virtual meeting 5:00 p.m., june 10, 2020

Virtual Meeting5:00 p.m., June 10, 2020

The Montrose City Planning Commission held a meeting on May 27, 2020, at 5:00 p.m. in City Hall Council Chambers. The meeting agenda was posted in accordance with the Colorado Open Meetings Act (C.R.S. §24-6-401, et.seq.).

PRESENT

Planning Commissioners Greg Easton, Chad Huffman, Karen Vacca, Anthony Russo, David Fishering, Steve Mason, and City staff Scott Murphy, Amy Sharp, Ann Morganthaler, Rachel Allen, Christine Aslakson, Stephen Alcorn and Sharon Dunning.

ABSENT

Jan Chastain

GUESTS

Becky Waugh, Chris Shima, David Coker, Justin Musser, David Beard, Jessica Larson, Wade Pynes, Paul Bannister

CALL TO ORDER

Chairperson Anthony Russo called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Greg Easton moved to approve the minutes of the March 25, 2020 meeting as submitted. Karen Vacca seconded and the motion carried unanimously.

ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS

Amy Sharp announced Rachel Allen, Assistant City Attorney, will give a brief presentation on meeting protocols.

PLANNING COMMISSION ETHICS UPDATE, Rachel Allen, Assistant City Attorney

Rachel Allen gave a presentation on Planning Commissions and how they operate. Rachel covered the legal and ethical responsibilities of the Planning Commission and the importance of it remaining impartial and fair and she discussed the procedural requirements of the hearings.

RZ20-0024 – ESTATES AT STONE RIDGE. This is a proposal to rezone Lots 1-10, 13, 15-28 and 36-56 within the Estates at Stone Ridge Subdivision from R-2 Low Density District to R-3 Medium Density District. David Coker is the applicant.

Amy Sharp introduced this item. All public requirements have been fulfilled and the official files and exhibits have been entered into the record.

Planning Commission May 27, 2020 Page 2 The site is currently located in the R-2 Low Density District. The surrounding lots in this development are zoned R-3 Medium Density District. The applicant would like to rezone to the R-2 Low Density District portion to R-3 Medium Density District to be consistent with the surrounding lots in this subdivision and allow for both single family homes and duplexes.

The staff finds that the criteria have been met, is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, is compatible with existing uses in the area, and recommends approval of the request. The Planning Commission’s role at this meeting is to make a recommendation to City Council and City Council will make a final decision.

David Fishering asked for confirmation that the northern portion of the development is zoned R-3, has townhomes that already exist, and the purpose is to make the entire development all the same zoning. Amy Sharp confirmed stating the purpose of this rezone request is to provide a larger building envelope with reduced setbacks.

Anthony Russo asked how many extra units could be created on this property if the zoning were to be changed to R-3. Amy responded there could be as many as 50 extra dwelling units if the intent were to put duplexes on each lot.

Greg Easton asked what the highest recommended gradient for zoning would be to maintain a buffer between high and low density changes for residential areas. Amy responded there is not a consistent gradient, and there is also B-2 adjacent zoning to this residential area.

Greg Easton asked Scott Murphy about the capacity of Woodgate Road, if there have been traffic studies done and if there has been any thought as to how this might affect the traffic on Woodgate Road. Scott discussed the traffic studies and that the current capacity of Woodgate is currently at about 45% capacity. At some point the City plans to widen Otter Road down to Townsend Avenue to help relieve traffic issues.

Anthony Russo stated many letters were received from the public regarding this agenda item and he summarized the public concerns as safety, traffic congestion, pedestrians walking space, overcrowding in the school, and making sure the building process got done and would look good.

Karen Vacca asked about the previous zoning issue brought before the Planning Commission by this applicant for this subdivision. Anthony stated they would have the applicant answer the question.

