AgdaPkt 2010-06-07 clds, jnt - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7A Page 63 Commissioner Bondonno spoke to the clustering component Ms. Ekas mentioned. He noted putting together a configuration on how to get more than three (3) units might involve this clustering. He specifically pointed out the proposed amendment included mention of this clustering. In reading the entire Residential Ordinance, he suggested more complete and appropriate codification was necessary. He asked if accepting the proposed amendment as it was contradicted other sections of the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Ekas noted Staff considered the Other Required Conditions sections very carefully. These refer to public and quasi-public facilities such as schools and childcare centers which may locate in an R-2 Zoning District. It discussed the actual types of residential development where "there shall be a limit of one single family dwelling, one two-family (duplex) dwelling or one three-family (triplex) dwelling building per lot except for permitted dwelling groups." The permitted dwelling groups allowed for other combinations pursuant to the PD permit. It allowed for flexibility in reducing setbacks and reducing them to zero in some cases where there was zero lot line development. She stated if the Commission was comfortable with this, or if they preferred to offer more control and assurance to neighbors about how big buildings might be, they could put a limit in both Other Required Conditions as well as in the Permitted Uses section. Commissioner Bondonno spoke to the phrase, "except for permitted dwelling groups," He asked if that clause would in fact allow for, and not contradict, the proposed addition of having multiple dwellings as part of the permitted uses. Ms. Ekas stated she thought that was the case, but it still brought with it some confusion. She invited the Commission's feedback in further clarifying this code section. Commissioner Bandanna stated placing a limit on the number of dwelling units was one side of the equation. It was important to note the number of overall dwelling units on a private lot as well. Ms. Ekas stated the word lldwelling" led to confusion with "dwellings units per acre" where someone might perceive this lias dwelling per unit." Staff was thinking of using the terminology "number of units per building or structure" in order to clarify this. She noted the PO allowed for some discretion in this, but they were looking for something going to balance, clarify and cap the limit. The code with a limit made more sense than a flexible PD. Commissioner Bondonno stated he was trying to understand what would be the best mechanism in moving forward. Ms. Ekas offered that if the Commission made a recommendation to Council tonight, this was in order to provide some direction on what they perceived as the outcome. She noted Staff would then codify this in preparation for the City Council, based on what they were hearing tonight, and all would be reviewed for legal consistency. Commissioner Smith asked if they changed the language, or put in stronger language, did this limit the PO or the possibilities for a PO applicant in the future. Mr. Aranda stated it the PD umbrella allowed for the maximum flexibility. Page 12 of 24