|
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT SUMMARY Regular Agenda -Public Hearing Item
|
|
ITEM NO. 11: PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR CAMSON VILLAS, 430 EISENHOWER DRIVE (SLD/LAW)
PDP-02-01-07: Preliminary Development Plan for Camson Villas, located at 430 Eisenhower Drive. Submitted by Paul Werner Architects, for Mallard Homes, property owner of record. |
|
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the following setback reductions:
Planning staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Development Plan for Camson Villas based upon the findings of fact presented in the body of the Staff Report and forwarding it to the City Commission with a recommendation for approval subject to the following conditions:
1. Approval of proposed setback reductions; 2. Provision of a note on the face of the preliminary development plan stating that it is a single phase development and including projected timing for completion of the development; 3. Revise sidewalk and provide ramp at a 90 degree angle at the corners of building F and G so that pedestrians are not directed into the parking lot; 4. Provision of a revised Preliminary Development Plan to show additional screening and landscaping along the east property line of the office building; and 5. Provision of a note on the face of the Preliminary Development Plan that states “No patio or balcony spaces shall be allowed in the peripheral setback area along the east side of the development.”
|
||
|
Applicant’s Reason for Request: |
Multi-Family Residential development.
|
|
|
KEY POINT · Property is zoned Planned Residential Development per the previous development code. · Property abuts a public park along the east side.
|
||
|
FACTORS TO CONSIDER · Compliance with development code for planned unit developments (Code pre July 1, 2006).
|
||
|
ASSOCIATED CASES/OTHER ACTION REQUIRED · Submission and approval of a Final Development Plan · Property platted as part of the Final Plat of Park West, Recorded in 2002 · [Z-01-04-02; A to PRD-2; 12.26 acres; Park West located south of Wakarusa Drive and East of Queens Road, Ord. No. 7519
|
||
|
PUBLIC COMMENT |
||
|
None received
|
||
|
GENERAL INFORMATION |
||
|
Current Zoning and Land Use: |
PRD (Planned Residential Development) Districts; undeveloped property
|
|
|
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: |
RM12D (Multi-Dwelling Residential) District to the north and west; developing duplex lots.
PD [Parkwest Gardens PRD] to the west; developing multi-family project.
PD [Village Meadows PRD] to the southwest; with a UPR for a retirement communication including independent living units and a nursing home pending new submission.
OS (Open Space); future city park.
|
|
Site Summary |
|
|
Number of Lots: |
1 |
|
Gross Area: |
4.340 acres |
|
Rights-of-way: |
No new right-of-way dedication proposed or need identified |
|
Drainage Easements: |
1.372 acres – Tract A |
|
Net Area |
2.968 acres |
|
Number of Buildings |
9 apartment buildings (2-story; 1 bedroom; four-plex units) 5 covered parking structures 1 office/manager’s unit with storage below |
|
Number dwelling units |
37 units |
|
Density |
12.47 units per net residential acre (Maximum allowed 15) |
|
Open Space Required |
20% required of 3.340 acres = .868 required for total 20% required of 2.968 acres = .5936 required excluding Tract A |
|
Open Space Provided |
3.193 acres total including Tract A 1.821 acres total excluding Tract A |
|
Parking Required |
56 space @ 1.5 spaces per 1 bedroom units |
|
Parking Provided |
57 spaces provided |
The subject property is located along the east side of Eisenhower Drive (a collector street). The property also abuts Overland Drive on the south side (a collector street). The east side of the property abuts an undeveloped parcel designated as a future park owned by the City of Lawrence.
The subject property was part of a 53 acre subdivision known as Park West platted in 2002. The subdivision included a total of 129 lots including 12 acres intended as planned residential development. The area to the west has developed with duplex units and a multi-family development known as Parkwest Gardens.
This project was submitted under the zoning regulations that predate the Land Development Code (effective July 1, 2006). The proposed Preliminary Development Plan for multi-family development has been evaluated based upon the following suggested findings of fact and conclusions outlined in Section 20-1010.1 of the Zoning Ordinance for the City of Lawrence.
1) In what respects the plan is or is not in general conformity with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan of the City.
The Comprehensive Plan, Horizon 2020 recommends infill development over annexation of new residential areas. The Plan also recommends a mixture of housing types, styles and economic levels for new development in a compatible density arrangement. The subject property is located within a part of the Park West subdivision. This proposed request is intended to represent a medium density development consistent with the definition of medium density found in Horizon 2020, between 7 to 15 dwelling units per acre (Page 5-3). The proposed Preliminary Development Plan notes density at 12.47 dwelling units per net residential acre. The proposed development is consistent with the density limitations established for the PRD and with conventional density analysis for a PRD.