David Coker, 501 E Main Street, Montrose, spoke in favor of the proposed rezoning. Mr. Coker stated the Stone Ridge subdivision was developed back in the early 2000s and the north section was always R-3, the other part was R-2. When he bought the property he thought the whole subdivision was zoned R-3. He came up with the idea of putting in duplexes for people who need the type of home where the yard and snow removal were taken care of for them, but the concept was one lot would remain one unit. The lots were deep but not wide and so they replatted the lots with a zero lot line at the garage in order to give more room for the duplexes.

The primary reason for rezoning the R-2 section is the lot dimensions change to where they are wider, but with the R-2 zoning requiring a setback of 25 feet there is less depth on the lots to build on. Mr. Coker stated his plan is to place duplexes on 10 of the lots, with each unit on its own lot. There will be no change in density. Anthony Russo asked if he could accomplish same thing with a variance. Mr. Coker replied yes, and he and the Planning Department looked at that option, but decided this would be the better option.

Planning Commission May 27, 2020 Page 3 David went on to explain his company builds semi-custom homes with custom features. The average home value is over $400,000, compared to the average price of homes in Otter Pond, which he found to be around $413,000. The objective is to have a nice subdivision, but not change the density.

Chris Shima, 2027 Otter Pond Circle, spoke about the proposed zone change. He stated there is a lot of misconception, the big one being there will be increased density.

Anthony reminded everyone the Planning Commission must look at this rezone as what could be done under this zoning and whether it fits with the surrounding area.

Justin Musser, 2018 Otter Pond Circle, spoke about the proposed zone change. His question regarding traffic was answered, but wanted to know if Woodgate Road would reach 100% capacity before anything would be done about it. Scott Murphy responded not many roads are pushed to 100% capacity. What really controls it is the intersections. When delays out of streets get too busy is when traffic signals and roundabouts come into play. This evolves over time. His department routinely does traffic counts and is trying to stay ahead of it throughout town.

Wade Pynes, 1824 Otter Pond, spoke about the proposed zone change. Mr. Pynes asked Scott Murphy about the date the traffic study was conducted. From his observation he feels 45% seems way low. Scott responded it was just completed for the Woodgate alignment. It is a conservative estimated capacity for a given level of service. Traffic is exploding all over town, and Montrose has a big tourist season. The objective is to maintain safety and acceptable loads.

Becky Waugh, 2034 Otter Pond Circle, spoke about the proposed zone change. Her main concern is the actual number of residences in the subdivision if the rezoning takes place, stating there really is a difference between 50 and 100 residences, which the new zoning would allow.

David Beard, Otter Pond, spoke about the proposed zone change. His first concern is the potential of more residences with the rezoning and feels it makes more sense to make boundary adjustments instead of a zone change. His second concern is with the school traffic, and feels the health, safety and welfare issue is not met at all. Mr. Beard wants to go on record that he does not want the property to go from R-2 to R-3, and feels the same thing could be achieved with some boundary adjustments.

Chris Shima, 2027 Otter Pond Circle, returned to speak. He wants to go on record to say he has a big concern about traffic and overcrowding in the school.

Becky Waugh, 2034 Otter Pond Circle, returned to speak. Her thought is to not change the zoning until the traffic problems are addressed.

The public portion of the hearing was closed.

David Fishering addressed David Coker to ask him if the zoning did not change, would the restrictions with current zoning make it so a functional house could not be built because of the dimensions and setbacks.

David Coker, 501 Main Street, returned to comment. Mr. Coker stated with the R-2 zoning there is only 50 feet to work with and so there are no options. All the homes will look the same and he is trying to stay away from that. The zoning is critical for a different look of homes. The intent was never to change density, just to give a little breathing room to build.

Planning Commission May 27, 2020 Page 4 Karen Vacca stated she is having a problem with the order of this process, and wondered if there is some way to limit the traffic. She feels it is not really equipped to handle that much traffic. Stephen Alcorn responded the order is set out in the City Code specifically so we make decisions based solely on the legalities of changing the status, not on sentiment or an emotional decision. As the process moves along and there is a problem at an intersection we address the traffic. We don’t want to stop development in the City.

