|
June 14, 1971
<br />
<br />Zoning Petition Z 71-18 -~'Joe A. Freedman
<br />
<br /> A~torney Stanley Livesay. spole i~ support.
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Irvine Smith and seconded by Mr. Raymond
<br />was approved on first reading, and by the following vote:
<br />
<br /> "ZONING AMEND'IMENT ORDINANCE Z 7t-18"
<br />
<br />Smith,
<br />
<br />the following ordinanc~
<br />
<br />Ayes: Holley, Johnson, King, Irvine Smith, Raymond Smith, Barnes
<br />Nays: Turner
<br />
<br />Zoning Petition Z 71-19 - Everett A. Bond, Jr.
<br />
<br /> On ~motion of Mr. King and seconded by Mr. Irvine Smith, the following ordinance was
<br />approved on first reading, and by the following vote:
<br />
<br />"ZONING AMBNDMBNT ORD~41qN~B"
<br />
<br /> Ayes: Holley, Johnson, King, Irvine Smith, Raymond Smith, Burner, Barnes
<br /> Nays: None
<br />
<br />Use Permit 71-4 - Petition of Southern Fuel Distributors, Inc.
<br />
<br />Mr. F. D, Hodgson spoke.
<br />
<br />On motion of Mr. Holley, to concur with Mr. Hodgso!n'S~recomm~nd~ons.
<br />
<br /> A substitute motion by Mr. Raymond Smith and seconded ~y Mr. Irvine Smith to refer the
<br />petition to the Planning Commission for review and clarification, was adopted, and by the
<br />following vote:
<br />
<br />Ayes: Johnson, King, Irvine Smith, Raymond Smith, Turner, harm, s
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br />with
<br />first
<br />
<br />71-271 On motion of Mr. Irvine Smith and seconded by Mr. Rgymond Smith, to concur
<br />the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the following ordinance was approved
<br />reading, and by the following vote:
<br />
<br />on
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE
<br />SECTIONS 4-8(b), 4-8.1(b), 4-9(b), 4-9.1(b),
<br />TO USE PERMITS."
<br />
<br />OF THE CITY OF PORTSMOUTH, 1961 BY AMENDING
<br />4-10(b), AND 4-12(b) ~HEREO~, PERTAINING
<br />
<br />Ayes: Johnson, King, Irvine Smith, Raymond Smith, Barnes
<br />Nays: Holley, Turner
<br />
<br />Attorney Stanley L~vesay spoke in favor.
<br />
<br /> 71-272 The following letter ~sm City Attorney M. A. Korb, Jr., Re: "Blanket Use
<br />Permit", was read:
<br />
<br /> "Some months ago t~is Council requested that the Department of Law draft an amendment
<br />to the Zoning Ordinance which would enable the City Council to grant use permits for any use
<br />which it felt would be desirable but which was not already enumerated in Article 4 of the
<br />%oning Ordinance. In accordance with your request the desired ordinance was drafted by
<br />Assistant City Attorney William J. O'Brien, Jr.
<br />
<br /> Normally, I would not publicly comment on legislation drafted at the behest of the Counc
<br />u~less asked to do so. However, I feel that the Code Of Ethics of my profession requires
<br />that I publicly express my opinion as to the validity Of the ~lanket use permit concept and
<br />the proposed amendment. I believe that the blanket use permit concept is forbidden by the
<br />Code and Constitution of Virginia and the Constitution of the United States and that if such
<br />amendment is adopted it will do inordinate damage to~e Zoning Ordinance of this City. No
<br />amount of drafting magic can remedy the fatal defect o~ said concept the lack of adequate
<br />standards, guidelines and safeguards to govern the gra~ting of such use permits. Unlimited
<br />discretionary power, which is the bais of this concept, ~s not permitted by the aforesaid
<br />laws and constitutions because such unfettered discretilon w~uld make possible unequal and
<br />arbitrary treatment under the law. Also, this c~ncept 'if enacted would work to undermine the
<br />rest of the Zoning Ordinance which is founded upon and ~constructed of specific standards and
<br />stringent safeguards. Therefore, it is my opinion that~ the so-called "blanket use Permit"
<br />would be unconstitutional and inappropriate in whateve~ form drafted. Therefore, I recommend
<br />rejection of the proposed amendment.
<br />
<br /> In closing, I would like to add that Assistant Citly Attorney O'Brien concured in the
<br />above-stated opinions and requested that I publicly explress his concurrence in the body of
<br />this letter."
<br />
<br /> On motion of Mr. Irvine Smith and seconded by Mr. Turner, the following ordinance was
<br />defeated by the following vote:
<br />
<br />"AN ORDINAM~zTO ~END THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THEI CITY OF PORTSMOUTH, 1961,
<br />AMENDING SECTIONS 4-3(b), 4-4(b) 4-S(b), 4-6(b), 4-7(b), 4-8(b), 4-8.1(b),
<br />4-9(b), 4-9.1(b), 4-10~b), 4-11(~), 4-12(b), AND 4-1S(b) THEREOF, PERTAINING
<br />TO USE PERMITS."
<br />
<br />BY
<br />
<br />Ayes: Holley, Johnson, King, Irvine Smi!th, Raymond Smith, Turner, Barnes
<br />Nays: None
<br />
<br />il
<br />
<br />
<br />
|