1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Nq t t� 902 PAGE 2 No one else spoke and the public hearing was closed. . Following discussion, a motion was made by Ms. Ausbie, seconded by Mr. Hildreth to recommend approval of the petition. The motion carried 7 ayes, 1 nay with Mr. Hayter voting nay. I Chairman Swaim declared the public hearing open.on the petition of Ronnie Thrasher for a change in zoning from a One Family Dwelling District No. 2 (SF -2) to a Multi - Family Dwelling District No. 1 (MF -1) on Lot 5, City Block 213 located at 1951 W. Sherman Street. Mr. Thrasher was present and told the Commission that he proposed to demolish the old house on the lot and construct 4 -6 apartment units on the 70' X 300' lot. He-pointed out that there is a duplex adjacent to his property on the east and other rental property close by. No one else was present to speak for or against the proposed zoning change.- Mr. McCollum read the names of Estelle Cochran 506 19th S.W.' and Joyce Smith, 1950 W.. Sherman who were unable to attend the hearing but wanted to voice objection to the change. The public hearing.was closed. Commission discussion centered around the narrow lot width and provision of off street parking. Mr. Hayter made a motion to recommend Planned Development - Housing instead of MF -1 zoning so that the Commission can review a site plan. Ms. Ausbi-e. seconded the motion which carried 7 ayes, .1 nay with Mr. Burnett voting nay. Chairman Swaim declared the public hearing open on the petition of Nathan J. Bell for a change in zoning from a Two Family Dwelling District (2F) to an Office District (0) on Lot 6, City Block 113 -A located at'414 12th S.E. Mr. Bell was present and stated he represented the Ellis family, who owns the property which has a vacant, dilapidated house on it, He said there was office zoning just north of the lot-and he felt that changing f the zoning to Office would enhance the possibility of development and µ: would improve the area. He said there was no immediate plans for the property. ' No one else spoke on the matter and the public hearing was closed. Discussion centered on where the line should be drawn on.Office Zoning in this area. After discussion, a motion was.made by Mr. Burnett, seconded by Mr,. Hayter to recommend denial of the petition. The motion failed 3 ayes and 5 nays. Commissioners Ausbie, Burnett andflayter voted aye. A. ' motion was then made by Mr. Nutt, seconded by Mr. Pe.rry to recommend approval. The motion carried 5 ayes, 3 nays. Commissioners Ausbie, t=; Burnett and Hayter voted nay. L`