My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
07/13/2011 P&Z Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Packets
>
2011
>
07/13/2011 P&Z Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/25/2014 9:56:15 AM
Creation date
6/24/2014 12:11:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Packet
Meeting Date
07/13/2011
P&Z Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
88
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• <br />AGENDA ITEM V B <br />STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jeff Smyser <br />P & Z MEETING DATE: July 13, 2011 <br />DISCUSSION TOPIC: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING <br />Amending Section 6 of the Zoning Ordinance <br />(Residential Zones) <br />BACKGROUND <br />This P & Z opened this public hearing at the June meeting. We went through Section 6 in its <br />entirety and resolved most issues. The Board continued the hearing to allow further discussion <br />of two topic areas: minimum dwelling unit sizes, and; a proposed maximum garage door <br />proportion in the R -2 zone. The Board directed staff to look at some home sizes and designs in <br />the building market and research ordinance requirements of other communities for comparisons. <br />ANALYSIS <br />Minimum Dwelling Unit Sizes. The first question relates to the minimum size requirements <br />for residential dwelling units, both detached houses and multifamily units. The current <br />ordinance lists minimum square footages for floor areas. The Board supported changing this to <br />footprint areas for detached homes. However, questions arose over what is an appropriate <br />minimum, given that the housing market is moving toward smaller homes. A related question <br />arose whether the City should establish minimum dwelling unit sizes at all versus just leaving it <br />to market forces to address consumer demands. <br />To facilitate discussion, I suggest addressing the this multi- faceted issue in the following order: <br />• Question: Should the ordinance establish minimum dwelling unit sizes? <br />Option A) If the answer is no, the problem is solved. <br />Option B) If the answer is yes, we need to determine the following: <br />1. the minimum footprint for <br />a) single family detached dwellings <br />and <br />b) twin homes <br />and <br />c) how to account for an attached garage in the footprint minimum <br />and <br />2. the minimum livable floor area for attached dwelling units <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.