Horizon 2020 expands the definition of medium-density residential development and states: “medium density residential areas are intended to promote a mix of housing types within planned development areas.” Development is intended to include a mix of single-family detached and attached homes, cluster homes, townhomes, and similar housing types. Development is recommended to avoid concentrations of same housing type. Horizon 2020 also states that medium-density residential development “should be designed to help avoid major and abrupt changes in density or use” (Page 5-4).
Horizon 2020 identifies the specific elements to be considered in development proposals and compatibility to include: use, building type, density, intensity of use, architectural style, scale, access, relationship to the neighborhood, and amount and treatment of screening and open space, with respect to location criteria. The land use zoning was approved for medium-density residential development as a Planned Residential Development without restrictions (Residential Goal 1, Policy 1.1(a)).
The proposed development provides additional housing choices in the neighborhood. The property is separated from adjacent development by a collector street along the north, south and west property lines and a public park area to the east.
Staff Finding – The proposed development is a medium density development consistent with the general land use recommendations of Horizon 2020 and the approved zoning.
2) In what respects the plan is or is not consistent with the Statement of Objectives of Planned Unit Development. [The statement of objectives of planned unit developments is found in Section 20-1002 of the Zoning Ordinance]
(1) To promote and permit flexibility that will encourage innovative and imaginative approaches in residential, commercial, and industrial development which will result in a more efficient, aesthetic, desirable and economic use of the land while maintaining density and intensity of use consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan for the City;
The approval of the zoning district allows for multiple buildings on a single parcel and allows building to be located within 10 feet of another structure within the development. The subject property is relatively narrow and arrangement of buildings is somewhat limited because of the size and shape of the property.
(2) To promote development within the City that can be conveniently, efficiently and economically served by existing municipal utilities and services or by their logical extension;
Extensions of water and sanitary sewer service were found to be available to the property as part of the subdivision review. The subject property is considered to be infill development; the surrounding areas are developing.
(3) To promote design flexibility including placement of buildings, and use of open space, pedestrian and vehicular circulation facilities to and through the site, and off-street parking areas in a manner that will best utilize potential on-site characteristics such as topography, geology, geography, size or proximity;
The development includes pedestrian connections internal to the development and to the adjacent public sidewalks. Access to the park area is available, but is not provided via an improved pathway. Internal vehicular circulation is restricted because of the size and shape of the property. Separation of vehicular and pedestrian areas is provided.
The development plan provides substantial open space around the site and within the development. The drainage area separates the use from the public open space. Only one vehicular access point is provided to the site along with two pedestrian connections to the public sidewalks at the north and south ends of the development.
(4) To provide for the preservation of historic or natural features where they are shown to be in the public's best interest including but not limited to such features as: drainageways, floodplains, existing topography or rock outcroppings, unique areas of vegetation, historic landmarks or structures.
The property also includes substantial grading to create berms on the west side of the property along Eisenhower Drive. This creates a protected and private space to the rear of the buildings for common open space within the development.
Staff Finding – This finding requires a review of the physical aspects of the development as they relate to the topography (slope and grade) as well as the drainage features of the site. The proposed Preliminary Development Plan provides the inclusion of the drainage area into the development as a peripheral element. The open nature of the covered parking allows view through to open spaces rather than being totally blocked by fully enclosed structures.
3) The nature and extent of the common open space in the Planned Unit Development, the reliability of the proposals for maintenance and conservation of the common open space, and the adequacy or inadequacy of the amount and function of the common open space in terms of the densities and dwelling types proposed in the plan.
The proposed development exceeds the required amount of open space within the development (5.05 acres). Almost 74% of the site is open space most of which represents the 1.37 acres of Tract A. Open space areas are also found around the perimeter of the site as well as areas in front of the buildings and noted as common areas on the face of the plan.
Staff Finding –The proposed Preliminary Development Plan exceeds the requirement of open space and includes pedestrian access throughout the development with connections to public streets and informal access to the park property to the east.
4) Whether the plan does or does not make adequate provisions for public services, provide adequate control over vehicular traffic, and further the amenities of light and air, recreation and visual enjoyment.
Staff Finding – A Planned Unit Development is required to provide access to a collector street. The proposed development complies with this criterion. Off-street parking and interior access accommodate the use per city standards. Utilities can be extended to serve the site.
5) Whether the plan will or will not have a substantial adverse effect on adjacent property and the development or conservation of the neighborhood area.
Zoning and subdivision considerations that included this property anticipated development of multi-family residential units. The size and configuration of the lot generally limit the total number of units allowed on the site. The subject property abuts the city park property on the east side. Parks staff has commented that appropriate construction practices must be followed to mitigate damage and runoff onto the public property. The applicant has been made aware of this concern. This issue is typically controlled through permits (SPW3) and public improvement plans during the construction process.
