HomeMy WebLinkAboutA003 - Commission Action Form dated April 7, 2021 ITEM: 8
DATE: 04/07121
COMMISSION ACTION FORM
SUBJECT: TEXT AMENDMENT FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) OVERLAY
DISTRICT AND PRIVATE STREET STANDARDS
BACKGROUND:
On January 20, 2021, staff presented a memo and PowerPoint presentation (Attachment '1')
to the Planning and Zoning Commission, which was followed by an engaging discussion
between the Planning and Zoning Commission and staff about housing options. The memo
included a summation of the information that led up to the City Council's directive given on
December 8, 2020 to move forward with zoning text amendments. On December 8, 2020, Staff
had provided to the City Council a follow-up on the Developer's Workshop held on October 28,
2020. Developers were presented with similar materials as those presented at the January 20,
2021 P&Z Meeting. The developer workshop materials and summary of the meeting are
attached as Attachment '2'.
The City Council's directive to staff was to proceed with preparing a zoning text amendment
that would add a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay Zone as a new zoning tool for the
purpose of expanding options for development of housing and to also creating private street
standards within the Subdivision Code. The focus of the proposed PUD as draft by staff is to
allow for smaller lots and reduced setbacks when there is a defined development concept for
a project compared to using standard lot sizes and setbacks where development would occur
with less integration and up-front design details. The Commission is to consider the approach
and issues addressed in the draft standards as it relates to City Council's goals for the PUD
Overlay.
The proposed draft (included as Attachment '3') is designed to allow for variability in zoning
standards and housing types, but within the density limits of the base zoning allowance. Staff
used research on PUD approaches from other communities and the City's current development
policies to help inform the working draft for Planning and Zoning Commission review.
It is anticipated that this tool could be used to assist in the development of housing related to:
• for sale sub-6,000 sq. ft. detached home lots
• for sale townhome communities
• for sale condominium buildings
• for sale single-family attached
• rental multi-family, and
• accessory dwelling units within new development
As drafted, the PUD Overlay could also apply to redevelopment situations on larger existing
sites (> 2 acres) and not just to new greenfeld development. It is intended to address a wide
range of interests and issues related to residential development. Specifically, it allows flexibility
1
in the creation of a range of lots sizes and price points- with no mandated mix of lot sizes,
allowing developers to address market preferences.
The PUD is applied as an overlay to an existing residential base zone. PUD zoning may be
applied with any residential base zone of Floating Suburban Zone (FS) in the City. These zones
include: RL, RM, UCRM, RH, FS-RL, FS-RM, and S-SMD, note S-SMD is a Special Purpose
zone for residential and small commercial uses. The base zone provides the foundation of what
is expected (and required) regarding permitted uses, density, and maximum building height
and can provide a certain degree of certainty for surrounding development. If the base zoning
does not match the proposed PUD concept, it may be rezoned to one of these base zones
concurrently with the rezoning establishing the overlay district.
The Proposed PUD related amendments specifically address the following:
• Identify Findings for Rezoning Approval Related to the Purpose of the PUD Overlay
• Add Flexibility in Lot Size (reduce to less than 6,000 sq. ft.)
• Add Flexibility Setbacks for Front, Rear, and Side Requirements
• Add Flexibility in Lot Width (reduce lot width to less than 50 feet)
• Maintain Density and Height standards Directed by the Base Zones and Floating Zones
(FS)
• Maintain a Common Open Space Requirement Similar to FS zoning, although reduced
from a F-PRD.
• Maintain but also Modify Specific Block Length Design Requirements Compared to FS
zoning.
• Add Standards for Design Compatibility Related to Street Fronts Due to Reduced Lot
Sizes
• New Private Street Standards within the Subdivision Ordinance (Chapter 23).
DRAFT STANDARDS
APPROVAL PROCESS:
The approval process for a rezoning map amendment is described in 29.1507. The process for
a PUD is similar to that required for FS-RL or FS-RM. Each requires a pre-application meeting
as described in 29.1200(2) and referenced in 29.1502(3)(a) as well as a Master Plan as
described in 29.1502(4).
