Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout18514 The Nest CPUD-DRB Staff Report Design Review Board Staff Report 18514 The Nest Concept PUD December 5, 2018 Page 1 of 11 Report To: Design Review Board From: Sarah Rosenberg, Associate Planner Subject: The Nest Concept PUD, Application 18514 Meeting Date: December 12, 2018 Project Location: Lot R1, Westbrook Subdivision, Phase 4, Bozeman, MT 59718 WESTBROOK SUBDIVISION, PHASE 2, 3, 4, S04, T02 S, R05 E, BLOCK 5, LOT R1 Recommendation: Provide comments on concept PUD Report Date: December 5, 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 56 residential units that will contain a mix of condominiums and townhomes on 5.41 acres. The site is presently vacant and surrounded by residential subdivisions to the north, east, and south, and a park to the west. This application is reviewed against the Unified Development Code plan review criteria that apply to 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 Development Review Committee reviewed the application and provided comments on the application (attached). The Design Review Board will consider the application on December 12, 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. TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES ........................................................................................................... 3 SECTION 2 - REQUESTED RELAXATION / DEVIATIONS / VARIANCES ........................................ 6 Design Review Board Staff Report 18514 The Nest Concept PUD December 5, 2018 Page 2 of 11 SECTION 3 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND COMMENTS ....................................................................... 7 APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF ............................................. 11 ATTACHMENTS ........................................................................................................................ 11 Design Review Board Staff Report 18514 The Nest Concept PUD December 5, 2018 Page 3 of 11 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES ZONING CLASSIFICATION Design Review Board Staff Report 18514 The Nest Concept PUD December 5, 2018 Page 4 of 11 PROPOSED SITE LAYOUT Design Review Board Staff Report 18514 The Nest Concept PUD December 5, 2018 Page 5 of 11 CONCEPTUAL PERSPECTIVES OF UNITS Design Review Board Staff Report 18514 The Nest Concept PUD December 5, 2018 Page 6 of 11 SECTION 2 - REQUESTED RELAXATION / DEVIATIONS / VARIANCES The applicant is seeking 12 separate relaxations within the PUD application. 1. 38.350.020.A, Minimum lot area for three or four-household configurations, to allow for some of the townhouse lots to not meet minimum lot area. Staff supports this relaxation. 2. 38.320.020.B, Minimum lot width, to allow lesser lot width than what is allowed in the R-3 zone district. Staff supports this relaxation. 3. 38.320.020.C.A, Maximum lot coverage, to allow townhouse lots to exceed the maximum allowed lot coverage. Staff supports this relaxation. 4. 38.320.020.F, Setbacks, to allow encroachment into setbacks. No details or narrative were provided in regards to what setbacks would encroach and how the design team plans to deviate from review criteria for Staff to evaluate. 5. 38.320.050.A.4, Porch encroachment, to allow some porches of townhouse units to encroach into setback. Staff is not in support of this relaxation as more information is needed and more design effort is required on the façade fronting on the open space and greenway corridor. There are more design elements and articulation on the façade facing the alley/woonerf that should also be illustrated on the façade facing the open spaces. 6. 38.360.240.E, Open space per townhouse lot, to allow lesser open space requirements per townhouse. Staff will reevaluate this proposed relaxation if the applicant displays that the access to the trail is dedicated as a public access easement and efforts are shown that the open space promotes maximum flexibility and innovation. 7. 38.380.070, Pricing affordable housing, to revise the two-bedroom unit to utilize the AMI for a three-person household. The City Commission reviewed the Affordable Housing Ordinance on November 19, 2018 to allow for the pricing of affordable housing to utilize different AMI per household number. Although it was approved by the City Commission, there are adjustments needed to the language before being placed in the UDC. Staff has asked the applicant to keep it in the requested relaxations until the adoption is finalized and the updated language is placed in the UDC. 8. 38.380.130, Incentives for affordable housing, to allow for incentives available for lower-priced homes to be available for affordable homes priced at 80% AMI. The City Commission reviewed the Affordable Housing Ordinance on November 19, 2018 for affordable housing incentives. Although it was approved by the City Commission, there are adjustments needed to the language before being placed in the UDC. Staff has asked the applicant to keep it in the requested relaxations until the adoption is finalized and the updated language is placed in the UDC. 9. 38.400.090.B.2.c, Frontage width, to allow some townhouse lots to not meet minimum frontage width. Staff supports this relaxation. 10. 38.400.090.D, Minimum distance between access, to exceed minimum distance between Durston Road and Rosa Way. Staff supports this relaxation. 11. 38.400.060.B, Alternative alley section, to allow woonerf to act as primary access. Staff supports this relaxation. 12. 38.410.100.A.2.d, Minimum wetland setback. Staff supports this relaxation, however, a separate exhibit needs to be submitted showing the watercourse setbacks zones prior that staff needs to evaluate. Design Review Board Staff Report 18514 The Nest Concept PUD December 5, 2018 Page 7 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 offer 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 residential and a zoning designation of R-3, residential medium-density. The uses are permitted in the R-3 District and conform to the City’s adopted growth policy. Staff Review Discussion Items: In staff’s review, the discussion regarding this PUD is highlighted below. Topics include the relationship to adjacent properties, affordable housing, open space, and access. 