Laserfiche WebLink
styles where it may be beneficial to exceed that height. There may be a way to <br />establish the maximum building height, and then for the Old Town PUD area to <br />provide some what of an exception to exceed that by five feet provided that it is not <br />habitable space. <br />Commissioner VanNostrand - I am wondering if, when we're looking at F.A.R. verses bulk <br />plane, we are talking about in Old Town development standards is preserving the current character <br />of the neighborhoods or if it is limiting the scale of the new structures, or trying to encourage <br />some sort of pedestrian scale, or all of the same. I think one or both of these will lend itself better <br />to what the philosophy is that were looking at. If we were to go with an F.A.R. you would run <br />into more problems with home owners doing work without a permit than with a bulk. plane <br />restriction. On the other hand, the F.A.R. is much easier to administer than a bulk plane. If <br />you're looking to preserve the current character of the neighborhood then, to me, we should be <br />looking at what the current square footage is now, so you are not getting something that is <br />permissible that is out of scale of that. If you are looking to limit new structures or new <br />development in the same area then I think that raises some different problems as well. Restricting <br />the height to 27 feet may be the easiest way to solve the finished floor area above grade problem. <br />Q. <br />A. <br />On your bulk plane diagram, where does the height limit of 27 feet cut through <br />horizontally? <br />Peter indicated on the diagram where the limit was. <br />Commissioner Renfrew - The Denver ordinance increases the height by a foot for every five foot <br />of width over a 50 foot lot up to 40 feet. That would seem to me out of character with Old Town. <br />If we allow for the large bulk plane envelope and cut the height off at 27 feet are we asking for <br />unpitched roofs at the top, which we be out of character as well? <br />Peter Kernkamp - Not necessarily. Certainly that could be the approach that you could take. <br />Looking at the larger lots you can get almost another third floor. <br />Commissioner Renfrew - The more I look at the bulk plane it would seem to be more complicated. <br />I would be hard pressed to explain what that meant to a contractor. Do I want to bite off more <br />problems by going bulk plane as an overlay to F.A.R. and all the other limitations, where it may <br />be misused is if someone goes through and assembles a multiple number of lots to build something <br />very large. I am leaning more towards the F.A.R. and the other restrictions rather than a bulk <br />plane, just for simplicity. <br />Q. <br />A. <br />Which of the two approaches would you say tend to preserve the character of Old <br />Town? <br />I don't have a real good feel for that. The trade off is that as you make your <br />regulations more specific, the more likely that the outcomes are going to be more <br />uniform. One of the characteristics of Old Town is the diversity. On a gut level, I <br />5 <br />