Greg Easton asked for some clarification about going to a site planning phase, stating all these lots are already platted. He asked what site planning phase would this subdivision have to go through. Scott Murphy answered if David Coker moves forward as he has stated, there will be no more planning processes. It is final platted and those lots are created. If the property changes hands, and goes to a higher density, it will go to a planning process.

Greg Easton clarified his understanding is that it is already platted for 100 units and will stay 100 units, and if someone wanted more units they would have to go through a process to get that approved. Scott Murphy said full disclosure is the zoning could allow higher density, but also part of that planning process are all the traffic studies that would have to demonstrate that the increased density could be supported without creating a public safety hazard, and if not, what are the plans to remedy the situation so the subdivision could be approved and still maintain safety of the corridor.

Greg Easton moved to recommend approval of RZ20-0024, rezoning Lots 1-10, 13, 15-28, 35-56 from R-2 Zoning District to R-3 Zoning District. The proposal meets the code criteria for rezoning based on the evidence presented in the staff report and public testimony. Chad Huffman seconded and the motion passed unanimously.

OTHER BUSINESS

None.

The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for June 10, 2020.

PUBLIC COMMENT

None.

ADJOURNMENT

Anthony Russo adjourned the meeting at 6:18 p.m.

_____________________________________

CHAIRPERSON

_____________________________________

ATTEST

1

City of Montrose

Planning Services Staff Report HILLTOP ADDITION ANX20-0020

INITIAL ZONING

PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN FULFILLED. THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN POSTED, LETTERS SENT TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 100 FEET, AND AN AD APPEARED IN THE MONTROSE DAILY PRESS. IF THERE IS NO OBJECTION FROM THE APPLICANT, PLEASE ENTER THE STAFF REPORT AND EXHIBITS INTO THE OFFICIAL RECORD.

Background: The Hilltop Addition is a proposed annexation 15.75 acres in size, located at 366 6600 Rd, north of Locust Rd and between 6600 Rd and 6650 Rd. The Annexation hearing before City Council is scheduled for July 7, 2020. Location maps are included in this packet. Proposed Zoning: R-4 High Density District Applicant: Hilltop Health Services Corporation Staff Analysis: 1. Below is an excerpt from the Municipal Code regarding the zoning of new annexations:

Section, 4-4-29(B), Zoning of Additions: “The Planning Commission shall recommend to the Council a zoning district designation for all property annexed to the City not previously subject to City zoning, and shall follow the review procedure set out in Section 4-4-31 in arriving at its recommendation. Proceedings concerning the zoning of property to be annexed may be commenced at any time prior to the effective date of the annexation ordinance or thereafter. The zoning designation for newly annexed property shall not adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare (emphasis added).”

2. Municipal Code, Section 4-4-8(A): R-4 High Density District: Intent: The R-4 High Density District is intended to provide for high density multiple family residences and to allow variable densities. This allows a variety in the types of residences.”

3. The proposed zoning is compatible with existing zoning and general conditions in the area. The property is adjacent to R-4 High Density District zoning directly to the south, as well as agricultural uses.

4. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the area of the Addition as Residential Mixed Density Medium.

5. The R-4 zoning does not appear to be adverse to the public health, safety and welfare.

2

Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of R-4 High Density District. Planning Commission Recommendation Alternatives: Approval Motion Recommendation:

“I hereby make a motion to approve the initial zoning request of R-4 High Density District. The request meets the Code criteria based on the evidence and testimony presented at this hearing and in the staff report.”

Denial/No Action Motion Recommendation: “I hereby make a motion to take no action on the request. The request does not meet the Code criteria based on the evidence and testimony presented at this hearing and in the staff report.”

Amy Sharp, Senior Planner

3

Vicinity Map

4

Site and Location Maps for Reference:

(5) Schools.

(Ord. No. 2472, § 4-4-7, 5-7-2019)

Sec. 4-4-7.1. "R-3A" Medium High Density District.

