Laserfiche WebLink
To accurately portray medium density in the “Current” <br />version of the map, the medium density should have <br />been a similar color to the LMDR in the “Proposed” <br />version of the map (although the LDR and LMDR are <br />also a bit too similar in color when viewed on the map <br />for my taste, at least they are distinguishable). <br />st <br />5.In the October 21work session, the transitions drawing seemed to make SW-SAZ transitions <br />much better than the current transitions already in place in the building codes. <br /> <br />Truth: <br />a.First, the drawing isn’t to scale. If you measure the 35 foot maximum mark on the first <br />page, divide by 7, the distance for the 5 feet remaining is larger than the measure of 5 <br />feet marked on the page (the distance between the fence and building). So it shows the <br />building as closer than it really can be (it should be about ¼ larger than what is marked). <br />b.Given the 35 foot height, the teeny tiny R-1 house comes out to only 15 feet high <br />(including what seems to be a pitched roof), with no mention that R-1 can go to 30 feet <br />high, plus the same additional pitched roof height that is allowed in R-2. But the <br />drawing does show the R-2 house at maximum height of 35 feet with additional pitched <br />roof height. The truth is that there is only a 5 feet maximum height difference between <br />these two zones. Not many people would be worried about this. <br />c.It implies that R-3 and C-2 can be full height at only 5 feet away from R-1. Not so. <br />What most people are worried about is R-3 or C-2 buildings next to R-1 or R-2. The current <br />building code takes care of this, being restricted to the same height as the adjoining R-1 or <br />R-2 property for the first 50 feet. (Kevin Shanley drafted the existing building code diagram <br />on the next page.) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Page 3 of 7 9/20/2016 <br /> <br />