immiedate <br />area, par�icularly residential property owners io the north. Mr. Garley <br />built the first two structures north of Oxford Court, in�tially renting <br />them to occupants. 4lithin a short time, he conv�rted them to <br />condominiums and sold the units as condorniniums under the State <br />Condominium Law. Many of the units were so7d to renters occupying <br />them at the time. h�r. Gar7ey reports that this was a very successful <br />venture and was pleased with the resu1ts. <br />2. Due to the 7imi�ed demand �ar apartmen� praperty (caused primarily <br />by �isca� constraints} the secand ha7f of the project vras t�ever <br />comple�ed. � <br />�. A� this time, Mr. Garley propases to deuelap the land �or 12 dup7ex <br />sites, as sholvn in the reduced copy of the pre�Iiminary plat. iie <br />nates his desire to take tf�is step, because he does not choose to <br />continue to ha7d the land and pay the iaxes d�ring the interim <br />period be�or� apartments would be �easible to construct on the <br />praperty. <br />4_ �!e sugc�est tha� as the comr�unity matures, and the remaining land is <br />uti7ized fot^ development, that i� is very impor�ant tf�at the City <br />use �ts remaining property as efficient�y as passible. Because.it <br />is frequent�y very difficuit to rezone �and from single family to <br />apartments, we suggest there is a serio�s question as to whether or <br />not �'t tivou�d be appropriate to "down zone" the pronerty in quesiion <br />and develop the land far dupiexes, mere7y because the property <br />owner finds this economically feasible. The apar-�ment development <br />proposa� inc�uding the �our buildings as orig�nally p1anned were <br />accepted by the Ci ty i n gooc4 fai th and zaned accordi ng�y . 4Ji th ttte <br />exist�ng a�artment units in plaee, the remaTning �and is abvious1y <br />a superb s�te for future condominiums in view a�F which relationship <br />to County Road C and in view of the parlc area �o the south. <br />