CITY PLANNING COMMISSION

CITY OF NEW ORLEANS

MITCHELL J. LANDRIEU
MAYOR

ROBERT D. RIVERS
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
LESLIE T. ALLEY
DEPUTY DIRECTOR

City Planning Commission Staff Report

Executive Summary
Zoning Docket: 006/17
Applicant:

3800 Howard Investors, LLC

Request:

This is a request for a Zoning Change from a BIP Business-Industrial Park

District to an MU-2 High Intensity Mixed-Use District.

Location:

3800 Howard Avenue

Summary of Proposal:
Zoning Docket 006/17 is a request for a Zoning Change from a BIP BusinessIndustrial Park District to an MU-2 High Intensity Mixed-Use District. The
subject property is the Times Picayune building, the former headquarters and
printing press of the newspaper. The approximately 9 acres site has been vacant
for about 1 year. The applicant is proposing to change the zoning to MU-2
District to prepare the site for development but does not state the development
plans for this property. The staff does not believe that the proposed MU-2 High
Intensity Mixed-Use District zoning designation is appropriate for this site for a
number of reasons. The proposed MU-2 District zoning is intended for walkable
neighborhood centers, while the subject property is physically isolated and not
easily accessible for pedestrians or vehicles. The site is separated by railroad
tracks on two sides and the Broad Street overpass and the Pontchartrain
Expressway on the other two. This results in a site only accessible by vehicles
along minor industrial streets or by taking Howard Avenue a half a mile from
Jefferson Davis Parkway. The sites only pedestrian access involves detours of
multiple blocks or navigating high speed merging traffic on the Broad Street
overpass.
The subject site and adjacent properties have a long history of industrial and
business use which is more compatible with the current zoning than the proposed
zoning. The zoning change request would result in a loss of industrial land at this
site, and would not protect adjacent industrial districts from the encroachment of
incompatible uses. There are alternatives, such as the Planned Development

ZD 006/17

process, that would allow for some flexibility from the current zoning
requirements while not necessitating a zoning change.
In addition, the proposal is not consistent with the Master Plan. The property
owner has submitted a Master Plan Amendment application to change the Future
Land Use Map designation to Mixed-Use High Density; however, this request is
still being evaluated by staff, and a zoning change request based on the new
Master Plan Future Land Use Map designation would be premature. For all of
these reasons, the staff does not support this zoning change.
Master Plan: The proposal is not consistent with the Master Plan.
Recommendation:
The staff recommends DENIAL of the request.
Reasons for Recommendation:
1. The proposed MU-2 District is too intense for this physically isolated site, given
the limited surrounding infrastructure, and the fact that the site is not easily
accessible for vehicles or pedestrians.
2. The request is incompatible with the historic land use of the site and the current
land use of adjacent properties.
3. The proposal would result in a loss of industrial land and would not protect
adjacent industrial districts from the encroachment of incompatible uses.
4. The request does not meet all standards for approval set forth in Article 4 of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, including not being consistent with the Master
Plan.
5. There are other alternatives for developing the site under the current zoning
designation, such as taking advantage of the flexibilities permitted through the
Planned Development process.

ZD 006/17

City Planning Commission Meeting

Tuesday, January 10, 2017

CPC Deadline: 03/11/17

CC Deadline: 60 days from receipt
Council District: B - Cantrell

PRELIMINARY STAFF REPORT

Zoning Docket: 006/17
To: City Planning Commission
From: Robert Rivers, Executive Director
Stephen Kroll, Planning Administrator
Prepared by: Nicholas Kindel
Date: January 3, 2017
I.

GENERAL INFORMATION

Applicant:

3800 Howard Investors, LLC

Request:

This is a request for a Zoning Change from a BIP Business-Industrial Park

District to an MU-2 High Intensity Mixed-Use District.

