CC 01-31-1977 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

" ., ,q nUTes of RllgU I ar Counci I MeeTi ng Page ~h-io January 31, 1977 REVIEW OF PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE P-I OJ stri ct Woodburn moved, seconded by Hanson, that Counci I approve the deletion of the proposed P-I District; al I areas of proposed P-I to revert to the district it had been previously. Motion carried (Woodburn, Crichton"Hanson, Crepeau voting In favor of motion; Wingert voting in opposition). Clubs & lodges Houses of Worship Institutional Housing Pub Ii c Uses School, General Educ. .I;'~,*-""'" 7 Council^ ncurred with these land Use Chart (p. 2-4) Woodburn referred Councl I to a proposed revision of the land Use Chart (after deletion of the P-I Distric1') proposing the following uses as permitted, with a Special Use Permit, in Zoning Districts: R-I R-2 R-3 R-4 S- S- S- S s S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S . changes. District Requirements Chart Woodburn proposed the fol lowing changes in the District Requirements Chart (p. 2-5) (after deletion of the P-I District): R-2 R-3 R-4 3. Minimum Lot Dimensions (feet) Width at front of bldg. line Depth 8. Boundary of Zoning District (feet) 120 85 120 120 40 40 After discussion, proposed changes were accepted by Councl I, except Boundary of Zoning District (feet) in R-4 was retained at 50". Non-residential Uses In Residential Districts Crichton suggested that some restrictions be Incorporated In the ordinance for al I non-residential uses permitted in residential districts; proposed that all ingress and egress be to major streets (major or minor arterials); require set back of 50' to 100' for all structures and hard-surface areas. Woodburn suggested that these proposed restrictions be limited to major developments; not to neighborhood churches, day care centers etc.; burden of proof be placed on the developer to substantiate that restrictions are not appl(cable. Aftar discussion, Crichton moved, seconded by Woodburn, thet Councl I request the Attorney and Planner to draft the appropriate wording to be Incorporated In the ordinance; requiring certain restrictions for non-residential uses, permitted In the residential district. . Wingert suggested that the restrictions Include all the "Perfornlance Standards" - noise, glare etc., not only traffic (ingress and egress) and set-back. ZoninG Map Crichton suggested that the Zoning Map be amended to reflect the current zoning map except that: a) 1-2 replace '~he existing L-I in all locations south of 1-694. b) 1-2 and R-I replace the existing L-I In the arsenal (as shown on the Proposed Zoning Map). c) I-I replace L-I between 1-694 and Highway 96. d) B-2 replace existing G-B at all locations, and replace R-B locations south of County Road E between Highway 51 and Lexlnqton Avenue. e) 8-1 replace all existing R-8 locations. fl R'.3 replace existing R-2 at Arden M'3nor. g) R-3 replace existing R-I at Pemtom. h) R-3 and R-4 replace e~lstlng R-I at Hunters Park (as shown on the Propose d Zon i ng ~lap). -2-