2011_0228_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

26 4.0 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS BY ZONING CHAPTER 2 7, 4.1 Chapter 1001. The only amendment in this chapter seeks to eliminate the redundancy 28 between § 1001.0 and § 1001.0 as they are currently numbered; Planning Division staff 29 proposes to combine these two sections into one and renumber the subsequent sections as '30 shown in Attachment A. '31 4.2 Chapter 1002 ' 2 The primary amendment originally being contemplated for this chapter is to add a section 3 ' I 3 N, pertaining to development agreements - because Planning Division staff is continuing to work with the City Attorney on how best to execute such developments when necessary, '35 this ordinance is not ready for Council action at this time. The ordinance being considered is intended to establish the legal ability to recoup costs incurred by the City as 7' a result of addressing needs identified by a formal environmental review process (e.g., ' 8 Environmental Assessment Worksheets [EAW], Alternative Urban Areawide Review "39 [AUAR.], etc.),. In the short term,, such a development agreement would provide a 40 mechanism by which the City could apply an existing cost allocation calculation to new 141 developments in the Twin Lakes area to recover the costs of installing the public street 142 and utility infrastructure according to the needs identified in the Twin Lakes AUAR. 4,'3 Staff had originally intended that a development agreement ordinance like this would 14,14, accompany the yet- to -be- developed Regulating Map and Plan for the newly-created 145 Community Mixed Use district but, as the discussion has progressed, the ordinance 146 seems to make better sense in a more fundamental section of the Zoning Code rather than 4 7' in a section that is specific to one area or zoning district. 48 4.3 Chapter 1004 149 a. This chapter has a few proposed changes, which are shown in Attachment B. The 50 most minor amendment is re-titling § 1004.07 as "Table of Allowed Uses"' to be 51 consistent with the corresponding sections in the other chapters. 52 b. Although slightly more significant,, the next proposed amendments are still more 5'3 clerical than substantive. The language in § 1004.05A2 is clearly missing words and/or 54 punctuation but,, on closer inspection, it seems that the final edits in the recent Zoning 55 Code update process weren't completed properly. The same is true for § 1004.06G; the 56 language in both places was supposed to be the same, and was not to include both 5 7' ((primary building face" and "'predominant portion of the principal use"'. In addition to the 58 revised language, Planning Division staff would prepare a sidebar image and/or text 59 description that helps to explain that the "-predominant portion of the principal use"' refers 60 to the front of the main house structure or to the ftont of a front porch or something 61 similar), but, since the sidebar contents are not ordinances, they would be introduced as 62 time allows. 6'3 c. The final proposed change is in Table 1004-6, but it may be difficult to see. The &4 amendment would connect the minimum rear yard setback requirement for buildings in 65 an HDR-2 District to footnote "a"' of the table. While rear yard setbacks are generally 66 greater than side yard setbacks, this requirement was intended to provide the flexibility to 6 7' require even greater setbacks when a large apartment building would be adjacent to 68 lower-density residential properties or to relax the setback when such a building would 69 be among other large buildings, commercial properties, or the like. Amendments—RCA-02281 Ldoc Page 2 of 5