Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-26-11 Study Session minutesDublin City Council Study Session Monday, September 26, 2011 Minutes of Meeting Mayor Lecklider called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers. Present: Council Members: Mayor Lecklider, Vice Mayor Salay, Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher, Mr. Gerber, Mr. Keenan and Mr. Reiner. Mrs. Boring was absent (excused). Staff: Ms. Grigsby, Mr. McDaniel, Mr. Smith, Mr. Langworthy, Mr. Goodwin, Ms. Ray, Mr. Thurman, Ms. Crandall. Mayor Lecklider stated that the purpose of the meeting is for Council to receive an overview of the Bridge Street Corridor form-based code. Mr. Langworthy stated that the presentation will address the various elements of the Bridge Street Corridor form-based code. It will include many familiar elements – parking, signs, landscaping – but some unfamiliar elements as well. The first part of the discussion will focus on how the streets and buildings relate to the properties. The second part will address building requirements. Streets and Building Orientation Mr. Goodwin stated that he will review how the draft Bridge Street Corridor development code will create the walkable urban form depicted in the Bridge Street Corridor Vision Plan. The slides depict a hypothetical block of residential development that could occur under the Code. The discussion will address requirements concerning street types, street blocks, street frontage or building siting, parking location, and open space. The City’s zoning code traditionally divides the City into different districts, each with a different set of permitted and conditional uses. The Bridge Street Corridor (BSC) code does that as well, but it is only one part of the larger strategy of form-based zoning. The BSC code allows for a greater mix of uses within the various districts. Each district is intended to foster a different balance of uses, so that there are different character areas and or neighborhoods. The BSC code contains an emphasis on building types, as it is recognized that streets play an integral role in creating vibrant, walkable places. The BSC code contains a draft street map. It categorizes the different streets, existing and planned, for the BSC industry families, two of which are the primary address streets and the neighborhood address streets. They are similar to the functional classifications used in the Thoroughfare Plan within the existing Community Plan. They do not focus only on the traffic volume function of the streets. They also emphasize that the street is part of the development area, a place where the buildings interact with the public realm, through which people travel via different modes. The primary address streets are a higher level of street, similar to collector streets, which are intended to connect different neighborhoods to provide a higher visibility front door to development within the corridor. The neighborhood address streets do not receive a high volume of traffic; they serve local destinations. A new term within the BSC code is “principal frontage street,” which recognizes that certain streets receive priority in establishing a pedestrian-friendly Dublin City Council Study Session September 26, 2011 Page 2 of 6 streetscape. With pedestrian-friendly streets, there are designations concerning how buildings are located in relationship to the street and how vehicle access within the block is permitted. Within the BSC corridor, the various districts have different maximum block sizes. The intent is to ensure that all the blocks in this new street network are walkable with multiple safe crossing points. For example, in the BSC residential district, the maximum block size is 425 feet x 300 feet. A 425-foot block length is approximately a two-minute walk. Vehicle access into blocks must be through rear alleys, service streets, and private driveways. Blocks cannot be located off the principal frontage streets. For blocks longer than 425 feet, mid-block pedestrian ways are required. Different building types in the BSC residential district include: apartment buildings, single-family attached, and loft buildings. All lots must have street frontage. The Code establishes the concept of a required building zone. Unlike the typical minimum building setback, residential building zone (RBZ) states that the front façade must be located five to 20 feet from the front property line. The purpose of this is to reinforce the character of the street, and begin to create a street “wall” -- not of continuous buildings per se, but to create a frame for the pedestrian realm – avoiding vast, open areas. Parking cannot be located between the front door and the public sidewalk. The building type requirements establish a minimum distance across the front property line that each building must cover. For instance, with an apartment building, 75 percent of the front property line must have a building façade. A front courtyard could meet that requirement. Generally, the BSC code requires parking to the side or rear of the buildings. For some commercial areas, parking along the street would be permitted. There would also be vehicular use area landscape requirements appropriate for urban areas. The BSC code contains specific parking landscape requirements, which could include alternative stormwater management as part of the parking lot design. On-street parking is an integral part of the BSC street types. It will provide additional parking, slow vehicle movement, and serve as a barrier between pedestrians and the street. Open Space Requirements in Residential Districts Every dwelling unit is required to provide 200 square feet of open space. Every 50 square feet of commercial development must provide one square foot of open space. All development must contribute to the open space requirements within the BS corridor. An apartment building with 36 dwelling units would therefore require over 1/10 acre, which would require a pocket park open space. