Laserfiche WebLink
1693 <br />the east, we have had requests for "spot zoning." Our <br />purpose here is to establish a general plan so you don't <br />have people come in and build under the old zoning and <br />then, later, have someone come in an try to put up a <br />building that would be objectionable. Again I say R-3 <br />or R-2 is a compromise, In all honesty, we feel, after <br />spending two years stud~ri;ng this, that the proposed zoning <br />is right; that it vrill hurt fewer people than having people <br />come in for snot zoning month after month. <br />Jaros, 178 Tatum ~fi11 there be off-street narking requirements on all <br />apartments? Nilsen: Yes, 1-1/3 narking spaces per unit. <br />Frank Irving, I would like to know more about the double bungalow concept. <br />17115 Tatum: Do we ha~.~e any in the Village? Does the code control the <br />size, value and design of these structures? Nilsen: Besides <br />the apartments, all the buildings on the North side of <br />Larnenteur, between Arona and Pascal, are double bungalows <br />except some single family residences near and. to the <br />Pascal corner. Shavor: Some cities and villages have <br />clauses tha+., Hermit consideration of the aesthetic features <br />and we are planning some changes in the building code which <br />should give us some control. Calvin's Z"e are aut'rorized to <br />set certain standard as to size, height, building materials, <br />and manner of construction. Crofts ldost of the Cities and <br />Villages have minimum requirements on room sizes so if a <br />double bungalow is going to be built, it vron't be so small, <br />it won't be suitable. I don't think we cal have an ordinance <br />that says you can't build a duplex on R-2 property. <br />Cartwright: All plans have to be submitted. to the building <br />inspector, and I suppose you check with the neighbors. <br />Croft; Yes, if I think +,here is any question. <br />~3ianchi: Can we place a monetary restriction on double bungalows, say <br />nothing can be built for less than 930,000.00? Galvin: It <br />can be done but L~ahlgren doesn't particularly recommend that <br />because of fluctuation; shell building (Vthere a person has the <br />main ':wilding done by contract and finishes the inside himself, <br />thereby reducing the cost considerably) or some-one at the <br />University may design something that could. be built for <br />45,000.00 but would still be acceptable. <br />Schmiege, tiF!ha+., effect does this have on existing buildings? Cartwright: <br />1739 Tatum. If there is a building on the property worth :1,000.00 or <br />more, the building can be used for it's present use. It <br />can be rebuilt in case of fire or storm damage. It .cannot <br />be down-graded or expanded. <br />Schmieges I would be in favor of R-1 rather than R-2 abutting the R-3. <br />Is there any advantage to the Village such as a larger tax <br />base on P~-2 property? Cartwright: Yes. However, that is not <br />the purpose of the R-2 zoning. ode °elt it would serve as a <br />buffer, but it seems there would be no problem. <br />