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
With the findings, conditions, and future permit requirements noted above, staff finds that <br />stormwater standards will be met. <br />k) All other applicable development standards for features explicitly included in the <br />application except where the applicant has shown that a proposed noncompliance is <br />consistent with the purposes set out in EC 9.8300 Purpose of Planned Unit <br />Development. <br />The applicant has stated that three noncompliance items are included in the application and is <br />requesting that they be approved through the PUD process which allows for flexibility in design <br />of the site. The applicant is requesting that specialty care be considered a subset of assisted <br />care and be allowed in this location. The applicant is also requesting approval for an additional <br />foot of fencing height, and two (2) additional parking spaces above a maximum they have <br />assumed. <br />As addressed at Description of Planned Unit Development Request, in this instance, specialty <br />care meets the definition of assisted care which is conditional permitted in the R-2 zone. The <br />applicant has elected the PUD process instead of a conditional use permit which is allowed per <br />EC 9.2740 Residential Zone Land Use and Permit Requirements. Staff also notes that the <br />applicant is in compliance with parking standards as no maximum is prescribed for residential <br />uses, and assisted care is considered a residential use. <br />Staff notes that the applicant has not met EC 9.6420(3)(d)(3)(a) Perimeter Parking Area <br />Landscaping, which requires that parking areas adjacent to property that is zoned residentially <br />shall provide perimeter landscaping along interior lot lines according to EC 9.6210(3) High <br />Landscape Standard (L-3). Referral comments from Land Use staff note that a condition of <br />approval is needed to meet this requirement as the current plan indicates a narrower <br />landscaped area along the parking to the north and east: <br />A seven (7) foot wide landscape bed, meeting requirements of EC 9.6210(3) High <br />Landscape Standard (L-3), shall be shown on the final PUD site plans, for the parking <br />areas along the north and east property lines for the length of the pavement. <br />Land Use staff also noted that compliance with EC 9.6105 Bicycle Parking Standards, EC 9.6200 <br />Landscape Standards, EC 9.6725 Outdoor Lighting Standards, and EC 9.6740 Recycling and <br />Garbage Screening cannot be confirmed without more details. Compliance with these items will <br />be evaluated at the time of building permit review. <br />The applicant's request for a seven (7) foot fence exceeds the maximum allowable fencing <br />height of six (6) feet designated at EC 9.2750 Residential Zone Development Standards. As <br />mentioned above at EC 9.8320(3) and incorporated herein by reference, the additional foot of <br />fencing height provides a screening function, and additional security for residents of the facility. <br />Staff finds that the PUD process provides for flexibility in site design, and finds the additional <br />foot of fencing height a reasonable request. <br />Based on the above findings, staff recommends approval for the applicant's proposed <br />McKenzie Living Staff Report May 2016 15 <br />HO Agenda - Page 48 <br />198
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.