Laserfiche WebLink
CASE # <br /> <br />PRoPOsED REVISIONS TO THE B-1 AND B-2 BUSINESS DISTRICTS <br /> By: Zoning Administrator Sylvia Frolik <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />As a follow Up to, our amendments to the B-3 Highway District regulations, I have drafted changes <br />to the B-1 Bfisiness District and B-2 Business District. In addition to that, you may recall that <br />about one y4ar ago, i proposed a zoning amendment to eliminate conflicts between zoning <br />designations and zoning definitions. There are properties outside of the Urban Area that are zoned <br />B-1 Business[ this conflicts with the definition of Rural Business (commercial property outside the <br />Urban DistriCt). ,Owners of B-1 properties outside the Urban area were opposed to the zoning <br />designation change to Rural Business. The zoning amendment did not go forward and staff was <br />directed to n~[ rg¢ the two districts and qualify permitted uses and standards based on whether or <br />not the property was served by sewer and water. <br /> <br />Enclosed for your review is what I propose as the merging of the Rural Business District and the B- <br />1 Business District regulations and the proposal for the B-2 Business District. The merging of the <br />B-1 and Rural Business Districts will also require a zoning map change to reclassify Rural <br />Business pro~er[ies to B-1 Business. Chapter 9 will also have to be amended to delete the <br />definition of Rural Business. <br /> <br />Observations: <br /> <br />For your corripaflson purposes, I am also enclosing a copy of the existing Rural Business, B-1 <br />Business and B-2 Business District regulations. As you will note, the permitted uses Rural <br />Business an~ B-i Business were identical. The only differences I could find between the two <br />districts had .to do with dimensions and area in the Standards section and setbacks in the Setback <br />section. With the exception of lot size and lot width, we may want to consider amending these <br />standards an~setbacks to bring consistency to what will now be one district. <br /> <br />As with the 13-3 Business District, the permitted uses have been amended to include those uses we <br /> I , <br />have already determined are acceptable with a conditional use permit contingent upon meeting <br />certain criteria. Those criteria have been converted to performance standards. We have also <br />included a Japuary 1, 1997 date for all properties to be in conformance with site improvements <br />(hardsurface parking and curbing). <br /> <br />Some items Iiwould like to discuss with the Commission are: 1) In the B-2 District Permitted <br />Uses, what isi'Essential Services'? 2) Note that Item (i) of the B-2 Permitted Uses prohibits on- <br />site consumption :of food purchased. We should discuss whether this is too restrictive or perhaps <br />allow for some on-site consumption with a restriction on the area devoted to the deli and seating. <br />3) You will note that there currently are no provisions for outside storage, sales, service, rental as <br />an accessory use of property in the B-2 district; no change to that is proposed. 4) The B-3 District <br />regulations that were forwarded to Council were not yet introduced; Council questioned that <br />standard lan'gh.' age used in all districts regarding architectural control. They have not given me <br />direction as to what they are looking for as far as architectural standards, but until I have an <br />opportunity tq discuss it more with Councilmember Hardin, but in the interim I have proposed the <br />language you~..see-in Subd. 4, Item (1) in the B-2 District and Subd. 4, Item (4) in the B-1 District. <br />Refer to the ,[copies of the existing regulations for that language currently used to address <br />architectural ~ontrol. <br /> <br />IA' <br /> <br /> <br />