Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout18213 HRDCs Griffin Village CPUD-DRB Staff Report Design Review Board Staff Report 18213 Griffin Village Concept PUD June 13, 2018 Page 1 of 11 Report To: Design Review Board From: Courtney Johnson, AIA, Senior Planner Martin Matsen, Director of Community Development Subject: Griffin Village Concept PUD, Application 18213. Meeting Date: June 13, 2018 Project Location: 206 East Griffin Drive NORTHEAST ANNEX, S06, T02 S, R06 E, ACRES 5.73, N2NW4 LESS TR City of Bozeman, MT. Recommendation: Provide comments on concept PUD Report Date: June 7, 2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The planned unit development (PUD) concept review is a pre-application review and discussion with the City’s Development Review Committee (DRC), Design Review Board (DRB), other applicable advisory boards and the planning staff of the applicant's proposal and any requirements, standards or policies that may apply. This step represents an opportunity to identify any major problems that may exist and identify solutions to those problems before formal application. The property owner/applicant has made a PUD concept plan application for the construction of a new HRDC Griffin Village and related site improvements on 5.72 acres bound by a Griffin Drive, Montana Rail Link and existing M1 storage buildings. The site is presently partially developed with older residential buildings and industrial site storage. The PUD concept plan is for the development of a three phase project to construct a Food Bank, Resource Hub with Warming Center above, 41 detached transitional housing sleeping units. This application is reviewed against the Unified Development Code plan review criteria that apply to all site plan applications, conditional use permit criteria and the criteria of the PUD chapter specific to the proposed nature of the PUD. If relaxations to the zoning standards are requested with the PUD the review authority must find that the deviation will produce an environment, landscape quality and character superior to that produced by the existing standards of this chapter, and which will be consistent with the intent and purpose of this article, with the adopted goals of the city growth policy and with any relevant adopted design objectives plan. The Design Objectives Plan for the Entryway Corridors 2005 is the relevant adopted design objectives plan at this time. The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and provided comments on the application (attached). The Design Review Board will consider the application on June 13, 2018. The Board is required to provide a comments and recommendations to the applicant as to whether the concept plan meets the City’s requirements, standards and policies. Design Review Board Staff Report 18213 Griffin Village Concept PUD June 13, 2018 Page 2 of 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES ........................................................................................................................ 3 SECTION 2 - REQUESTED RELAXATION / DEVIATIONS / VARIANCES ...................................................... 5 SECTION 3 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND COMMENTS ..................................................................................... 6 APPENDIX A - PUD INTENT STATEMENTS............................................................................................. 10 APPENDIX B - PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY ............................................................... 11 APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF ........................................................... 11 ATTACHMENTS ..................................................................................................................................... 11 Design Review Board Staff Report 18213 Griffin Village Concept PUD June 13, 2018 Page 3 of 11 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES Design Review Board Staff Report 18213 Griffin Village Concept PUD June 13, 2018 Page 4 of 11 Design Review Board Staff Report 18213 Griffin Village Concept PUD June 13, 2018 Page 5 of 11 SECTION 2 - REQUESTED RELAXATION / DEVIATIONS / VARIANCES 1. 38.510.030.G Block frontage standards for building entrances, at least one building entry visible and directly accessible for the street is required. Departure criteria “…will be considered provided the alternative proposal meets the intent of the standards…”. The intent for Other Block Frontages intent is to “…ensure that development frontages along these streets provide visual interest at all observed scales and meet the design objectives of the city.” 2. 38.510.030.G and 38.520.040.D.1 for reduced sidewalk width, “…6’ minimum sidewalks required adjacent to arterial streets and public parks and 5’ minimum width in other areas…” and “All internal pathways must have a minimum five-foot-wide… surface…” There are no departures listed for these sections. The proposed sidewalk width relaxation for ‘local pathways’ is supported by staff with a proposed modification. Please provide a minimum 5 foot sidewalk where the ‘pods’ of sleeping units have a shared pathway. Otherwise if a ‘local pathway’ serves only one sleeping unit, Staff would be supportive of this proposed 3 foot wide sidewalk relaxation. Please see Staff modification markup within DRC comments. 3. 38.510.030.J Special residential block frontage standards along sidewalks and internal pathways for two ADA units located south of the Resource Hub. A departure is possible. Staff would be supportive of this proposed relaxation to support the functions of the two ADA sleeping units. (38.510.030.J) 4. Proposed Crosswalk relaxation, all crosswalks need to provide a durable contrasting materials and/or patterns to ensure the resilience of these identifying safety features are not diminished by continued pedestrian use and snow plowing. Staff would be supportive of crosswalk painting/artwork in addition to the minimum crosswalk standards. (38.520.040.C.3) 5. 38.520.060 On site residential open space, potential deviations may be desired by the design team. No details or narrative were provided how the design team plans to deviate from review criteria for Staff to evaluate. Ordinance No. 1997 (which is Not Yet Codified) does exempt parkland dedication requirements but does not exempt for open-space requirements. (38.520.060) 6. 