Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes DecemberDecember 12, 2013 ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: FILE NO.: LU13-02 (DECEMBER 12, 2013) Walter Malone, Planning Staff reviewed the package of Land Use Plan change areas. Mr. Aaron Glazier, spoke about the changes in Area 10. He lives in the area shown as 'A' and agrees with the proposed change for that area. He also agrees with the change proposed for the 'B' area but is opposed to the change in the 'C' area. He believes that the area should not have an increase in density. Mr. Glazier and a neighbor circulated a petition against the change in Area 'C'. All those available to sign, agreed that the densification should not be made. (A copy of the petition against the change to Area 10C was presented to the Commission.) There was a discussion about the 'A' area with Chairmen Rector and and how the area could have been developed with a different designation. Chairman Rector reviewed zoning versus Land Use with Mr. Glazier and what the potential uses with a Medium Density designation might be. Mr. Rector noted that the land in area 'C' is zoned single-family and a rezoning would have to occur for anything other than single family to be built on that land. There was discussion about voting on the 'package' and pulling the area 10C out separately. Tony Bozynski, Director Planning and Development, indicated that in cases like this the sub -area in question had been voted on separately. Ruth Bell, League of Women Voters, stated that today's discussion reconfirmed that more publicity is better to help everyone understand. She recommended pulling area 10C out for a separate vote. There was further discussion about area '10C': it is zoned single-family and a rezoning would have to occur for more than a single family house to be allowed on the land. The likely rezoning of this land would be a Planned Zoning District rather than MF6 or MF12, if it is developed at the Medium Density level. Commissioner Nunnley indicated he agreed there would be enough 'safe guards' in place if the area was shown for Residential Medium Density. Several Commissioners expressed a desire to allow time for Staff and the neighborhood to meet to discuss the issues. A motion was made to defer LU13-02-10C to January 30, 2014 (Fountain, Finney). By a vote of 7 for, 1 against, 2 absent and one open position the motion was approved. Commissioner Nunnley asked about the change to Commercial along Stagecoach Road with a change next to it for Public Institutional (LU13-02-02B and LU13-02-02C). Mr. Nunnley asked about a retail use selling alcohol next to a church. There was some discussion about this. Commission Brock indicated the church was no longer functioning and the land was for sale. After some additional discussion a motion was made to remove LU13-02-02B —Mixed Office Commercial to Public Institutional from the package (Nunnley, Dillion). By a vote of 8 for, 0 against, 2 absent, 1 open position the 0] December 12, 2013 ITEM NO.: 10 (Cont. FILE NO.: LU13-02 motion to remove LU 13-02-02B was approved. A motion was made to approve the package of changes as amended (Fountain, Dillion). By a vote of 8 for, 0 against, 2 absent, 1 open position the amended package of changes was approved. 10