My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008-77 AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE - XXIV. OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS
COD
>
City Clerk
>
ORDINANCES
>
2008
>
2008-77 AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE - XXIV. OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/16/2015 11:07:08 AM
Creation date
10/16/2015 11:07:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Resolution/Ordinance
Res Ord Num
2008-77
Res Ord Title
AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE - XXIV. OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS
Department
City Manager
Approved Date
10/20/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
City Plan Commission <br /> ' October 2,2008 <br /> Page 5 <br /> Mr. Crowe stated that special use permits are for the use of the property. <br /> Mr. Crowe stated that the ordinance does not allow any deviation for a� approved surface. <br /> Mr. Clevenger stated that he feels other types of new surfaces should b reviewed. <br /> Mr. Smith asked that if the petition is not approved, the petitioners are tuck with the 1,300 feet. <br /> Mr. Crowe replied yes. <br /> Mr. Smith stated that the petitioner should be able to come up with an alternative proposal and <br /> that there should be special instances where an alternative plan could be presented to the Zoning <br /> Board of Appeals to make the decision, not just one person making the decision. <br /> Ms. Stickle stated that every individual would feel they have a special circumstance. <br /> Mr. Smith stated that he feels the Zoning Board of Appeals is the wrong place for this type of <br /> case to be heard. Mr. Smith asked what other avenues are available to hear this type of case to <br /> get a variance based on other criteria other than interpretation. <br /> Mr. Crowe stated that it is up to the City Plan Commission to make a recommendation to the <br /> City Council to determine whether the interpretation was in error. <br /> Mr. Crowe stated that you could get rid of the decision making by �he Director and go to the <br /> Zoning Board of Appeals. <br /> Mr. Smith stated that the wording is too restrictive and asked if there is anything to appeal except <br /> the interpretation. <br /> Mr. Robinson stated that the Zoning Ordinance strictly limits the Zoning Board of Appeals <br /> authority to grant variations from the Zoning Ordinance. <br /> Mr. Smith asked what types of approved surfaces there are. <br /> Mr. Crowe stated asphalt and concrete are approved surfaces and there might be an opportunity <br /> later on into looking at new paving treatments. <br /> Mr. Smith asked what the next step would be if the City Plan Commi�sion recommends moving <br /> the petition to the City Council. <br /> Mr. Crowe stated that with the amendment the individual needs to pro ide a letter to the Director <br /> of Economic and Urban Development showing their alternative pave�nent and showing that the <br /> first 100 feet inside the property line would be improved. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.