AgdaPkt 2013-09-23 Closed and Regular

Browse Search

8.A. - Page 305 8.A. - Page 63 Laud Way Joint Venture Laurel Way Arca Neighbors Assodatidn April 15, 2011 page 2 .As there bas been some confusion regarding the current status of the Laurel Way Project, I am writing this letter for the purpose of clarifying the record, for the benefit of the Joint Venture, LWANA, and all other interested nx=bers of the public. This leiter sets forth the position of the City's staff regarding the current status of the Laurel Way Project. Also, part of the purpose of this Letter is to respond to questions raise/ in II►Is. Simon's letter to the City dated April b, 2011. If any of you believe that there is anything factually incorrect in this letter', I encourage you to bring any such frtctual errors to my attention and/or to the attention of City staff at your earliest convenience. You are welcome to email me at ricks iarvisfay.com. Hut I stress that l am only representing and advising the City — it is not my role to provide legal advice to any of you or to any other member of the public regarding the Laurel Way Project. 1V&. Dauer, l understand that you and the Laurel Way Joint Venture are not currently represented by an xwmey in this matter. You and/or the Joint Venture may wish to retain and consult with your own attorney. Mr. Velyvis, I understand that you have been retained as the attorney for LWANA. In order to make the City stag's position as clear as possible, I will start by summarizing some of the background for the Laurel Way Pmject, with which you are all already familiar. The Laurel Way Project, as described m the Laurel Way Planned Development Environmental Impact Report recently prepared by the City's conmultants, includes a 5.1 acre site which currently consists of 20 lots owned by 16 Merent owners. These lots arc steeply sloped T only three have an average slope of I= than 30•x. Section 32.2 of the City's Zoning Code sets forth the `minimm building site area" for lots having a slope of six percent or greater. For example, that section requires lots with a slope of 30% to have a nvninum building site of at least 30,000 square feet, while lots with greater than 30% slopes caro oWy be developed with a /Tarried Development Permit. Al of the existing lots within the Laurel Way Pwject area are less than half this size, and the majority of them are less than a third of this size. None of these lots conform with the City's existing code requirements. However, it appears that the lots were lawfully created through a subdivision map iced in 1926, before the Project area was annend to the City. (While LWANA has argued to the effect that the lots were not lawfuUy created, City staff has not been persuaded by these arguments.) Section 33.2 of the City's Zoning Code provides that '1a] nonconinirning lot ... may be used for developmcrt subject to compliance with all other provisions of this article and oilier applicable codes. A nonconforming lot may not be further reduced in area or dimensbri. except by variance.,' Article 46 of the City's Zoning Code authorizes the City to issue Plaroraed Development Permits. Section 46.7(AX3) authorizes the City to reduce minimum building site sizes for projects subject to Planned Developnint Permits.