HomeMy WebLinkAboutITEM V-BWASHINGTON
Memorandum
Planning and Development
Department
To: Councilmember Lynn Norman, Chair, Planning and Community Development Committee
Councilmember Nancy Backus, Vice- Chair, Planning and Community Development Committee
Councilmember John Partridge, Member, Planning and Community Development Committee
From: Stuart Wagner, AICP, Planner
CC: Mayor Pete Lewis, Kevin Snyder, AICP, Planning and Development Director, Elizabeth
Chamberlain, AICP, Planning Manager
Date: May 23, 2011
Re: Phase II - Code Update Project (Update)
Background
Staff first discussed the second phase of the Code Update Project with the Planning and Community
Development Committee at their meeting on January 10, 2011 and subsequently on February 14,
2011. Since that time staff has met on several occasions to discuss new layouts, code content,
specific development standards, and other organizational matters. A summary of those discussions,
which are now classified as work activities and next steps, are detailed below.
Table A: Staff Work Efforts (to date)
Topic
Work Activities
Next Steps
Determine whether
Staff has created various permitted use tables and
Permitted Uses
permitted use tables are
is now reviewing the uses listed, as well as the
helpful or confusing.
readability of those tables.
Allow flexibility with front and side street setbacks
Development
which would allow buildings closer to the street.
Don't want to be too
standards
prescriptive with the
Explore an incentive based code that gives relief
standards.
on certain development standards (coverage,
setbacks, height, etc.) in exchange for good design
and incorporating green building/site practices.
Attempt to meet 90% of the layout/width/depth
Development proposals
requirements (maybe through the use of
Parking
typically have trouble
administrative variance process)
meeting all of the
dimensional requirements
Another approach would be to keep dimensional
for parking stalls and drive
requirements for parking spaces and drive aisle,
aisles
but loosen the landscaping requirements. The
.
site, however, must contain a certain percentage of
landscaping.
Page 1 of 3
AUBURN *MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED
Currently there are
Allow a reduction in the number of required parking
several impediments to
stalls if a development is close to transit, or
shared parking.
incorporates bicycle parking and/or car sharing
stalls (i.e. zip cars).
When a site redevelops,
additional parking
improvements are
Look at ways to avoid upgrades to parking lots.
sometimes triggered. This
Ex. If close to transit stop than credit for one (or
can prove to be
two) parking stalls are given.
problematic.
Minimum planter widths
(in the current code) may
A 5-ft landscape strip might not be appropriate.
'
be too small for
Looking into an equivalents of 5-ft, where it
s 10-ft
landscaping to thrive
in some areas, none in others.
Look at achieving an overall percentage of
landscaping at a site (10-15%) and become less
rigid about where landscaping goes. The
Flexibility with on-site
landscaping criteria should be some within the
landscaping.
parking lot, some along the frontage, and adjacent
to residential zones.
Find ways to combine landscaping requirements
with storm drainage requirements.
Landsca
in
p
g
Try and keep existing trees on the site (maybe
provide incentives to do so).
Provide incentives for native plantings. No
Other landscaping
irrigation sources are needed here.
provisions being
considered: Retention of
A maximum tree size may be a better standard to
existing trees, use of
ensure survivability: 1.5 inch caliper vs. 2 inches.
native plantings, plant
No topping, excessive pruning should not be
quality, and additional
allowed. The code needs to be more prescriptive
requirements for long term
about long term maintenance.
maintenance of
landscaping.
Bonding (for performance) - a need to remove
building official reference and change 120 day
requirement, need longer timeframe (in case
phasing of a project occurs).
When granting relief from the code, should both
Evaluate and if
qualitative and quantitative code provisions be
Administrative
appropriate, creation of a
considered.
Variance (new)
new administrative
variance process for the
Determine whether a public comment period
City
should be carried out prior to making a decision on
an administrative variance.
How great of an "administrative" variance should
be granted (10%, 15%, 20%, etc.)
Recently staff has found that further direction from the PCD Committee is needed on several
planning topics. Next month staff will return to the Committee and seek input that will further assist
us with the code update project. Some of these topics are detailed in the next section.
Future Discussions
Parking Requirements
More often than not parking lots are the single greatest land use in most industrial, office, and
commercial developments. This is largely due to municipal codes mandating a minimum number of
parking stalls for each kind of use. Auburn's zoning code is set up in this fashion and as a result of
its minimum parking requirements, large and underutilized parking lots are commonly built. In order
to provide a more balanced approach to parking and land use, staff would like to discuss solutions
such as establishing parking maximums, allowing reduced minimum requirements as incentives, or
establishing landscape reserves (areas initially installed as landscape areas but be converted to
parking).
