Laserfiche WebLink
redesignating that portion of the City known as the Logan Area from the Industry <br />designation to the mixed Residential and Industry designation, except for a portion <br />to be redesignated to the Comity Shopping Center designation; and Amendment <br />Application No. 813 to rezone the major portion of property located within the <br />Logan Area from the Heavy Industrial District to the Residential Industrial <br />District, a new use district, and from Heavy Industrial District to General <br />Commercial District. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Robert Su_ndstrom highlighted the salient points in the reports <br />dated May 23 and May 24, 1979, prepared by the Planning Department. He outlined <br />the basic parameters established by the Council and utilized by staff to develop <br />evaluation methodology. Using slide transparencies, he described the five <br />zoning alternatives developed in response to the requests of property owners <br />and residents of the Logan neighborhood, the area generally bounded by the <br />Santa Aha Freeway on the north, Santa Aha Boulevard on the south, Lincoln <br />Avenue on the east and Santiago Boulevard on the west, and summmrized the staff <br />evaluation of each. <br /> <br />The five alternatives were listed as follows: <br /> <br />Alternative I - No Rezoning or General Plan Amendment - No change in <br />existing M2 zoning (or permitted uses contained therein). <br /> <br />Alternative II - Rezoning and General Plan Amenclment - Rezone select parcels <br />to the R2 and C2 Districts; amend General Plan to Mediun Density Residential and <br />Conummity Shopping Centers designations corresponding to zoning pattern. <br /> <br />Alternative III - Modified Residential/Commercial/Industrial Zoning - Rezone <br />properties from the M2 District to the Mi-S, R2-S and C2 Districts based <br />on existing use of property; modify zoning regulations for the Mi and R2 <br />Districts, creating an R2-S and Mi-S zoning district for the Logan Neighborhood <br />(R2-S-Multiple Family Residence-Special, and Mi-S-Light Industrial-Special); <br />R2-S Special zoning regulations would provide less restrictive standards for <br />off-street parking, yard setbacks and unit density; M1-S Special zoning <br />provisions provide for buffer requirements between industrial to residential <br />and permit residential uses permitted in R2-S zone; amend General Plan to Medium <br />Density Residential and Community Shopping Centers corresponding to zoning pattern. <br /> <br />Alternative IV - Mixed Use Zone - Creation of a new RM '%{ixed Use-Special" Zone <br />for specific application to the Logan neighborhood; development of regulations <br />similar to Alternative II, R2-S and M1-S Districts; development of design/ <br />land use manual; creation of neighborhood planning committee to review and make <br />reconm~ndations on all building permits. <br /> <br />Alternative V - Mixed Use Zone - Creation of a new RM '~ixed Use-Special" Zone <br />for specific application to the Logan neighborhood; permitted uses would be <br />all uses permitted in the R2 and M2 District; RM si~e plan review required <br />for all development within the area (processing similar to C5 site plan review); <br />development or redevelopment with similar permitted uses to that existing on <br />the property or of contiguous parcels through RM site plan review process; <br />development or use of a parcel inconsistOnt with the uses on contiguous parcels <br />would require approved Conditional Use Permit; all residential development would <br />conform to the requirements of the R2 or more restrictive residential district; <br />specific development standards for conflicting uses to be established. <br /> <br />Karl Mazzeo-Fernandez, Ecos Management Criteria, introduced Richard Juarez, another <br />member of the team of consultants who prepared the Environmental Impact Report. <br />Mr. Juarez described the unique, multi-faceted Report, prepared by Ecos and <br />Advanced Planning and Research Associates, and the methodology used in its <br />development. Using the slide transparencies depicting each of the five alternatives, <br />he summarized the t~am's evaluation of each. <br /> <br />The Deputy Clerk of the Council reported there were no written communications. <br /> <br />Speakers in favor of Alternative III were: <br /> <br />CITY COUNCIL MINUTES <br /> <br />188 JUNE 4, 1979 <br /> <br /> <br />