Jefferson County. Case RZ. Presenter: Alan Tiefenbach. Planning and Zoning Division

Transcription

1 Green Gables Official Development Plan Case RZ Presenter: Alan Tiefenbach

2 Proposal Rezone from Agricultural-Two (A-2) to Planned Development (PD) 225,000 square feet of commercial uses, including office and retail Allows a single retail tenant of up to 155,000 square feet 600 residential units 300 single family detached with densities between 5 and 15 dwelling units per acre 300 multifamily units, both as a stand-alone use or above ground floor commercial

3 Background acres Golf course/country club since the 1920 s. Floodplain bisects the property Located on major arterial intersection. Only quadrant of Wadsworth/Jewell that isn t highly developed commercial. Mostly surrounded by Lakewood UGB revision needed

4 Residential High up to 30 du/acre Residential Medium up to 15 du acre 155,000 Commercial Residential above commercial 155,000 Commercial No gas stations Fast food without drive through Commercial Retail < 40,000 Stand-alone multifamily Residential above commercial Residential allowed at ground floor no more than 50% GFA. Commercial Retail < 5,000 sf Stand-alone multifamily Residential Medium up to 15 du acre Residential Low Residential up to 5 du/acre Low Up to 5 du/acre Special Destination Commercial Residential Low Up to 5 du/ac 7,500 sf minimum lot size No commercial allowed within 350 7,500 sf minimum lot size

5 Community Input Community Meeting held on September 21, signed in, although more were probably there. Concerns raised: Traffic on an already impacted intersection More development Loss of open space Impacts on existing commercial Public access to lake Preservation of clubhouse Why the developer choose not to annex

6 Compliance with Comprehensive Master Plan Complies with all sections: Transportation Air, Odor, Noise and light Visual Resources Land Use Sustainability Housing Economic Development Open Space Water Resources Hazards Wildlife Historic i Resources Services, Utilities

7 Land Use Within South Plains Area of the CMP Indicated as Mixed Use Area 22 This area should be a collection of office, light industrial, retail and other commercial uses, with higher density residential supporting and providing synergy to the surrounding commercial development. If development incorporates the pedestrian-oriented and mixed use concepts and principles of the Neighborhood Center, larger square footages for an anchor tenant may be considered.

8 Plan recommends: Neighborhood Commercial (24,000 retail, 75,000 grocery store) Anchor tenant may be larger if mixed use and pedestrian concepts of Neighborhood Center used. High density residential supporting commercial. Applicant proposes: Neighborhood Commercial Single retail tenant up to 155,000 s.f. Residential allowed above commercial (not required)

9 Plan recommends: Limited Commercial (5,000 retail, No gas station/fast food) High density residential (transitioning to lower to east) Applicant proposes: Neighborhood Commercial Single retail tenant up to 155,000 s.f. Gas stations/service stations prohibited. Fast food allowed without drive-through. Residential allowed above commercial or stand alone if not more than 50% ground floor (residential not required).

10 Pedestrian-Oriented and Mixed Use Concepts of the Neighborhood Center Walkable and bicycle friendly Architecture should emphasize primary building entrance and pedestrian scale. Ground floor transparency through windows and display cases. Buildings oriented to street. Parking behind or to the side of buildings. Internal circulation paths Central gathering places, squares, and pedestrian amenities. Multifamily residential development above commercial. Some multifamily residential units may be allowed at ground floor Setbacks and building shapes, forms and heights should be varied Staff does believe many of the proposed design regulations would be in the spirit of this intent

11 How a traditional suburban design looks What the ODP requires Parking required to be to the east of the anchor Parking Parking not allowed between the buildings and Evans Street Parking Language added requiring public plaza along Evans

12 Traditional suburban b development Buildings brought to the entrance street. *Souce: Google Earth

13 Plan recommends: Neighborhood Commercial (24,000 s.f retail) and highest residential densities to west Applicant proposes: Neighborhood Commercial (with 40,000 s.f. retail) and stand alone multifamily Staff does not have an issue with the larger square footage on this portion.

14 Plan recommends: Limited Commercial (5,000 s.f retail, no gas stations, fast food) and decreasing multifamily densities. Applicant proposes: Limited Commercial (with 40,000 s.f. retail) and stand alone multifamily. Retail limited to 5,000 sf at eastern portion. Commercial development prohibited within 350 of the southern ODP boundary

15 Transportation Alternative One ierce Pi LOS E LOS D Wads sworth Jewell Existing Light on Pierce (Primary Residential Access) Evans Proposed Light on Evans (Primary Commercial Access)

16 Transportation Alternative Two ierce Pi LOS E LOS D Wadsworth Jewell Existing Light on Pierce (Primary Residential Access) ¾ turn at Evans Evans Southern connection from Morrison Rd across adjacent southern lot A Transportation Section has been added to the ODP which requires an updated traffic study at time of development, that Evans/Wads be at least ¾ movement, a southern connection to the property line, and LOS cannot be degraded below a LOS D (unless already functioning at that level).

17 Entitlements/County Process This rezoning allows entitlements It would allow the applicant to have up to 225,000 sf of commercial uses, with retail as big as 155,000 sf. It would allow 300 residential units, and 300 multifamily units. The applicant is required to Plat/SDP to design the development after rezoning. At that time, issues such as traffic, necessary infrastructure, access, lot sizes, setbacks, etc would be dealt with on a technical basis and may be limiting factors. If the applicant cannot achieve access or resolve traffic issues required for full- build out, the applicant will need to scale the development back. Whether or not the applicant can achieve full build-out of this development is their risk.

18 Visual Resources The applicant proposes numerous and extensive design elements that will facilitate high quality development. Buildings required to face the street. Architectural elements such as arcades, display windows, trellises and awnings required. Additional requirements when buildings face right-ofways or public spaces. Landscape features such as fountains, statues, plazas required at entrances. Requirements for outdoor seating and patio areas. Additional and separate requirements for building tops and bases. Requirements for multifamily, including staggering g and cluster units, and alternating building plans. Provisions for building grouping around common squares and greens.

19 Planning Commission This case went to PC on May 2, people signed in, and 21 testified in opposition. Traffic, signage, scale of project, annexation, impacts to the surrounding businesses, and perceived lack of communication. Because the rezoning went to the PC at the request of the applicant, staff had concerns with the ODP as proposed. The Commissioners continued the hearing to May 9 for staff and the applicant to come to agreement on the ODP, for editorial clean-ups and for staff to bring back additional information. At the May 9 hearing, the applicant presented an ODP that staff supported except for the signage allowances and height of light poles. The Commissioners recommended approval of the ODP 6-1 with staff s recommendations. The applicant has since agreed to those recommendations.

20 Compatibility Staff believes the proposed rezoning is compatible with allowed and existing land uses in the general vicinity of the project area. The project is located at the intersection of two arterials with highly developed commercial uses on three of the four quadrants (the subject property is the only undeveloped quadrant). The highest intensity commercial uses have been oriented toward the intersection, and residential densities transition to lower densities as it moves east toward the existing residential. Additionally, there are extensive design standards to ensure that any development that occurs here will be held to a higher standard than the minimum standards of the Zoning Resolution.

21 Staff Recommendations Staff recommends the Board find the rezoning proposal complies with the Comprehensive Plan, is compatible with existing and allowable land uses, and will not result in significant impacts to the health, safety, and welfare of the residents and landowners in the surrounding area. And Staff recommends the BCC APPROVE Case RZ with the Red-Marked print as dated June 12, 2012.