Item 7: Ordinances on Goal 5 Natrual Resources Study

Home Browse Search

Staff Commentary: Staff supports this amendment. Staff has consulted with Public Works-Parks and Open Space (PaS) staff on this issue, and pas staffhas agreed that this change would be acceptable. Construction of a paved road for maintenance access is very rarely needed, and would reduce natural functions and values within the conservation area. Construction of pedestrian paths within a 20 to 25 foot buffer would occupy nearly 30% of the setback area width, which staff considers excessive. Along streams with 20 foot setbacks, a paved pathway would have to be outside of the conservation area. Non-paved paths up to 3 feet in width are allowed under 9.4930(2)(h). Motion Related to EC 9.8030(21)(b),(c), (d), and (e) Motion C (Councilor Kelly) Description: This amendment would revise BC 9.8030(21)(b), (c) and (d) and add a new subsection (e). BC 9.8030(21)(b), (c) and (d) provide for adjustments to the conservation area if certain standards are met. The new Section (21)( e) would provide standards for demonstrating that enhancement measures increase the functions and values of the conservation area. Section (21 )(b) provides for a setback reduction of up to 20% on setbacks of 40 feet or more, if certain standards are met. This amendment would require an applicant for this adjustment to demonstrate that the new enhancement standards under (21)( e) are met in order to reduce the setback by 20%. This amendment would require an applicant for the adjustment under (21)( c) to demonstrate that the new enhancement standards under (21)( e) are met in order to use setback averaging on the site. The amendment would revise (21)( d) so that in order to qualify for the adjustment, the property would have to: (1) be undeveloped, (2) be such that the lot couldn't be developed without this adjustment, and (3) would have to meet the new standards in (21)(e). Staff Commentary: Staff supports this amendment. These changes would strengthen the intent of these adjustment provisions to provide for an increase in the functions and values of the resource while providing flexibility for adjacent development. The amendment also increases the clarity of (21)(d) by spelling out more explicitly what kinds of sites would qualify. Motions Related to EC 9.8030(21)(a) Three motions are included that address 9.8030(21)(a). Subsection (21)(a) provides for an adjustment to the conservation area if the combined area of the setback and the resource site beyond the setback exceed 33% ofthe lot area. In other words, the area of the water feature itself is not included in this calculation. At the October 24, 2005 council work session, there was considerable discussion about this subsection, and whether or not it ultimately would provide adequate protection for the resource. Motion D (Councilor Bettman) Description: This amendment would limit this adjustment to those sites that are undeveloped and on which no development could occur without this adjustment. Staff Commentary: Staff does not support this amendment. This amendment would mean that this adjustment could not be applied to a parcel with a single family residence, even if the entire parcel was taken up by the conservation area. In this example, within a residential yard with no native habitat whatsoever, the homeowner would be prevented from expanding the footprint of the existing residence. This would be true even if the expansion would not adversely affect the resource, because, for instance, the expansion is modest in size and is on the opposite side of the house from the resource. The application of the 33% threshold adjustment would provide relief