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
EC 9.8865(2): The proposed change is consistent with applicable adopted refinement <br />plans. In the event of inconsistencies between these plans and the Metro Plan, the Metro <br />Plan controls. <br />The applicable adopted refinement plan for the area of the proposed zone change is the River <br />Road Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan (RRSC). As stated in the refinement plan, its land use <br />diagram along with policies and suggested actions is intended to provide a more detailed guide to <br />future land use than shown on the Metro Plan land use diagram. The RRSC plan also includes <br />subarea maps showing the land use designations and recommendations relating to each, which is <br />discussed further below. <br />The land use diagram found on page 2-3 of the RRSC plan appears to designate the area of the <br />subject parcels along River Road for commercial use, which is consistent with the Metro Plan <br />diagram. However, the RRSC diagram does not clearly delineate the boundary between <br />commercial and residential use designations as it relates to the eastern edge of the subject <br />property. The subject parcels are also located in the RRSC's subarea c. River Road/Hilliard, which <br />includes a somewhat more specific land use diagram and description, as well as recommendations <br />regarding the specific subarea. The subarea diagram does provide a closer view of the land use <br />designations in the area of the subject property than the Metro Plan diagram, but the diagram is <br />not parcel specific (nor to scale) and therefore, still requires some degree of interpretation. <br />The applicant's written statement on page 5 notes the following: <br />The Metro Plan and RRSC land use diagram (as well as subarea) diagram are <br />Diagrammatic" and not tax lot specific. Therefore the "edges" of the ambiguous areas <br />must rely on additional information for a conclusive determination. <br />Tax Lot 7701 currently has a zoning designation of C-1 Neighborhood Commercial <br />The Tax Lots directly to the south of the proposed zone change are also C-1 Neighborhood <br />Commercial <br />The River Road/Hilliard subarea description in the RRSC (page 2-24) notes that "This <br />subarea is characterized by strip commercial uses and contains several non-conforming <br />uses. A 200-foot strip along both east and west River Road has been zoned for commercial <br />use." If this were the case, Tax Lots 7800 and 7701 would have portions that fall outside of <br />the 200 foot strip. <br />Recommendation on RRSC (page 2-26) states to rezone small split zone tax lots to their' <br />most intensive use. <br />Therefore, Tax Lot 7701 should be considered as having a commercial designation. <br />Staff noted that the subarea's "200 foot description" speaks only to existing zoning conditions at <br />the time of the refinement plan adoption, and therefore does not necessarily support future <br />rezoning based on that language. Additionally, while the subarea recommendation may describe <br />the intent of having split-zoned lots rezoned to their most intensive use, the subject tax lots are <br />not currently split-zoned, so this RRSC recommendation does not apply or provide any support for <br />the request as suggested by the applicant. <br />Hearings Official Decision (Z 11-5) 4 <br />375
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.