The Planning and Zoning Commission also recommended a building height of 58 with these added mitigating measures.

Similar documents
CITY PLAN COMMISSION STAFF REPORT

TABLE (A): TABLE OF DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS IN THE RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICTS REQUIRED YARDS [4], [5] SIDE YARD (FT) REAR YARD (FT) R-1 DISTRICT

Bylaw No , being "Official Community Plan Bylaw, 2016" Schedule "A" DRAFT

DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS RESIDENTIAL BUILDING TYPES: APPROPRIATE ZONES AND DENSITIES 2-1

CITY OF CASCADE LOCKS PLANNING COMMISSION ORDER VARIANCE WINDSONG TERRACE LLC

Ordinance No. 04 Series of 2013 RECITALS

Staff Report: Date: Applicant: Property Identification: Acreage of Request: Current Zoning of Requested Area: Requested Action: Attached:

Town of Cary, North Carolina Rezoning Staff Report 14-REZ-20 Habitat for Humanity Evans Road Town Council Meeting October 16, 2014

ATLANTA ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE

Chapter URBAN VILLAGE ZONING DISTRICTS

This zone is intended to accommodate and regulate the development of medium density, high rise multiple family housing.

Development Requirements in the Residential Zoning Districts

THE CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF PEACHLAND BYLAW NUMBER 2065, A Bylaw to Amend Zoning Bylaw Number 1375, 1996

May 12, Chapter RH HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL ZONES REGULATIONS Sections:

This zone is intended to accommodate and regulate the development of low rise multiple family housing.

Article Optional Method Requirements

SECTION PLANNED RESIDENTIAL UNIT DEVELOPMENT

LUC AND UNDERLYING ZONING: OCP DESIGNATION:

City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report. Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council. Joel Rojas, Development Services Directo r~

Appendix D MOUNTAIN PARK SPECIFIC PLAN EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

CHAPTER 8. REVISION HISTORY

TO: Mayor & Council DATE: July 19, FROM: General Manager, Planning & Development FILE:

MEMORANDUM. DATE: November 9, 2016 PC Agenda Item 3.C

Compatible-Scale Infill Housing (R-2 Zones) Project

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT STANDARDS. Cadence Site

Section Low Density Residential (R1) Land Use District

City of Coral Gables Planning and Zoning Staff Report

Z-MAX BLVD HARRISBURG, NC OFFERING MEMORANDUM

17.13 RH HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL ZONES REGULATIONS SECTIONS:

PART XXIII - RT-1 TOWNHOUSE RESIDENTIAL ZONE A. INTENT

SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION

LOCATION: LUC AND UNDERLYING ZONING: OCP DESIGNATION:

Staff Report: Date: Applicant: Property Identification: Acreage of Request: Current Zoning of Requested Area: Requested Action: Attached:

CASTLES OF CALEDON URBAN DESIGN REPORT

4 LAND USE 4.1 OBJECTIVES


Re: Grand Jury Report No. 1707, Homelessness in the Cities by the Contra Costa Grand Jury

PINE CANYON PD ZONING REGULATIONS

Staff Report PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. Salt Lake City Planning Commission. From: Lauren Parisi, Associate Planner; Date: December 14, 2016

MEMORANDUM. DATE: April 6, 2017 TO: Zoning Hearing Board Jackie and Jake Collas. FROM: John R. Weller, AICP, Zoning Officer

MEMORANDUM Planning Commission Travis Parker, Planning Director DATE: April 4, 2018 Lakewood Zoning Amendments Housing and Mixed Use

Berry/University Form Based Code and Urban Residential Development

Article 3. SUBURBAN (S-) NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT

PART 11 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONES

(b) each living unit shall have a minimum floor area of 27 m 2 (290.6 sq.ft.). (B/L No ) (a) the zoning designations R4, R5, R9, or

Air Rights Reference Guide

HILLS BEVERLY. Planning Commission Report. City of Beverly Hills

TOWN OF ORO VALLEY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: December 6, 2011

BUILDING AN ADU GUIDE TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS PLANNING DIVISION

Arch-Laclede s Landing Station

Summary of Inclusionary Zoning Practices in Colorado Communities

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF REPORT. For Planning Commission Meeting of May 6, 2014