(A) Intent.The "R-3A"MediumHigh Density District is intended to provide an area which

is suitable for single-family homes, duplexes and multifamily residences with intermediate

overall density. This district provides for other uses which are compatible with such

residential uses.

(B) Uses by Right.

(1) Single-family homes, duplexes, multifamily residences.

(2) Public utility service facilities.

(3) Government buildings and facilities.

(4) Parks and recreation facilities owned or operated by a homeowner association.

(5) Places of worship.

(6) Accessory uses.

Childcare facilities. A childcare facility shall be considered an accessory use to a

residence in all districts, provided nomore than eight children under 13 years of age

are present on the premises at any one time, including children of the family living

in the residence; a childcare facility shall not be considered an accessory use to a

residence when a greater number of children is present on the premises at any one

time. The facility must comply with all appropriate State Statutes and regulations.

(7) Short-term rentals.

(C) Conditional Uses.

(1) Childcare facilities. A childcare facility shall be a conditional use in all districts if

more than eight but less than 16 children under 13 years of age are present on the

premises at any one time, including children of the family living in the residence, in

accordance with State Statutes and regulations.

(2) Skilled nursing and assisted living facilities.

(3) Schools.

(Ord. No. 2472, § 4-4-7.1, 5-7-2019)

Sec. 4-4-8. "R-4" High Density District.

(A) Intent. The "R-4" High Density District is intended to provide for high density

multiple-family residences and to allow variable densities. This allows variety in the types of

residences.

§ 4-4-8BUILDING REGULATIONS

CDIV:73

Sec. 4-4-8. "R-4" High Density District.

(B) Uses by Right.

(1) Single-family homes, duplexes, and multiple-family residences.



(4) Parks and recreation facilities owned or operated by a homeowner association.


(6) Accessory uses.

(i) Bed and breakfast operations operated solely by the residents of a residence

providing nomore than four bedrooms for rent in the dwelling unit, and the only

meal provided on the premises shall be breakfast to the renters. The lot shall

be at least 6,250 square feet and at least 3,125 square feet per rental

bedroom.

(ii) Childcare facilities. A childcare facility shall be considered an accessory use to

a residence in all districts, provided nomore than eight children under 13 years

of age are present on the premises at any one time, including children of the

family living in the residence; a childcare facility shall not be considered an

accessory use to a residence when a greater number of children is present on

the premises at any one time. The facility must comply with all appropriate

State Statutes and regulations.



(1) Skilled nursing and assisted living facilities.





(3) Schools.

(Ord. No. 2472, § 4-4-8, 5-7-2019)

Sec. 4-4-8.1. "R-5" Low Density/Manufactured Housing District.

(A) Intent. The "R-5" Low Density/Manufactured Housing District is intended to provide

a quiet, low density development for single-family residences. Environmental protection is

provided by allowing only single-family residences with certain other compatible land uses.

Manufactured housing meeting the performance standards of Subsection (D) of this

Section is allowed.

§ 4-4-8 MONTROSE OFFICIAL CODE

CDIV:74

1

City of Montrose

Planning Services Staff Report SINNER SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN & PRELIMINARY PLAT SUB20-0022


Background: The Sinner Subdivision Combined Sketch Plan & Preliminary Plat is a proposed plat that will subdivide Lot 2 of the Marbella Minor Subdivision which consists of 12.8 acres into 5 new lots. These lots will range from 1.7 acres up to 3 acres. Lot 1 will front on the existing 6840 Road and the rest of the lots will front on the existing East Oak Grove Road. Since no engineering is needed, this project was given the approval to proceed as a combined Sketch Plan and Preliminary Plat. The hearing before City Council to approve or deny the Preliminary Plat is scheduled for July 7, 2020. Location maps are included in this packet. A Final Plat will also be required within five (5) years of approval of this Preliminary Plat (City of Montrose Municipal Code, Section 4-7-5(C)(1)(a). Total Size: 12.8 acres Applicant: Paul Sinner Staff Analysis: 1. Municipal Code, Section 4-7-5(A)(2): Subdivision Procedure.