Location:

The petitioned property is located on Square 590, portions of Squares 571, 572,
and 589, and portions of closed Palmetto and Dorgenois Streets, all of which are
bounded by South Broad Street, the Pontchartrain Expressway, Howard Avenue,
Euphrosine Street, and the Union Passenger Terminal right-of-way. The
municipal address is 3800 Howard Avenue. (PD 4)

Description: The subject property is a large irregularly shaped site that includes portions of
multiple squares located between Howard Avenue/the Pontchartrain Expressway,
S. Broad Street, Euphrosine Street, and the Union Passenger Terminal right-ofway. The almost 9 acre site is the location of the former Times Picayune
headquarters. The building was first occupied in 1967, but it has been vacant
since January 2016 when print production at the newspaper moved out of state.1
The applicant is proposing to change the zoning from a BIP Business-Industrial
Park District to an MU-2 High Intensity Mixed-Use District. The application
materials state that the purpose of the zoning change request is to prepare the site
for development, but no specific information is provided. In addition to the zoning
change request, the applicant has submitted a Master Plan Amendment to change
the Future Land Use Map designation for this site from BC Business Center to
MUH Mixed-Use High Density. This request is currently being considered by the
City Planning Commission, and the current BC Business Center designation will
1

The news staff moved out of this location in 2013.

ZD 006/17

still apply to the site until if and when the Master Plan Amendment is approved
by City Council.
Why is City Planning Commission action required?
The City Planning Commission is required to make a recommendation on all requests for
zoning map amendments prior to City Council action, in accordance with Article 4,
Section 4.2.D.3 Action by the City Planning Commission of the Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance.
II.

ANALYSIS

A.

What is the zoning of the surrounding areas? What is the existing land use? And
how are the surrounding areas used?
Zoning
The petitioned site is at the center of a BIP Business-Industrial Park District corridor
located between the Pontchartrain Expressway and Earhart Boulevard/Euphrosine Street.
This corridor is over one mile long extending from S. Claiborne Avenue to almost
Jefferson Davis Parkway (S. Rendon Street). The purpose of the BIP District in Article
16, Section 16.1.D of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance is as follows:
The BIP Business-Industrial Park District is intended to provide appropriate
locations for certain types of business and light industrial facilities in welldesigned and landscaped campus environments, and provide employment
opportunities near residential areas. Supporting commercial uses are permitted,
primarily for service to employees in the district. Typical development in the
district would be that which is commonly known as an office and industrial park.
Across Euphrosine Street from the subject property is a corridor of a C-3 Heavy
Commercial District that is located between Earhart Boulevard and Euphrosine Street.
This C-3 District provides a buffer from the industrial uses along the highway to the OSN Neighborhood Open Space District and HU-RM2 Multiple-Family Residential District
located on the other side of Earhart Boulevard.
On the opposite side of the Pontchartrain Express is an approximately 20 block MU-2
High Intensity Mixed-Use District that is bounded by the S. Broad Street, the
Pontchartrain Expressway, Tulane Avenue, and S. Galvez Street. The proposed zoning
change would extend this district to the other side of the highway. On the other side of
both S. Broad Street and the Pontchartrain Expressway from the subject property is a LI
Light Industrial District. This is location of the Criminal Justice Complex.
The zoning history for the subject property, and most of the adjacent properties, has been
industrial or unrestricted since zoning was first established in 1929. See the section below
for the complete zoning history of the site.

ZD 006/17

Land Use
The subject property has a long history of mostly industrial uses. According to the 1909
Sanborn Map, Square 589 was the American Turpentine & Tar Company, and Square
572 was the W.P. Richardson Silicate of Soda Factory. The 1940 Sanborn Map shows
most of the area as either vacant or a junk yard and the Sinclair Refining Company on a
portion of Square 571. The 1951 Sanborn Map shows a motor freight station and auto
wrecking yard on Square 589, the J.J. Clark sand, gravel, & cement company on Square
590, and the rest of the site vacant or occupied with rail tracks. In 1967, the Time
Picayune Building opened which housed the newspapers offices and printing press. In
2013 the newspapers offices moved, and in 2016 the printing press closed. Sanborn
Maps that document the land use history of the site between 1909 and 1994 are shown in
Figure 1 at the end of this section below.
The majority of the land uses in the vicinity are industrial and commercial. Across
Euphrosine Street is an industrial supply and lighting company warehouse. There is a mix
of industrial uses (warehouses, contractor storage, food processing, and motor vehicle
operation facilities) and commercial uses (offices, art studios, a boxing gym, and a flower
shop) in the first couple of blocks across S. Broad Street from the subject property.
Southeast of the site is the Union Passenger Terminal right-of-way and just beyond the
railroad tracks are warehouses.
A couple of blocks away across Earhart Boulevard are the Rosenwald Center NORDC
facility and adjacent to that is the new Marrero Commons multi-family residential
development.2 Across the Pontchartrain Expressway from the subject site are mostly
industrial uses (building materials/contractor storage, warehouses and a distillery)
between I-10 and Poydras Street. There is multi-family residential across Poydras Street.
On the other side of both the Pontchartrain Expressway and S. Broad Street from the
subject property is the Citys Criminal Justice Complex with the Orleans Parish Prison,
the New Orleans Police Department headquarters, the Criminal Courthouse, and some
other criminal justice agencies.