DIVISION 7. R-6 AND R-6A RESIDENTIAL ZONES* The purpose of the R-6 residential zone is:

Table of Contents ARTICLE 5A CHARACTER-BASED ZONING 1

Chapter 17-2 Residential Districts

LITTLE MOUNTAIN ADJACENT AREA REZONING POLICY

RM 4 and RM 4N Districts Schedule

CITY OF MERCED SMALL LOT SINGLE-FAMILY HOME DESIGN GUIDELINES

ASPEN GLEN PUD. Eighth Amended PUD Guidelines

Provide a diversity of housing types, responsive to household size, income and age needs.

130 - General Regulations for Residential Zones and Uses Only

Article 6: Planned Unit Developments

Residential Neighborhoods and Housing

ZA and ZA Zoning Change and Concept / Site Plan Preliminary Plat Delta Southlake Center

ARTICLE I ZONE BASED REGULATIONS

RM-3 District Schedule

Exhibit A-1. Piney Creek Bend Planned Development

Town of Jamestown Planning Board Zoning Staff Report June 14, 2010

David J. Gellner, AICP, Principal Planner, ,

Plan Making and Implementation AICP EXAM REVIEW. February 12-13, 2010 Georgia Tech Student Center

GENERAL ZONING CODE DESIGN CRITERIA FOR MULTIPLE- DWELLING DEVELOPMENT

CITY OF HUDSONVILLE Planning Commission Minutes March 15, (Approved April 19, 2017)

PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 3, 2018 PUBLIC HEARING

NOTICE OF MEETING AND AGENDA FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SPRINGVILLE, UTAH... JANUARY 23, 2018

Table of Contents ARTICLE 5A CHARACTER-BASED ZONING 1

SILVER PINES SUBDIVISION

ARTICLE 3 DEFINITIONS

Division 3: Zoning ( Zoning added by O N.S.; effective )

Burlington Unincorporated Community Plan

MEMORANDUM. Mr. Sean Tabibian, Esq. Dana A. Sayles, AICP, three6ixty Olivia Joncich, three6ixty. DATE May 26, 2017

the conditions contained in their respective Orders until January 1, 2025, at the discretion of the Director of Planning, Property and Development.

EXHIBIT D. Planned Unit Development Written Description April 13, 2016 Rouen Cove Phase II PUD

DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT STAFF REPORT PUD/DCI BAINBRIDGE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT

SCHEDULE 32 TO CLAUSE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY

Heights in Residential Zoning Districts Stakeholders Meeting September 17, 2009

CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

RM-2 District Schedule

Packet Contents: Page #

Town of Cary, North Carolina Rezoning Staff Report 14-REZ-31 Cary Park PDD Amendment (Waterford II) Town Council Meeting January 15, 2015

Plan Making and Implementation AICP EXAM REVIEW. February 11-12, 2011 Georgia Tech Student Center

ORDINANCE NO

4027 and 4031 Ellesmere Road Zoning Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision Applications - Request for Direction Report

Appendix1,Page1. Urban Design Guidelines. Back to Back and Stacked Townhouses. DRAFT September 2017

Chapter 100 Planned Unit Development in Corvallis Urban Fringe

Conditional Use Permit case no. CU 14-06: Bristol Village Partners, LLC

(H) RM-10: LOW-DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 123

. \. structure. portion of a. yard setback. in height. for that. above 45 ft. structure above. 20-ft. front. 2, additional.

Date: January 9, Strategic Housing Committee. IZ Work Group. Legacy Homes Program

Cover Letter with Narrative Statement

A New Zoning Code for a 21st Century Los Angeles

Transcription:

April 27, 2018 Town Council Matt Pielsticker, AICP Planning Director Town of Avon 1 Lake Street Avon, CO 81620 Re: PUD 17001 - Village at Avon Planning Area F Amendment Dear Avon Town Council: This letter is intended as an update and amendment to our application for a preliminary PUD amendment to Planning Area F, in The Village (at Avon). Below are a list of additional changes and some discussion of each, which we believe address issues raised by a majority of the Town Council members present at the hearing on April 10, 2018. We hope that our revisions will allow the Town Council to approve this amendment and allow us to start the process over again with a Final PUD Application where we can provide more detail and final refinements to the proposal. Building Height. The initial proposal by the applicant, based on information from a potential developer, was to increase the allowable building height from 48 to 66. Based on further analysis the applicant modified the proposal to increase the building height to 58, a 10 increase, along with two other proposed mitigating standards: New Setback: A proposed building setback of 40 from Post Boulevard and East Beaver Creek Boulevard for any structure taller than 48. The current setback is 25. This was to address the issue of taller buildings crowding the street. New Building Coverage Standard: A new standard changing the building coverage/building footprint standard from 80% of the site to 50% of the site. The provision addressed the site being overcrowded with buildings and applies to all buildings on the property regardless of height. The Planning and Zoning Commission also recommended a building height of 58 with these added mitigating measures. Town Council Concerns: Several Town Council members expressed concern about the impact of taller buildings as a transition from the southern boundary of the PUD to the northern boundary of Planning Area F but noting that the tall hillside leading to the interstate provides some relief to the height. 1

Revised Proposal: To address the concerns, the applicant is proposing a 100 setback from the south boundary of Planning Area F for any building over 48. This ensures that there will be a transition of building heights across Planning Area F to address the concern. Additionally, the applicant is proposing that buildings be limited to four (4) total stories above grade to assure that the added height is truly to address architectural and livability issues and not an attempt to gain additional stories or floor area. Density in Planning Area F: As discussed in the memo from the Town Attorney dated January 24, 2018, The Village (at Avon) has a density cap of 2,400 dwelling units. When the PUD was approved in 1998, all impacts of the entire PUD to the Town were evaluated including traffic, fiscal impacts, transit impacts, and many other impacts. The PUD mitigated for all of these impacts with improvements and other concessions. The change in the density only shifts dwelling units within the PUD to provide a slightly higher concentration on Planning Area F than is allowed today. The proposal as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission is to increase the maximum potential density on Planning Area F from 18 units per acre to 25 units per acre. Planning Area F is approximately 13 acres so the result is a potential increase from 234 units to 325 units or an increase in 91 units. Town Council Concerns: Several Town Council members expressed concern about the increase in density on this parcel even though the net effect on density in the PUD is zero. To provide some context, in the core areas, residential densities range from 50 units per acre to 95 units per acre (upa) Westin Mountain Villas at 95 upa Westin Hotel at 70 upa Avon Center at 50 upa Wyndham at 54 upa In areas surrounding or outside the core: Eagle Bend Apartments at 32.5 upa (240 units on 7.38 acres) Avon Crossing at 24 upa Avon Lake Villas at 24 upa Sunridge at 20 upa. Revised Proposal: To address the concern of density we further analyzed the need for additional density to allow for the desired type and density for a multiple family project with a mix of units including smaller one and two bedroom units. Density is only based on unit or key count and does not discriminate between a 600 sq. ft. unit and a 2,000 sq. ft. unit (or a 5,000 sq. ft. unit for the matter). The applicant believes that 285 units are necessary to allow for a viable project on the site. That translates to 22 units per acre or an increase of 51 units on Planning Area F or a 2% shift in density within the PUD. PO Box 4777 Eagle, Colorado 81631 970.376.3318 www.mpgvail.com 2