(A)(2) “The proposal shall be consistent with the Master Plan, City subdivision and zoning regulations, standards and other applicable ordinances and regulations and will be reviewed considering the following at a minimum: (a) Conformance with the master plan and zoning regulations;

(b) Relationship of development to topography, soils, drainage, flooding, potential hazard areas and other physical characteristics; (c) Availability of water, means of sewage collection and treatment, storm water drainage, access and other utilities and services; (d) Compatibility with the natural environment, wildlife, vegetation and unique natural features;

(e) Adjacent streets and traffic flow, including pedestrian access; (f) Availability of fire, police and other emergency services protection; (g) Impacts on area schools.

2

2. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the area as Residential Mixed Density Low.

3. Municipal Code, Section 4-4-5: R-1A Large Estate District. Intent: The “R-1A” Large Estate District and “R-1B” Small Estate District are intended to provide an area of large single-family residential lots with semi-rural environment.

4. The proposed use is compatible with existing zoning and general conditions in the area. The property is adjacent to properties that are zoned “RL” Rural Living and agricultural uses.

5. The Sinner Subdivision Preliminary Plat does not appear to be adverse to the public health, safety and welfare and is in compliance with the City’s Subdivision Regulations.

Staff Recommendation: Conditional Approval Condition:

1. [Standard Condition]: The approval of this Plat is expressly conditioned upon City staff ensuring that all policies, regulations, ordinances and municipal code provisions are met and that the Applicant adequately addresses all of staff's concerns prior to the execution of the Final Plat. The City staff is not authorized by this approval to execute the Final Plat prior to all conditions being satisfied.

Planning Commission Recommendation Alternatives: Conditional Approval Motion: “I hereby make a motion to approve the preliminary plat with the condition(s) as stated in the staff report. The request meets the code criteria based on the evidence and testimony presented at this hearing and in the staff report.” Denial Motion: “I hereby make a motion to deny the preliminary plat. The application does not meet the code criteria based on evidence and testimony presented at this hearing and in the staff report.” Amy Sharp, Senior Planner

3

Vicinity Map

4


1

City of Montrose

Planning Services Staff Report RIVER CROSSING ADDITION ANX20-0025

INITIAL ZONING


Background: The River Crossing Addition is a proposed annexation 36.33 acres in size. The parcel is located west of S. Townsend Avenue and between Ogden Road and S. Rio Grande Avenue. The Annexation hearing before City Council is scheduled for July 7, 2020. Location maps are included in this packet. Proposed Zoning: B-3 General Commercial District Applicant: Jerry W. Trudell and Milan Hawxby Staff Analysis: 1. Below is an excerpt from the Municipal Code regarding the zoning of new annexations:

Section, 4-4-29(B), Zoning of Additions: “The Planning Commission shall recommend to the Council a zoning district designation for all property annexed to the City not previously subject to City zoning, and shall follow the review procedure set out in Section 4-4-31 in arriving at its recommendation. Proceedings concerning the zoning of property to be annexed may be commenced at any time prior to the effective date of the annexation ordinance or thereafter. The zoning designation for newly annexed property shall not adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare (emphasis added).”

2. Municipal Code, Section 4-4-14(A): B-3 General Commercial District. Intent: The “B-3” General Commercial District is intended for a large variety of uses that require large storage areas to conveniently serve customers.

3. The proposed zoning is compatible with existing zoning and general conditions in the area. The property is adjacent to properties that are zoned B-2, B-3, and P (Public).

4. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the area of the Addition as General Commercial.

5. The B-3 zoning does not appear to be adverse to the public health, safety and welfare.

2

Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of B-3 General Commercial District. Planning Commission Recommendation Alternatives: Approval Motion Recommendation:

“I hereby make a motion to approve the initial zoning request of B-3 General Commercial District. The request meets the Code criteria based on the evidence and testimony presented at this hearing and in the staff report.”

