My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1983 05 18
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1983 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1983 05 18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:21 PM
Creation date
7/7/2009 4:25:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
5/18/1983
Original Hardcopy Storage
7C3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1983 05 18
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />~teven Anderson, Represent- <br />ing Moses and Rickman <br /> <br />5/18/83 <br /> <br />Page -5- <br /> <br />Gave a slide presentation of the area located <br />at 333 South Boulder Road, west of the Hill- <br />side Square Development, County zoning agri- <br />cultural, consisting of 1.3 acres, desig- <br />nated residential land use on the comp plan, <br />and was an enclave and currently has two <br />residential units on the site. <br />Mr. Anderson stated they- had a peculiar situa- <br />tion with the site in terms of placing homes <br />and maintaining the ditch. The zoning request <br />of the applicant was for R-H; however Planning <br />Commission recommended R-M zoning. Initially <br />when the request was made, staff requested <br />that a 30' right-of-way be dedicated from the <br />center of South Boulder Road for the expan- <br />sion of South Boulder Road. Subsequently <br />after the first plan, an additional 30' was <br />requested to make it a 60' right-of-way, which <br />has been placed in the plan. He depicted this <br />area on the map stating that it involved 21% <br />of the overall site. Mr. Anderson felt this <br />amount of dedicated property should be a <br />factor in considering the differentiation of <br />R-H and R-M zoning and the number of units <br />it would allow for development, as well as <br />the dollar amount in terms of economic feasi- <br />bility of bringing the property into the City. <br />This was the reason for the R-H zoning request; <br />also the fact that the adjacent property is <br />zoned R-H. There will also be a 12% dedi- <br />cation of property or cash in lieu of upon <br />development. Addtionally staff and Planning <br />Commission have requested a join~ access with <br />the Hillside Square development. The appli- <br />cant agrees with this requirement. R-H zon- <br />ing was still being requested by the appli- <br />cant or an alternative of density transfer <br />with land dedicated area, i.e. allow only <br />the square footage to be transferred in terms <br />of density into the developable property. <br />This would not bring it up to the density of <br />R-H, rather it would split it in half. This <br />compromise has been discussed with staff and <br />the applicant wished to know Council's re- <br />action to the compromise. <br /> <br />Mayor pro-tem Fauson continued the public <br />hearing - anyone in the audience that wished <br />to speak in favor of Ordinance :/f789 -none. ~Anyone <br />against Ordinance if789 - none. Questions - none. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.