Design-Related Standards
As Auburn continues to grow in size and become increasingly more urbanized, the City will continue
to face design challenges. The current zoning ordinance does not have sufficient standards to
address development control in building appearance and physical form. Staff would like to know
whether development standards addressing fagade control, such as four-side architecture,
articulation, fenestration (i.e. the arrangement and design of windows and doors in a building) should
be considered. The City of Denver recently updated their zoning code (See Exhibit A). Included
among the typical developments standards like setbacks, height, and coverage, are design related
standards (highlighted). At a future meeting staff would like to discuss whether design-related
standards should be addressed in the code update.
Incentive Zoning
Incentive zoning, as its name implies, offers a reward (usually in the form of increased density) to a
developer who does something "extra" that is in the community's interest (such as more open space)
or promote a public goal. During phase I of the code update, incentive zoning was incorporated in a
new chapter, ACC 18.49 Flexible Development Alternatives, but only for residential and mixed-use
developments. The second phase of the code update project will look into ways that incentives,
such as flexible development standards, can be used with commercial and industrial projects.
Exhibit A: Denver Zoning Code (portion)
Exhibit A
K. General
Not to Scale. Illustrative Only.
A
- - - - - -J -J
F F F
I
I
D
I
~
I
J
B
B
PRIMARY STREET
I',I
3.3-241 DENVER ZONING CODE
GENERAL
S-CC-3
S-CC-S
S-CC-3x
S-CC-5x
S-MX-2x
S-MX-2
S-MX-3
S-MX-S
S-MX-8
S-MX-12
A Stories (max)
3
5
2
2
3
5
8
12
A Feet (max)
45'
70'
35'
35'
45'
70'
110'
150'
Feet, within 175' of Protected District (max)
na
na
na
na
na
na
75'
75'
RESTRICTION
All S-MX All S-MX
S-CC-3, -3x, -5, -5x Option A Option B
Allowed only if Ground
na na Story is equal or greater than
20,000 square feet
B
Primary Street (min %within min/max)
na
50%
50%
1
50%
50%
1
,
0
/80
0
/150
SETBACKS
C
Primary Street (min)
0'
0'
0'
D
Side Street (min)
0'
0'
0'
E
Side Interior (min)
5'
01
01
Side Interior, adjacent to Protected District
'
'
'
(min)
10
10
10
F
Rear (min)
0'
0'
0'
Rear, adjacent to Protected District, alley/
'
1
S-MX-2x: 075'
S-MX-2x: 075'
no alley (min)
/10
0
01/10'
01/10'
PARKING
Surface Parking between building and
Allowed, limited to two
Primary Street/Side Street
Allowed/Allowed
Allowed/Allowed
double loaded aisles within
the Build-To range/Allowed
Garden Wall required within
0715'for 100%ofthe zone
lot's Primary and Side Street
Surface Parking Screening
See Article 10
, Division 10.5
frontages, excluding access
points and portions of build-
ing within 0715, following
the standards of Article 10,
Section 10.5.4.3
Vehicle Access
Access determined at Site Develop
ment Plan Review
S-CC-3
S-CC-S
S-MX-S; S-MX-B;
S-CC-3x
S-CC-5x
S-MX-2x S-MX-2
S-MX-3
S-MX-12
BUILDING CONFIGURATION
Upper Story setback above 27, adjacent to
G
Protected District: Rear, alley/Rear, no alley
15725'
20725'
na na
15725'
20725' 20725'
20725'
and Side Interior (min)
Upper story setback above 51; adjacent to
H
Protected District: Rear, alley/Rear, no alley
na
35740'
na na
na
35740' 35740'
35740'
and Side Interior (min)
GROUND STORY ACTIVATION
Transparency, Primary Street (min)
40%*
40%*
40%* 40%*
40%*
40%* 40%*
40%*
J
Transparency, Side Street (min)
25%*
25%*
25%* 25%*
25%*
25%* 25%*
25%*
K
Pedestrian Access, Primary Street
Pedestrian
Connection
*Applies only to street-facing portions of bu
ilding facade located within 80'of the Primary and/or Side Street
DENVER ZONING CODE 13.3-25