Denial/No Action Motion Recommendation: “I hereby make a motion to take no action on the request. The request does not meet the Code criteria based on the evidence and testimony presented at this hearing and in the staff report.”

Amy Sharp, Senior Planner

3

Vicinity Map

4


(4) Public museums and visitor centers.

(5) Public parks.

(6) Public recreation land and facilities.

(7) Private recreation facilities.

(8) Open space corridors.


(10) Parking facilities.

(11) Renewable energy facilities.

(12) Accessory uses.


(1) Commercial businesses.

(2) Single-family homes.

(3) Multiple-family residences.

(4) Golf courses.





(6) Antennas and towers are allowed only as conditional uses in all zones and are

subject to the provisions of Section 4-4-21 and the other applicable requirements of

City ordinances and regulations.

(Ord. No. 2472, § 4-4-11.1, 5-7-2019)

Sec. 4-4-12. "B-1" Central Business District.

(A) Intent. The "B-1" Central Business District is intended as a shopping and business

center for the City and surrounding area. The most intensive commercial use of buildings

and land is encouraged with parking primarily of public concern. No off-street parking is

required, except where otherwise specified. This district is oriented to pedestrian traffic.

(B) Uses by Right.

(1) Retail stores, business and professional offices, and service establishments which

cater to the general shopping public.

(2) Libraries and museums.



CDIV:79


(5) Private and fraternal clubs.

(6) Theaters.

(7) Restaurants and taverns.

(8) College or other place of adult education.

(9) Fueling stations which comply with the following criteria:

(a) All fuel storage, except propane, shall be located underground.

(b) All fuel pumps, lubrication and service facilities shall be located at least 20 feet

from any street right-of-way line.


(11) Childcare facilities.

(12) Parks and playgrounds.

(13) Accessory uses.

(14) Hotels and motels (off-street parking required).

(15) Single-family homes, duplexes, and multiple-family residences (off-street parking

required).


(17) Public transportation facilities.




(1) Schools.

(2) Funeral homes.

(3) Building materials businesses.

(4) Automobile and other vehicle sales or service establishments.

(5) Automobile body shops.

(6) Distribution, warehouse and wholesale operations.

(7) Drive-in or drive-through restaurants.

(8) Storage facilities.


CDIV:80




(D) Outdoor Storage Businesses. Businesses that need outdoor storage are not com-

patible with this district.

(Ord. No. 2472, § 4-4-12, 5-7-2019)

Sec. 4-4-13. "B-2" Highway Commercial District.

(A) Intent. The "B-2" Highway Commercial District is intended to provide for business

oriented toward serving the motoring public. This district provides for the convenient

exchange of goods and services along the major thoroughfares of the City.

(B) Uses by Right.

(1) Those listed in the "B-1" district as uses by right.

(2) Self-service laundry facilities.

(3) Drive-in or drive-through restaurants.

(4) Car washes.

(5) Childcare facilities.

(6) Rental storage units inside a building.

(7) Veterinary clinics or hospitals for small animals.

(8) Skilled nursing and assisted living facilities and hospitals.

(9) Retail building material supply businesses.





(1) Those conditional uses listed for the "B-1" district.

(2) Recreational vehicle parks and campgrounds.

(3) Retail stores, business and service establishments serving the general public but

which also involve limited manufacturing of the products supplied.





CDIV:81

(D) Not Included in this District. The following uses are not to be construed as a use by

right or conditional use in the "B-2" Highway Commercial District:

(1) Farm implement sales or service establishments.

(2) Construction and contractor's equipment storage facilities.

(3) Machine and welding shops.

(4) Above ground storage facilities for hazardous fuels.

(5) Manufacturing and industrial uses except as allowed by Subsection (C)(3) of this

Section.

(6) Storage facilities. Small rental storage units are allowed. See Subsection (B)(6) of

this Section.