Marrero Commons is the redevelopment of the former B.W. Cooper housing development.

ZD 006/17

Figure 1: 1909, 1940, 1951, & 1994 Sanborn Maps for the subject site

B.

C.

What is the zoning and land use history of the site?

Zoning:

1929 J Industrial & L Unrestricted Districts

1953 L Heavy Industrial District
1970 HI Heavy Industrial District
2015 (prior to 8/12/2015) HI Heavy Industrial District
2015 (effective 8/12/2015) BIP Business-Industrial Park District

Land Use:

1929 Industries and Warehouses

1949 Heavy Industrial / Vacant Land / Single Family Residential
1999 Industrial / Vacant Industrial3

Have there been any recent zoning changes or conditional uses or planned
developments in the immediate area? If so, do these changes indicate any particular
pattern or trend?
In the past five years, there has only been one request for a land use action for properties
located within 1,500 feet (approximately five blocks) of the subject site. This request was

The 1999 Land Use Plan presented a generalized indication of land uses, and was not lot-specific.

ZD 006/17

for an amendment to a conditional uses related to the community center at B.W. Cooper.
This request is not related to the proposed zoning change request, and it does not indicate
any particular trend or pattern.
D.

What is the purpose of the rezoning?

The project description submitted as part of the application only states that the purpose of
the zoning change is to prepare site for development. The NPP invitation letter adds
that offices or businesses are unlikely to be the new uses of the site and the proposed
MU-2 District zoning would allow for the sites full redevelopment. Given this
information, the staff assumes that residential development would likely be a major
component of any future redevelopment of the site.
The rezoning request would change the zoning from a BIP Business-Industrial Park
District to an MU-2 High Intensity Mixed-Use District. The purpose of the MU-2 District
in Article 15, Section 15.1.E of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance is as follows:
The MU-2 High Intensity Mixed-Use District is intended encourage walkable
neighborhood centers and corridors conducive to transit, with a mix of residential
and supportive commercial and office uses. Buildings may contain vertical
mixed-use as well as single purpose uses designed to be located both at
neighborhood centers and along major arterial corridors.
The MU-2 District is one of the zoning districts with the highest intensity outside of the
Central Business Districts. This district allows for some of the greatest ranges of uses in a
single zoning district, including residential, commercial, light industrial, and institutional
uses. The residential densities are at the upper limit of what is allowed in a non-CBD
District. The 7 story and 85 feet height limit is also near the upper range of what is
allowed outside of the Central Business District.
It is possible that the purpose of the zoning change could be achieved through another
method. The Planned Development process, as outlined in Article 5, is an alternative to
requesting to change the zoning for the site. The Planned Development process allows for
flexibility in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to promote the adaptive reuse of
existing structures and to promote site-specific flexibility for the development of large
tracts of land. This site is greater than five (5) acres, so it would qualify for the Planned
Development process, which will allow for exceptions to use, density, height, parking,
and other limits in the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance.

E.

What impact will the proposed zoning change have on the transportation system, if
any?
Traffic
The petitioned site fronts Howard Avenue, S. Broad Street, and Euphrosine Street, all of
which are two-lane, two way streets. This site is generally physically isolated from the

