Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />Q. With regard to the landscape strips, those are currently available for landscaping, and tree <br />planting, within certain parameters, are they not? <br />A. Yes. Generally, although they are City ROW, they are maintained by the adjoining property <br />owner. <br />Q. The F.A.R. would not really address an unfinished attic, that a homeowner would finish at <br />a later date? <br />A. That is correct. <br />Q. With regard to the wording for non -existing structures, the wording states that, "if 50% or <br />more is destroyed by fire, it may be rebuilt in the same location". Would that also mean if <br />it were less than 50 % were destroyed by fire you would be able to rebuild? <br />A. Yes, that is the current standard. It is considered repair unless it is more than 50% <br />destroyed. If it were more than 50% destroyed it would have to come into compliance with <br />the code in effect at that time. <br />Q. The way that is written it says, "as to setbacks". Could a structure in Old Town be non- <br />conforming as it relates to F.A.R. or lot coverage, then not be rebuildable? <br />A. That is a good comment. What I was thinking was in terms of structure as opposed to use. <br />I think there is a second question in the commercial area as to non -conforming uses within <br />that area. That would probably need to be dealt with in a separate section. As Peter Stewart <br />indicated in his letter, we may want to treat Main Street differently then other areas. <br />Q. Under the current zoning, if a home is destroyed, is there anything to prevent the unsightly <br />front garage door? <br />A. No, there is not. That is a very good point and we should probably address that. <br />Q. Do you see a problem in restricting the situation in sketch one where there is alley access? <br />A. No. In those areas where there is alley access, there are a few areas where alley access may <br />not be available because there are no alternatives. The only other situation would be for <br />corner lots where there may be a secondary street access. Those may need to be addressed <br />separately. <br />Q. To Peter Stewart - With regard to setbacks, your suggestion is that they should match that <br />which is established on each block, what would be your approach to that? <br />A. The first point is maybe that the setbacks should not be written as minimum setback. It <br />should be within 20 feet of the street instead of at least 20 feet away from the street. There <br />may be something realistic, say between 4 and 20 feet. Or you could choose another method <br />and say you would match the neighbor on the right or the left. <br />Q. To Peter Stewart - With regard to height limits being established to the eve lines, how do <br />you deal with the dormer situation, when would it cease to be a dormer and become a third <br />story? <br />A. Most of the time, when it is the eve line, it is almost like a supplemental note to establish <br />a floor level... Then you . can have two floors whichcan't be more than nine feet each. <br />Sometimes it is a percentage of the overall. I prefer the story idea. You can have two <br />stories, plus a dormer which is 10% of the overall. <br />Q. Do you have any idea as to what other jurisdictions have done to establish a reasonable <br />standard there? <br />A. A percentage. That is what I have seen before. <br />