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher noted that the Parks Master Plan did not contemplate requirements for the BS corridor. Mr. Goodwin stated that it would be reviewed to ensure that it provides sufficient spaces in response to the BSC vision plan. Dublin City Council Study Session September 26, 2011 Page 3 of 6 Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she envisions a different type of park within densely created areas. Perhaps the terminology should be updated. For this type of area, it appears to be a landscape engagement with the building. She would not call that a park. Mr. Goodwin responded that the term “pocket park” can mean many different things. In the latest Code version, a pocket plaza for commercial areas is also included. The streetscape treatment can also provide open space. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher stated that initially the concept was to have immediate engagement with open space, even in walking to your car. Mr. Keenan noted that in Savannah, there are many squares surrounded by many types of buildings all around, and that is engaging. The BSC concept is almost the opposite in terms of the engagement with the landscape and the topography. Is the Savannah concept not possible here, due to the economy? Mr. Goodwin stated that there is a limit in the illustration he has provided. What Mr. Keenan describes is actually what this code is intended to achieve. With this illustration, he was attempting to address the relationship of size to the number of dwelling units being developed. Mr. Langworthy stated that the BSC code deals with 1,100 acres in a wide range of environments. There will be a wide range of different spaces within the corridor, beginning at the street and moving on to larger parks. Some of the spaces will be public; some will be private. Mayor Lecklider asked how a private developer would provide a required open space, if the space is not available on his lot. Mr. Goodwin stated that the size and timing of individual developments will have an impact on how open space is provided. Either the developer would need to acquire more land or pay a fee in lieu. The development could therefore occur and the open space would be provided at a later time in coordination with other development. In larger development plans, it is possible to plan that open space earlier in the process. An entire block could potentially become an open space, surrounded by buildings. Mr. Langworthy noted that the Code requires that larger parcels be divided into smaller, walkable blocks. When they subdivide the property, one of the blocks could be set aside as open space. Dublin City Council Study Session September 26, 2011 Page 4 of 6 Building Architectural Requirements Mr. Reiner stated that a developer shared with him a concern that the City was taking a major risk by not establishing an architectural style for this area. He is concerned that the requirements have been written sufficiently tight to achieve a unified look for the area. Ms. Ray stated that she would address the intended form and character of the buildings, and how the Code requirements will ensure the expected Dublin quality is achieved, while at the same time allowing for creativity and diversity on the part of architects. Mixed-Use Buildings A building type permitted in many of the districts in the BSC corridor is the mixed-use building. There are several key requirements of this building type. The BSC form- based code differs from the traditional code in respect to building height. In the BSC code, height is measured by the number of stories per building with specified floor-to- floor heights. A mixed-use building is required to be at least two stories and a maximum of five stories. When a building is located in a high pedestrian activity area, the ground- floor height is permitted to be slightly taller than the other stories to accommodate commercial uses. Because ground-floor commercial uses are anticipated in mixed-use buildings, there must be opportunities for window shopping and other ways to create an interesting pedestrian experience. The BSC code has a ground-story street façade transparency requirement that requires glass to make up at least 70 percent of the area of highest pedestrian visibility, between two and eight feet above the sidewalk. The upper stories have lower transparency requirements due to the more private nature of the uses on those floors, such as office or residential. A minimum of 30 percent transparency is required. The Code prohibits large expanses of blank building facades. The required building mass is broken down in order to provide comfort to the pedestrians. In addition, vertical façade divisions are required a minimum of every 45 feet along the building facade. That is achieved through recesses and projections a minimum of 18 inches along the façade. The height of the building appearance is brought down by requiring a