The Master Plan and proposed development must include enough detail to determine that the
Findings included in 29.1114(3) are satisfied related to the purpose of the PUD. The Master
Plan allows the developer to get entitlement without having to fully flesh out complete details
required for a Major Site Development Plan or Preliminary Plat. The Master Plan would
describe any expected deviations from zoning standards and provide conceptual development
information. The City may require additional materials related to housing design as needed to
support the proposed rezoning request. A Major Site Development Plan would be required
subsequent to approval as a PUD. Notably this process requires somewhat less up front detail
compared to the current PRD process that requires a Major Site Development Plan with initial
approval.
2
PUD PURPOSE
By pairing the flexibility allowed in bulk regulations (lot area, lot width, frontage, setbacks, and
site coverage) with the supplemental development standards and compatibility standards, the
purposes of the district can be achieved:
(a) Provide opportunity for innovative and imaginative development through flexibility in the
design, placement and clustering of buildings, mix of housing types, use of open space,
and related site and architectural design considerations;
(b) Increase the stock of diverse housing types for a variety of income levels;
(c) Promote efficient land use and infrastructure construction with allowances for smaller lot
sizes, while maintaining high-quality living environments for privacy, architectural
interest, streetscape, walkability, and open spaces for private and common use;
(d) Provide for a mix of private and common open space areas corresponding to smaller lot
sizes along with additional amenities for larger developments;
(e) Encourage and preserve opportunities for energy efficient development; and
(f) Encourage context sensitive infill development.
SUPPLEMENTAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
Although the PUD Overlay grants flexibility, development must still be consistent with the
standards described within Table 29.1114(5). It stipulates when and how the base zone
requirements apply, what other standards must be satisfied, and when flexibility is allowed.
Base zone requirements, such as lot area, lot width, lot frontage, setback, and site coverage
are flexible and are allowed to be defined under the PUD. The details of these modifications
must be noted on the Master Plan that accompanies the rezoning request. However, all lots
must have approved access to a public way or a private street, regardless of frontage.
Additionally, off-street parking requirements and subdivision improvements (street and
infrastructure requirements including sidewalks and street trees) apply.
Even though reduced setbacks are allowed, garage access must be a minimum of 20 feet when
accessed from a public street. This standard for garage access from a public street is not
unique to PUDs. It is not unlike the standards included for FS-RL and FS-RM, where garage
faces are required to be at least 25' from the front property line and is replicated in the F-VR
zoning district for Country Homes.
Open Space
Within the PUD, the required common open space is 10%. This is same percentage required
for FS-RL. The intended purpose of the proposed open space must be set forth in the plan and
suitably improved for its intended purpose. Usable open space is to be readily accessible to
residents (see definition of Useable Open Space). A standard for developments with over 50
dwelling units is included as well as an allowance for medium and high-density developments
to be able to provide indoor recreational amenities in-lieu of the common open space
requirement. The percentage of open space required for the PUD is one of the key factors
differentiating it from the F-PRD zoning district. Staff notes that in some situations, quality of
private usable open space on individual lots may be a priority for the development layout.
Understanding tradeoffs on yard space, building to building setbacks, access points to a home
3
will all be considered when evaluating a proposal. For example, a project that has minimum
or no setbacks and as a result, does not have usable private space as a yard, deck, patio, etc.,
would be expected to augment the common area amenities with private open space. A good
example would be a townhome community where the structure essentially occupies the whole
of the individual lot area. This may not be the case with other housing configurations.
Block Design
The City of Ames prioritizes connectivity within its development patterns, as described within
Land Use Policy Plan's goals and in a more direct manner with its street and block length
standards. Staff believes that with reduced block sizes, connectivity becomes more important
to serve both the pedestrian and vehicular transportation needs of the residents. For this
reason, the block design requirements within the PUD restrict block length to no more than
660'. This standard is supported within the Subdivision Ordinance, which states that the
preferred block length is 600' (although an exception for larger block size is included)_
Additionally, the City has a 660' foot preferred connectivity standards for roadway length
related to pedestrian circulation as part of the current FS zoning standards.
Cul-de-sacs are discouraged within the Subdivision Ordinance. The PUD limits the use of cul-
de-sacs and dead-end streets to areas where physical or environmental conditions preclude
an interconnected street network. This is not intended to limit small-shared auto courts or
driveways that serve a small group of homes off of a street.
COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS:
Large lots with large front setbacks have the opportunity to disengage from the street and one
another and use space to mitigate transitions between the street to a home and to adjacent
properties. This is not the case with reduced lot size and reduced front setbacks that may occur
within a PUD. Garages and driveways can easily dominate the dwelling frontage and become
a defining feature of the street and impact other design elements of the neighborhood. The
relationship of the residence to the street becomes more impactful to the neighborhood within
smaller lot developments.
Due to the concentration of dwelling units that will occur when dimensional requirements are
reduced, compatibility standards have been included. Compliance with the compatibility
standards is required to determined compliance with the purposes of the PUD_ The
compatibility standards are purposefully focused on a limited number of features of residential
development. These are: garages & driveways, building front entrances, and building massing.
These features were selected for their impact in increasing livability and neighborhood
character, in exchange for allowing flexibility with lot area and setbacks. The features are
important not only at the individual lot scale, but also to the larger neighborhood character and
their influence on the public realm. Staff has not included specific architectural character or
design elements as standards or guidelines with the proposed draft. It maybe necessary with
a project proposal to provide this level of detail on architectural character to make findings for
approval of a requested PUD overlay.
4
Garages & Driveways-
• Narrow lots constrict the area available for building. As a result, the default is frequently
for garages being the dominate feature of the front facade of the dwelling. Garages that
are recessed behind the front facade of the dwelling or projecting porch feature, allow
the residential portion of the dwelling to define the character of the street or open space.
The PUD requires that garages and off-street parking areas not dominate the front
facade.
• Narrower lots result in closer driveway spacing and less street frontage available for on-
street for parking. A trade-off to narrower lots is to restrict driveway width and to
encourage driveway clustering. The PUD allows either front or rear-loaded garages
(from an alley).
Building Front Entrances-
Primary facades are to include architectural treatment that emphasizes the main
entrance. This might be a porch or stoop but could also be another form of architectural
treatment. Staff supports including main entrance identification in support of City goals
for sense of place, connectivity, and neighbor interaction with neighborhood
development. As a semiprivate outdoor room, they serve as a transition between the
dwelling's interior and exterior space and between the private and public realms.
Building Massing-
The design of new multi-family buildings must consider abutting single-family and two-
family dwellings, so that the existing dwellings are not overwhelmed by the scale and
massing of the new development. Rather, the new buildings must be compatible in
scale, massing, window proportions and architectural style. Numerous design options
exist that can be included to accomplish this standard. These requirements will generally
be evaluated on a case-by-case basis as dictated in relation to existing and planned
residential uses abutting a site.
Other considerations are also mentioned with the standards to ensure that these factors are
reviewed and given some consideration in the project design. They include.. Future
Development, Existing Trees, Landscape Buffering, and Infill Compatibility.
PRIVATE STREET STANDARDS:
Private street standards have been included as a text amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance
(Chapter 23), at the request of staff and developers. Including a standard for private streets
ensures that when private streets are included, they conform to a minimum standard of
compliance. Private streets would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
Private streets and alleys will be required to meet or exceed Iowa Statewide Urban Design and
Specifications (SUDAS) standards and the City of Ames supplement design standard
requirements regarding, pavement profile, base, and drainage. A minimum design life of 30-
years is expected for a private street and alley improvement. Verification that the private street
has been installed according to the approved plans, is required to be provided by the project
engineer-of-record.
The standards also stipulate when private streets are considered appropriate. Private streets
will be required to accommodate two-way traffic, fire access and turn-around requirements, on-
5
street parallel parking (or alternatively, guest parking bays), sidewalks (or alternatively, an
alternate pedestrian circulation system), street trees, and lighting. The standards do not exempt
private streets from any of these things but may allow flexibility on how these items are
provided.
The biggest advantage for the developer is the reduced right-of-way width. Having a reduced
right-of-way results in more property to be available for other purposes. One disadvantage is
that the HOA becomes responsible for the maintenance and ongoing upkeep of the street.
These costs are passed onto the homeowners through their HOA fees. HOA's are not
uncommon in the City, but developers have indicated that Ames' residents are sensitive to
HOA fees, and that it is in the developer's interest generally to keep the HOA fees to a
minimum.