We believe 22 units per acre is a reasonable shift in density. Commercial/Residential Allocation in Planning Area F: Planning Area F is currently restricted to a maximum of 50% of the floor area developed as residential. The commercial floor area allowed can be 100% of the floor area. The proposed amendment seeks to reverse that, allowing 100% of the floor area to be residential and 30% of the floor area developed as commercial, but not required. An example of what the current PUD requirement that might look like, if 100 dwelling units were proposed at an average of 1,000 sq. ft. each, the result is 100,000 sq. ft. of residential use. That would require an equal amount or greater of commercial floor area or 100,000 sq. ft. of commercial floor area. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommend a minimum of 10% of the floor area be required as commercial. An example of that might look like: 200 dwelling units which equals 200,000 sq. ft. requires another 20,000 sq. ft. of commercial floor area. Neither examples of a minimum commercial requirement are supportable given the retail trends and the vacancy rates in Avon and the mid-valley region. Town Council Concerns: At least one Town Council member expressed concern about removing the requirement for a minimum amount of commercial space in Planning Area F, despite the proximity of Planning Area F to existing commercial uses within the PUD and adjacent to the PUD. What was expressed was a desire to see some limited commercial uses within the planning area. Revised Proposal: While the applicant would prefer to have no requirement and allow the market to dictate whether commercial is appropriate or not, to address the concern the applicant is proposing to add a requirement that with each 150,000 sq. ft. of residential floor area completed in the planning area, there would be at least 1,000 sq. ft. of commercial floor area. The applicant hopes this approach supplies enough residential carrying capacity (approximately 150 units) to support the commercial space (in Planning Area F) provided to help prevent the commercial space from being vacant or under-utilized. We hope that the proposed changes help make the Town Council comfortable with the proposed amendments and shows a willingness on the part of the applicant to respond to real concerns of the Town Council as it works to enable a better product for Avon. We look forward to discussing this with you on May 8. Sincerely, Dominic F. Mauriello, AICP Principal 3

THE VILLAGE (AT AVON) PUD GUIDE REVISIONS MAY 3, 2018 B. TOTAL PERMITTED DENSITY. The total permitted density for The Village (at Avon) PUD shall not exceed: 1. Planning Areas A, C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K, RMF 1 and RMF 2 shall not exceed: (a) Commercial Uses. 825,000 consolidated Gross Square Footage of Commercial Space. (b) Dwelling Units. 2,400 Dwelling Units. Pursuant to the terms of the Affordable Housing Plan, 500 of the 2,400 Dwelling Units shall be constructed as affordable housing, and, subject to satisfaction of the conditions precedent set forth in the Affordable Housing Plan, an additional 23 of the 2,400 Dwelling Units shall be constructed as affordable housing. 2. The permitted Commercial Use and Dwelling Unit densities within Planning Area I shall be determined in the future pursuant to the formal amendment procedures set forth in Section Error! Reference source not found. of this PUD Guide; provided, however, the permitted Commercial Space for Planning Area I shall not be less than 196,970 consolidated Gross Square Footage (which shall be in addition to the 825,000 square feet of consolidated Gross Square Footage stated in Section A.1(a)), and the permitted Dwelling Units shall not be less than 750 Dwelling Units. The Town acknowledges that Planning Area I is entitled to be developed as mixed-use development, and Uses may include Residential Uses, Commercial Uses, and public and institutional uses at densities in addition to those set forth above as approved by the Town. Until such time as a secondary access road is constructed, no non-residential Uses shall be allowed and the maximum density of Dwelling Units shall not exceed 280 Dwelling Units. 3. Density calculations, as applicable, for development of Dwelling Units within all Planning Areas where Residential Uses are permitted shall be based on the gross acreage within the applicable Planning Area as reflected in the land use table contained in the PUD Master Plan. Density calculations shall be on a Planning Area by Planning Area basis rather than on a Final Plat by Final Plat basis or on a Site by Site basis. 4. Subject to the requirement that the maximum number of Dwelling Units within any particular Planning Area, as applicable, shall not exceed that permitted under the terms and conditions of this PUD Guide, as applicable, the actual number of Dwelling Units per acre within

