6.2. SR 06-20-2011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Minutes June 23, 1992 Page 11 5. THAT ALL THREE UNITS CAN NOT BE USED AS PROFESSIONAL OFFICES WITHOUT ADDRESSING THE TWO EXTRA PARKING STALLS THAT WOULD BE NEEDED. COMMISSIONER MINTON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 4-0. 12. Consider Zone Change Request (R-lb to C-3) By Wapiti Park/P.H. Steve Rohlf, Building & Zoning Administrator, stated that the Planning Commission originally heard this request at their April 28, 1992 meeting and voted to recommended denial of the request. At the May 18, 1992, City Council meeting, the Council directed the Planning Commission to take another look at this issue because the petitioners indicated that they had new information related to the zone change request. The petitioners were requesting that this new information be consider in the Planning Commission's recommendation. Mr. Rohlf stated that he has not received any new evidence of why Ms. White's zone change should be approved, but maybe a new approach to the zone change request (PUD). Virgil Herrick, Attorney for Lorraine White, distributed three handouts to staff and the Commission which included: 1) a petition by the people using the campground in favor of the request, which included about 52 signatures. 2) a petition signed by two of the single family residents also in favor of the proposed zone change request. 3) a memorandum to the Planning Commission from Virgil Herrick, Ms. White's attorney, addressing some of the issues relating to this request. At this time the Planning Commission took a few minutes to review the new documents. Vice Chair Eberley read both of the resident's petitions and their response to the zone change request. The three documents were entered into the public record at this time. Mr. Herrick explained and addressed the following criteria as outlined in his memo dated 6/23/92: -- is the request a reasonable request? -- is a zone change warranted? -- is it feasible for Ms. White to develop her property with the present zoning situation? Mr. Herrick stated that they would like an opportunity to work with the City, Zoning Administrator and City Attorney to come up with some sort of development agreement that would allow for a mixture of commercial and residential uses on the property. Mr. Rohlf stated that the property being rezoned is a part of a larger parcel. Mr. Rohlf questioned whether the portion of the parcel not being rezoned had a use already on it (ie. part of the campground). Ms. White stated that it was a separate parcel according to the tax . records. There was further discussion regarding this issue, as staff was not sure this was a separate parcel from the campground parcel. Vice Chair Eberley opened the public hearing.