Agenda Date: 04/09/18
Subject:
Title
Resolution 09-2018, An Ordinance to Amend Title 10, Chapter 9, Planned Development Overlay, and Chapter 2, Zone Districts
Body
|
Presented By: |
Jocelyn Mills, Community Development Director |
PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT:
The proposal is to amend Chapter 9, Planned Development Overlay (PDO) and Chapter 2, Zone Districts of Title 10 of the City Code.
PROCESS:
A proposed zoning code amendment is a Legislative function and decision. Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council. City Council is the final decision-making body for code amendments. If Planning Commission recommends approval of this proposed ordinance, the next steps in the process will be two hearings (a first and second reading) before City Council on the proposed ordinance.
Legislative decisions involve policy choices that apply to a broad class of landowners. Information gathered at public hearings, from informal conversations with citizens and others, from memoranda prepared by City staff, and from other sources, may be used in deliberation. Legislative bodies are not required to be impartial, only to grant fairness in the procedure.
BACKGROUND:
There are several items in the PDO chapter of the zoning code are in need of review.
PRIOR ACTIONS OR DISCUSSIONS:
A study session was held with city council on the proposed code amendments on February 27, 2018. A study session on the proposed updates also was held with planning commission on March 13, 2018.
The proposed code amendments (with date of 3/13/18) also were posted on the LittletonPlans website after the study sessions with city council and planning commission. Public comments received as of April 4, 2018 regarding the proposed amendments are attached to this staff communication.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Potential code updates for the Planned Development Overlay (PDO) section of the city’s zoning code include removing the option for a PDO in any of the city’s residential zone districts, and eliminating the option for a reduction in parking through a PDO process. Staff found that as we started to evaluate potential changes to the PDO chapter, it continued to then require further review and potential modifications to the city’s zone districts.
The potential changes also include clarifying and cleaning up the PDO provisions identified in the Central Area Multiple Use (CA) and Transitional (T) zone districts, as well as further clarifying minimum and maximum residential densities and floor area ratios (FAR) in all of the city’s zone districts. Currently in the PDO chapter, it lists maximum residential densities and FAR for all of the city’s zone districts. The majority of the city’s zoning districts also calculate maximum densities within each individual district. The proposal includes removing the densities and FAR listed in the PDO chapter, and relocating the densities from the PDO into each individual corresponding zone district in Chapter 2.
The other often confusing language in some of the zone districts is the minimum lot areas and in certain districts it also include minimum lot areas per residential unit, which is another way to calculate density but this is not as clear as listing density in “number of units per acre” (a typical reference in most zoning codes). Other updates proposed include clarifying setbacks for multifamily uses in the Residential Multiple- Family District (R-5), and setting a minimum lot size and unobstructed open space requirement for residential only uses in CA.
During the study sessions with city council and with planning commission, both asked staff for more research regarding existing lot widths in the R-5 zone district and in the CA zone district. Based on further analysis of reviewing all lot frontages for R-5 properties, existing lot frontages in Littleton’s downtown area in R-5 tend to be smaller than the existing lot frontage requirement of 60 feet. The existing residential lots in downtown that are in the CA zone district are of similar size to the downtown R-5 lots. As a result of proposing to eliminate the PDO option in all residential zoned districts (currently the only option in the zoning code to establish a residential duplex or townhome style project that has zero internal lot lines as units are physically attached), the proposed updates include establishing minimum lot frontage in R-5 and CA (for downtown only - east of Santa Fe Drive/ west of the railroad tracks, and south of Crestline Avenue) for residential townhomes of 25 feet. The proposal includes adding minimum lot frontages for residential townhome projects in CA as currently there are no minimum lot frontage requirements for properties in CA. Additional detail will be presented during the hearing regarding the background and research conducted.
The attached proposed ordinance (with a date of 4/9/18) include the above amendment to lot frontages in R-5 and CA.
Citywide Plan: The proposed code amendments appear to meet the following goal and actions in the Citywide Plan.
Goal 4: A Distinctive Littleton:
• Build upon the assets that are unique to Littleton, such as the Platte River and its adjoining natural areas and Littleton’s history, schools, neighborhoods, cultural facilities, and public image.
• Encourage high quality design, architecture, landscape architecture, and public art throughout Littleton.
• Encourage “architecture of place” and small independent businesses that differentiate Littleton from nearby municipalities.
Please reference the following attachments regarding this application:
1. PC Resolution 09-2018
2. Draft Ordinance
3. Public Comments received as of 4/4/18.
4. Code and Criteria Reference Links
OPTIONS/ALTERNATIVES:
The planning commission may take the following actions on the application: forward recommendation of approval to city council, forward recommendation of approval with conditions, continue to date certain, or forward recommendation of denial. A sample motion is provided for each option.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the proposal to amend Chapter 9, Planned Development Overlay, and Chapter 2, Zone Districts of the city’s zoning code complies with the pertinent goals and policies of the city’s comprehensive plan, and promotes the general welfare of the community. Staff recommends approval of Resolution 09-2018.
PROPOSED MOTION:
Proposed Motion
Motion to Approve and/if necessary, With Conditions
I move to approve PC Resolution 09-2018, amending Chapter 9, Planned Development Overlay and Chapter 2, Zone Districts, which forwards a favorable recommendation to city council, with the following condition(s):
1.
2.
Motion to Continue to a Date Certain
I move to continue the public hearing on PC Resolution 09-2018, amending Chapter 9, Planned Development Overlay and Chapter 2, Zone Districts, to __________ (insert date) in order to_____________________.
Motion to Deny
I move to deny PC Resolution 09-2018, amending Chapter 9, Planned Development Overlay and Chapter 2, Zone Districts, which forwards a recommendation of denial to city council. The foregoing recommendation of denial is based on the findings that the proposed ordinance:
Note: Identify criterion or criteria not met and adjust motion accordingly:
1.
2.