Click of edit Master subtitle style City to Auburn

Downtown Study Committee

January 19, 2010
4/14/12
Photo courtesy of www.realestateinauburn.com

Downtown Study

Timeline
Committee Appointme nt Initial meetings

Stakeholder interviews

Identifies challenges and

Regulatory Review and Discussion Wrap up

obstacles to development in the Urban Core. zoning regulations that were

Challenges largely deal with

4/14/12

Downtown Study

August 14, 2009 Auburn Chamber of Commerce Commercial Business Focus Group report to Mayor Ham

Timeline
Committee Appointment

September

1, 2009 First of thirteen meetings

Introduction and

organizational purposes.

Stakeholder interviews

Regulatory Review and Discussion Wrap up

September 8, 2009 Benchmarking Analysis

Special Use Provisions Stepback Requirements

4/14/12

Downtown Study

Initial meetings

Timeline
Committee Appointment

Stakeholder September

Interviews
Downtown Study

Initial meetings

15 through October 20 (six meetings)

Downtown Merchants Property Owners Auburn University Former Chair of the Urban

Stakeholde r interviews Regulatory Review and Discussion Wrap up

Core Task Force (2006)

4/14/12

Chamber of Commerce

Timeline
Committee Appointment

General Points from stakeholders

Land

Stakeholde r interviews Regulatory Review and Discussion Wrap up

is very expensive in downtown while land further out is inexpensive if any, incentives to upgrade existing downtown sites or redevelop

Few,

4/14/12

Downtown Study

Initial meetings

Timeline
Committee Appointment

Regulatory

Review and
Downtown Study

Discussion
November

Initial meetings

Stakeholder interviews

3 through December 8, 2009 (four meetings) issues within context of feedback from stakeholders included

Regulatory Review and Discussion Wrap up

Discussed

4/14/12

Topics

Timeline
Committee Appointment

January Review

7, 2010
Downtown Study

Initial meetings

Stakeholder interviews

of final recommendations for City Council consideration on January 19, 2010.

Regulatory Review and Discussion Wrap up

4/14/12

UC vs. CEOD
Urban

4/14/12

significant portion of the UC zone has a College Edge Overlay (CEOD) with

Downtown Study

Core (UC) is a base zoning classification

CEOD
On both sides of the street
North

College St. between Rail line and the University

Magnolia
4/14/12

Avenue between

Downtown Study

Stepback in CEOD Zone

Existing Regulation
Downtown Study

15

foot stepback after the first 24 to 36 in height limited to two building floors.

4/14/12

Stepback in CEOD Zone

Proposed Regulation: CEOD.
Provide
Downtown Study

Stepback

not mandatory in the

incentives* to encourage stepback

*Potential incentives can be researched and explored during the Planning Commissions 4/14/12 further review of these proposals in their work

Special Use Provisions

Existing Regulation
Downtown Study

Third

level through fifth level uses must be

Residential Office, or Commercial

Hotel Hotel Hotel

4/14/12

(hotel and

Special Use Provisions

Proposed Regulation
Commerci al Commerci al Commerci al

Commercial and

entertainment

Office, or Residential
4/14/12

Downtown Study

Third

level through fifth level uses are required to be

Special Use Provisions

Effect of Proposed Change guidelines
Allows
Downtown Study

Maintains

the intent of the original

for a greater variety of uses at levels 3 through 5 (including restaurants)

also necessitate higher floor to ceiling heights at levels 3 through 5 to accommodate the 4/14/12

Would

Building Height
Existing Regulation
Building

height is limited to 66 ft

4/14/12

66 feet Downtown Study

Building Height
Proposed Regulation
Downtown Study

Increase

allowable height in the UC/CEOD to 75 feet to accommodate potential non-residential uses at levels 3 through 5

Purpose:

Buildings can have The Committee felt that limiting the same height was more importantnumber a than of set number of floors stories, yet 4/14/12

Source: http://www.stradaatcoconutcreek.com

Floor Area Ratio

What is it?
Downtown Study

Ratio of the Building area to the area of the parcel. FAR = Building Area Parcel area

Illustration of a FAR of 1.0

4/14/12
Source: http://lahd.lacity.org/lahdinternet/Portals/0/Policy/curriculum/images/ch_far.gif

Floor Area Ratio

Existing Regulation

Effect: buildings with finished basements are limited regarding height and lot coverage

4/14/12

Downtown Study

Finished basements are considered part of FAR calculation (this is applied city-wide)

Floor Area Ratio

Proposed Regulation
Downtown Study

Allow

finished basement area not to count against the allowable FAR (apply city-wide) would allow for basement level uses to be established downtown while also resolving an on-going issue in performance residential single-family subdivisions.

