SIDNEY — Three rezoning requests were considered by the Sidney City Council during its Monday evening meeting.
Three separate public hearings were held in conjunction with the three ordinances that were introduced to City Council.
The Sidney Planning Commission OK’d the three rezoning requests during its June meeting and recommended for the Sidney City Council to approve the requests.
The first ordinance introduced was for the petition of Tom Martin, on behalf of 4783 ANOM LLC, for the rezoning of two lots on the west side of South Stolle Avenue. One lot, 173-175 S. Stolle Ave., is currently developed as Sidney Body CARSTAR and Enterprise Car Rental, Community Development Director Barbara Dulworth said. The second lot, directly to the south of 173-175 S. Stolle Ave., is currently undeveloped. The request is to change the zoning from IIM, industry/innovation/manufacturing to a CC, corridor commerce. If rezoned to CC, the existing body shop and car rental uses would be principally permitted uses.
These lots are located in policy area No. 1 of the city’s comprehensive plan, Dulworth noted. The recommendations for this policy area include the promotion of commercial and industrial uses. Appropriate land uses include commercial fronting on Michigan Street, with light industrial uses limited to parcels not fronting on Michigan Street. The proposed zoning would be in compliance with the recommendations set forth in the comprehensive plan.
When asked what the purpose was for the rezoning request, Martin told council members he wants to install a building there.
The second ordinance was for the request of Choice One Engineering, on behalf of WRPW Properties LLC, for the rezoning of one parcel located on the south side of Michigan Street between Stolle Avenue and Meadowlane Drive. The property is currently undeveloped. The request is to change the zoning from R-1, residential single family to CC, Corridor Commerce. If rezoned to corridor commerce the following types of uses would be principally permitted, Dulworth noted.
These lots are also located in policy area No. 1 of the city’s comprehensive plan, Dulworth said. The recommendations for this policy area include the promotion of commercial and industrial uses. Appropriate land uses include commercial fronting on Michigan Street, with light industrial uses limited to parcels not fronting on Michigan Street. The proposed zoning would be in compliance with the recommendations set forth in the Comprehensive Plan.
Council member Mike Barhorst again asked what the plan is for the property. Council was told the plan is to market it for sale at this point.
Meadowlane resident Cheryl Gibbs spoke during the public hearing to express concern with how close it will come up to her property. Dulworth said a site plan permit must be up to engineering standards and believes the required buffer set back footage is 20-30-feet wide with trees and bushes.
The third rezoning ordinance was a request by Fairway 57 Holdings LLC, on behalf of Creekside Sales, for the rezoning of two parcels at the north east corner of Fourth Avenue and Countryside Lane. The request is to change the zoning from CC, corridor commerce to R-3, residential multi-family. Both lots are currently undeveloped and are classified as vacant commercial land. Creekside Sales is proposing the development of market rate multifamily housing, said City Planner Tim Hurysz.
These parcels are located in policy area No. 5 of the city’s comprehensive plan. This policy area lists residential multi-family as an appropriate land use and recommends that higher intensity uses, such as multi-family dwellings, be located within the northern section of the policy area, north of Paul Street. The proposed zoning would be in compliance with the recommendations set forth in the comprehensive plan.
Several residents of Countryside Commons, a housing community for seniors, attended to express concern about what may develop there, including disapproval of the development and young families with children. One of the residents previously brought a petition to the Sidney Planning Commission meeting with 30 names listed and wished to add an additional 15 Countryside Commons residents’ signatures she collected who were also concerned. City Manager Andrew Bowsher noted they would not be able to dictate who could or could not live there based upon age. Council members assured the concerned residents they would not make a decision in haste and will consider all information before making a decision.
Eric Prall, with Fairway 57 Holdings, had previously assured the residents at the Planning Commission meeting these units will not be three floors and will likely have very few children that would live there. He said most of the units would contain only one bedroom and two floors. He had assured those present at the Planning Commission meeting the homes do not cater to children. Monday, VanMatre asked if the housing was not aimed toward families with kids, who was target customer. Prall said housing is aimed for workers of local companies in the city of Sidney.
These items will return to the Sidney City Council for further consideration at its July 25 meeting.