ZD 006/17

greater transportation network. Howard Avenue has a marked lane in each direction. It
dead ends into the site and provides access to S. Jefferson Davis Parkway. This segment
of S. Broad Street is located below the Broad Street overpass. There is no access from the
Broad Street overpass to nearby the site, and there is only access from nearby the site to
the northbound/downtown direction of Broad Street. This segment of S. Broad Street is
only two block long between Howard Avenue and then dead ends at the railroad tracks
without connecting to Earhart Boulevard. Euphrosine Street has no marked lanes and it
dead ends into the UPT right-of-way adjacent to the site. Euphrosine Street provides
access to S Dupre Street two blocks from the site, which provides access to Earhart
Boulevard.
There is not much traffic on the adjacent street because it is an isolated area. There are
limited access points to this area, so traffic can back up on S. Dupre Street to access
Earhart Boulevard and trying to access Jefferson Davis Parkway near the I-10 overpass.
In addition, with all of the surrounding industrial uses, there is a high volume of truck
traffic in the vicinity. The proposed zoning change could result in a development that
would add substantial traffic to the street network.
Given that the site is physically isolated, this is not an appropriate location for a high
intensity mixed-use zoning category, such as the proposed MU-2 District. To access the
site, a vehicle has to take S. Dupre Street to Euphrosine Street, which are both narrow,
minor, industrial roads or come from S. Jefferson Davis Parkway and take Howard
Avenue a half mile to the subject property. It is not appropriate to rezone a property MU2 High Intensity Mixed-Use District that is so isolated from the transportation network.
Parking
The applicant will be required to provide off-street parking in accordance with Article
22, Section 22.4.A (Table 22-1) Off-Street Vehicle and Bicycle Parking Requirements.
Parking is required based on the number of residential dwelling units and the floor area
and use classification of the non-residential uses. A large portion of the existing site is
currently parking and vehicular use areas, so the applicant should be able to
accommodate the required parking onsite. Compliance with the off-street parking
requirements will be reviewed by the Department of Safety and Permits during the
building permit review and/or by the City Planning Commission during any design
review, planned development, or conditional use application review.
F.

Can the request be considered a spot zone? Does it fall within the Historic NonConforming Use Policy?
The request would not be considered a spot zone. The terms spot zone and spot
zoning refer to zoning changes which have the effect of singling out a lot or other
relatively small tracts of land for treatment different from similar surrounding parcels.
These zoning changes have the effect of granting preferential treatment to those spot
zoned parcels which is not also granted to similarly-situated surrounding properties. Due
to this preferential treatment, the Commission is generally not supportive of spot zoning.

ZD 006/17

In this particular case, the subject property is comprised of multiple squares and is almost
9 acres in area. The spot zoning policy refers to singling out relatively small tracts of
land. Given the size of the zoning change request, the spot zoning policy does not apply
to the subject property. Therefore, the request is not considered a spot zone.
G.

Evaluation of approval standards

The City Planning Commission recommendation and the City Council decision on any
zoning text or map amendment are matters of legislative discretion. In making their
recommendation and decision, the City Planning Commission and the City Council shall
consider the standards contained in Article 4, Section 4.2.E Approval Standards of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. In this section, the staff evaluates the application
using those standards.
The proposed amendment is compatible with the Master Plan and Future Land Use
Map.
This standard is not met. The proposal is not consistent with the Plan for the 21st
Century, commonly known as the Master Plan. Chapter 14: Land Use Plan of the
Master Plan designates on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the petitioned site as
Business Center. The goal, range of uses, and development character for that
designation are copied below:
BUSINESS CENTER
Goal: Provide areas to serve as regional employment centers outside of the
Central Business District.
Range of Uses: Professional office and/or light industrial parks (warehouse,
distribution and storage centers). Large retail centers are not permitted but
supportive retail is allowed.
Development Character: Structures often in business park settings, typically
with surface parking. Landscaping and buffers required, particularly when
proximate to residential areas.
The Business Center Future Land Use Map designation does not allow for residential
uses. Certain business and industrial uses that are permitted in the MU-2 District would
be consistent with the Business Center FLUM designation, which is why the MU-2
District is included in the Consistency Table for the Business Center FLUM designation.
The application materials state that offices or businesses are not likely new uses for this
location. In addition, the request would change the zoning from an industrial district to a
mixed-use district, so industrial uses are not likely uses of this location either. The zoning
change request would likely facilitate high-density residential development, which is not
supported by the Business Center FLUM designation. In addition, given the attributes of

