Laserfiche WebLink
104 <br /> March 2,1988 <br /> Ralph Schaper,of 0111 creek,stated as a lender, the professional <br /> Tenrltball'OM geglr treivjy'mti,"="tt%ernIt7cirnsig%nr° <br /> these properties very difrioult if not impossible. <br /> Ann Robinson,1631 Cedar,supports the passage of these amendments. <br /> A letter from Henry Newton, 1820 32nd Street, was read into the <br /> record Protesting the professional office definition in the proposed <br /> eMendaents. <br /> A letter from Roland Hublou, 335 Medical Dental Building, was read <br /> into the record protesting spot zoning froM Hewitt Avenue to Alst <br /> Street and what he considers down zoning in this area. <br /> nvo:cel giaglg::,01,79.Pope, seconded by Councilmember Gipson to <br /> President Niva asked if anyone else would like to speak and no one <br /> Roll was called with all councilmembers voting yes. <br /> ' Motion carried. <br /> 111. <br /> COUNCIL BILL NO.882-26 <br /> FINAL READING: <br /> 11, <br /> 'gdiraprierIbl:s.°°35V27 Cloy 18479%,°6771l,"412Ol744EgO <br /> 804-81 and 928-83. <br /> Om:nonmember Stephenson recognized the staff and Planning <br /> Commission,s commitment and time and felt that the workshop and the <br /> hearing have been very beneficial in adding to the education of <br /> all. He stated he felt that the amendments may appear to inhibit <br /> the free enterprise system and the City needs to be sure that the <br /> 1 amendments support this system and that it may be better to review <br /> the entire zoning code at one time. He felt that it is necessary to <br /> take the additional time to be sure that they are done right. <br /> C <br /> .rilrit17.:MI:e1v'laCeO:Tberth:b,t:1%s:Tonalloneb°m° Problems mlbb the <br /> Moved by Councilmember Stephenson,seconded by Councilmember Pope tO <br /> remand the proposed zoning code amendments back to the Planning <br /> Oepartment and Planning Commission with the following conditions: <br /> 1. That feasibility of more density in R-3 zones be <br /> studied. This increased density be reviewed in context <br /> that certain conditions must be agreed to between the <br /> Planning Department and developers. <br /> 2. That feasibility of expanding some specific R-3 zones <br /> to R-4 zones be reviewed. This should be done with the <br /> understanding that the integrity of the zone must be <br /> retained and that this rezoning only occur in areas <br /> where, after careful review end study, point out that <br /> it is feasible. <br /> f <br /> M,M <br />