File #: 2003-0354    Version: 1
Type: Archive - Ordinance Status: Passed
File created: 10/21/2005 In control: City Council Regular Meeting
On agenda: 5/21/2003 Final action: 5/21/2003
Title: Resolution - PUD Concept Plan that the concept plan generally qualifies for review and processing as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezoning for Papa Joe's Market, located on approximately 15 acres at the northwest corner of Rochester Road and Tienken Road, Parcel No. 15-03-477-017 through 021, 030, 031 & 033; zoned B-2 (General Business), B-5 (Automotive Service), I-1 (Light Industrial) & O-1 (Office Business), Curtis Properties, LLC, Applicant
Indexes: Planned Unit Development
Title
Resolution - PUD Concept Plan that the concept plan generally qualifies for review and processing as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezoning for Papa Joe's Market, located on approximately 15 acres at the northwest corner of Rochester Road and Tienken Road, Parcel No. 15-03-477-017 through 021, 030, 031 & 033; zoned B-2 (General Business), B-5 (Automotive Service), I-1 (Light Industrial) & O-1 (Office Business), Curtis Properties, LLC, Applicant
 
Body
Whereas, the Planning Commission and the City Council met on May 6, 2003 for a preliminary review of a conceptual plan and outline of a PUD agreement, identified major issues associated with the project and provided the applicant with preliminary direction; and
 
Whereas, the Planning Commission determined that the concept plan and PUD outline generally qualify for PUD rezoning;
 
Now Therefore Be It Resolved that the Rochester Hills City Council hereby concurs with the Planning Commission's determination that the concept plan generally qualifies for review and processing as a PUD rezoning project in the matter of City File No. 02-004 (Papa Joe's PUD), located at the northwest corner of Rochester and Tienken Roads, and identified as parcel numbers 15-03-477-018 to 021, 15-03-477-030, 031 and 033.
 
Be It Further Resolved that this determination is made pursuant to City Code Subsection 138-1004(3), and does not constitute, nor should it be construed as, approval of the PUD proposal.