Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2020 05 14

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Staff Report May 14, 2020 4 e. The circulation of all pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle traffic; f. The location of any fixed or movable seating and tables; g. The location of restrooms; h. The location of vehicular and bicycle parking Setbacks Some communities include setbacks for vendor pads in certain circumstances, such as when the property is adjacent to residential development. Staff believes a setback could be appropriate when a mobile food court is adjacent to residential development and suggests the vendor pads meet the parking setbacks or other setback determined necessary to control the external effects of the proposal. Staff seeks Planning Commission input on if a setback for all circumstances or only some circumstances is appropriate. Options for setbacks could include: 1. Equivalent setback to the minimum building setback in the zone district. This ranges from 10 to 60 feet, depending on the street type and adjacent property type. 2. Equivalent setback to the minimum parking setback in the zone district. This ranges from 10 to 30 feet, depending on street type and adjacent property type. 3. Alternative setback, such as 10 feet for front property lines and 5 feet for side and rear property lines. 4. No specific setback, but review the overall site design under the approval criteria for SRUs and possibly specific criteria related to mobile food courts. Approval Criteria The Special Review Use regulations in the LMC include criteria and conditions for approval in Sec. 17.40.100. These would also apply to an application for a mobile food court. The review criteria follows: 1. That the proposed use/development is consistent in all respects with the spirit and intent of the comprehensive plan and of this chapter, and that it would not be contrary to the general welfare and economic prosperity of the city or the immediate neighborhood; 2. That such use/development will lend economic stability, compatible with the character of any surrounding established areas; 3. That the use/development is adequate for internal efficiency of the proposal, considering the functions of residents, recreation, public access, safety and such factors including storm drainage facilities, sewage and water facilities, grades, dust control and such other factors directly related to public health and convenience; 4. That external effects of the proposal are controlled, considering compatibility of land use; movement or congestion of traffic; services, including arrangement of signs and lighting devices as to prevent the occurrence of nuisances; landscaping and other similar features to prevent the littering or accumulation of trash, together with other factors deemed to effect public health, welfare, safety and convenience;