Laserfiche WebLink
Regular Meeting of the Planning Conaisalon <br />taMWy 21, 1970 <br />The Planning Commission met on the above date with <br />the following members present: Chairman Pro Tern <br />Russell, Members: Kullberg, Oasch, Dongoske, Porn, <br />Nicholls, Mayor Oberhauser, Councilman McCarthy <br />7:30 P.M. <br />Raymond Abrahamson represented himself at a <br />public hearing to rezone from R I C to R I D pro­ <br />perty owned by himself at 22$ N, Perndale Rd, Parcels <br />205» 3600, Section 36. Russell read the minutes of <br />the last Planning Commission mooting. Mr, Abrahamson <br />explained that ho originally asked for one assess­ <br />ment on the property and was given th'-ee. Mayor <br />Oberhauser explained the reason for . .e three <br />assessments was due to size of property. It was <br />deemed there was room for at least three building <br />sites; one the present home and two sites on North <br />Perndale. Mr. Abrahamson then showed plats of <br />the area explaining that his lot sizes as proposed <br />were equal in size to all lots in Hilloway except <br />one. Russell then defined the definition for low <br />lying land and asked how much of the land was too <br />low under that definition. Mr. Abrahamson said <br />there was some low land but that it was drained <br />by a ctilvert to the other side of North Perndale Rd. <br />PUBLIC HEARING <br />REZONING <br />Abrahamson <br />Mr. Russell asked if anybody wished to be heard. <br />Messers. Kramer, 245 N. Perndale Rd,; Wainwright, <br />107 Chevy Chase Dr,; Zaske, 115 Chevy Chase Dr.; <br />Arnoldy, 109 Chevy Chase Drive; Nelson, 113 Chevy <br />Chase Dr.; Jesse Meyers, 146 Chevy Chase Dr.; <br />Dr. and Mrs. Curry, 111 Chevy Chase Drive spoke in <br />opposition to the rezoning. Objections raised <br />were that 1/2 acre lots would not enhance the area, <br />would destroy property values, would result in <br />back-to-back housing and concern with a reduction <br />in lot sizes,as they had bought homes on the strength <br />that the area was zonedRI C and would remain that <br />way, Mrs. Curry was of the opinion that reducing <br />the size of the lots would have no economic advan­ <br />tage over larger lot sizes, taking into considera­ <br />tion the total property. <br />Mr. Abrahamson countered that, even with larger <br />lots, there coiiLd be back-to-back housing, that <br />his request for rozoning was no threat to safety, <br />welfare, health, and that he merely wished to <br />equate his lot sizes with the surrounding property, <br />Russell then read two letters voicing objection <br />to the rozoning.