Staff Finding –Much of the surrounding area includes multi-family uses. The surrounding area includes a variety of different housing types including conventional single-family detached, duplex/townhouse, elderly as well as multi-family housing in the immediate area. No substantial adverse effects on adjacent property have been identified.
6) In what respects the plan is or is not in conformance with the development standards and criteria of this article. [The general standards are found in Section 20-1006 and Preliminary Development Plan requirements are listed in Section 20-1010]
The proposed development plan complies with density limitations, open space, and parking requirements of a Planned Residential Development. The plan notes that two reductions in the peripheral as follows:
Section 20-1008 (d) provides the authority for the Planning Commission to reduce the setback provided that any reduction below 10’ between structures must be designed to meet building code requirements for zero setback. The two proposed requests do not change the proximity of the building separations within the development. There are no other criteria provided for the consideration of a request to deviate from the setbacks established for planned unit developments. Common requests that have been routinely approved relate to building separation when individual lot lines are proposed to allow the same accommodation of side-yard setback as is applicable to conventional single-family residence. Peripheral reductions have been evaluated on a case by case basis.
Applicant Response:
We are requesting two small waivers to allow the buildings to be spread out slightly. The drainage easement provides an increase peripheral boundary for most of the project. Since the projects abuts park property and provides a larger setback for a majority of its boundary it seems reasonable that two buildings could encroach slightly into the required boundary.
The proposed reductions allow for more useable common areas and greater front yard areas within the development and separation of buildings. The proposed office/maintenance unit is expected to have frequent activity and should be screened from the public park area to mitigate the activity public to the open space. If approved, staff recommends that additional landscaping be added to the rear of the office unit and that patio or balcony areas not be allowed in this area.
Staff Finding - The proposed Preliminary Development Plan complies with the required development standards with the exception of the two identified building setback reductions requested. The setback reductions are relatively minor and result in more usable open space within the development.
7) In what respects the plan is or is not in compliance with the requirements for application for tentative approval of the Planned Unit Development. [This finding refers to Section 20-1005 of the Zoning Ordinance-pre 7/1/06.]
(a) A plan that is consistent with (1) the "Statement of Objectives for Planned Unit Development," (2) the adopted Comprehensive Plan of the City, (3) the development standards set out herein, and (4) any specific rules and regulations for Planned Unit Developments adopted from time to time by the planning commission and city commission and placed on public record in the office of the city clerk shall be deemed to be qualified for tentative approval. No such rules and regulations shall be revised or added to so as to be applicable to a specific proposal for a Planned Unit Development after an application for tentative approval has been filed by the landowner or his or her agents.
(b) A plan shall be consistent with the following standards for the use, type, bulk, design and location of buildings, the density or intensity of use, the common open space, the public facilities and the development by geographic division of the tract.
Staff Finding – As noted above, the proposed development plan complies with the density limitations and provides buffering to address land use changes between abutting uses.
8) The sufficiency of the terms and conditions proposed to protect the interest of the public and the residents of the Planned Unit Development in the case of a plan that proposes development over a period of years.
The proposed development is shown as a single phase. This element will be confirmed with the Final Development Plan. Notes will be needed on the Final Development Plan to clarify the level of site improvements to be completed before occupancy.
Staff Finding –The Proposed Preliminary Development Plan should be revised to note the project is a single phase development. The applicant should be advised that a phasing plan will be required if occupancy of individual buildings is requested prior to the completion/construction of the entire development to mitigate conflicts between residential and construction activities.
9) Stormwater detention calculations and storage of excess stormwater drainage as per City Policy.
The proposed development includes Tract A, a platted drainage easement. City staff has reviewed this area and the submittal documents to assess the requirements for the area. Staff has not identified any deficiencies in the submission documents or the proposed stormwater management plan for the proposed development.
Staff Finding – A stormwater study was provided for this area as part of the original subdivision plat. The documentation was revised and accepted by the Public Works Staff.
The subject property is located within a developing residential area that includes a variety of housing options.
· Maximum density is set at 15 dwelling units per acre.
· The property is bounded by public streets on three sides and a future park property on the east.
· Access to the site is limited by the location of existing street intersections and the city park property. Only one access to the development is provided.
No new right-of-way or street improvements were identified in the review process for this project.
The property has been zoned for Planned Residential since 2002. There were no use restrictions associated with the rezoning or subdivision of the property. The application notes that the proposed use is for a multi-family rental development.
Closing
The Preliminary Development Plan complies with the minimum standards of the Planned Unit Developments per the previous Zoning Code. Some minor changes to the plan are recommended based on review comments made by staff and are reflected as conditions of approval.