Land Development Code Update Update/LDC_CC-PC_Presentation_11.12.2018.pdfNov 12, 2018 · THE WORK PLAN 3 1. Project initiation 2. Code Modules preparation and public review 3. Draft

Land Development Code Update

City Council / Planning Commission Workshop

November 12, 2018

We Dream Big and Deliver

PURPOSE OF MEETING

• Introduce “Module 3” • Request City Council and Planning Commission input on:

– Bulk plane – Short-term rentals (STR)

• Provide follow-up from the August 13th workshop: – Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) – Expanded business use of the home – Height of buildings in residential districts

2

THE WORK PLAN

3

1. Project initiation 2. Code Modules preparation and public review

3. Draft Code development and public review 4. Remapping of zoning Districts

5. Code completion and approval

JAN. FEB. MAR.AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC.MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULYFEB.MAR. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. JAN.FEB.SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. JAN.

2018

1

2019

CODE MODULE #2OPEN HOUSE


DRAFT CODE OPEN HOUSE


2

3

4

5

2017

2020


CITY COUNCIL/

PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP

We are here

PLANNING COMMISSION

& CITY COUNCIL

HEARINGS

MODULE 3 INTRODUCTION

4

Intro to Procedure Key Objective – “Make things as simple as possible, but not simpler.”

Suggestions

• Use a streamlined set of procedural steps for nearly all application types, with different decision points based on the type of application

• Ultimately, all application types should fit into one of about 5 to 7 procedural “pathways” or “tracks”

Pre-Application

Application

Completeness Review

Compliance Review

Referrals

Neighborhood Meeting

Notice / Public Comment

Recommendation or Decision (Staff) Hearing / Decision

Notice

Recommendation or Decision (PC)

Decision (Council)

Hearing / Decision Notice

Suggestions



Pre-Application

Application

Completeness Review

Compliance Review

Referrals




Notice


Decision (Council)


Suggestions



Pre-Application

Application

Completeness Review

Compliance Review

Referrals




Notice


Decision (Council)


Suggestions

• Decision making pathways can be standardized into “tracks” with distinct requirements for procedural steps and, potentially, notice

• Instead of customizing a process for each type of application, the Code could create tracks and then assign them to the various required approvals and permits

• That way, over time, process improvements could focus on tracks rather than just particular types of approvals and permits

Current – Process Detailed by Approval Type

Proposed – Establish “Tracks”

Proposed – Assign Tracks to Approval Types

Appeals

• Administrative appeals are appeals to a person or an appointed or elected body (e.g., Hearing Officer, Board of Adjustment, Planning Commission, or Council), as opposed to a court

• Current code allows two administrative appeals for FDP, minor plat, minor subdivision, certain easements, site plans, certificates of compliance with design guidelines (Olde Town), and several other approvals

• “Best practice” is “one bite at the apple” for an administrative appeal – balances convenience and cost to appellant (and applicant, if different), control of City’s fate by City itself, and time necessary for “finality” of decision

Appeals

• Module 3 will address: • Who hears appeals?

• What’s the standard for review?

• What qualifications, if any, are required of appellants?

• What are the timeframes?

BULK PLANE

15

BULK PLANE

Purpose: – Provide transition between infill / new development and

adjacent existing single-family residential districts

Three Options:

– Intent is to provide an easy to understand and effective approach

16

BULK PLANE – OPTION 1, IN CURRENT LDC

6.3.2. - Exception to general rule: Transitional heights. “Where a multifamily residential structure or nonresidential structure is constructed within 100 feet of a single family detached or attached structure on an adjacent lot, the new multifamily or nonresidential structure shall meet one of the following criteria:

A. It shall not extend upward through a bulk plane beginning on the nearest lot line of the adjacent residential structure and extending upward at an angle of 45 degrees over the multifamily residential or nonresidential lot.

B. Alternately, the new multifamily or nonresidential structure may be constructed to a height no taller than the adjacent existing single-family structure.”

17

BULK PLANE – OPTION 2

Option 2: 45 degree bulk plane begins 6 ft. above the zoning district boundary.

18

Zoning District Boundary Line

Residential District

Building in Residential, Mixed-Use or Commercial District

BULK PLANE – OPTION 3

Option 3: New buildings cannot exceed maximum building height of adjacent residential district within a 75 ft. transition zone from zoning district boundary.

19

SHORT-TERM RENTALS

20

SHORT-TERM RENTALS

• To gauge community’s response: – SpeakUp Arvada survey and

quick poll, generally 70% in favor (197 responses)

• Council directed Short-Term Focus Group be established

• Focus Group met on October 9th and November 1st and developed proposal

21

SHORT-TERM RENTALS

• To gauge community’s response: – SpeakUp Arvada survey and

quick poll, generally 70% in favor (197 responses)

• Council directed Short-Term Focus Group be established

• Focus Group met on October 9th and November 1st and developed proposal

22

Do you think that short-term rentals (i.e., rentals less

than 30 days) should be allowed in single-family

residential areas in Arvada, unless excluded by HOA

rules?

