|
justme
Advanced Member
1428 Posts |
 Posted - 05/31/2007 : 08:04:59 AM
|
I listened to the debate Tuesday night about code changes and just finished reading today's paper with a recap and I'm trying to understand what I'm missing.
Although I agree that we need changes, why does it have to be so complicated? Instead of changing the lot size(s), why not restrict the height to the highest peak on surrounding (neighboring) buildings? When a property is demolished, can't we require that it be replaced with the same number of residential units?
This would allow existing lots to remain buildable as currently zoned and prevents unscrupulous contractors from overbuilding and destroying the character of a neighborhood. The only thing that would have to be done by people, who currently have homes sitting on what is considered a double lot, would be for them to make sure the property is identified as such.
It's foolish to try to force people to "use it or lose it". Some of these lots are viewed as security and owners currently have no intention of ever building on them. But it sure is nice to know they could sell it if the need arose. Don't penalize these people. Thank them for leaving the green space.
Okay............. Tell me what I'm not seeing.
|
|
Zoning Code Changes
