PC Minutes 11/1506 DRAFT

ITEM NO. 10:           REVISIONS TO CHAPTER 20, DEVELOPMENT CODE (JCR)

TA-10-10-06: Consider amendments to Chapter 20, Development Code to correct inconsistencies since adopted. Initiated by the Planning Commission at their October meeting.

STAFF PRESENTATION

Joe Rexwinkle, Planning Staff, gave an introduction and overview of revisions to Chapter 20, Development Code.  He outlined changes to Articles 4, 5, 9, 10 and 13. 

• Article 4 addresses non-residential and agricultural use. 
• Article 5 changes revise and clarify building structures to section 20-601(A)
• accessory dwelling units in 534(2)(iii)
• add section 538 for use regulations
• Article 9 clarify where boats and motor homes can be located in residential districts
• 908(c) correct subsection title, add H, GPI and OS to list of non-residential districts, correct reference to “Sec. O”
• 910 clarify where recreation vehicles may be parked
• Article 10
• 1002 revise street tree standards for consistency
• 1005 (c) add H and GPI
• 1006 (c) add subsection C to the additional screening requirements
• Article 13
• 1301(q)(3)(iii) revise mailing notice procedures from 10 to 20 days
• 1305(b) and (c) clarify when site plan review is required
• 1305(m)(2) correct reference to Section (G)(1)

Comm. Eichhorn asked if there will be a negative impact in delaying the development process if allowing a longer period for notification.

Mr. Rexwinkle stated the certified property ownership list is provided by the applicant and this change will allow the applicant additional time to request the list from the Douglas County Clerks office, prior to submission of the list with the application.

Comm. Harris asked if it was intended to change the words “commercial and industrial” on page 5 to “nonresidential”. 

Mr. Rexwinkle replied that it would be good to change the wording to nonresidential for clarity as the Commercial and Industrial Districts are commonly referred to as nonresidential districts elsewhere in the Code.

Comm. Harris asked if the street tree placement and required distance from the curb was for new construction.

Mr. Rexwinkle replied that it was and would be required at the site planning stage. 

Comm. Harris stated that street tree placement in older areas is a character defining feature. 

Mr. Rexwinkle said that Traditional Neighborhood Design addresses street tree and sidewalk placement and it is also dependent upon where utilities are located.  He suggested the development of the parallel code may provide some information that could be incorporated into the Development Code to address street tree and sidewalk placement in older neighborhoods.  At the very least, the changes proposed should be accomplished prior to the adoption of the Subdivision Design and Improvements Article so that the street tree section is consistent with the new article.

Comm. Burress took issue with the language on page 4 that states “the footprint of all accessory structures will be equal to” and suggested it should read either “not greater than” or “not less than” or “may not exceed”.

Ms. Stogsdill replied that she would like to take a look at the recommended language changes.  She said that the Planning Staff looked at applying these lot situations to many areas and wanted to use positive language in the code such as “you may do…” as opposed to “you many not do…”

PUBLIC HEARING

No members of the public spoke regarding this item

ACTION TAKEN

Comm. Burress moved to forward a recommendation for approval of the proposed revisions [TA-10-10-06] to Articles 4, 5, 9, 10 and 13 “Development Code, July 1, 2006 Edition,” to the City Commission with two changes two 533(4) and 908(c) as recommended by Comms. Burress and Harris and outlined below.  Seconded by Comm. Eichhorn.

· 533(4)

Building Coverage

The combined footprint of all detached covered Accessory Structures may not exceed the footprint of the Principal Building , or 20% of the total area of the Lot, whichever is greater.

A detached Accessory Structure may not have a larger footprint than the Building footprint of the Principal Building .

(ii)     The combined footprint of all accessory structures may not exceed the  footprint of the principal building, or  20% of the lot area, whichever is greater; moreover the footprint of all structures  may not exceed the maximum building coverage as permitted by section 20-601(a) or (b) for the corresponding building district.

· 908(c)

(c)   Commercial and Industrial Districts Nonresidential Districts

The location of off-Street Parking Areas in Nonresidential Zoning Districts shall comply with the adopted city design standards and the following standards:

District	Allowed Location	Minimum Setbeck from Right-of-Way (feet)	Minimum Setback from Residential Lot Lines (feet)
CN1	Not allowed between the Facade of the Building with the main entrance and the Street.	15	10
CO
CN2
CD	Prohibited between a Building and any Street
CC	No restriction except as specified in Sec. O
CR
CS
IBP
IL
IG
H
GPI
OS

                             Motion passed unanimously, 10-0.