How is the PUD Overlay similar or different than the F-PRD Zoning?
Both F-PRD and PUD have similar approval processes and require City Council approval of
rezoning and development plans. Each must abide by the City's subdivision standards for
streets and infrastructure. Both FS-PRD and PUD allow a great deal of flexibility in the
implementation of the bulk regulations. Both require a minimum acreage of two acres with an
exception for environmentally sensitive areas.
The most significant difference between the F-PRD District and the PUD Overlay is the
requirement for open space and how density is determined. F-PRD allows for a project to
request a rezoning to a higher density in a PRD without direct correlation to the underlying
zoning and Land Use Policy Plan designation, the PUD will require direct correlation to an
underlying base zone. The F-PRD requires 40% open space for low and medium density
residential and 35% for high density residential. The F-PRD emphasizes open space and
amenity features within the development. Developers have indicated a strong disapproval of
the 40% requirement and its impacts on the feasibility of development flexibility. By practice
the City has allowed for a mix of private usable yard spaces and common area to meet this
standard, with a majority of areas expected to be within a common area. Within the PUD, the
required common open space is reduced to 10%. This is same percentage required for FS-RL.
One minor distinction between the proposed PUD Overlay and the F-PRD is also how uses
area allowed. The F-PRD has its own exclusive set of uses that cannot be changed, whereas
the PUD allows for Base Zone uses but broadens allowances to all housing types, including a
new accessory dwelling unit options, within the defined density limitations of the base zone.
Developer Outreach
Initial developer outreach on different zoning concepts occurred in October 2020. This meeting
was sparsely attended by a mix of civil engineers and developer/real estate professionals. The
interests discussed at that meeting are included as Attachment '2'. Outreach on the draft
standards for the PUD and Private Streets was circulated to the same email list of 45
professionals that were initially contacted in October. To date, responses have only been
received from the Hunziker Development team. A virtual meeting was held with the Hunziker
team to discuss their concerns as they began their review of the materials.
Hunziker's biggest question was whether the PUD would result in the construction of more
diverse housing types as was defined as the primary goal. Hunziker expressed concern that
6
the required standards might be so onerous that developers would not benefit from the flexibility
available within the PUD. Issues related to streets and cul-de-sacs as well as prescriptive
language similar to Village zoning of Somerset were of concern. They intend to continue to
review the materials and discuss with staff as the review process unfolds.
To date staff has only made minor changes to the draft shared with developers last week,
including establishment process, dead end streets, and other minor tweaks to standards. The
most current version of the draft standards is attached to this report.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The Planning & Zoning Commission can recommend approval of the zoning text
amendment establishing a new Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay zone within
the Zoning Ordinance along with private street standards in the Subdivision Ordinance
(Chapter 23).
2. The Planning & Zoning Commission can recommend alternative language to the
proposed text amendments.
3. The Planning and Zoning Commission can request additional information and defer
making a recommendation.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The working draft text defines opportunities for increasing housing diversity as an option to the
existing F-PRD zoning district. Although it requires substantially less open space and continues
to offer flexibility from bulk regulations such as lot size and setback, the PUD also includes
several standards to ensure that open space, street connectivity, and building frontages
enhance quality of life within the community. The proposed text is intended to strike a balance
between increased flexibility and standards while also addressing the City's neighborhood
development expectations that apply to other developments.
Staff is particularly interested in hearing the Planning &Zoning Board's questions and concerns
as to whether the appropriate balance has been achieved. How might the working draft be
modified, if necessary, to address the Ames market interest to achieve greater housing
diversity? Overall, the PUD Overlay is an optional tool, a developer will still be able to use
standard zoning or the F-PRD option to meet their development needs.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the Department of Planning and Housing that the
Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of Alternative #1, which is for
the Planning & Zoning Commission to recommend to the City Council approval of the
text amendments creating a new Planned Unit Development Overlay District in the
Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 29) along with private street standards in the Subdivision
Ordinance (Chapter 23). With this Alternative, staff would continue to refine the process and
standards and move forward with tranferring it into the draft ordinance process with the City
Attorney's office for City Council consideration.
7