Laserfiche WebLink
<br />) .(. :). ")' <br />.}, . <br />i..I !'-..,.1 Al>:4l <br /> <br />TUESDAY <br /> <br />APH.IL 9~ 1968 <br /> <br />Following further consideration of Mr. Whittle's petition at its <br />meeting on April 8, the Commission with five of its seven members <br />present and by a vote of three to two, voted to recommend to Council <br />that this petition be denied. <br /> <br />The reasons expressed by the majority vote were as follows: <br />1. All of the growth in this neighborhood in the past few years <br />has been residential in character and the neighborhood is as yet <br />a good area for residential use. <br />2. Such rezoning would not be in conformity with orderly growth of <br />the community. <br />3. Commercial development at this location would be detrimental to <br />the health, safety and welfare of the community. <br />4. Traffic is already heavily congested on Starling Avenue in this <br />area and would be further congested by an commercial development. <br />With regard to this, the developer has not produced any plans <br />for the relief of this congestion by providing a turning land <br />or otherwise. <br />5. There is presently on Starling Avenue partially blighted commer- <br />cially zoned property within three blocks of this location and <br />the rezoning of new properties to a Commercial classification in <br />the same general area is not an answer to the redevelopment of <br />presently zoned commercial areas within the general neighborhood. <br />6. This same petition was denied within the past year and there is <br />no evidence to indicate that conditions have been changed since <br />that time. <br /> <br />After hearing from Mr. S. G. Whittle, III, petitioner, who cited not only the <br /> <br />opinions on this proposal of members of the Planning Commission, as expressed <br /> <br />to him on occasions, indicating that the full membership might be divided <br /> <br />four-to-three either for or against, but also the absence of objections to <br /> <br />his proposal by (from) property owners in the area. After some discussion, <br /> <br />Council held in abeyance a decision on the Planning Commission's recommendation, <br /> <br />pending the holding of a duly-advertised public hearing by Council at its <br /> <br />forthcoming May 14th meeting. <br /> <br />In token of appreciation and in recognition of Mr. A. J. Eggleston for his long <br /> <br />and faithful service as an employee of the City's Electric Department, Mayor <br /> <br />Renick and Council presented Mr. Eggleston with a check in the amount of $50.00 <br /> <br />upon his retirement as of March 31, 1968. <br />