I was involved in the Development Dialogue and provided comments at City Council, Planning Commission meetings, and ad hoc committee meetings. My general comments on the proposed amendments to the zoning ordinance are that they do not uphold the citizens’ intent of the Zoning Ordinance, but rather insert the Planning Director’s intent to change the Zoning Ordinance. None of the proposed changes diminish the power of the Planning Director to misinterpret and misuse the citizens’ Zoning Ordinance, which is the root cause of our development issues.
At the February 25th City Council meeting, we observed an example of how successful the rezoning process can be during the presentation of the Lennar Zoning Case on Newland Street. This is what responsible planning looks like. Using the rezoning process, which involves the public and City Council, would resolve most of the issues that were attempted to be resolved by the proposed changes.
Changing the use of multi-family in the M-E Zone from “P” to “L” in Use Table 17.4.1 along with using the rezoning process would fix most of the issues with Mixed Use Zones in the Zoning Ordinance. This would allow us to have more planning successes such as the one at Newland Street.
Item 1: purpose and intent – unnecessary change as mixed use should mean mix of uses and shouldn’t need to be “promoted”.
Item 2: “illustrative figure” does not clarify any more than “graphic” does. Table is what needs to be clarified when discussing conflict with the text.
Item 5: purpose and intent – There are currently no Special Area or Corridor Plans referenced in the Zoning Ordinance.
Item 6: Mixed means more than one use. Instead of making these changes, simply use the existing rezoning if an applicant wants to have a single use on a parcel in a mixed use zone.
Item 7: While I agree with the intent to improve open space requirements, single use does not belong in a mixed use zone. The amount of appropriate open space would be allocated during the rezoning process for the appropriate residential zone.
Item 10: Use the rezoning process to accommodate the neighborhood and applicants wishes instead of creating a new zone district that could be misused. Example – if the new R-1-0 district was established, a home owner could sell out and put 10 slot homes on his single family or duplex zoned lot with no input from neighbors.
Item 12: Edited language changes the citizens’ intent of the ordinance.
Item 13: Edited language changes the citizens’ intent of the ordinance.
Your "no" vote is critical to upholding the original citizens' intent of the Zoning Ordinance.03/24/2019 8:10 pm
Your Question has been submitted.