ZD 006/17

and accessibility to the subject property, the MU-2 District is not appropriate for this
Business Center FLUM designation. Therefore, the proposed zoning change is not
consistent with the Business Center Future Land Use Map designation in the Plan for the
21st Century.
The property owner has submitted a Master Plan Amendment application to change the
Future Land Use Map designation of this property to Mixed-Use High Density. The
proposed MU-2 District would be consistent with that FLUM designation. The Master
Plan Amendments are currently being considered by City Planning Commission staff and
will not be approved by City Council until at least summer 2017. Therefore,
consideration of the zoning change based on the proposed Master Plan Amendment
would be premature. At this time, the staff has determined that the zoning change is not
consistent with the Master Plan.
The proposed amendment is compatible with the place designations of this
Ordinance.
This standard is not met. The proposed amendment requests a zoning district within the
Commercial Center & Institutional Campus Districts place designation. These districts
represent major destination areas within the city, and range from pedestrian orientation
areas to those that accommodate significant parking. Specifically, the purpose of the MU2 High Intensity Mixed-Use District is to encourage walkable neighborhood centers and
corridors conductive to transit, with a mix of residential and supportive commercial and
offices uses.
First, this site is not intended to be a major destination or a neighborhood center as it is
physically isolated by both distance and infrastructure. The site is only accessible in one
direction and is physically separated by a highway on one side and railroad tracks on two
other sides. In addition, it is about a half mile to the other major destinations in the
vicinity.4 While Broad Street is a major transit corridor, this site is not a pedestrian
friendly environment. The options for accessing the site by foot include dodging merging
traffic on the Broad Street overpass or going a couple of blocks to S. Dupre Street which
is out of the way and does not also does not have pedestrian infrastructure. In addition, as
discussed in the transportation section above, the site has limited vehicular access and
would not be appropriate for high intensity traffic and parking uses either.
Finally, it is important to maintain and protect the Citys industrial lands. The purpose
statement for the current Centers for Industry place designation calls for protection from
encroachment of incompatible uses into the Centers for Industry Districts is key to
preserve important city assets such as port-related uses and active industrial areas. The
proposed amendment would not protect and could result in an encroachment of
incompatible uses. Therefore, the proposed zoning change is not compatible with the
place designation.

These sites are the Criminal Justice Complex going north on Broad Street and the Broadmoor commercial district
at Washington Avenue going south on Broad Street.

ZD 006/17

10

The proposed amendment is compatible with existing use and zoning of nearby
property.
This standard is not met. The existing and historic land use pattern of the site and the
surrounding properties is predominately industrial, commercial, and office uses. A high
intensity mixed-use designation, especially one that would encourage high-density
residential uses, is not compatible with the surrounding land uses. In general, the new
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance promotes mixed-use where appropriate but seeks to
limit conflicts among incompatible land uses, especially industrial and residential uses.
Changing the zoning to a high intensity mixed-use district, especially one that allows
high density residential, would not be compatible with the surrounding industrial,
commercial, and transportation land uses. Therefore, the proposed amendment is not
compatible with the existing land use and zoning of nearby properties.
The proposed amendment promotes the public health, safety and welfare of the
City.
This standard is not met. The request could result in residential encroachments into an
industrial area. This request would not promote public health as it would encourage
residential uses on a site with a long history of industrial uses and in close proximity to
industrial and transportation uses. The proposed zoning change could impair the public
health; therefore, this standard is not met.
The proposed amendment is a more suitable zoning classification for the property
than the current classification.
This standard is not met. The current zoning aligns with the Master Plan and is consistent
with the zoning in the vicinity. If the zoning change were approved, the proposed MU-2
District would break up the current corridor of BIP District zoning that the site is at the
center of. The subject property has a long history of industrial use, which the existing BIP
District zoning is more suitable for than the proposed MU-2 District zoning. Therefore,
this standard is not met.
Based upon the length of time that the property in question has been vacant, the
proposed amendment is a more suitable zoning classification for the property than
the current classification considered in the context of development in the area where
the property is located.
This standard is not met. According to historic Sanborn maps, the subject property has a
long history of industrial uses dating from at least 1908. The subject property has only
been vacant since the beginning of 2016. This is not a situation where the current zoning
is no longer suitable for the property causing the property to site vacant for a number of
years. Given that the structure was designed for office and industrial uses, the building
has only been vacant for a year, and the surrounding development is predominately
industrial and commercial, the current zoning classification is more suitable than the
proposed zoning.

