pf_01626 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

GRAHAM INVESTMENT, 1609 Page 2 The application is for the rezoning of all the land in question from R-1, B-1, and B-2 to a B-3 zone. An off -sale liquor store is listed in the ordinance as a special use in the B-1B, B-2, B-3, and B-4 zones. Mr. Frank Whaley, who resides in a single family home on a very large tract of land directly north of the proposal (north side of Roselawn Avenue), has expressed his concern and that of the neighbors to a rezoning to the B-3 district. This district, of course, offers a wider range of potential uses for the property than that included in the B-2 zone. We suggest that the Planning Commission and Council consider a rezoning of the land to B--2 in as much as that district is designed primarily for neighborhood retail uses and precludes the ultimate use of the land for such uses as automobile repair, car washes, wholesale distribution, and a variety of service shops (plumbing, electrical, cabinet making, etc.). In as much as the site plan provides for additional space for expansion of the building and provision for more parking than is required, one of the retail uses provided for in the B-2 district could be added to the structure in the future. It is this proposed addition and possible reuse of the entire structure that concerns the neighbors. 4. Mr. Al Schreiber, owner of the two 11 unit apartment buildings to the south has conferred with us oegarding his concerns with the proposed development. He does not opposed the development of the liquor store but, requests that the southerly most driveway on Lexington Avenue be closed to minimize vehicular traffic contiguous to this site. He would also like the parking eliminated in the front of the building, recognizing that this may be somewhat unrealistic in as much as these are the prime, convenient parking spaces relating directly to the entrance to the store at the northwest corner. His is a two and a half story building which is located 10 feet from the north property line, whereas 15 feet is required. A cedar fence is proposed on the south property line and the east property line of the proposed development. The height of this fence is proposed to the four feet, whereas the ordinance requires that the fence should be at least 6 feet high. In as much as Mr. Schreiber's building is only 10 feet from the line, the 4 foot fence may be more appropriate in this location. Mr. Schreiber did not express his concern regarding the fence but may wish to do so at,the public hearing. 5. The landscape plan presented is very general and could be conditioned on further staff review. You will note that no landscaping is proposed in the 20 foot space on the east side of the property contiguous to the residential area to the east. This 20 foot space could be effectively landscaped to more adequately accomplish the transition from the single family zoned to the east and the proposed development.