04-10-1989 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MIHUTBS or THT LANNIMG COMMISSION MEETING MARCT 20. 1989 H ZONING FILE #1386-OTTEN CONTINUED time the sketch plan review was done, the questions of buffering to the north and an east/west service road were discussed. Since that time, those items have been specifically addressed. An east/west service road out lot has been designated all*?wing for the setbacks required with a B-1 zoning. A retention pond has also been designated. Chairman Kelley suggested that the specifications of B-1 zoning be briefly reviewed. Mabusth informed the Planning Commission that there was an existing B-1 corridor to the east of the subject property. Should the Otten proposal be approved, it would extend that corridor. Initially it vas proposed that Lots A and B be developed with multiple-family dwellings. Since then, however, the owner of Parcels A and B, has sold the individual lots for single family residential use. Mabusth further mentioned that there is a proposed subdivision that Mr. Otten will complete in the near future. Mabus >h suggested that Pin: Ridge Lane be vacated at the time of the subdivision and that acc*-'^s be secured to Lot B. Since Locs A and 3 wilt stay in single family residential use, the commerci'\l line is now proposed to be moved up along the southern border nickey Lake Drive. Landscape buffering along that boundarv w^.s presented at the first commercial site plan review. Zoning Administrator Mabusth said that the B-1 zoning classification was not designed for the Highway 12 Corridor, as it is more compatible with limited neighborhood commercial. In comparing the B-1 zoning with the B-6, Mabusth questioned why design criteria was not established for the B-6 as it was for B- 1. She did not know why it would not be the same criteria as a PUD. Mabusth pointed out that the commercial use that exists to the east is net true B-1, it*s more of a shopping center commercial use. In Mabusth's opinion, tf , PUD vould be more appropriate for Mr, Otten's proor^al than the l-l. Mabusth suggested that the Octen appli or- be for^^arded on to the Council in order to receive concepiuai directior and some form of a commitment regarding the approve ’ ''f the PUD ordinance. Once the PUD ordinance has been appru\ -and is in place, th«3 Otten rezoning can be completed. Chairman Kelley expressed his concern ^.nvolved with the resale and a more intensified retail use of t s property in th f uture. He thought the use Mr. Otten was ideal^ fo- the location. Mabusth comfortable with the PUD PUD would require appro^ whether the rezoning of whether the subdivisi-' comm€;*nted that if the a , acres, that Mr. Otter ' .j not at all- Mr. Ott . ii. PUD, sked Kelley if e would be more •* f or this app ation since the ''^urg» usfe. She questioned <ccur as one parcel or ired at all. Bellows in as one PUD for all 13 .e *che subdivision first or he is not asking for a