38.400.090.H. Drive Access distances at Griffin, separation is slightly closer (~298) than the requirement. This decision was made with the support and guidance of the City Engineering Department. Design Review Board Staff Report 18213 Griffin Village Concept PUD June 13, 2018 Page 6 of 11 SECTION 3 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND COMMENTS The purpose of the Concept PUD is for discussion of the applicant’s proposal with the designated review committees in order to identify any requirements and applicable standards and policies, as well as offering the applicant the opportunity to identify major problems that may exist and identify solutions prior to making formal application. Staff has evaluated the project and offers the following comments and questions for the DRB’s consideration. Conformance to and consistency with the City’s adopted growth policy The project site has a land use designation of industrial and a zoning designation of M-1, light industrial. The uses (warehouse with accessory retail, offices and transitional & emergency housing) are all permitted uses in the M-1 District (all uses are Permitted Principal Uses except for transitional housing which is listed as a Permitted Special Use). The Adopted Ordinance No. 1997 (which is Not Yet Codified) will establish “Transitional & Emergency Housing” as a new land use classification. The industrial land use designation description in the growth policy states “This classification provides areas for the uses which support an urban environment such as manufacturing, warehousing, and transportation hubs. Development within these areas is intensive and is connected to significant transportation corridors. In order to protect the economic base and necessary services represented by industrial uses, uses which would be detrimentally impacted by industrial activities are discouraged. Although use in these areas is intensive, these areas are part of the larger community and shall meet basic standards for landscaping and other site design issues and be integrated with the larger community. In some circumstances, uses other than those typically considered industrial have been historically present in areas which were given an industrial designation in this growth policy. Careful consideration must be given to public policies to allow these mixed uses to coexist in harmony.” If the PUD project were approved and constructed, how would this alter the M-1 district? Would future industrial uses ever locate in the vicinity of this project? Will a significant increase in residential units create future conflicts between the current industrial uses? It is arguable that the district changes substantially if this project is constructed with a stronger likelihood that more residential projects would follow and with an increase of conflicts between residential uses and industrial uses. Planned Unit Development Design Objectives and Criteria Discussion Items: Sec. 38.430.090.C - Evaluation process. The acceptability and performance of a planned unit development proposal will be evaluated as follows: Each of the relevant objectives and criteria for the applicable land use classification and for all development contained in subsection E of this section, will be answered “Yes,” “No” or “Not Applicable” (NA). A “No response” to any of the applicable objectives and criteria will automatically preclude the development proposal from further consideration and eventual approval, unless a deviation is granted by the review authority. An objective or criterion is applicable if it can reasonably be applied to the development proposal. The applicant must clearly demonstrate how the planned unit development specifically addresses each applicable objective and criterion. Design Review Board Staff Report 18213 Griffin Village Concept PUD June 13, 2018 Page 7 of 11 Sec. 38.430.090.E - Design objectives and PUD review criteria. 1. The city will determine compatibility of a project based upon the evidence presented during evaluation of the community design objectives and criteria of this chapter. 2. In addition to the criteria for all site plan and conditional use reviews, the following criteria will be used in evaluating all planned unit development applications. a. All development. All land uses within a proposed planned unit development must comply with the applicable objectives and criteria of the mandatory “all development” group. d. Industrial. Planned unit industrial developments in industrial areas (M-1, M-2, BP and NEHMU zoning districts) may include employment, wholesaling, manufacturing and utility centers for the community. The particular types or combination of uses are determined based upon its merits, benefits, potential impact upon adjacent land uses and the intensity of development. (1) Is the project located adjacent to an arterial or collector street that provides adequate access to the site? As presented the site does provide adequate access in two locations along Griffin Drive. (2) Is the project developed such that the least intense uses must be located along the arterial streets, where visibility to the public is likely? More intense uses such as heavy industrial uses and warehousing activities must be located away from the arterial streets, buffered by the other uses. The subject property’s proposed plan does not comply. The least intense uses are not along Griffin Drive (arterial street classification). The Food Bank warehousing activities are currently located along Griffin Drive and visible from the public, without buffering by the other uses. (38.430.090.E.2.d). (3) Does the project utilize a landscaping theme that will tie adjacent uses or projects together? At the concept level, the application does not delineate in detail the amount of landscape features that are intended. (4) Is the project being developed on land substantially surrounded by property approved for development or developed property with existing services and utilities already available? Subject property is surround by property approved for development, however off and on site improvements are required prior to development of this project. Bozeman Community Plan Goals and Objectives Discussion Items: 1. Goal LU-1: Create a sense of place that