|
Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2019-03 - Transit Zoning Code Amendments
<br />May 13, 2019
<br />Page 6
<br />Lot Width and Depth Standards Issue: The Transit Zoning Code specifies minimum lot dimensions in multiple sections.
<br />Text Amendments Lot width and depth standards are primarily listed in Table BT-1, Permitted Building
<br />p. 4-5 TZC Section 41-2021 Types and Lot Depth, but are repeated in each building type's subsection on pages
<br />Tower on Podium (b) 4-5, 4-7, 4-9, 4-1 1, 4-13, 4-15, 4-17, 4.19, 4-21, 4-23, 4-25, and 4-27, creating
<br />opportunities for inconsistencies between various code sections.
<br />p. 4.7 TZC Section 41-2022
<br />Flex Block (b)
<br />p. 4.9 TZC Section 41-2023
<br />Lined Block (b)
<br />p. 4.11 TZC Section 41-2024
<br />Stacked Dwellings (b)
<br />p.4-13 TZC Section 41-2025
<br />Hybrid Court (b)
<br />p. 4-15 TZC Section 41-2026
<br />Courtyard Housing (b)
<br />p. 4-17 TZC Section 41-2027
<br />Live/Work (b)
<br />p. 4-19 TZC Section 41-2028
<br />Rowhouse (b)
<br />p. 4-21 TZC Section 41-2029
<br />Tuck -Under Housing (b)
<br />p. 4-23 TZC Section 41-2030
<br />Bungalow Court (b)
<br />p. 4-25 TZC Section 41-2031
<br />Duplex, Triplex, and Quadplex (b)
<br />p. 4-27 TZC Section 41-2032
<br />House (b)
<br />Analysis: Modifies pages 4-5, 4-7, 4-9, 4-1 1, 4-13, 4-15, 4-17, 4-19, 4-21, 4-23,
<br />4-25, and 4-27 to refer to the lot width and depth standards in Table BT-I, Permitted
<br />Building Types and Lot Depth.
<br />• Reduces opportunity for inconsistencies among multiple pages and code
<br />sections.
<br />Proposed Amendment:
<br />Modify pages 4-5, 4-7, 4-9, 4-11, 4-13, 4-15, 4-17, 4-19, 4-21, 4-23, 4-25, and
<br />4-27, subsection b, to read "The minimum and maximum lot width and the minimum
<br />lot depth shall be as prescribed In Table BT-1 (Permitted Building Types):'
<br />Planning Commission Work -Study Session
<br />On March 25, 2019, staff held a work-study session with the Planning Commission to review the
<br />proposed amendments and solicit feedback. The Planning Commission did not express any
<br />concerns or changes to the proposed amendments but asked questions to clarify parking
<br />requirements, floor area ratio (FAR), and encouraged staff to publicize the amendments. Because
<br />the code amendment has a broader impact, the proposed project was noticed in the Orange
<br />County Register which has a wider distribution than the Orange County Recorder which is the
<br />City's standard method of notification. In addition, the Downtown and Lacy Neighborhood
<br />Association representatives were contacted to inform them of the proposed amendments.
<br />75G-14
<br />
|