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. Open Space: Townhouse and rowhouse dwellings must provide open space at least equal to 10% of the building living space. The proposed development provides porches and balconies for each dwelling unit along with two common open space lots. Although the proposed development exceeds the amount of open space that is required, the size, shape and configuration of some of the lots are not able to achieve the 12 foot minimum width and depth for open space per lot. Additional open space can be counted towards the performance points that must be met for a PUD. Staff is asking the applicant to provide more information on the efforts given to the open space that promotes maximum flexibility and innovation. Affordable Housing: The Nest is proposing that it will meet or exceed the current requirements of the City of Bozeman Affordable Housing Ordinance. To meet the moderately-priced home requirements, the current ordinance requires 12 units (30% of the 40 townhome units) to be priced based on a household income of 90% of the AMI and sold to buyers with qualifying incomes at or below 100% of AMI. The applicant is proposing to offer introductory pricing for up to 18 units to buyers. The applicant is also hoping to implement an affordable rental program during the process. Watercourse Setback: One of the relaxations proposed with the PUD is to allow for a minor encroachment into the 50’ watercourse setback on the northwest portion of the property. A portion of the sidewalk proposed encroaches into Zone 1 of the setback and will not contribute to sedimentation. Staff is in support of the encroachment but is requiring further information about the length of the encroachment within Zone 1. Building Design: There are a combination of two and three bedroom townhomes and two bedroom condominium options. The applicant is proposing four different building designs. The initial drawings demonstrate high quality design, however, emphasis on the design is placed on the façade facing the woonerf (alley) and not towards the greenway corridor and open space. Staff is requesting that the applicant design more articulation and features into the front façade facing the park and open space. Design Review Board Staff Report 18514 The Nest Concept PUD December 5, 2018 Page 8 of 11 Automobile Connections: A woonerf is the primary connection between Annie Street and Durston Road. The Development Review Committee discussed that the woonerf design does meet alternative road standards that is allowed, however, the applicant is proposing perpendicular parking stalls in front of the condominium units. Staff’s concern is that the perpendicular parking stalls along the woonerf does not have the adequate back up space and could be a safety hazard for pedestrians. 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, and brush. The watercourse setback and wetland area is under separate landscape standards. Pedestrian Circulation: The pedestrian circulation is generally acceptable. Standard sidewalks will be provided and connections to the existing trail is being proposed. An existing trail is located to the west on the existing park. This links to the existing network in the surrounding area. The DRC is requesting that the existing gravel fines trail be improved to better service the pedestrian circulation in the area and that another sidewalk connection to the north of Block 4 be extended to the existing trail and be made as a public access easement. Service and Utilities: The applicant is requesting a relaxation for a narrower lot size than what is typically allowed for townhouse lots, the narrowest one being 14 feet side. Although Planning Staff is in support of this relaxation, the DRC has concerns how service and utilities will access each unit with a lot that narrow. Thought will need to be given to create an innovative approach of how each site will be serviced that then requires approval from Engineering, Water and Sewer, and NorthWestern Energy. Discussion is still underway and staff is requesting that this be resolved prior to pre-app submission. APPENDIX A – PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT INTENT AND CRITERIA 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; Design Review Board Staff Report 18514 The Nest Concept PUD December 5, 2018 Page 9 of 11 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). 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. b. Residential. Planned unit developments in residential areas (R-S, R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4,R-5, RMH and R-O zoning districts) may include a variety of housing types designed to enhance the natural environmental, conserve energy, recognize, and to the maximum extent possible, preserve and promote the unique character of neighborhoods, with provisions for a mix of limited commercial development. For purposes of this section, "limited commercial development" means uses listed in the B-1 neighborhood service district (division 38.310 of this chapter), within the parameters set forth below. All uses within the PUD must be sited and designed such that the activities present will not detrimentally affect the adjacent residential neighborhood. The permitted number of residential dwelling units must be determined by the provision of and proximity to public services and subject to the following limitations and considerations: (1) On a net acreage basis, is the average residential density in the project (calculated for residential portion of the site only) consistent with the development densities set forth in the land use guidelines of the city growth policy? The proposed developed is consistent with development density as it proposed 10 dwelling units per acre. (2) Does the project provide for private outdoor areas (e.g., private setbacks, patios and balconies, etc.) for use by the