more horizontal façade division, which can also be created by recesses and projections, or a cornice or brick course at the top of the ground story. The roof planes are divided to coordinate with the vertical façade divisions. Entrances to the buildings are required along the principal frontage street. This will help achieve the active, vibrant streetscape desired. Certain architectural features on building entrances are also required to provide emphasis. In summary, very specific architectural elements are required to help ensure that buildings are constructed with careful detailing and scaled to the pedestrian level. That is a fundamental element of the form-based code – bringing the mass of the building down to a pedestrian scale. Building Materials and Windows Another critical element to the pedestrian environment is building material. The buildings are meant to be experienced “up close and personal” and therefore, high Dublin City Council Study Session September 26, 2011 Page 5 of 6 quality materials are necessary. The BSC code requires that at least 80 percent of the building be made up of primary building materials, specific for each building type. Up to 20 percent may be of a secondary material, which will allow accents to give a building character. Windows are also critical to have buildings of enduring quality and character. In residential buildings, flush-mounted windows will be prohibited. This will create shadow lines that help to depict depth and thickness to the buildings, giving an impression of both age and endurance. The overall design parameters for the Bridge Street Corridor buildings are intended to create buildings of the lasting, high-quality character that is expected in Dublin, but also allow design flexibility for architects to create buildings that are interesting. Mr. Gerber stated that during planned development reviews, Dublin has traditionally asked one final question: “Does the building aesthetically fit with the surrounding area?” Will there be that type of “catch all” provision in the BSC code? Mr. Langworthy that the review criteria for the site plan and development plan provide for taking in account the surrounding environment. In regard to Mr. Reiner’s comment concerning an architectural theme – none has been defined. There are 1,100 acres and a wide range of activities throughout this corridor. It may be that themes are developed along the way in different subareas of the corridor. For example, the Historic Dublin theme is not desired throughout the entire corridor. It is important that a building fit within the environment of its subarea, not the entire corridor. At this point, the design details appear specific, yet there are many ways in which to accomplish them. A uniform look is not desired throughout the entire corridor. Mayor Lecklider agreed that unique areas -- not the same from block to block -- are much more interesting. Mr. Langworthy stated that the BSC code also provides the ability for the Administrative Review Team (ART) to have architectural consultants. This will provide staff an outside viewpoint on how one style of architecture fits with another and how to create statements in different locations. Mayor Lecklider stated that the Short North provides an attractive visual example of architectural variety from block to block. Mr. Reiner stated that he recently returned from Europe, where he had an opportunity to tour approximately 20 neighborhoods -- some by bus, some by foot. They were interesting, built in different time periods with different architectural styles. He noticed that, although there were variations in architecture, all the neighborhoods were tied together with street trees. Dublin City Council Study Session September 26, 2011 Page 6 of 6 Mr. Langworthy responded that the streets will be included in the design process, along with the lots, blocks and buildings. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher stated that she is familiar with the building in Grandview that was provided in the presentation as a visual example. However, there is also a building on Tremont in Upper Arlington that she finds overpowering when driving by, and assumes that it is particularly overpowering for passing pedestrians. What is provided in the BSC code that will prevent that type of building design? Ms. Ray responded that the second building she references is residential condominiums and it stands out in stark relief next to adjacent single-family buildings. In the BSC area, building heights within the same district must have a relationship to one another, particularly if there is an adjacent development that is not within the BSC. Much of the BSC corridor is constructed near I-270, but there will be some instances in which there will be a non-Bridge Street Corridor lot next to a Bridge Street Corridor lot. The height requirements in the code will help address those situations. Mr. Keenan asked about the setback on the building on Tremont in Upper Arlington, which was mentioned. It seems to be much less than that of the Grandview building -- perhaps that is the problem. Ms. Ray stated that one building also has landscaping along the frontage. The building on Tremont does not have much transparency along the ground floor. Having transparency and breaking up the mass of a building make it more comfortable to pedestrians. Mayor Lecklider thanked staff for the presentation. The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Clerk of Council