Laserfiche WebLink
min reg meeting <br />Planning commission <br />May 27, 1971, cont. <br />LAND <br />USE <br />MAP <br />Three exhibits were presented to the Commission <br />Exhibit 1. The ].and use map as designed by the land use <br />committee, apponited by the council. <br />EXHIBIT 2. A land use map as designed by the committe <br />appointed by the Planning Commission, Mr. Radford <br />and Mr Rada. <br />EXHIBIT 3. A land use map showing a difference between <br />exhibit 1 and 2. <br />UPON THE MOTION OE MR RADFORD AND SECONDED BY MR RADA <br />IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED TI-IAT ALL P.U.D. AREA BE OMITTED <br />FROM THE LAND USE MAP. <br />Discussion: <br />Mr. Thoma The coloring of the P.U,D. areas may be <br />omitted singethere is no P.U.D. zonning <br />district, The intend of P.U.D. should not <br />be eliminated as the motion so indicates <br />because the planning commission was instructee <br />to adopt and approve a land use map and ex- <br />hibits 2 & 3 appear to be a zoning map and <br />no consideration was given to the land use. <br />MR. Radford. Since there is no essential difference <br />between P.U.D. and R-3 zonning proceedure <br />why have P.U.D. ? <br />The following matter were also discussed <br />before a vote was taken. Some of the members <br />were of the opinion that all P.U.D. proposal: <br />must be approved and could not be denied. The <br />densities between P.U.D. and R-3 are the same, <br />More variances are avable in P.U.D. then in <br />R-3 zoning. <br />There being no other discussion, the following vote was taken <br />Yes 4 <br />No 2 The motion to recommend to omit P.U.D. <br />from the Land USe Map. <br />page 3 <br />