Laserfiche WebLink
COMPARZSON AND ANALYSZS W:[TH EXIST~[NG ORDZNANCE <br /> <br />ARTI'CLE 8 <br /> <br />Purpose: <br /> <br />Major Points Discussed: <br /> <br />To establish parking and driveway requirements for the County. <br /> <br />Major Similarities/Differences: <br /> <br />8.1.1. Applicability and 8.1.1.1 cssentially the same as 10-2 Compliance in the <br />existing ordinance <br /> <br />8.1.1.2. Exception--Single family is not shown as an exception in the existing <br />ordinance, and 2 spaces are required; the existing ordinance also shows no <br />exception by district. The UDO provides exception for single family from this <br />portion of the ordinance, along with areas zoned CC. <br /> <br />8.1.2.1. Location--Same as required in existing ordinance <br /> <br />Limitation of parking spaces allowed (50%) in the setback area for lots less than <br />200' in depth--this is not stated in the existing ordinance. <br /> <br />8.1.2.1.1. Parking spaces not allowed in front yard setback area for lots <br />exceeding 200' in depth this is not stated in existing ordinance. <br /> <br />8.1.2.2 Hodification to Required Parking--not allowed in existing ordinance in the <br />ordinance text. <br /> <br />8.1.2.3 Landscaping--required in existing ordinance <br />8.1.2.4 Exterior Lighting--similar requirements in existing ordinance <br />8.1.2.5 Paving required--similar to existing ordinance <br /> <br />8.1.2.5.1 Overflow parking--similar to existing ordinance <br /> <br />8.1.2.5.2 Paving Exemption for Assembly Uses--similar to existing ordinance <br /> <br />8.1.2.6 Overhang protection--similar to existing ordinance <br />8.1.2.7 Striping Required--not addressed in existing ordinance <br />8.1.2.8 Backing Hovements Prohibited--similar to existing ordinance <br /> <br /> <br />