varies throughout the City, efficiently provides public and private basic services and facilities in close proximity to where people live and work, and minimizes sprawl. Established industrial businesses and activities are located within this area. Does this project contribute to the existing and expanding sense of place in this location? Does this project allow people to live in close proximity to work, public and private basic services and minimizes sprawl. Is this product supporting infill development and respect the context of the existing development which surrounds it? Design Review Board Staff Report 18213 Griffin Village Concept PUD June 13, 2018 Page 8 of 11 2. Objective LU-1.4: Provide for and support infill development and redevelopment which provides additional density of use while respecting the context of the existing development which surrounds it. Respect for context does not automatically prohibit difference in scale or design. This project is infill development and is the redevelopment of an underutilized site that provides needed transitional & emergency housing along with HRDC resource facilities. Traditionally offices were only included in buildings as accessory to other light industrial uses. These buildings propose warehouse with accessory retail, offices and transitional & emergency housing residential at a density not seen previously in the district. Does this larger scale respect the context of the existing development which surrounds it? Will the new uses respect the context of the existing development around it? 3. Goal LU-2: Designate centers for commercial development rather than corridors to encourage cohesive neighborhood development in conjunction with non-motorized transportation options. The project is along a corridor. This project provides additional housing density and allows transitional residents to access services with primarily motorized transportation. Non-motorized transportation options will be made available with street and pedestrian improvements to Griffin (schedule for FY 2021) and proposed trail corridor to the south of the site. 4. Objective LU-2.3: Encourage redevelopment and intensification, especially with mixed uses, of brownfields and underutilized property within the City consistent with the City’s adopted standards. This project includes mixed uses and is proposed on underutilized property. 5. Objective C-1.3: Support compatible infill within the existing area of the City rather than developing land requiring expansion of the City’s area. This project is compatible with the M-1 zoning district, and is an infill project of an underdeveloped site within the City. 6. Objective C-5.2 Encourage the inclusion of plazas and other urban design features as public areas within developments. This project includes a public covered entry at the Food Bank, and garden. Other urban site features could be integrated into the public areas. 7. Objective H 1.1 - Encourage and support the creation of a broad range of housing types in proximity to services and transportation options. This project provides new housing options for transitional & emergency residents that do not exist in the M-1. The location will be the resource center for a majority of services residents will be requiring. Transportation services will be made available, as scheduled by HDRC. 8. Objective H2.2 –Support infill development and the preservation of existing affordable housing and encourage the inclusion of additional affordable housing in new infill developments. This project proposes long term transitional & emergency housing within an infill development. Design Review Board Staff Report 18213 Griffin Village Concept PUD June 13, 2018 Page 9 of 11 In staff’s review, the single largest policy discussion regarding this PUD is around the proposed character and the intensity of uses proposed within an established industrial area in regards to pedestrian use and safety. Staff Review Discussion Items: 1. Overhead Power. NW Energy’s preliminary review comments substantially impact the proposed plan. Overhead power lines may require additional building setback in order to provide clearances. Please contact and discuss further with Northwestern Energy what potential easements may be required with future development. The following overhead power was discussed during the DRC meeting: a. 161 transmission line along Griffin with a 50ft on center easement for future development b. 50 KVA overhead along the western property line with a 40ft on center easement required for future development 2. Design objectives and PUD review criteria for PUDs within industrial areas. The subject property’s proposed uses does not place the least intense use along Griffin Drive (arterial street classification). The Food Bank warehousing activities are currently located along Griffin Drive and visible from the public, without buffering by the other uses. This may be reevaluated as a potential relaxation for the forthcoming PPUD application. (38.430.090.E.2.d). 3. Development Guidelines: With a PUD, Section 38.430.070 BMC requires development guidelines for all phased PUD’s. This project is proposed as three phases, as such development guidelines are is required. Each building will be required to be submitted with full design and site plan level materials with the preliminary PUD or subsequent with the final PUD plan review in order that building permits for all portions of the development can be issued simultaneously. The alternative is to submit a phasing plan and development guidelines. 4. Performance Points: With a PUD, Section 38.430.080.E.2.a.(7) requires at least 20 performance points for the subject property. Points can be met using any combination of on-site and off-site open space or other options listed in the code. The Preliminary PUD must specify how the performance points are being met. The concept plan provides an inventory and small discussion of how the PUD performance requirements are to be met onsite. The proposal is to utilize a variety of options to satisfy the PUD performance requirement. 5. Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation: The pedestrian circulation system is a strong element of the design. A hierarchy of types of circulation is provided and connections are available both in the north/south and east/west orientations. Bicycle racks are required and should be covered, numbered and placed near key building entrances or open spaces. 