2014_0512_CCpacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

,;,. redevelopment at densities up to 8 units per acre..." which does describe the subject property. �._ c. According to the comments made on April 21st, the City Council's interpretation of � o:� the LDR-2 Statement of Purpose can perhaps be paraphrased as: "The LDR-2 district �04 may be applied only when lot sizes are wholly substandard to LDR-1 minimum 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 requirements and only in existing areas with concentrations of two-family and townhouse dwellings." d. By contrast, Planning Division staff's understanding of the LDR-2 Statement of Purpose can be paraphrased as: "The LDR-2 district may be considered when proposed developments would create smaller single-family lots than the LDR-1 minimum standards (and/or include two-family or attached dwellings) that are not out of place in an existing neighborhood, provided that residential densities don't exceed 8 units per acre as advocated in the LR designation of the Comprehensive Plan." � � s 4.4 The proposal seeks to create seven single-family residential lots from the land area of the � � 4 two existing parcels. The land area and frontage length along County Road B and � � 5 Farrington Street is sufficient for seven lots, as proposed, that meet or exceed the � � 6 minimum width and area requirements for residential parcels in the existing LDR-1 � � 7 zoning district. While the rezoning to LDR-2 isn't essential to creating a 7-lot plat, the � � 8 smaller minimum width requirement of the LDR-2 district facilitates a better arrangement � � g of the proposed lots and keeps the width of the lots more consistent with the adjacent �2o properties along County Road B and Farrington Street. To wit, of the 100 residential lots �2� within about 800 feet of the property—an arbitrary distance chosen to include many �22 parcels and still allow legible notes on each parcel-63 fail to meet one or more of the 123 LDR-1 lot size requirements whereas 37 conform to LDR-1 standards. Alternatively, just �24 looking at the lots abutting County Road B from William Street to Western Avenue, 73% �25 of these lots fail to comply with the minimum LDR-1 width requirements, the average of � 26 which being about 72 feet wide. �2� 4.5 The narrowest of the proposed lots are 70 feet wide, and the smallest area is about 11,500 �2s square feet, which exceed the minimum requirement� of 60 feet of width and 6,000 � 2g square feet of area in the LDR-2 district. 130 5.0 EASEMENT VACATION ANALYSIS �3� 5.1 The Public Warks Department staff has reviewed the proposed vacation/relocation of the � 32 drainage and utility easement as illustrated in Attachment C and is supportive of vacating �33 the existing easement provided that the proposed replacement easement meets the � 34 pertinent requirements. The applicant is continuing to wark with Public Warks staff on 135 these details. 136 137 138 139 140 141 52 Since the Planning Commission is responsible for holding the public hearings for applications like the proposed vacation, Planning Division staff is preparing the report and supporting materials for review. But the Planning staff doesn't have an interest, per se, in such proposals and merely conveys the comments and recommendation of the Public Warks Department in addition to coordinating the review of the proposal by the Planning Commission and City Council. PF14-002 Prelim RCA 051514.doc Page 4 of 8