05/17/2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

provisions of this section, except as set forth in Section 10-1.502(e) or except in the • case of parcels or lots which have a Lot Unit Factor of .50 or less. Parcels or lots which have a Lot Unit Factor of .50 or less require a Conditional Development Permit and development area may be restricted below seven thousand five hundred (7,500) square feet as a condition of the permit. Maximum development area for lots which require a Conditional Development Permit shall be 'established as the maximum floor area allowed by Section 10-1.5030 below, plus two thousand one hundred (2,100) square feet. The Site Development Authority may approve development area of up to a total of four thousand five hundred (4,500) square feet for any lot or parcel without requiring a variance, so long as the findings for a Conditional Development Permit are made." "The allowable floor area on any parcel or lot shall not be reduced to less than five thousand (5,000) square feet by application of the provisions of this section, except as set forth in Section 10-1.503(e) or except in the case of parcels or lots which have a Lot Unit Factor of.50 or less. Parcels or lots which have a Lot Unit Factor of.50 or less require a Conditional Development Permit and floor area may be restricted below five thousand (5,000) square feet a s a condition of the permit. Maximum floor area for lots which require a Conditional Development Permit shall be established as the ratio of the Lot Unit Factor (LUF) for the lots divided by 0.50 times five thousand (5,000) square feet. The Site Development Authority may approve floor area of up to two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet for any lot without requiring a variance, so long as the findings for a Conditional Development • Permit are made." AYES: Mayor Finn and Councilmembers Casey and Fenwick NOES: Councilmembers Cheng and O'Malley B. LUF (Lot Unit Factor) Committee Report Jim Abraham, Chairman of the LUF Committee,referred to the final report as prepared by their committee. As noted in a previous presentation to Council Mr. Abraham pointed out that the committee was unable to reach a unanimous agreement on recommendations to the Council but the following were the recommendations from the majority of committee members: retain the LUF concept, apply the LUF factor as envisioned in Councilmember Fenwick's formula(Proposed ordinance, April 5, 2001 by Councilmember Fenwick: For parcels with LUF greater than .5, MDA=3750+(gross acre)(7500)+7500(LUF -.5); MFA=3000+(gross acre)(2000)+(2000)(LUF-.5)) and approve the proposed MDA/MFA ordinance, address the visual impact changes resulting from the new formula, and address the discrepancies in lot definitions in various areas of the Town. Mr. Abraham believed that there should be a balance between flat and sloped lots. He further commented that more study was needed on this to achieve a long term equitable solution. John Harpoothan, member of the LUF Committee, noted that they all agreed that by changing the formulas more development would result. He believed the slope density May 17, 2001 Regular City Council Meeting 3