This

4/14/12

Floor Area Ratio

Existing Regulation
Downtown Study

FAR

is limited to 5.0

4/14/12

Floor Area Ratio

Proposal
Downtown Study

Review

existing FAR requirement within the context of the ensuing Planning Commission work session process

Why? and height limits are both necessary as effective determinants of height 4/14/12
FAR

Permitted and Conditional Uses in the CEOD/UC

Existing Regulation
Downtown Study

The

land use table in the zoning ordinance has two conditional use classifications
C is a standard conditional use C~ is a permitted use if in a building

established prior to February 20, 2007, otherwise a standard conditional use

4/14/12

Permitted and Conditional Uses in the CEOD/UC

Proposal right. Why? greater symmetry between the manner in which uses are treated downtown and the rest of 4/14/12 the City.
Provides
Downtown Study

C~

uses should be permitted by

Permitted and Conditional Uses in the CEOD/UC

Proposal
Downtown Study

Maintain

requirement that all mixed-use projects require master development plan review by the Planning Commission (and City Council, if conditional use approval is being requested).

Why? provide adequate assurance of 4/14/12

To

What is Mixed Use?

The City Zoning code: combination of residential and non-residential uses on a single property or land parcel, involving two (2) or more uses of different land use categories that may or may not be located in a single structure . . . A single site 4/14/12 may include contiguous properties.
A
Downtown Study

Source: http://www.cityofholladay.com

Permitted and Conditional Uses in the CEOD/UC

Lounges Committee also considered the prospect of further regulating lounge uses in terms of establishing distance 4/14/12
Downtown Study
http://www.auhcc.c om

The

Balconies
Existing Regulation
Downtown Study

Balconies

may extend 4 ft beyond the primary faade, within the 15 foot stepback at least 11 ft from right-ofway

Setback No 10
4/14/12

more than 12 ft in width ft separation between balconies

Balconies
Proposal
Downtown Study

Balconies

may be appropriate to be located within the right-of-way (over the public sidewalk)

further through the Planning 4/14/12 Commission work

Review

Balconies
Special consideration
Downtown Study

The

code language needed to facilitate this will need to be placed not only in the Zoning Ordinance, but the City Code of Ordinances as well, due to the prospective use of right-of-way.

4/14/12

Parking
Existing Regulation
Downtown Study

Residential uses in CEOD shall provide 1.5 parking spaces per unit.

uses in the UC shall provide one (1) 4/14/12 parking space per

Residential

Parking
Proposed Regulation

Make minor modifications to the onsite parking requirement. Required parking in the Urban Core & CEOD shall be provided either:
On-Site; Within one thousand (1,000 feet)

of the site through an arrangement *This option will only beproperty Council chooses to or lessee (a with the available if the City owner establish a parking 4/14/12 or a fee-in-lieu of parking . fund

Downtown Study

Parking
Why?
The

dense nature of the Urban Core and the small and often odd shaped parcels make it very difficult for a property owner to redevelop and provide on-site parking. Committee felt it was

4/14/12

The

Downtown Study

Parking Lot Screening

Existing Regulation parking will be allowed to be visible from the street at any level. At grade level adjacent to the ROW, parking must be screened with a building. In cases where the parking cant be screened by a building of the 4/14/12 permitted use, the parking must be
No
Downtown Study

Parking Lot Screening

Proposed Regulation

Allow parking to be visible from the street with appropriate buffers with landscaping

Clarify existing requirements that parking garages must have an 4/14/12

Fencing at First Baptist Church Parking Lot

Downtown Study

Parking Lot Screening

Why?
Downtown Study

Parking

is necessary in the Urban Core, but it must be accessible, visible, safe, and properly screened with fencing and landscaping.

4/14/12

Source: http://www.mankatomn.gov

Signs
Background
Downtown Study

Standards

of the UCTF were not adopted until April 2007

most recent overhaul of the sign ordinance took place between 4/14/12 September 2007

The

Signs
Existing Regulations
Downtown Study

Sign

area is primarily a function of building width and not so much height. of 32 sq ft per building consideration for buildings with multiple faades or entrances

Maximum No

blade sign may be provided in addition to building mounted 4/14/12

One

Signs
Proposal
Downtown Study

Sign

area calculations to be respective to each building faade and to building height sign area allowance for extraordinarily narrow buildings signs for any wall that has an entrance sandwich board signs

Minimum Blade

Permit 4/14/12

Nonconformities
Existing Regulation
Current regulations can present
Downtown Study

Article

VII in the Zoning Ordinance

serious challenges and potentially undesirable results in certain scenarios.

Particularly challenging is the

4/14/12

requirement that any expansion of an existing non-conformity requires compliance with all current regulations.

Nonconformities
Proposal
Downtown Study

Review May

existing regulations governing non-conformities be merit in examining distinctions between detrimental and benign nonconformities.

issue is a project, in and of itself, and may need to be reviewed separately. 4/14/12

This

Glazing
Proposal
Downtown Study

Evaluate

requirements with the Planning Commission work session process.

Why? has encountered instances where the application of glazing requirements has not always 4/14/12
Staff

Next Steps
Review

Planning

Commission work sessions

Source: http://www.engagecommunitychurch.com

Staff

4/14/12

will draft changes to Zoning

Downtown Study

of final recommendations for City Council consideration on January 19, 2010.

Questions?

4/14/12

Source: http://ulster.scienceshop.org

Downtown Study