My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
3A Public Hearing 2007 0116
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2007
>
Packet 2007 0116
>
3A Public Hearing 2007 0116
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/4/2007 12:46:30 PM
Creation date
1/18/2007 11:16:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Staff Report
Document Date (6)
1/16/2007
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
_CC Agenda 2007 0116
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Agenda Packets\2007\Packet 2007 0116
8C Consent 2007 0205
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Agenda Packets\2007\Packet 2007 0205
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
43
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Draft Minutes Excerpt - 12/14/06 Planning Commission Meeting <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />would also amend Sub-section E to add review and approval requirements pertaining to new <br />large homes. <br /> <br />. Article 5, Section 2-582 <br />Commissioners saw a slide of the garden feature that triggered the amendment proposal. No <br />building permit was required, and hence no planning review occurred. If the proposed <br />amendment is approved, any outdoor feature encompassing more than 120 square feet andlor <br />exceeding 10 feet in height will trigger administrative staff review and notification of <br />adjacent neighbors, giving them a chance to evaluate the proposal before it is built and make <br />comments to the ZEO if they choose. <br /> <br />. Article 5, Section 2-584 <br />This section of the Code lays out, in table format, the type of review needed for single-story <br />and two- and three-story construction. The proposed language would incorporate a specific <br />section on "new large homes." In most R Districts, this includes requirements for a Major <br />Residential Site Plan Review, notice to adjacent properties, and BZA action at a public <br />hearing. In the RS- VP District, noticing goes to properties within a 500-foot radius, and also <br />includes View Preservation Review. <br /> <br />. Article 17. Section 4-1704 <br />The proposal would amend standards for parking requirements for RO District developments. <br />In the past, a significant number of condominium-conversion projects have come before the <br />BZA, with residents often expressing concems about parking. In consequence, the proposed <br />modification would make the RO District standards match those in the RS District - two <br />covered spaces for each unit. (RO currently allows uncovered parking as well as tandem <br />parking.) Secretary Pollart said that this was one topic that generated animated discussion at <br />the informal BZA hearing the previous week. Several Board Members wanted to retain the <br />provision for uncovered tandem parking, and in fact expand it to the other R Districts, <br />especially for lots that have substandard widths. Secretary Pollart explained that the standard <br />[or covered spaces stems from aesthetic concems and to avoid jockeying cars back and forth <br />so people can get in and out. Also, to address the issue of larger homes, the new language <br />calls for an additional parking space, which could be uncovered, for residences exceeding <br />4,000 square feet or with five or more bedrooms. <br /> <br />. Article 24, Section 5-2424 <br />For whatever reason, the pace of condominium-conversion applications, primarily in the RO <br />Districts but also in the RD (such as duplexes on Pacific Avenue and Orchard Avenue), <br />picked up steam in 2006. Because these applications have already undergone the requisite <br />Site Plan Review, it seemed an unnecessary burden on Planning staff as well as the BZA to <br />hear such applications. Accordingly, proposed language would call for ZEO administrative <br />review. The same Parcel Map requirements would apply, but it would be an administrative <br />process rather than one going before the BZA for a use permit. <br /> <br />Summarizing last week's BZA meeting, Secretary Pollart said there were no public comments. <br />The Board expressed consensus on changes proposed in regards RS- VP garden features, FAR <br />standards, Daylight Plane standards, and the review processes for large homes and condominium <br />conversions. Board Members did not agree on the parking proposal, and one did not feel that a <br />single additional space for large homes was sufficient. Secretary Pollart also indicated that for <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.