|
December 9th, 1958.
<br />
<br /> Application to rezone from 'C' Two Family Dwelling District to 'G' Commercial Business District.
<br /> This petition was denied because of the Eesidentint neighborhood and it was felt that the Commercial
<br /> zoning on Seventh St. was adequate for this neighborhood.
<br /> 2. 17-$8. ~rs, Nannie B. Br~dshaw to rezone property located on the northeast corner
<br /> of~lhe intersection of Halifax Ave. and Griffin St., fronting 60 ft. on G~iffin St. and having a depth of 105.5
<br /> ft. on Halifax Ave.; block 183, lots 22 and 24, plate 314. Application to rezone from 'B' Single Family Dwell-
<br /> ing District to 'G' Commercial Business District.
<br /> This petition was denied because it was felt that the Commercial zoning on Airline
<br /> Boulevard was adequate for this area.
<br /> 3. 20-55 Delores Brown Waters $o rezone property~ located approximately 75 ft. north of
<br /> the intersection of Jefferson St. and Elm Ave.; fronting 50 ft. on the east side of Elm Ave. and having a depth
<br /> of 105 ft.; block 31, plate 73, lots 5 and 6. Application ~o rezone from 'C' Two Family Dwelling District to
<br /> 'D' Multiple Family Dwelli~g~District.
<br /> This petition was denied b~cause it was felt that this would be spot zoning and not
<br /> good for this residential neighborhood.
<br /> 4. 22-58 Thomas Walker to rezone property located on the~ southeast intersection of
<br /> Lewis St. and Cherry St~, beginning am {his point extending in an easterly direction on the south side of Cherry
<br /> St. for 75 ft. and having a depth of 200 ft.; plate 197, block 3, lots 1,2,$,2g, 29 and 20. Application to re-
<br /> zone from 'C' Two Family DwelIing District to 'D' Multiple Family Dwelling District.
<br /> This petition was denied because it was felt that this was a very good residential
<br /> neighborhood.
<br /> 5. 23-58 Bradford~ Watts to rezone property located on the northeast corner o£ Evergreen
<br /> Ave. and Gosport Road, beginning at this point extending in an easterly direction for 52.5 ft. on the north side
<br /> of Gosport Road and having a depth of lO0 ft.; plate 137, block 3, lots i and 2. Application to rezone from
<br /> 'B' Single Family Dwelling Distr~ct to 'G' Commercial Business District.
<br /> This petition was denied ~ecause it was ~elt that this was a very good residential
<br /> neighborhood.
<br /> 6. 24-58 Joseph C Lewis to rezone prol~ty located on the southwest corner of Henry St.
<br /> and Fifth St. beginning $~ ft. south of this intersection, fronting 4~ ft. on the west side of Fifth St. and
<br /> having a depth of 80 ftc; plate 43. Application to rezone f~om 'D' Multiple Family Dwelling District to 'F'
<br /> Local Business District.
<br /> This petition was denied because it was felt tha{ the Commerc{al zoning on Fourth St.
<br /> was adequate for this neighborhood.
<br /> 7. 14-58 D. Kingsley Traylor and Harold A. Taylor ~o rezone proper~y located at inter-
<br /> section of' County ~t. and Loudoun .Ave., fronting 120 £t. on south side of County St. (in a westerly direction),
<br /> and having a depth o~ 108.5 ft.'; lots 1,S,5 an~ 7, of block 154, plate 302. Application to rezone from ~B'
<br /> Single Family Dwelling District to 'G' Commercial Dis~ricto
<br /> This petition was denied because it wms felt that the 'G Commercial Zoning on the
<br /> east side of Loudonn Ave. was sufficient for this area.
<br /> S. J.P. Boyd to rezone property located at southeast ~ntersection of Leckie and Owen Sts.
<br /> fronting 55 ft. on south side of Leckie St. by SO ft. deep. Application to rezone from 'D' Multiple Family
<br /> District to 'F' Local Business District.
<br /> This petition was denied because it was felt that the four corners already zoned
<br /> '~' Commercial ar the intersection of Leckie St. ~re ~ufficient to support business in this neighborhood.
<br />
<br /> High Street Zoning
<br /> Parcel No. 4. Property is located on the southeast intersection of High St. and
<br /> Ninth Ave., fronting 7~ ft. on the south ~ide of High St. and 109 ft. on the east side of Ninth Ave., thence
<br /> easterly 100 ft., thence northwesterly 135 ft. on west side of Western Branch Road; lots 1,2,3 and 4, plate 173.
<br /> To rezone from 'E' Multiple Family Dwelling District to 'G' Com~aercial District.
<br /> It was the concensus of the Planning Commission to ask the Honorable City Council to
<br />· delete this parcel from the recommended zoning changes, as this parcel was erroneously included.
<br />
<br />12-58. Construction Associates, Inc., ~o rezone the following parcels of land:
<br />Parcel No. 5. Property located on southwest corner of Race St. and Loudoun Ave.,
<br />fronting on south side of Race St., 360 ft., and having a depth of 10S.5 .ft., lots 1,.3, 5, 7, 9,11, 15, 17, 19,
<br />21 and 23, of b~ock 196. Application to rezone from 'B' Single Family Dwelling District to 'G' Commercial Dis -
<br />trict.
<br /> Parcel No. 6. Property located on southeest corner of Race St. and Loudonn Ave,
<br />f~onting, approximately 380 ft. on south side of Race St. (relocated); all of lots 19, 21, and 23, ~d parts s
<br />of lots 1,3,5,?,9,11,13, 1D and l?, of block I97.
<br /> Parcel No. 5 and part of Parcel ~ is located south of the Mid-City Shopping Center and
<br />it wms felt that this proposed zoning should be denied."
<br />
<br /> Item~No. i (of the advertisement) - Motion of Mr. Weiseman-to concur in the recommen-
<br />dation of the Planning Commission to approve, was adopted~ without d~ssenting ~ote.
<br />
<br /> Item No. 2 - Motion of Mr. Bartlett to concur in the ~ecommendation of the Planning
<br />Commission to ° approve, was adopted, without dissenting vote.
<br />
<br /> Item No. 3 - Motion of Mr. Bartlett to concur in the recommendation of the Planning
<br />Commission to approve, w as adopted, without dissenting vote.
<br />
<br /> Item No. ~ - Motion of Mr. Breedlove to. concur in the recommendation of the Planning
<br />Commission to deny was adopted, without dissenting vote.
<br />
<br /> Item No. 5 - Motion of Mr. Weiseman to concur in the recommendation.of the Planning
<br />Commission to deny was adopted, without dissenting vote.
<br />
<br /> Item No. 6 - Motion of Mr. Breedlo~e to refer back to the Planning Commission for
<br />further consideration was adopted, without dissenting vote.
<br />
<br /> I~em No. 7 - Motion of Mr. Weiseman ~o concur in the recommendation of the Planning
<br />Commission to deny was adopted~ without dissenting vote.
<br />
<br /> Item No. 8 - Motion of Mr. Breedlove ~o refer back to the Planning Comraission with
<br />directions that the applicant be given an opportunity to be heard,was adopted, without dissenting vote.
<br />
<br />
<br />
|