Laserfiche WebLink
Chairperson Boulet - I agree with the idea concerning the garages facing the street rather than the <br />alley. I think that is a good point. I also think it would be worth looking at alternatives to the <br />idea of F.A.R. limits or some other modifications to that which might work better to accomplish <br />our objectives. I hate to say that it might require further study, but I think we need to be careful <br />with what we are doing here. I think we need to look at alternatives to see if there is a better way <br />to go about what we are trying to do. I think we have a good overall sketch that will accomplish <br />most of our objectives, but we may be able to fine tune it; possibly even shift gears and come up <br />with a different way of limiting bulk. <br />Q. If you solve the unfinished attic problem, what would be the advantage of the bulk plane <br />idea? <br />A. In terms of the bulk plane, when owners build to the limits, what you would end up with <br />would then be nicer than what you would have with the setback scenario. In some cases it <br />will double the solar access for neighbors. <br />Q. To Staff - Is there any methodology that exists currently to prohibit the flat roof syndrome? <br />A. One possible way to address that would be to use a combination of the bulk plane along with <br />some sort of overall height limit. It could also be possible to use the F.A.R. in combination <br />with the bulk plane so that it may not be possible to max out the total bulk. <br />Q. What are the current restrictions on home offices and employees there of? <br />A. Currently the home occupation standards state that it is a principle residence and that home <br />occupation is conducted only by persons living at the site. The effect of that would be to <br />not allow any outside employees. <br />Q. Residential is still allowed within the commercial zone is it not? <br />A. Multi -family residential is allowed as a special review use in the CC zone district. <br />Commission Discussion/Direction <br />Chairperson Boulet - I think we need to talk about a possible schedule for continuing these <br />discussions. We do have a planning meeting in November. However, next month will be a very <br />busy in terms of regular business. <br />Q. <br />A. <br />To Staff - What would be your projection for the next possible additional meetings for this? <br />I .think, realistically we would probably be looking at January before we would have <br />additional information. I think the next step is to try to broaden the public input. That <br />might be through some sort of work shop type setting. We would try to advertise that <br />extensively and make an attempt to include some neighborhood entities into that. I think it <br />would be February before we would have an actual final public hearing. <br />Commissioner Puryear - If we are not considering this until January, what are we going to be <br />planning? Can we not just set up the January meeting for this subject as a work session? If staff <br />can incorporate some of these ideas and get some ideas on the administration, then using that <br />session to come up with something that could lead to a final draft in the February meeting. <br />5 <br />