HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976 05-05 Controversial Beam rezone faces stiff final test May 13 THE REVIEW y, 1'J /(,-
Controversial Beam rezone
faces stiff final test May 13
by Scott Carlson While voting for first reading of the efforts to rezone the land to Business "on the same night."Don't try to run it
The controversial rezoning of Beam rezone,Murdock said that the words"no Commercial (BC), Limited Business through in one night," he exhorted
avenue from White Bear avenue to other," as pertaining to allowed and Commercial and Commercial Office Bruton.
Hazelwood street faces one more hurdle prohibited commercial land uses,could district have all lacked the necessary Responded councilman Anderson, "If
before the Maplewood city council can be subject to misinterpretation by future four-fifths council support. you had one year it wouldn't make any
move onto the sticky question of how to councils."It can be interpreted any damn Councilmen Greavu and Murdock have difference.We have been on this thing so
apportion street assessments. way you want,"he said. favored BC zoning as a means to relieve long you should know by heart whether
And that last"hurdle"may be difficult Mayor Robert Bruton, appearing property owners from high pending you want it or not."
to surpass,even though the council last irritated at Murdock's waffling on sup- assessments. Mayor Bruton and cowl- But Murdock said,"We want to delete
Thursday night passed first reading of an port for the ordinance, said, "Before I cilmen Norman Anderson and Donald the things that are not agreeable to you
ordinance which would rezone that ordered this hearing I said I hope it is the Wiegert, however, have pushed for a folks on Beam avenue.
portion of Beam,on the south side,to intent of the council to understand why we rezone less than BC in order to control "It's 3-2 (the vote) right here," he
Business Commercial Modified(BC-M). are ordering a hearing. commercial development. declared."That was the intent of arguing
"Unfortunately here we are questioning Maplewood City Manager Michael and fighting over this thing.If we haven't
IT WILL TAKE FOUR VOTES to ap-
what we have,"Bruton said. Miller last Thursday described the BC-M gotten there yet,then baby I'm not voting
prove second and final reading of the But Murdock testily shot back,"Don't zone as a compromise."I hope that we for it.
ordinance for the rezone when the council take me to task for not understanding have finally come to the end of the road on "I don't give a damn if the ceiling
meets May 13.And Councilman Burton what this is all about.We know what the this,"Miller said. comes down,"Murdock added.
Murdock indicated that his"hangup"on hell it's all about.We are trying to get the Anderson responded,"We were trying
certain terminology in the BC-M or- thing rezoned so we can get it assessed." But Murdock,in his heated exchange to do the best for the whole city and not
dinance might be enough to reverse his with Bruton, left some doubt as to just us three here."
vote. If that happens it is likely that INDEED, COUNCIL EFFORTS to whether the"end"had finally come.
colleague John Greavu will join him in the rezone the south side of Beam avenue He and Greavu dissented on a council UNDER THE BC-M ZONE drive-in
Io have failed several times since the vote to waive council rules and consider theaters and drive-in restaurants,along
dissent. summer of 1974.In the lastyear and a half second and final readingof the ordinance
with commercial or fee parking lots,
would be prohibited.Uses allowed under
the ordinance,without special use permit
approval, include hotels, motels,
theaters,job printing,bakery or candy
shops.
Uses which would be allowable subject
to issuance of a special use permit in-
clude:restaurant,place of amusement,
and all uses permitted in a high
residential district.
Only two citizens spoke at the hearing
last Thursday night.
Richard Schreier,2125 DeSoto,called
the BC-M zone for Beam avenue little
different than the Limited Business
Commercial zone.
Attorney Clayton Parks Jr.,who owns
property along Beam avenue,asked if the
ordinance would restrict the height of
commercial office buildings.The city said
there would be no restrictions.
Regarding the possibility of misin-
terpretation of the ordinance, Parks
suggested that the council at some time in
the near future may want to draft a
statement of intent regarding the BC-M
zone.