2002-33 AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE

Home Browse Search

Economic & Urban Development Department Memorandum # 02-49 May 2, 2002 I��I TO: Honorable or Terry M. Howley and City Council Members FROM: Steve G City Manager A.J. Krieg , ssistant City Mana SUBJECT: Zoning Or uiance Amendment RECOMMENDATION: City staff recommends that the comprehensive amendments to the Zoning Ordinance be approved. BACKGROUND: As Council is aware City staff has completed a comprehensive amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. The City conducted a public hearing regarding the comprehensive amendment during the April 1, 2002, regular meeting. During that meeting two temporary restaurant facility operators appeared in opposition to the proposed amendments. Specifically, the two operators were seeking either a non-conforming use designation and/or relief from the requirements of the proposed ordinance. The amended ordinance proposes to treat these operators e�cactly the same as permanent building owners in that setback and parking requirements must be adhered to; with the option of seeking a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Since that time, City staff has researched the issue further and presented the Council with two options (as described in Memorandum #02-43). Memorandum #02-43 sought specific direction by proposing two options and asking for the Council's preference. Four responses have been received;three for Option 2, and one undecided. City staff is recommending approval of the comprehensive amendment utilizing Option 2; use of the Zoning Board of AppeaLs var'iance process. The zoning ordinance is the document which regulates the use and development of land city-wide, and the comprehensive amendment includes some important (and in City stai�s view necessary) changes for the community. The new landscape section, the changes to the B-1 Neighborhood Commercial District, and other changes were done at the request of current and previous City Council and Plan Commission members. Whatever Council's preference with respect to the temporary restaurant facility question, needlessly delaying approval of the comprehensive amendment is not in the larger community's best interests. POTENTIAL OBJECTION: Various groups did attend some of the special Plan Commission review meetings to object to specific provisions of the Ordinance. After a review process that included several special Plan Commission meetings, meetings held with the Chamber of Commerce, and multiple public hearings, the Plan Commission did vote 8-0-1 to recommend approval of the amended Ordinance.