Laserfiche WebLink
91 indicated -no such.. provision had- been made in St. An- <br /> 2 ' - thony' s Ordinance.. because-.the, community grew from the <br /> 3 start as a re-sidential suburb; <br /> 4 said some municipal ordinances ar.e: ".cumulative" to allow <br /> 5 any. use which is permitted in a residential district to <br /> 6 be used in .a commercial zone and anything which is- <br /> 7 allowed in a lower classification to be allowed in -a <br /> 8 light industrial zoned area; <br /> 9 indicated St. Anthony' s is generally considered to bean <br /> 10 "exclusive" Ordinance, which allows only one exclusive ­ - <br /> 11 use in each different zoning category, but is hot -com- <br /> 12 pletely exclusive because it allows single family homes <br /> 13 or duplexes to be built in areas zoned for single .family <br /> 14 homes and then imposes exclusive zoning for commercial <br /> 15 and light industrial; <br /> 16 said he perceived no major problems had been created. by <br /> 17 allowing such a mix as long as issues like parking, <br /> 18 access, and codes had been- addressed; <br /> 19 said he wasn' t certain it would be wrong to allow an <br /> 20 _ unused 1 , 000 square feet of space in the back of 'a ware- <br /> 21 house to be. used for living space for someone who would <br /> V2 keep an eye on the property for the owner as long as <br /> 23 there was adequate parking and access and the space was ' <br /> 24 brought up to code for that purpose; <br /> 25 told Chair Franzese he perceived that whether .that was a <br /> 26 good or .bad thing was a value judgment she would have to <br /> 27 make in terms of- how she viewed her community and what <br /> 28 land uses she thought were right or wrong in different <br /> 29 zoning districts . <br /> 30 Werenicz indicated he personally perceived, that because Mr . Solie <br /> 31 had reported having less vacancies in his property than <br /> 32 was the norm, there had been little hardship demonstrated <br /> 33 to justify a drastic step like changing -the Zoning <br /> 34 Ordinance to improve that business. <br /> 35 when the Chair said she perceived the Commission was being re- <br /> 36 quested to change the Zoning Ordinance to provide a second resi- <br /> 37 dence for a caretaker and yet she wasn 't . hearing that it wasn' t <br /> 38 really going to be for a caretaker, Mr . Solie told her that the <br /> 39 only purpose for remodeling the unit would. be for use as a second <br /> 40 caretaker residence and that his: firm would :not be renting to the <br /> 41 genera-1 public now that- they had been made aware that doing so <br /> 42 would pose a problem. for the Ordinance. <br /> 43 Commissioner Wingard commented that he understood the. Commission <br /> • 44- was only being asked to change the Ordinance to allow two rather <br /> 7 <br />