a particular Final Plat or Site within the affected Planning Area may exceed the maximum number of Dwelling Units per acre based on the acreage within such Final Plat or Site. By way of example, in a Planning Area containing 20 acres and subject to a maximum residential density of 18 Dwelling Unit per acre (i.e., a total of 360 Dwelling Units), a 10 acre Site within that Planning Area would be permitted to be developed with 300 Dwelling Units (i.e., 30 Dwelling Units per acre) but the remaining 10 acres could be developed with no more than 60 Dwelling Units, with the resulting density within such Planning Area in the aggregate being 18 Dwelling Units per acre (i.e., (300 + 60 = 360 Dwelling Units) / 20 acres = 18 Dwelling Units per acre). 5. Density calculations for development of Residential Uses within Planning Areas A through I, RMF 1 and RMF 2 shall exclude areas with slopes exceeding 40%. Notwithstanding the foregoing, areas with slopes exceeding 40% created by the placement of dirt stockpiles shall not be excluded for density calculations for development of Residential Uses within Planning Areas A through I, RMF 1 and RMF 2. 6. At final build-out of the particular Planning Area, the following minimum and maximum ratios of consolidated Gross Square Footage of Commercial Space and consolidated Gross Square Footage of Residential Uses, stated as a percentage of the aggregate Gross Square Footage the Planning Area [e.g., Gross Square Footage of Commercial Space (Gross Square Footage of Commercial Space + consolidated Gross Square Footage of Residential Uses) = percentage of Gross Square Footage of Commercial Space], shall apply within the following Planning Areas: Planning Area Residential Commercial Min% Max% Min% Max% Planning Area A 30% 80% 20% 70% Planning Areas C and D 90% 100% 0% 10% Planning Areas F 0% 50%100% 50%1,00 0 sq. ft. per each 150,000 sq. ft. of construct ed residentia l floor area 100%30 % Planning Areas G and H 0% 50% 50% 100% D. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WITHIN THE VILLAGE (AT AVON) PUD. 6. Planning Areas F, G, H and I Regional Commercial Mixed Use Projects.

(d) Building Envelope Requirements: (i) Minimum Building Setbacks: (1) Commercial Uses: a. Front: 25 feet b. Side: None c. Rear: 10 feet feet d. Abutting Interstate 70 or railroad right-of-way: 20 (2) Industrial and Residential Uses: a. Front: 25 feet b. Side: 7.5 feet c. Rear: 10 feet feet d. Abutting Interstate 70 or railroad right-of-way: 20 e. In Planning Area F, any building over 48 in height shall be set back a minimum of 40 from the property line adjoining Post Blvd. and 100 to East Beaver Creek Blvd./future Main Street. (3) Vertically-integrated Mixed Use Projects: a. Front: 25 feet b. Side: None c. Rear: 10 feet feet d. Abutting Interstate 70 or railroad right-of-way: 20 e. In Planning Area F, any building over 48 in height shall be set back a minimum of 40 from the property line adjoining Post Blvd. and 100 to East Beaver Creek Blvd./future Main Street.

(ii) Maximum Building Height: (1) Commercial Uses: a. Hotel Uses (including without limitation, hotel Uses comprising a portion of a Mixed Use Project) on Planning Area I only: 55 feet, provided that such Uses may be permitted up to a maximum Building Height of 135 feet as specifically identified as a Special Review Use in Section Error! Reference source not found.. b. Hospitals on Planning Area I only: 80 feet. c. All other Commercial Uses: 48 feet. (2) Industrial Uses: 48 feet. (3) Residential Uses: feet. a. Single-family Dwellings and Duplex Dwellings: 35 b. Multi-family Dwellings: 48 feet in Planning Areas G, H, and I and 58 feet in Planning Area F. In Planning Area F, buildings are limited to four stories of habitable residential floor area (excluding vaulted spaces) above finished grade. (4) Vertically-integrated Mixed Use Projects (except as set forth in Section A.6(ii)(1) with respect to hotels comprising a portion of a Mixed Use Project): 48 feet. (iii) Minimum Landscaped Area: 20%. (iv) Minimum Lot Area: Not applicable. (v) Maximum Site Coverage in Planning Area F only: 50%. (b) Residential Density Maximum: (i) (ii) Planning Areas F, G and H: 18 22 Dwelling Units per acre. Planning Areas G and H: 18 Dwelling Units per acre. (iii) Planning Area I: Subject to this Section A.6(b)(iii), 15 Dwelling Units per acre, subject to the following: cul-de-sacs may exceed 1,000 feet in length and service not more than 280 Dwelling Units within Planning Area I, and that the portion of a cul-de-sac that is in excess of 1,000 feet shall not service Commercial Uses. With respect to any cul-de-sac located both within and outside of Planning Area I, (i) no Dwelling Units served by the portion of such cul-de-sac located outside of Planning Area I shall be counted toward the foregoing 280 Dwelling Unit limitation; and (ii) the portion of any such cul-de-

sac located within Planning Area I shall be deemed separate and distinct from, and not included with, any portion of the same cul-de-sac located outside of Planning Area I for purposes of calculating the Dwelling Units counted toward the foregoing 280 Dwelling Unit limitation.