04-10-89 Zoning & Vacation - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• QJ ummtt#rr gond ZONING AND VACATION COMMITTEE go the Qlommon elouzwtt of tie ettg of l'outli end: The April 10, 1989 meeting of the Zoning and Vacation Committee was called to order by its Chair Person Council Member Lee Slavinskas at 4:30 p.m. in the Council informal meeting room. Persons in attendance included Council Members: Luecke, Niezgodski, Puzzello, Slavinskas, Zakrzewski, and Coleman; Doug Carpenter, William Farabaugh, Howard Dukes, Carolyn Pfotenauer, Larry Vanosdal, Mike Dansch, and Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand. The first item on the agenda was to review Bill No. 120-88 which is a zoning request to rezone the property located at the corner of Miami Road and Kern Road. Since no one was available to give the presentation, the Committee took no formal action on the Bill. The Committee then reviewed Bill No. 10-89 which is a zoning request for the southeast corner of Black Oak Drive and Edison Road. Mr. Mike Dansch of Peirce & Associates gave the presentation. -He noted that several of the items raised at the Area Plan meeting of March 21, 1989 would be addressed. He noted that the *developer would change the access point and that the cite distance met all of the State regulations. He stated that he did not believe there would be a commercial intrusion to the residential area and showed an aerial photograph and proposed cite development plans of the area in question. He also noted that the three homes near to the development could be buffered and that the office type use was less intensive. He also stated that the office use would be restricted to the hours of 8 to 5. He further noted that he had conversations with Mr. Mike Meeks ' of the Engineering Department who stated that he was unaware of any current plans to four lane Edison Road. Council Member Coleman, the Council's representative to the Area Plan Commission noted that both the staff and the Area Plan' Commission gave unfavorable recommendations to the proposed rezoning. The basic reasons were concerns regarding traffic, intrusion into the wooded estates area, and a too intensive development. Following further discussion Council Member Coleman made a motion seconded by Council Member Puzzello that Bill No. 10 89 be recommended unfavorably to the Common Council. The motion passed.