Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1 ZC & PB Article 5 Memo 2-7-17 MEMORANDUM TO: Bozeman Zoning Commission and Planning Board FROM: Tom Rogers, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Draft code review and work session – Article 5 - Project Design DATE: February 7, 2017 We have received preliminary draft code revisions from our consultant team integrating site design elements from the Design Objectives Plan into our development code. The draft revisions are based on direction the City Commission provided on December 5, 2016. The revisions and additions apply Block Frontage generally throughout the City and integrate standards from the Design Objectives Plan. In addition, a proposed classification system is included detailing at what point improvements, modification, and additions require full conformance with City code. Currently, section 38.19.070 and 38.19.100 describe the points that require what degree of site improvements is associated with site improvements. Other notable suggestions include: 1. Eliminates the Entryway Overlay District (does not change the NCOD), 2. Exempts certain developments from these provisions such as single-house residences and two-household dwellings, 3. Proposes a hierarchy for improvements (see 38.500.020), 4. Includes standards for “Gateway” block frontage (new frontage category discussed but not previously included), 5. Other sections labeled as “new” are code requirements that were culled from the Design Objectives Plan and integrated into the zoning code, 6. Modifications to open space requirements (see 38.520.060, page 56-60). 7. Refinement to utility meters standards (see 38.520.070.D), and 8. Building design standards (see 38.530.030). At the February 7, 2017 joint meeting staff will provide a summary of the form and function of Article 5 and use a hypothetical development proposal to analyze against the these provisions. Initial staff comments on the draft include the following: 1. One (1) foot building setback in ALL districts. Although you can construct buildings on a property line most do not use those techniques so the building footings, awnings, light fixtures (unless recessed), and even exterior finishes encroach into adjacent ROW or property. Technically, theses require encroachment easement of some sort. 2. Front Yard Setbacks. We see an increase of complexity here. Historically we use the property line as the start point for a setback. Property lines in Bozeman are generally one (1) foot beyond the sidewalk edge. The proposals are using a combination of the sidewalk, curb edge, and property line. Adding the additional setback starting points to our definition of yards and setbacks the desired outcome may be difficult to implement. Our discussion revealed a general concept we would like to consider. Essentially, stating clear setbacks as listed below (deemphasizing or eliminating the yard reference) and utilizes block frontage (BF) design standards to describe allowable encroachments to promote and encourage desired streetscape with elements including awnings, patios, seating areas, building articulation, etc. Side and rear yards to remain as they are today. The concept might mean using BF to highlight special areas rather than general application throughout the City. A default BF applies to district category (commercial, residential, industrial) with the agreed upon design standards for each type and use the CDF Map to designate and/or highlight special areas within the district. Residential districts 15 feet from property line Gateway frontage 25 feet from property line Commercial 15 feet from property line Industrial 15 feet from property line Parking 20 feet from property line In addition this approach should eliminate dependency on “corner side yards”. 3. Mixed block frontage. Should we or do we need to, clarify what a “mixed” block frontage means? We received a development proposal that took liberty to define a mixed block frontage as part Storefront and part Landscape on the same street frontage. I don’t believe this proposal meets the intent of the code it poses an integrating concept that we are not necessarily against. Perhaps mixed frontage must be predominately one or the other (51% / 49% or 75% / 25%). 4. Site Plan review criteria 38.19.100.A(4). Article 5 must be harmonized and more fully integrated to make work. I know you are working this aspect but wondering if you have any preliminary thoughts? 5. CDF Maps. Bozeman staff will be examining all the CDF maps and making tweaks and revisions based on our knowledge. In what format did you create these in? Is it possible to get original copies that we (GIS) can edit? In addition, two concepts we would like to consider: a. Add BF designation to known future street connections. Staff will add these connections. b. Reduce BF labeling (see no. 3 above) and refine and/or vary BF designation on a micro scale.