PCMin_84Jun26_Public Hearing - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION - PU$I,IC HEARING ON ZONING O1tDINANCE PAGE 2 dune 26, 198l~ • Mr. Dale felt that the old Zoning .Ordinance contained only one apartment district, which allowed what he considered a density that was too high. Many of the present apartments were built under the existing ordinance which allowed a high density -and amounted to filling the lots with buildings and parking and not allowing for green space. Tt also allows single family homes to be built in an apartment district. When a single family home is built within an apartment district and CAKL DALE is surrounded by apartment buildings, it could make the dwelling worthless. What is needed is to keep apartments in one-area and single family homes by themselves. Another problem with the Zoning Ordinance is that the terms are incomplete; improper definitions lead to lots of~problems. Also, State .;laws need to be followed such as solar access (communities need to keep solar access open) and manufactured homes (city cannot exclude). The existing Ordinance contains no performance standards, which needs to be addressed. The existing commercial districts are a hoc~e/p+~dge; commercial uses should be listed by categories in certain districts. In the area of the single family home district, the conditional, uses are too liberal. The existing ordinance also provides poor protection for homes adjacent to businesses (for example screening, lighting). Parking regulations were out-of-date, Mr. Dale then described the institutional district 1 and 2 as it relates to the University of Minnesota property. and the Fairgrounds .;and"felt that the existing ordinance did not address the issues. He recommended in the new Ordinance the t~se of:P=1 and P-2 (Private Institutional District) for city hall, playgrounds University of Minnesota, State Fairgrounds, school grounds and other public • governmental land uses will be zoned with a base zone for that use and if sold or leased for private use the property would revert to R-1, if so approved by the City Council. The uses of an overlay district are uses that are shown on a University campus plan, fairgrounds plan, school district plan, city plan, etc. for what they intend to do. That plan should be oa file with the City so if major changes are going to be made that would deviate from that plan, the City should be given 30 days notice to determine if those public developments will have any impact on city facilities (drainage, traffic, etc.). Another apartment district is added to the new ordinance--R-3 and R-!~. The existing apartment district does not distinguish between high and low density apartments. The existing apartment district allows 20 or more dwelling units per acre which is really high--twelve units per acre is recommended, which allows green space. The R-3 would be the low density or townhouse type development (which allows up to eight units per acre) and duplexes. It also allows the conversion of existing homes into one-two or three dwelling units, which could only be done by City Council approval. The R-1~ would be the medium density apartments. Townhouses would be allowed as well as partments up to 12 units per acre. A series of commercial districts have been created. B-1 is now pure office district; B-2 is pure retail (over the counter sales); B-lA is retained which is general business; and EB has been added, which applies primarily to spot scattered commercial uses. The intent of the EB district is to simply to provide the City with away to bring about changes to business; such as providing screening to adjacent single family homes, plantings and improvements. It has • no real affect on the use of the business.