PROPOSAL FOR ARVADA STR

Guiding Principles • Protect neighborhoods while accommodating an existing and desired

activity in residential zoning districts • Licensing to ensure short-term rental accommodations are good neighbors

and provide for a fair operating environment with hotels and other lodging providers

• Property owners who are present provide greater oversight to short-term rentals in contrast to properties not occupied by owners

23


STR Proposal • Allow STRs as an accessory use in all residential zone districts with:

– Property owner must reside on site – License required; Limit of one per property. For example:

• STR for either the principal residence, an ADU, or guest house • One side of a duplex, providing that the owner lives in the other

part of the duplex – Can only be rented to one party at a time – 1 additional off-street parking space is required

24


• Not allow STR in current PUD mixed-use zoning district • Apartment buildings:

– Only the property owner may operate a STR (based on one STR per property)

– Renters cannot operate a STR • Rental of a whole house would not be allowed (no owner present)

25

PROPOSAL FOR ARVADA STR LICENSE

• Requirements: – Proof of primary residence – Must identify which portions of the dwelling unit or property to be used

for STR – Must meet parking requirements – Must self-certify that meets all applicable codes and safety standards

(The unit may be inspected based on complaints.) – Proof of liability insurance (usually up to $500,000)

• License not transferable and terminates on sale of property • License to be used in all rental marketing materials and displayed in unit • Permit can be revoked for cause

26

COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS FROM STR FOCUS GROUP

1. Property owner must reside on site. Can this be a long-term renter with a formal agreement from owner?

2. Can only be rented to one party at a time.

(This is a fairly typical requirement in other cities.) Can more than one party have a reservation at a time?

3. Rental of a whole house would not be allowed (no owner present).

(Focus group commented this could allow absentee landlords / investors. Colorado Springs has taken this approach. Fort Collins and Golden limit this STR type to mixed-use and commercial districts. However, exception would be for on-site owner to leave for vacations, etc. and require property manager.)

Should the whole house be available for short-term rentals?

27

FOLLOW-UP INFORMATION

28

ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS

Appearance • Council requested photos to assess the visual impacts of ADUs • 8 Type A ADUs in Arvada (detached and separate dwelling, can be rented)

29

5335 GARRISON ST.

30

5708 ZEPHYR ST.

31

5612 ZEPHYR ST.

ADU over detached garage, alley access

32

5767 FALK COURT

33

6825 EATON ST.

34

7595 LEWIS ST.

35

7707 W 64 ST.

36

APPEARANCE

• Detached ADUs typically not visible from street • Possible specific solutions for corner lots to address appearance (could apply to all

lots): – Limit maximum ADU height to 2 feet less than primary dwelling, or maximum

height of 16 feet (unless located above a detached garage)

– Locate ADU minimum of 5 feet behind setback and front facade of house, and require screening fence or hedge, also narrowest frontage to face street

– Require similar exterior finish materials, roof pitch and color to primary dwelling – Prepare design guidelines and best practices guide – OR - Prohibit ADUs on corner lots

37


Deed Restriction • Currently:

• ADU cannot be sold separately, and lot cannot be subdivided • ADU cannot be increased in size • Property owner must live in either the principal dwelling unit or the ADU

38


Cities with deed restrictions: Golden, Lakewood, Thornton, Windsor, Boulder, Castle Rock Cities without deed restrictions: Longmont, Fort Collins, Loveland, Denver, Colorado Springs Other approach: – Durango requires affidavit on owner occupancy submitted to City in every odd-

numbered year – Englewood requires annual verification of owner occupancy in either principal unit or

ADU (ordinance currently in approval process)

Pros • Deters absentee investors, thereby maintaining single-family neighborhood character Cons • Time consuming process to remove or amend restriction if code is modified

39

EXPANDED BUSINESS USE OF THE HOME

• Uses to be specified in new LDC • Many cities allow use of accessory structure, garage - while parking requirements still

met, ADUs (Douglas Co., Wheat Ridge, Longmont) • Options:

– Exclude garage but allow in accessory building and ADU – Limit to one nonresident employee – Allow more than one home occupation within dwelling or accessory building – Limit to no more than 3 customers or clients at any one time (Golden) – Limits on ancillary retail, delivery, and traffic impact – Prohibit repair of equipment having a combustion engine – Limit glare, noise, etc. – No outdoor storage. Some communities limit storage area size.

40

NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION STRATEGIES

• Buildings heights in approx. 7,000 SF single-family districts in other cities: – Fort Collins: - Low Density (min. 6,000 SF lots): max. 28 ft.

- Neighborhood Conservation district: 2 stories, 1½ stories for ADUs – Westminster: max. 25 ft., 15 ft. for accessory lots – Lafayette: max. 27 ft., 16 ft. for accessory structure – Louisville: max. 27 ft. on estate lots, 27 or 35 ft. for 7,000 SF lots – Denver: (suburban district) max. 30 ft., 2.5 stories – Golden: max. 30 ft., 20 for accessory structure – Greeley: max. 30 ft. – Boulder: max. 35 ft., 20 ft. for accessory structure – Aurora: max. 35 ft. – Wheat Ridge: max. 35. ft., 15 ft. for accessory structure – Thornton: max. 35 ft., 16 ft. for accessory structure

41

NEXT STEPS

42

NEXT STEPS

• Community Open House #3, Code Module 2 cont’d – Thursday, November 29, 6:00 – 8:00 p.m.

• Advisory Committee, Code Module 3 – Thursday, December 6, 6:00 – 8:00 p.m.

• City Council / Planning Commission Workshop, Code Module 2 – January 14, 2019

• City Council / Planning Commission Workshop, Code Module 3 – March 25, 2019

• Community Open House #4, Code Module 3 – April / May, 2019

43

CONTINUED PUBLIC OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT

– Community open houses

– Website – AdvanceArvada.org – Social media and newsletters

44

45

Questions?

Documents

Land Development Code Update Update/LDC_CC-PC_Presentation_11.12.2018.pdfNov 12, 2018 · THE WORK PLAN 3 1. Project initiation 2. Code Modules preparation and public review 3. Draft