My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
23_10_17 Bacth2 Testimony
>
OnTrack
>
MA
>
2023
>
MA 23-5
>
23_10_17 Bacth2 Testimony
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2023 12:31:17 PM
Creation date
10/17/2023 12:22:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PDD_Planning_Development
File Type
MA
File Year
23
File Sequence Number
5
Application Name
River Road-Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan
Document Type
Public Testimony
Document_Date
10/17/2023
External View
Yes
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
708
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
03-2), Welch Boys LLC (Z 10-7), and Van Slyke (Z 14-5) all involve cases where the <br />overlay zone was imposed to meet a requirement of the applicable refinement plan. It <br />makes perfect sense to consider an earlier decision to impose an overlay zone to ensure <br />compliance with a refinement plan when determining whether or not to remove that overlay <br />zone. The decision maker can examine why the overlay zone was necessary in the prior <br />decision and determine whether the overlay zone is still necessary to ensure compliance <br />with the refinement plan policy. This is a proper consideration because EC 9.8865(2) <br />requires that a proposed zone change be consistent with the applicable refinement plan. If, <br />on the other hand, the overlay zone was not imposed to ensure compliance with an <br />applicable refinement plan (or the Metro Plan) then whether or not the purpose of the <br />overlay zone is preserved or not is not a proper consideration under EC 9.8865." RNS <br />Management (Z 17-3).a <br />In the present case, the site review overlay was imposed by the Planning Commission in <br />1992 when the property was annexed into the City and rezoned to Public Lands. The school sought <br />annexation primarily in order to receive police protection from the City. The Planning Commission <br />imposed the site review overlay (or subdistrict as it was referred to then) only on Swede Johnson <br />Stadium - not the entire property. The Planning Commission was concerned about future <br />expansion of the stadium and potential conflicts. As the staff report explained: <br />City staff is recommending that the Site Review Subdistrict be attached to the zoning on <br />this property to apply only to the stadium facility. A significant expansion of Swede <br />Johnson Stadium is a possibility at some future time. The expansion could result in an <br />increase in seating capacity from approximately 600 to 2500. The Site Review Subdistrict <br />would provide for a review of buffering, lighting, signage and landscaping issues prior to <br />expansion of the stadium and ensure that the expansion is compatible with the adjacent <br />residential neighborhood. The following site review criteria would be evaluated prior to <br />issuing a building permit for expansion of the Swede Johnson Stadium. <br />1. Compatibility with the surroundings, particularly when residential in <br />character. <br />2. Efficient, workable, and safe interrelationships among building, parking, <br />circulation, open space and landscaped areas, as well as related activities <br />and uses. <br />3. Signs and illumination in scale and harmony with the site and area." <br />Underscoring in original.) <br />The site review overlay was placed on the Swede Johnson Stadium portion of the property <br />related to these concerns. The site review was not imposed on the site due to any Metro Plan or <br />As far as I know, neither the Planning Commission not the City Council have addressed this specific issue since this <br />decision. <br />Hearings Official Decision (Z 20-2) Page 8 <br />165
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.