7-28-15 Trautman Public Comment (05)

to the findings and conditions at EC 9.8320(5), which are incorporated by reference. Following right-of-way dedication, Buildings.l.and 2 will be below the minimum 10-foot front yard setback requirement, being about a half of a foot and eight feet away, respectively. The applicant requests a modification to this setback, stating that "...the dwellings abutting Oakleigh Lane do not exceed massing widths or heights inconsistent with the neighborhood single-family proportions. Along Oakleigh Lane, at the southern side of the street, townhouses address the residential street with covered porches as found in this and other neighborhoods of the River Road area. Internally, the site plan is pedestrian oriented with many places for children to play and residents to sit outside. By clustering the units keeping all the parking to one side of the site, more usable open space, free from vehicle traffic, was able to be conserved with open views to the river and bike path." (See page 26 of the applicant's June 14, 2013 written statement.) The substandard interior yard setbacks are as follows: the concrete wall, garages and carports abutting the west property line and Tax Lots 10100 and 5700, respectively to the northwest and southwest; the concrete wall at the southwest property corner, abutting Tax Lot 5600; and Building 6, abutting Tax Lot 500. There is no explanation in the applicant's materials for the substandard building setback along the south property line; however, staff notes that the affected property owners (Mr. Adee of Tax Lot 500 and Mr. Campbell of Tax Lot 5600) submitted letters in support of the proposed development. With regard to the west property line, the applicant explains that the garages and carports are located near the property line because it makes for a better site layout. The applicant claims that, if there were a setback, it would collect weeds and trash because it would be an unused portion of the site that serves no one. Staff understands that the design attempts to load most of the development on the western portion of the site because the eastern portion is in the floodplain and abuts a natural resource area. Staff's main concern is the potential impacts on the adjacent lands to the west. In addition to aesthetics (i.e. screening and softening of the bulk and scale of the development along the property boundaries), the setback is intended to provide adequate separation between structures to meet fire code regulations. The setback regulation is five feet from property lines and ten feet between structures, which means that the abutting property would need to setback future structures ten feet from the common property line. The applicant proposes an eight-foot tall concrete wall along.the west property line, not only to fulfill the screening function of the setback, but to fire-rate the wall as well, to meet fire code requirements. Staff notes that the appropriate fire rating cannot be determined at this time because the abutting property owners are not proposing to build abutting structures; rating depends on materials and the regulations change over time. Because the waf I exceeds six feet, it too is considered a structure subject" to setback requirements. Staff believes the final determination as to acceptability of the concrete wall must include the participation of the affected property owners (Tax Lots 5700;10100, and 5600). Even if the setback modification is granted, EC 9.2751(7) requires the developer to obtain an easement from the abutting property owners. Staff recommends the easement as a condition of PUD approval, which will ultimately determine whether the wall is acceptable to the abutting property owners. If the applicant is unable to obtain the off-site easements, then staff recommends an alternative Staff Report: Oakieigh Meadows Cohousing September 2013 Page 28 HO Agenda -Page 35 1015