residents and employees of the project which are sufficient in size and have adequate light, sun, ventilation, privacy and convenient access to the household or commercial units they are intended to serve? The proposed development provides porches and balconies for each dwelling unit along with two common open space lots. (3) Does the project provide for outdoor areas for use by persons living and working in the development for active or passive recreational activities? The common open space lots will include Design Review Board Staff Report 18514 The Nest Concept PUD December 5, 2018 Page 10 of 11 active and passive recreational areas that contain a playground, seating, and landscaping. The subject property is also directly adjacent to a 8.5 acre park (4) If the project is proposing a residential density bonus as described below, does it include a variety of housing types and styles designed to address community-wide issues of affordability and diversity of housing stock? The proposed development contains a variety of housing types that include condominium units and three to four unit single family attached homes. The development is anticipated to contain affordable housing units. (5) Is the overall project designed to enhance the natural environment, conserve energy and provide efficient public services and facilities? The proposed development is adjacent to some wetlands that are located within the park and will not have any sort of negative impact on it. It is also located nearby some proposed commercial nodes. The applicant is also in the process of working out a bus system that will service the development. (6) Residential density bonus. If the project is proposing a residential density bonus (30 percent maximum) above the residential density of the zoning district within which the project is located and which is set forth in division 38.310 of this chapter, does the proposed project exceed the established regulatory design standards and ensure compatibility with adjacent neighborhood development? The number of dwelling units obtained by the density bonus is determined by dividing the lot area required for the dwelling unit type by one plus the percentage of density bonus sought. The minimum lot area per dwelling obtained by this calculation must be provided within the project. Those dwellings subject to division 38.380, must be excluded in the base density upon which the density bonus is calculated. The applicant is not seeking a residential density bonus as the proposed density is 10 du/acre. The minimum for R-3 is 5 du/acre. (7) Does the overall PUD recognize and, to the maximum extent possible, preserve and promote the unique character of neighborhoods in the surrounding area? The adjacent properties are residential and the proposed development fits in with the character of the neighborhood. APPENDIX B - PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY Zoning Classification The intent of the R-3 residential medium density district is to provide for the development of one- to five- household residential structures near service facilities within the city. This purpose is accomplished by providing for minimum lot sizes in developed areas consistent with the established development patterns while providing greater flexibility for clustering lots and mixing housing types in newly developed areas, providing for a variety of housing types, including single household dwellings, two to four household dwellings, and townhouses to serve the varied needs of households of different size, age and character, while reducing the adverse effect of non-residential uses. The use of this zone is appropriate for areas with good access to parks, community services and/or transit. Adopted Growth Policy Designation The property is designated as “Residential” in the Bozeman Community Plan. The residential land use designation description in the growth policy states “This category designates places where primary activity is urban density dwellings. Other uses which complement residences are also acceptable such as parks, low intensity home based Design Review Board Staff Report 18514 The Nest Concept PUD December 5, 2018 Page 11 of 11 occupations, fire stations, churches, and schools. High density residential areas should be established in close proximity to commercial centers to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities to persons without requiring the use of an automobile. Implementation of this category by residential zoning should provide for and coordinate intensive residential uses in proximity to commercial centers. The residential designation indicates that it is expected that development will occur within municipal boundaries, which may require annexation prior to development. The dwelling unit density expected within this classification varies between 6 and 32 dwellings per net acre. A higher density may be considered in some locations and circumstances. A variety of housing types can be blended to achieve a higher density. Large areas of single type housing are discouraged. In limited instances, the strong presence of constraints and natural features such as floodplains may cause an area to be designated for development at a lower density than normally expected within this category. All residential housing should be arranged with consideration of compatibility with adjacent development, natural constraints such as watercourses or steep slopes, and in a fashion which advances the overall goals of the Bozeman growth policy. The residential designation is intended to provide the primary locations for additional housing with the planning area.” APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF Owner: Center Arrow Partners, LLC, PO Box 1633, Bozeman, MT 59771 Applicant/Representative: Kilday and Stratton, Inc., 2880 Technology Blvd, Suite 271, Bozeman, MT 59718 Report By: Sarah Rosenberg, Associate Planner ATTACHMENTS PUD Concept Application PUD Concept Plans PUD Concept Submission PUD Concept Development Review Committee Memo November 28, 2018 The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715.