Laserfiche WebLink
-Site Coverage is defined as the area covered by buildings, driveways, parking lots, and <br />loading areas. According to the Zoning Code, additional site coverage may be <br />considered with outstanding landscape design and site planning features. Additional <br />features are meant to compensate for the loss of open space due to increased site <br />coverage. <br />-The site plan shows an area of heavy planting with a seating area near Delmar and <br />Delcrest. <br />-On the subject site, 70 % site coverage equals 92,436 square feet. 80 % site coverage <br />equals 105,641 square feet. The difference between the two is 13,205 square feet. The <br />difference shows the potential loss of open space. Site coverage of 74 % is equal to <br />97,718 square feet, 5,282 square feet more than 70 % site coverage. <br />-To compensate for additional site coverage, additional features should be incorporated as <br />listed in the Zoning Code. There are several areas of open space that could be used for <br />these elements. The site also exceeds the minimum parking requirements. <br />Staff recommends approval with conditions for the site coverage not to exceed 74 % with <br />conditions listed in Attachment A of the Staff Report. <br />Mr. Lai added that the difference in site coverage is about 1/3 the size of the proposed Walgreens <br />building. <br />Ms. Greening stated that the issue of concern may be that the items listed from the Zoning Code <br />should be changed to state “may” rather than “shall”. <br />Ms. Riganti stated that such additional coverage may be considered when the features listed are <br />included. The current Site Plan shows the addition of a bench and some landscaping. <br />Mr. Halpert asked if staff is ok with 74 % site coverage but would not like to go above that. <br />Ms. Riganti concurred. <br />Mr. Lai added that staff is ok with that number with additional landscaping and site planning <br />features to be included beyond what the applicant has proposed in order to compensate for loss <br />of green space. <br />Plan Commission members discussed the wording in Condition 2 of the Staff Report – <br />Attachment A. <br />Mr. Lai stated that there is flexibility in the requirements due to the wording “as approved by the <br />Department of Community Development.” He also added that there should be more features <br />incorporated into the site to compensate for the loss of 5,000 square feet of green space. <br />Mr. Byrne stated that he does not like the use of “shall” and “should” in the conditions. He <br />added that he does not like the use of shall in reference to the water features. <br />Mr. Halpert commented on the third sentence that the Landscaping plan shall be designed by <br />L.A. What if we added a sentence stating and shall comply with all applicable U City Zoning <br />tm; <br />šE <br /> <br />