6. Automobile Connections: A two vehicular connections are provided from Griffin Drive. One access is proposed to be the primary public access which the entrances to both the Food Bank and Resource Hub face. The second access will be primarily for services; deliveries and trash services. 7. Landscaping: At the concept level, the application does not delineate in detail the amount of landscape features that are intended. Overall, the landscape plan should provide at least 23 performance points for landscape open space areas. The concept plans shows a mixture of trees, turf, plaza landscaping areas. Public art is encouraged in all plaza areas and near building entrances. 8. Public Areas and Plazas: Consideration should be given to identifying ways in which to integrate landscape features, public art and passive site safety into proposed open space and plaza areas. Areas of safety concerns Design Review Board Staff Report 18213 Griffin Village Concept PUD June 13, 2018 Page 10 of 11 for the secluded southernmost open space area and the potential for animal containment in a large concentration of residents and uses. 9. Service and Utility areas: The proposal does provide adequate circulation for deliveries, and trash service. Depending on the overall mix of uses that develop within the project, demands for services may vary substantially. More detail in regards to outdoor storage for the Food Bank should be clearly explained; trash compactors, pallet storage, etc. Thought should be given to the trash service of the residents within the sleeping units. Currently the proposal does not address these elements. APPENDIX A – PUD INTENT STATEMENTS Sec. 38.430.010. Intent. A. It is the intent of the city through the use of the planned unit development (PUD) concept, to promote maximum flexibility and innovation in the development of land and the design of development projects within the city. Specifically, with regard to the improvement and protection of the public health, safety and general welfare, it shall be the intent of this chapter to promote the city's pursuit of the following community objectives: 1. To ensure that future growth and development occurring within the city is in accord with the city's adopted growth policy, its specific elements, and its goals, objectives and policies; 2. To allow opportunities for innovations in land development and redevelopment so that greater opportunities for high quality housing, recreation, shopping and employment may extend to all citizens of the city area; 3. To foster the safe, efficient and economic use of land and transportation and other public facilities; 4. To ensure adequate provision of public services such as water, sewer, electricity, open space and public parks; 5. To avoid inappropriate development of lands and to provide adequate drainage, water quality and reduction of flood damage; 6. To encourage patterns of development which decrease automobile travel and encourage trip consolidation, thereby reducing traffic congestion and degradation of the existing air quality; 7. To promote the use of bicycles and walking as effective modes of transportation; 8. To reduce energy consumption and demand; 9. To minimize adverse environmental impacts of development and to protect special features of the geography; 10. To improve the design, quality and character of new development; 11. To encourage development of vacant properties within developed areas; 12. To protect existing neighborhoods from the harmful encroachment of incompatible developments; 13. To promote logical development patterns of residential, commercial, office and industrial uses that will mutually benefit the developer, the neighborhood and the community as a whole; 14. To promote the efficient use of land resources, full use of urban services, mixed uses, transportation options, and detailed and human-scale design; and 15. To meet the purposes established in section 38.100.040 BMC (Intent of the Unified Development Code). Design Review Board Staff Report 18213 Griffin Village Concept PUD June 13, 2018 Page 11 of 11 APPENDIX B - PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY Zoning Classification The intent of the M-1 light manufacturing district is to provide for the community’s needs for wholesale trade, storage and ware-housing, trucking and transportation terminals, light manufacturing and similar activities. The district should be oriented to major transportation facilities yet arranged to minimize adverse effects on residential development, therefore, some type of screening may be necessary. Adopted Growth Policy Designation The property is designated as “Industrial” in the Bozeman Community Plan. This classification provides areas for the uses which support an urban environment such as manufacturing, warehousing, and transportation hubs. Development within these areas is intensive and is connected to significant transportation corridors. In order to protect the economic base and necessary services represented by industrial uses, uses which would be detrimentally impacted by industrial activities are discouraged. Although use in these areas is intensive, these areas are part of the larger community and shall meet basic standards for landscaping and other site design issues and be integrated with the larger community. In some circumstances, uses other than those typically considered industrial have been historically present in areas which were given an industrial designation in this growth policy. Careful consideration must be given to public policies to allow these mixed uses to coexist in harmony. APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF Owner: 206EG, LLC (Charles R. Schlegel II) PO Box 13, Bozeman MT 59771 Applicant: Human Resources Development Council of District IX (Contact - Heather Grenier) 32 S. Tracy Ave., Bozeman, MT 59715-4659 Representative: GroundPrint, LLC 1262 Stoneridge Drive, Bzn MT 59718 and Comma-Q Architecture, Inc. 108 North Rouse Ave, Bzn MT 59715 Report By: Courtney Johnson, AIA, Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS PUD Concept Application PUD Concept Plans PUD Concept Submission PUD Concept Development Review Committee Memo June 7, 2018 The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715.