Laserfiche WebLink
Ca.� e No � 61-71 (Mai er) <br />61-85 (Werncr <br />61-86 (Barney <br />and t�.aier} <br />S chmig) <br />- cont�nued <br />It is sugg�sCed that it would be wrong to rezone the Maier and Werner <br />properties withotat rezoning the Schmig property �a well.. Given the <br />£act tYaat the property to the nortl� of the Sr_hmig property is now zoned <br />multiple family �nd the continu�n�G of the undesirable factore affecting <br />Bice Street se a fronCage for aingle� fam�.ly resLdential purposes the <br />furure for the Schmi� property for singl� family purpoaes is doubtful. <br />(Schmig property appears to be uaed for aone kind of commercial storage <br />facility now)o <br />There remains the question as ro whether or not the plan submitted cons- <br />titutea a planned residential district for which a spec4al permit must be <br />iasued or whether it is intended Co develop the propezties by subdividing <br />inro eeparate lote for each pria�cipel atructureo The question before the <br />Planning Commisaion and Cc�uncil ie, of cou�r�e, that of the rezoning <br />p��ition. If �ucb petition ie approved� howevFr, the actual development <br />mu�t be aor�trolled elther as a"Pl�nn�d Residenti.al Development" requiring <br />8 special permit or subdivieion. In either case, the Planning Conamis�ion <br />and Council �aiatain cantrol ot th� actual development in the regulation� <br />mppl.ic$ble to the actual dQvelopment within the regulations �pplicable to <br />the zoning districto <br />