December 18, 1978 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Session 1205, Minutes December 189 1978 Page 8 district. Mr. Weinberg does not feel that members of the district should set their own standards - this was done in the City of St. Louis, and the meaning of the standards in many cases is not clear. Councilman Kelley wanted to know how the regulations are to be enforced. Mr. Weinberg said the regulations are first filed with the City Clerk, a building permit then reaches the Zoning Administrator for approval, and is then forwarded to the Historic District and Feature Commission, which has a period of time for review of the application. The Commission then recommends approval or disapproval to the Zoning Administrator, who is not bound by their recommendation, and he makes the final decision. The Zoning Administrator's decisions may be appealed by taking them to-Ehe.Bbard of Adjustment. PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENT TO ZONING CODE - SITE PLAN REVIEW The Council has scheduled a public hearing at 8:30 F.M. this evening to con- sider a proposed amendment to the Zoning Code which will require a site plan review for new development or substantial addition (a 25% increase of floor space). The amendment would include "SR" Single Residential and %R" Limited Residential Districts. David Magidson, 841 Barkley Square, asked to address the Council. Mr. Magid - son read a memo dated March 22 from Al Goldman, Director of Planning, to the Plan Commision on the subject, "Development Management Controls," which discusses the substance of the subject of this public hearing and had further comments. Councilman Lieberman siid he would like to hear Mr. Magidson's views on site plan review. Mr. Lieberman said all that Council wanted tonight was to hear the public's views on the general idea of becoming more restrictive in terms of site plan review. Councilman Adams said this proposed amendment simply would give the Council more control on development. Councilman Metcalfe said she was the one who originally asked that this proposal be referred to the Plan Commission, and that she had asked for this with the idea that the Council would have the opportunity to review any major developments which would have an impact on University City. Paul Packman, 6371 Waterman, had a question for the Council. He wanted to know what the current process is, and Councilman Lieberman said the kinds of items that fail under site plan review by Council are listed in the ordinance and include nursing homes, schools, automobile service stations, as examples. Councilman Kel.ey said the Council does not have site plan review over all substantial new coniercial developrients, and that is.what this proposal would do. Councilman Metcalfe said this proposed amendment would give Council site plan review over all new building and 8uh9tautial additions except single family and two-family buildings.