BZA 11/18/04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

eight-unit apartments, not less, so he needed comments and questions to see where they could go with this. He went on to say they needed to rezone fi.om I-1 to R-3 for financial purposes. Mr. Holloway talked about how there was a bad configuration of the property and the variances were specific to the nature of the property because up until about a year or so ago all eight units were market rate apartments. Mr. McClaren talked about how they were going to have a screening process for the renters. They would target mature people that would not need a yard or a playground. Don Barry asked about the closeness of the right of way behind the building fi.om the railroad track and if there was a possibility of getting a waiver fi.om the railroad to use this for parking. Mr. Holloway answered there was no right of way behind the building and there was an owner to the south they may be able to obtain some additional parking. Mr. Young asked if this property was ever zoned residential and the answer was probably not. Jon Swisher asked what the zoning was of the adjoining properties. Mr. Holloway answered to the south was I-1, to the north was Industrial, across the railroad tracks was Industrial and to the east was R-1. The petitioner is committing to one bedroom, hipped roof, demolishing and rebuilding, off street parking, and vinyl siding so it matches the surrounding community. From the audience Mr. Lundy, a close resident, commented there had always been police problems and cars parked on the street. Mr. McClaren told him there was a team in place right now to advertise and screen people and would do a background check to the tee. Mark Taylor, corner of Bridge and Bolton, told the commission that on his side of the street there was no sidewalk or curbs and he was concemed about the renters or visitors parking on his grass. Mr. McClaren told him if this gets approved they would go as far as putting up No Parking signs on Mr. Taylor's side of the street. Maintenance on the building would be done by a monthly check and the building would be all- electric. They want it to look acceptable to the community. There would be parking for two cars at one end and five or six cars at the other end. Mr. Holloway commented they could put a curb on Mr. Taylor's side of the street and would guarantee no parking. Mike Young stated that the options were industrial use or apartments. Mr. Lundy said he would rather see industrial than apartments. Mike Young asked if this request could be tabled to the December meeting and they bring back pictures of the proposed construction. Don Barry asked if the front of the building could be landscaped to force no parking in front and if they could see about parking in the right of way behind the building. Mike Young asked if the parking spaces could be assigned. Mr. Holloway answered yes to all the questions. Jon Swisher commented he didn't understand why they knew building six units were not feasible when they did not know what the rent costs would be for each unit. A motion was made by Mike Young with a second fi.om Don Barry to table the request for a variance of use and a variance of developmental standards, to the December 16, 2004 meeting and during the month talk to the railroad, if there was other off-site parking they need to see an agreement, an estimate of rent cost, pictures, plans, drawings, parking plans to keep apartment owners fi.om parking in fi.ont, and send their information to all the people they sent notices to including Cindy Shelley who was present at the meeting but had not received a notice. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Holloway commented dealing with the railroad might be a hang-up.