EDITORIAL
Zoning
district is unnecessary
Just as there are
times to act on good legislative proposals, there are also times to pass
on unnecessary ordinances. A proposal before Village Council that would
establish a new residential zoning district, whose only purpose is to
create larger pieces of property, falls under the category of unnecessary.
Council should do an about-face and reject this proposal, for it would
do little to enhance the Village Zoning Code.
At its meeting Monday,
July 21, Council is scheduled to vote on the second reading of an ordinance
that would create a fourth residential zoning district, Residence A-1,
in which lots would have a street frontage, or lot width, of 75 feet.
The new district would not be applied to property until someone makes
that kind of request. Any area rezoned Residence A-1 would have to be
at least 10 acres large.
When Council members
first considered the proposal last month, they were vague about their
reasons for supporting it, and there was surprisingly little discussion
on the matter. One Council member did say that the district would be useful
for families that want larger lots for play areas for children, while
another implied that it would provide more options for executive-style,
or larger, housing. When it gave its blessing to the proposal last month,
Village Planning Commission said that the new zone would provide the Village
with another zoning tool, providing more building and zoning options in
town. Next week, Council members should do a better job of explaining
why they think the new district is needed.
Though there may
be no harm in creating a new zoning district, there really appears to
be no need to do so. Right now larger lots can be created in town through
the current residential districts in the Zoning Code. The frontage standards
in Residences A, B and C are minimum requirements.
The creation of the
new district also contradicts a decision Council made earlier this spring
to decrease the minimum lot frontage of the three residential districts
the Village currently has on the books. The frontage requirements were
reduced, in part, to make more lots eligible for development. While Council
has made a point of emphasizing its desire to encourage more development
in town, it’s unclear how Residence A-1 helps achieve that goal.
One more point: there
appears to be little interest in the community for Residence A-1. The
proposal creating the district sparked a good debate in the Planning Commission,
but it has tiptoed through Council. Local residents should let Council
know what they think about this proposed zoning district. So far, the
silence has been almost deafening.
—Robert
Mihalek
|