The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutA004 - Council Action Form dated October 11, 2016 t ITEM# 34 DATE: 10-11-16 COUNCIL ACTION FORM SUBJECT: ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS RELATING TO MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN CAMPUSTOWN SERVICE CENTER (CSC) ZONING BACKGROUND: The developer of the 1.8 acre site within the 2700 Block of Lincoln Way requested that City Council initiate a text amendment to allow for a mixed use development to be constructed in a manner similar to mixed use developments in Campustown Service Center (CSC) zoning, but to allow for some household living residential uses on the ground floor. City Council consented to initiating a text amendment at its June 14, 2016 and gave direction on the approach for the text amendment at its August 9th meeting. Staff has prepared a draft ordinance that reflects the direction given on August 9tn For any change that is approved to the zoning standards, staff believes key requirements should be retained that require commercial along the primary commercial streets and transparency (windows) that allow for visual interest and an engaging activated pedestrian environment at the street level. With these concerns in mind, staff has drafted the attached ordinance to accommodate City Council direction, clarify standards, and address the general needs for the development project proposed for the 2700 Block of Lincoln Way. The changes to Sections 29.809 (2) and (3) are described below and included in their entirety as part of the attached ordinance: THousehold Living Use Category: Household living uses (residential uses) were previously only permitted in the CSC above the ground floor and when the first floor contained non-residential uses. A revision to the text has been made to describe household living as a standalone use and as a mixed use when above commercial uses or short term lodging. The new allowance is for corner lots, that an exception exists for household living on the ground floor when across from residentially zoned lots when commercial uses are maintained on the additional street frontages of the property and the commercial space is not negatively impacted by the use. The intent of the language about commercial uses is to ensure that the commercial frontage is maintained for commercial use and not overwhelmed by a residential use on the side of the building. With the 2700 Lincoln Way project, this language permits the residential units at the rear of the building on the ground floor to be approved. It also allows for the hotel to be on the ground floor rather than commercial space. 1 2. Maximum Building Coverage: Maximum building coverage was revised from 100% to no maximum. 100% building coverage was never attainable with a required 10 foot rear yard setback in the CSC zone development standards. This is cleanup and clarification item. 3. Windows: The minimum glazing requirement was revised to note a minimum 50% glazing at the ground floor level for non-residential uses, and a 30% minimum glazing for residential uses at the ground floor level. The requirement for windows that allow visibility into the commercial space has not been changed. 4. Building Materials: The text was adjusted to clearly state that clay brick is required to be the majority material on each facade, excluding windows and doors. As currently worded it was confusing to administer as a fagade or whole building requirement and that the amount of clay brick could effectively be a low percentage through the introduction of multiple materials. The revised text also clarifies that interior courtyard facades not visible from the street are exempt from the brick requirement. The courtyard standard addresses both U-shaped courtyards and four-sided fully enclosed courtyards. The facades facing a property line would always need to meet clay brick requirement, only facades that are not visible would be exempt. 5. Entrances: Text was added to require the short term lodging uses (hotels) shall be required to provide a lobby and entrance facing a street. This is included to help guard against development claiming first floor residential areas are short term lodging rather than household living that would likely be precluded. Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: At the meeting of July 20, 2016, the Planning and Zoning Commission discussed the original o�tions for amending the CSC standards that were reviewed by the Council on August 9t . The Commission discussed the intended character of Campustown and the need to have active and walkable commercial frontages. They noted a concern about the management of short term lodging uses (hotel) long term and the ramifications of allowing for such a use on the first floor if the use would be discontinued in the future. The Commission also discussed the concern for the loss of small commercial spaces for larger corporate tenant spaces. With a vote of 5-0, the Commission recommended that the City Council approve text amendments to allow for reduced window percentages for residential, allow residential across from residential on corner lots, and for short term lodging as a use within a mixed use building. ALTERNATIVES: 1. The City Council can approve on first reading the proposed ordinance amending Table 29.809(2) and Table 29.809(3) of the Campustown Service Center (CSC) zone. 2 2. The City Council can decline to adopt the proposed ordinance amending Table 29.809(2) and Table 29.809(3) of the Campustown Service Center (CSC) zone. 3. The City Council can recommend alternative language for the proposed amendments regarding the Campustown Service Center (CSC) zone. MANAGER'S RECOMMENDED ACTION: The intent of CSC zoning is to ensure that it continues to be a walkable commercial environment while allowing for intensification of housing in a well served infill area of the City. Any text amendment needs to ensure that the basic design and use interests for the area are preserved to meet the goals for Campustown as identified within the LUPP. With some trepidation in allowing for the short term lodging and residential uses on the ground floor, staff believes that the amendment do address the primary interests related to the 2700 Block project and are workable for the remainder of Campustown. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the City Manager that the City Council approve Alternative #1 as described above. 3 Attachment 1: Campustown Zoning Map ➢= W Re e tial� m High ensitt a� esi n iary ow I Zone m W� W o e �� h� _ zI m w _..�z ,a =,- �pi 0 - 5 Q-i N � S� r � Q LLJ � �x o] Governmentl irport WEST„ _W_EST ST UNION DR U/y�0 Distric o Ne N J li-ST....Wo �Clal W OR > R I a� G2 N\ON� UNION DR N z i a OI O v ��— 1x� �i� �� U'41ONDR — �� tia I g w De�si �_, o f --� p o Zoe�I z w A > g a— fi -UNCOLN WAY W x L_ILINCOLN LINCOL'N�—'--R@s�de^tikl�LINCOLN LINCOLN WAY AY LINCOLN WAY LINCOLNWAY WAY -- `..., WAY e Zo a R s ential lct = Q H' h en i WOOD ST < 6 w !_ w a C z' Zcne Wco L w D nsi z _ -' CHAMBERLAIN a CHAMBERLAIN o ST z >rty >, Of rimerH irport IQ, x- ARBOR � `_A R ST.,Q Q m b iSz�� ST ARBOR ST OI r Ji OIHUNT ST Proposed CSC HUNTST Expansion Z I I QI_ - - -KNAPP ST t KNAPP ST _ KNA_PP ST ------KNAPP ST- KNAPPST--"'- �— 'p I id In I Lo w Gov m ernent/Airport a j >� Q District < Q z Q� Gov rnment/ on z = U, District J J e 3 _ si n _BAKER ST z w LITTLE ST _O _ ti j�� Jw aQ Z � Campustown Zoning 69 i ' I1 0 j 69 4