Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />s <br />• <br />Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting <br />Minutes of September 3, 1987 <br />Page 2 <br />The staff is suggesting a "standard definition" through out the <br />ordinance be used as stated above. They feel this would cut down on <br />any confusion that could arise from different definitions in the <br />ordinance. <br />Janet Graves asked if the .largest definition of a lot we have up to <br />6,000 sq. ft.? Mark informed her that that is simply the minimum sq. <br />ft. required for developing single residential use. Janet then asked, <br />what is the largest lot we define right now (square footage)? At <br />present we only have a minimum "large lot" size. Mr. Latimer told the <br />Commission that a "Large lot" was referred to as one (1) acre. The <br />definition that the staff is recommending makes a more definitive term <br />as to what a "Large lot" is. No further questions. <br />Commission agreed to the standard definition suggested by staff. <br />Item No. 4 - Light trucks - Mark explained that this had a typo only <br />in the wording. The word include should <br />be exclude. John Armstrong stated that <br />this Was not a typo, he said it Was <br />changed by City Council so that trucks <br />With a 1-ton or less capacity could be <br />included under the definition of °Light <br />Trucks" . <br />Item No. 5 - Section ~-100 - Certified site plans required <br />Mark explained that at the present time we required a certified <br />site plan for everything, except residential construction, that has <br />a valuation of under $2500.00. The staff has received a lot of <br />comments on this, most people feel that this is to stringent and <br />that we really need to do something about it. What staff would <br />like to do is to use the survey the people already have, no matter <br />how old, unless it has been replated/subdivided, this would do away <br />with having to have a recent certified site plan/survey. This <br />would apply strictly to residential and not commercial. Staff <br />would like for the Commission to go with the second option listed <br />in the Zoning Ordinance Review text; page 3. On inground swimming <br />pools, a certified site plan will be required in all cases, no <br />matter the value. <br /> <br />Option ~~2 (A) - going from $2500.00 to $8000.00 or more <br />(B) - slab foundation containing or more sq. ft. <br />of floor area. Tabled at present time. <br />(C) - any building containing 1,000 or more sq. ft. of <br />floor area. <br />Commission agreed to changes as made. <br />