ZD 006/17

11

The proposed amendment corrects an error or omission, adds clarification to

existing requirements, or reflects a change in policy.
The proposed amendment does not correct an error, or reflect a change in current policy,
so this standard does not apply.
The proposed amendment benefits the citizens of the City as a whole.
This standard is not met. It is important for the City to maintain its industrial,
commercial, and employment bases. The proposed amendment would not only remove
the subject property from this industrial and employment base, but it could in an
encroachment of incompatible land uses that would compromise the surrounding
industrial districts. As maintaining an industrial base and industrial areas is important to
the entire City, the proposed amendment would not benefit the City as a whole.
The proposed amendment provides a more workable way to achieve the intent and
purposes of this Ordinance and the Master Plan.
This standard is not met. Based on the analysis of the Master Plan, the Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance, and the characteristics of the site, the existing BIP District zoning
better achieves the intent and the purpose of CZO and the Master Plan than the proposed
MU-2 District zoning.
The proposed amendment does not create a significant number of nonconformities.
This standard is met. Since the subject property is vacant, the proposed amendment
would neither create nor eliminate nonconformities.
The proposed amendment is compatible with the trend of development, if any, in the
general area of the property in question.
This standard is not met. There has been a long history of industrial and commercial uses
in this corridor. The historic trend remains for this area, where there are still industrial,
warehouse, office, and commercial uses in this corridor. Therefore, the current zoning is
more compatible with the development trends than the proposed zoning.

IV.

SUMMARY
Zoning Docket 006/17 is a request for a Zoning Change from a BIP Business-Industrial
Park District to an MU-2 High Intensity Mixed-Use District. The subject property is the
Times Picayune building, the former headquarters and printing press of the newspaper.
The approximately 9 acres site has been vacant for about 1 year. The applicant is
proposing to change the zoning to MU-2 District to prepare the site for development but
does not state the development plans for this property. The staff does not believe that the
proposed MU-2 High Intensity Mixed-Use District zoning designation is appropriate for

ZD 006/17

12

this site for a number of reasons. The proposed MU-2 District zoning is intended for
walkable neighborhood centers, while the subject property is physically isolated and not
easily accessible for pedestrians or vehicles. The site is separated by railroad tracks on
two sides and the Broad Street overpass and the Pontchartrain Expressway on the other
two. This results in a site only accessible by vehicles along minor industrial streets or by
taking Howard Avenue a half a mile from Jefferson Davis Parkway. The sites only
pedestrian access involves detours of multiple blocks or navigating high speed merging
traffic on the Broad Street overpass.
The subject site and adjacent properties have a long history of industrial and business use
which is more compatible with the current zoning than the proposed zoning. The zoning
change request would result in a loss of industrial land at this site, and would not protect
adjacent industrial districts from the encroachment of incompatible uses. There are
alternatives, such as the Planned Development process, that would allow for some
flexibility from the current zoning requirements while not necessitating a zoning change.
In addition, the proposal is not consistent with the Master Plan. The property owner has
submitted a Master Plan Amendment application to change the Future Land Use Map
designation to Mixed-Use High Density; however, this request is still being evaluated by
staff, and a zoning change request based on the new Master Plan Future Land Use Map
designation would be premature. For all of these reasons, the staff does not support this
zoning change.
V.

PRELIMINARY STAFF RECOMMENDATION5

The staff recommends DENIAL of Zoning Docket 006/17, a request for a zoning change
from a BIP Business-Industrial Park District to an MU-2 High Intensity Mixed-Use
District.

VI.

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION

1. The proposed MU-2 District is too intense for this physically isolated site, given the
limited surrounding infrastructure, and the fact that the site is not easily accessible for
vehicles or pedestrians.
2. The request is incompatible with the historic land use of the site and the current land
use of adjacent properties.
3. The proposal would result in a loss of industrial land and would not protect adjacent
industrial districts from the encroachment of incompatible uses.
4. The request does not meet all standards for approval set forth in Article 4 of the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, including not being consistent with the Master
Plan.

Subject to modification by the City Planning Commission

ZD 006/17

13

5. There are other alternatives for developing the site under the current zoning
designation, such as taking advantage of the flexibilities permitted through the
Planned Development process.

ZD 006/17

14

Zoning Map - ZD 006/17 - 3800 Howard Ave.

ZD 006/17

15

Sanborn Map
3800 Howard Ave.
ZD 006/17

ZD 006/17

16

ZD 006/17

17

ZD 006/17

18

ZD 006/17

19

ZD 006/17

20

ZD 006/17

21

ZD 006/17

22

ZD 006/17

23

ZD 006/17

24

ZD 006/17

25

ZD 006/17

26

ZD 006/17

27

ZD 006/17

28

ZD 006/17

29

ZD 006/17

30

ZD 006/17

31

ZD 006/17

32

ZD 006/17

33

ZD 006/17

34