(E) Performance Standards. No use shall be established, maintained or conducted in

any "B-2" Highway Commercial District that will result in any public or private nuisance.

(Ord. No. 2472, § 4-4-13, 5-7-2019)

Sec. 4-4-13.1. "B-2A" Regional Commercial District.

(A) Intent. "B-2A" Regional Commercial District is intended for a full spectrum of retail

and services uses including both convenience goods and general merchandise.

(B) Uses by Right.

(1) Uses listed as uses by right in the "B-2" and "B-1" districts.

(2) Automobile and vehicle sales or service establishments.


(4) Mobile home sales or service establishments.

(5) Building materials sales establishments.

(6) Rental businesses.

(7) Veterinary clinics or hospitals for large animals.


(9) Automotive repair and service establishments.





(1) Uses listed as conditional uses in the "B-1" and "B-2" districts.


CDIV:82

(2) Warehouses and storage facilities.

(3) Manufacturing uses allowed in the "I-1" Light Industrial district.




(D) Not Included in the District. The following uses are not to be construed as a use by

right or a conditional use in the "B-2A" Regional Commercial District:

(1) Manufacturing and industrial uses, except as allowed by Subsections (C)(1) and (3)

of this Section.

(2) Above ground storage facilities for hazardous fuel.

(3) Construction and contractor's equipment storage facilities.

(4) Animal boarding facilities.

(E) Performance Standards.

(1) Manufacturing and storage associated with manufacturing shall be indoors.

(2) No use may create a nuisance to other property by reasons of dust, odor, noise,

light, smoke, or vibration or other adverse effects which cannot be effectively

confined on the premises.

(Ord. No. 2472, § 4-4-13.1, 5-7-2019)

Sec. 4-4-14. "B-3" General Commercial District.

(A) Intent. The "B-3" General Commercial District is intended for a large variety of uses

that require large storage areas to conveniently serve customers.

(B) Uses by Right.

(1) Uses listed as "uses by right" in the "B-1," "B-2" and "B-2A" districts.

(2) Automobile and vehicle sales or service establishments.


(4) Mobile home sales or service establishments.

(5) Building materials sales establishments.

(6) Rental businesses.

(7) Feed storage and sales establishments.

(8) Veterinary clinics or hospitals for large animals.


(10) Automotive repair and service establishments.


CDIV:83

Sec. 4-4-14. "B-3" General Commercial District.

(A) Intent. The "B-3" General Commercial District is intended for a large variety of uses

that require large storage areas to conveniently serve customers.

(1) Uses listed as "uses by right" in the "B-1," "B-2" and "B-2A" districts.

(11) Construction and contractor's office and equipment storage facilities.

(12) Above ground storage facilities for hazardous fuels.





(1) Uses listed as conditional uses in the "B-1," "B-2" and "B-2A" districts.

(2) Warehouses and storage facilities.




(D) Not Included in this District. The following uses are not to be construed as a use by

right or a conditional use in the "B-3" General Commercial district:

(1) Manufacturing and industrial uses except as allowed by Subsection (C)(1) of this

Section.

(E) Performance Standards.

(1) Manufacturing and storage associated with manufacturing shall be indoors.

(2) No use may create a nuisance to other property by reasons of dust, odor, noise,

light, smoke, or vibration or other adverse effects which cannot be effectively

confined on the premises.

(Ord. No. 2472, § 4-4-14, 5-7-2019)

Sec. 4-4-15. "B-4" Neighborhood Shopping District.

(A) Intent. The "B-4" Neighborhood Shopping District is intended to provide for retail

shopping and services on a parcel or parcels of land collectively no greater than approxi-

mately five acres in size, with a convenient location relative to residential neighborhoods.

(B) Uses by Right.



(3) Retail stores, business and professional offices and service establishments which

cater to the general shopping public.

(4) Restaurants.

(5) Self-service laundry facilities.


CDIV:84

virtual meeting 5:00 p.m., june 10, 2020

Documents