2007_1217_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachr��nt C Extract fram the F'lanning Cornm'rssion Meeting Minutes�--UUctoi�er 3, 200i a. PROJECT FILE 0007 Revi�w ar�ci etiscuss�on of propvsed am�ndmenis ta iF�e Res�eience pistricts cha�t�r of the zoning ordinance, purs�ant fa the 2n07' Lot S�lit Stuciy recnrritn�ndations, Chair Bakeman opened the �'ublic Hearing for F'roject File d�01. �conomic C?e�elopment Associate Jamie Radel provided a brief review and discussion of proposed am�ndments to the Residence Districts chapfer of the City's �aning Ordinance, purs�ant tn the 2��7 Lat Split 5�udy recomtnendations; and t�ose items identified by the City Cnuncil follawing �hose recommendations. Ms. Radel noted tha� the Gity Cau€�ciE l�ac[ direct�d sta�f to irr�plement several of the recommended zoning and subdivision ordinance amendrr�ents made by the Ad�isory group, including those related �o subc[ivisior� variance language (B.2); perpendic�Eat lo� lines (B.3); private str�ets (B-4); driveway location (B.5}; creation af a zoning o�erlay dis�rict (C.�); eval�aatian of fees (C.5}; ihe zoning prearnble (C.6}; and environmentally- friendly d�veloprnent practices {�.1}. Sta�€ provided a red-lin�d copy of proposed lang€�age chang�s, relati�� fio iheir respective sec�ions; with ihe most significani amendmen� bein� the ereaiian af the Single-Famiiy Residential O��rlay Qistrict {SFROC3). Ms. Radel nc�ted that s�aff had not amended any fe�s at t�is time, as staff reviewed fees on an ann€�al basis as park af �he upcoming fisc�l year budget; and slso noted that stafF was doii�g a more sul�stanti�e review of zoning code fiar en�ironment protection and sustainabEe practices for incorporation into all codes as ap�licable. C}iscussion incl�ded s€de-yard setback for those lats guided hy the over[ay district; calculation of existing Eanguage and calcula�ions of seventy percent (70°/4}; rational� far and identifcaiion af sp�cific lots platted or� or befnre May 21, 1959; staff's reorganizatian of sections of the code to rnake it rnnre user-friendly and readable; design sfiandards for streets and driveways within the subdi�ision code (Chapter 1103); City �ngineer concems regarding fong-term rnanager�ent ofi private streets versus pub�ic streets; City Aitorney language recqmmendatio�s; n�ambering iterations vers€as substai�tive changes on f�ai�re drafts for easier tracking �y cor�rrtissioners; and potential overiay districis for future commercial neighbnrhood uses. Additionai discussion included rafianaie for a separate sec�ian for tf�e SR�OC3, rather �han incorporating ch�nges within business andlor residentiai sectinns of the code; �ypical planning praciice to have overlay dis�ricts as a separate section and the sequence of various chapters; no action directed by fhe City Council for creating an overlay or zoning distric� specific to shore(ar�ds; and a dise�ssion of the m�ximum accessory b�ildin� size and square fooiage, wiih current cade aJfowin� far 864 square feet of accessory building(s) an a single-family re�ideniia! lo#, and whether that size needed to be lo�nrered nn lats within the SFROD, ar if they would be self-regulating d�� to other r�echanisms (i.e., setback and cumula�ive impacts} in existing cade. Further discussiar� included methodology �or caieula#ions nf 864 square feet specified in the previo�� ordinances adopted in 1999/20D0; accesspry building standards (i.e., garages); prefecred I�eight restrictians and wheiher a thir�y-faot (3fl') ar high 2-112 stary hor�e built above grad� on a srr�a4! lot was appropriate; estir�nated number of patential lots (estimated by stafi to be 1d0 o€�t of 14,DOd} that wnuld faH within �he SFRO� andlnr under 7,70a square fs�t; non-conforrr�ity of the lots as they exist taday; smaller side-yard setbacks indicatecE; and staff's concern ir� dictating nr establishing design standards that would limii the style of homes possible �o be b€�ilt on these lots.