Laserfiche WebLink
<br />structures; and accessory parking and parking structures within the legal description(s) of the <br />site. The lot area must be defined within a boundary survey completed by a state registered <br />land surveyor. The boundary survey must also include the square footage of all building <br />footprints and the lot area in square footage. In 2002, the Council determined that only lot <br />area directly usable for the shopping center and its outbuildings is to be included as <br />developable, but left unchanged the provision that only 25% of the land may be built upon - <br />this is the building coverage requirement; the easements, exceptions, or road right-of-way <br />dedications are not to be considered part of developable lot area - shrinking the lot size. <br /> <br />2.4 According to Section 1006, only 25% ofthe site may be built upon (building coverage) , to <br />a height of two stories above grade, and no more than 35 feet in height with a basement, and <br />the total building square footage cannot exceed 50% of the lot area (FAR). <br /> <br />2.5 Given the new ordinances (2000) and the Council's definition for lot area, it has been <br />difficult to find a universal interpretation of percent building coverage and floor area ratio <br />(FAR) unless certain exceptions or interpretations are made. <br /> <br />3.0 CODE INTERPRETATIONS <br /> <br />Staff prepared a series of calculations that demonstrate how building coverage and floor <br />area ratios (FAR) impact all buildings within the shopping center districts. See the attached <br />charts. <br /> <br />3 .1 FAR: The FAR requirement would allow a shopping center to construct building <br />square footage equal to 50% of the lot area. This means that a one-story shopping <br />center covering the maximum of 25% of the lot area could add an entire second <br />level. The maximum height requirement is limited to 2 stories above grade or 35 feet <br />in height above grade with a basement. (Section 1006.02.D,) When the Council <br />adopted a new definition for land coverage, the FAR was inadvertently reduced on <br />each site. <br /> <br />3.2 Coverage Irregularities: By using the City GIS system as a measurement basis (not <br />a boundary survey from each parcel), 8 of the 10 centers currently located in <br />shopping center districts have building coverages that exceed the 25% land <br />coverage by 3% to 5%. Most centers are between 25% and 30% oflot coverage and <br />0.25 to 0.45 floor to area (FAR) ratios. In addition, it appears that some buildings <br />exceed the height limitations. No variances have been found to explain these <br />inconsistencies. <br /> <br />3.3 Parking Ramp Complexity: Ifparking ramps (for vehicle parking only) are added to <br />the building coverage, 9 of 10 shopping centers become non-conforming, including <br />Rosedale, which would preclude expansions or additional parking ramps without <br />variances or Planned Unit development status. (Staffs opinion is that "building <br />coverage" was meant to apply to the structures, which may contain office or retail <br />activity but not to the unheated storage areas for cars, which may be above ground, at <br />ground level, or below ground.) <br /> <br />2 <br />