|
32
<br /> DRAFT EXCERPT
<br /> 55 zoning districts, and then amending a table that would eliminate one of the type of buffers, Type
<br /> 56 C,which is currently required in only four instances. There is also a creation of a table, street
<br /> 57 trees and planting requirements,to require buffering on public and private streets, and this table is
<br /> 58 one that the amendments of the table that I just spoke of, it took streets out of it and made it its
<br /> 59 own separate table. I do want to point out on this one that I discovered an error in the numbering,
<br /> 60 and you'll see here on the screen that it's 6.8.7.D is crossed out. The correct numbering is
<br /> 61 6.8.6.H, and in your motion, if you could please address that, and I am going to remind you of that
<br /> 62 as well. In screening,we're seeking to clarify that the purpose and application of screening
<br /> 63 standards is to obscure foundations and equipment of multi-family or non-residential structures
<br /> 64 from public view. And then the landscape and tree preservation plan section clarifies when the
<br /> 65 plan is needed and the format of that plan. And then finally in the section dealing with additional
<br /> 66 standards for the economic development districts,we're proposing to eliminate the standards that
<br /> 67 refer to scenic views,which is an undefined term in the LIDO, and it's effectively unenforceable
<br /> 68 during review processes. So, as is contained in the abstract,the planning director's
<br /> 69 recommendation is for approval of the statement of consistency, and also the text amendments
<br /> 70 that are in Attachment 2. And the recommendation for tonight is to review and discuss the
<br /> 71 proposed amendments, consider the planning director's recommendation, and then make a
<br /> 72 recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners on the statement of approval and
<br /> 73 consistency in Attachment 1 and the proposed ordinance and LIDO text amendments in
<br /> 74 Attachment 2, hopefully in time for the October 1 st BOCC meeting. And, once again,when
<br /> 75 making the motion, if we can address the table identified on Page 40 of the packet needs to be
<br /> 76 labeled differently. That would be great.
<br /> 77
<br /> 78 Statler Gilfillen: This may be just my understanding of the language. On Page 6-39, Item No. 5, "Landscaping
<br /> 79 shall not be located in any portion of public or private drainage or utility easement." Now, does
<br /> 80 that mean no grass or any growing materials in those areas. My understanding of landscaping
<br /> 81 would include grass, so I'm not sure it makes sense to me.
<br /> 82
<br /> 83 Perdita Holtz: Well, the landscaping doesn't exactly include grass. The landscaping that's talked about
<br /> 84 throughout this section is about shrubs and trees, not grass.
<br /> 85
<br /> 86 Cy Stober: I would refer to the materials identified in the tables that describe A, B, C, now E and F type
<br /> 87 buffers.
<br /> 88
<br /> 89 Statler Gilfillen: As I read through it, it's a language issue of making sure that I understood what was acceptable.
<br /> 90 The second question on 6-46,where it refers to foundation plantings in the 5-foot landscape area,
<br /> 91 my experience is that when you're planting landscaping within the first 2 or 3 feet of a foundation,
<br /> 92 unless you're very careful,that can conflict long term between the landscaping and the building.
<br /> 93 I've dealt with that many times, and I don't know if there's anything in there that refers to that.
<br /> 94 When I was doing some checking online with other recommendation from organizations, the
<br /> 95 agriculture urban forestry group made some references that seemed much more clear and
<br /> 96 definitive following what I've just said here, about how close you should be to a foundation of a
<br /> 97 building.
<br /> 98
<br /> 99 Perdita Holtz: Okay, so are you suggesting that the current standard of having a 5-foot landscaped area around
<br /> 100 the perimeter should be more?
<br /> 101
<br /> 102 Statler Gilfillen: Possibly a little wider, and possibly it should at least allow a couple of feet out from the foundation.
<br /> 103
<br /> 104 Perdita Holtz: Okay. If you want to, if the board wants to make that recommendation,you're welcome to work
<br /> 105 that into your motion.
<br /> 106
<br /> 107 Adam Beeman: I think item No. 2, it's not possible to plant, you can put planters and other such things to block the
<br /> 108 view, so that gives you an out right there.
<br /> 109
<br />
|