Agenda - 03-18-1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

RAFT 0' 024 2 Smith noted that Column A represents the resulting landscape/pedestrian area derived from applying the ratio specified in the current ordinance to the maximum floor area allowed in a district. The second column represents the resulting area derived from applying the proposed ratio to the gross land area. The proposed ratios were determined on the basis of specifying 25% of the total open space as landscaped area. p. ARTICLE 4 - PERMITTED USES - ZONING DISTRICT APPLICATION CRITERIA q. ARTICLE 4 - PERMITTED USES - ACREAGE REQUIREMENTS With reference to items 5p, and 5q of the agenda, Susan Smith noted the amendments would specifically delete from the zoning district application criteria the references to specific townships and joint planning areas. The amendments further exempt those uses permitted on a special use permit basis or zoned Existing Commercial-V from inclusion in the calculation of maximum acreage requirements specified for the LC- 1, NC-2 and CC-3 zoning districts within a given activity node. Planning Board member Steve Kizer commented that one of the reasons for not putting GC-4 in all the townships is that for example, in Bingham there are not appropriate areas for GC-4 districts and uses. This amendment has some significant impacts on what will be set out for the other townships. He voiced opposition to the GC-4 exemption in calculating the amount of commercial land in a specific area. The design criteria describing a local commercial node were intend uses equivalent to a "Mom and Pop" store or a local service station. The problem with EC-5 is that, as was done in some areas, certain nodes were designated which include the GC-5 designation to try to take into account the fact that the existing businesses were already there. Some of these businesses can be quite large and, by the time you add those and if you raise the maximum again for LC-1, you have eighteen acres plus whatever was already there and the node is no longer a small commercial node in a rural area. By doing this, the intent of the nodes is changed. To calculate all the commercial uses when assessing the character of the node and not allow to exemptions can result in quite a large commercial area. r. ARTICLE 4 - PERMITTED USES - ASSEMBLY/PACKAGING OPERATIONS s. ARTICLE 8 - SPECIAL USES - ASSEMBLY/PACKAGING OPERATIONS t. ARTICLE T - ARTICLE 20 - DEFINITIONS - ASSEMBLY/PACKAGING OPERATIONS Planner Susan Smith continued with items 5r through 5t as identified in the agenda. With reference to Article 4 - Establishment of Permitted Use Table, Article 8-Special Use Permits and Article 22- Definitions, Smith indicated these amendments would provide specifically for assembly and packaging operations, including mail order houses. Amendments to Article 4 would specify where those uses would be permitted, the amendment to Article 8 would specify the standards to evaluate those requests for a Special Use Permit, and Article 22 would define such uses. Steve Kizer indicated that some of the same comments he made above would apply to these proposed amendments. These amendments are in reaction to the fact that the Zoning Ordinance actually worked with respect to the request for P & S Sales. The problem is that a simple packaging plant has an awful lot of input that comes to it and is not a minor operation. The parking lot at P & S sales has about 100 cars and is a major operation. The whole point of these smaller nodes was to make sure that large enterprises that would be out of character with the