My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1991-05-20
Charlottesville
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1991
>
1991-05-20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/18/2001 6:36:19 PM
Creation date
12/18/2001 6:11:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Meeting Date
5/20/1991
Doc Type
Minutes
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
,, J <br /> <br />223 <br /> <br />ORDINANCE: ADOPTING ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT AND AMENDMENT <br />TO SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE <br /> <br /> Council agreed to give preliminary approval to certain <br />sections in the amendment to the zoning ordinance. <br /> <br /> Mr. Higgins stated that the Planning Commission <br />supported the addition of "more than five cats" to the kennel <br />definition. <br /> <br /> On motion by Mr. Toscano, seconded by Rev. Edwards, <br />Council voted to add cats to the kennel definition. <br /> <br /> Mr. Higgins stated that the Planning Commission <br />supported allowing an accessory apartment in R-lA zones for <br />units over 1,600 square feet, with the owner occupancy <br />requirement removed and requiring a special permit for <br />duplexes in R-lA zones,~ with the home ownership requirement <br />removed. <br /> <br /> Ms. Slaughter made~a~motion to add the special permit <br />requirement for duplexes, make the parking requirement less <br />restrictive by requiring only one off street parking space in <br />the setbacks of either ~he back, front or side yard, <br />providing no more than 25% and 9'~°f front yard space is <br />used, and adding back the owner occupancy requirement for <br />duplex conversion. <br /> <br />Mr. Vandever seconded Ms. Slaughter's motion. <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters questioned the rationale for requiring both <br />owner occupancy and a special permit. <br /> <br /> Ms. Slaughter stated that she felt similar properties <br />have different circumstances such as traffic and how the <br />house fits in with the rest of the neighborhood which could <br />be addressed through the special permit process.~ <br /> <br /> Ms. Slaughter's motion was approved by the following <br />vote. Ayes: Rev. Edwards, Ms. Slaughter, Mr. Vandever, Ms. <br />Waters. Noes: Mr. Toscano. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano made~a motion to approve the Planning <br />Commission's recommendation allowing an accessory apartment <br />in units of 1,600 square feet or more, with no home ownership <br />requirement. Mr, Toscano expressed concern abOut the legal <br />questions regarding the owner occupancy requirement and with <br />potential problems with enforcement~ <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters stated that she could not support dropping <br />both the size requirement to 1,600 square feet and the owner <br />occupancy requirement. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano's motion failed for lack of a second. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano made a motion to allow accessory apartments <br />in units of 2,000 square feet, without the home ownership <br />requirement. Ms. Waters seconded the motion. <br /> <br /> Mr. Craig Brown, Deputy City Attorney, recommended that <br />the parking requirements be the same for the accessory <br />apartments and~duplexes. <br /> <br /> Mr, Vandever stated that he would.support allowing <br />accessory apartments in units~of 1,600 square feet, with the <br />owner occupancy requirement. . ~ <br /> <br /> Ms. Slaughter recommended making the parking <br />requirements consistent with those previously approved for <br />duplexes and Mr. Toscano accepted the amendment to his~ <br />motion. <br /> <br /> Ms. Waters questioned why the parking~requirements <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.