Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-14-11 Joint Work Session MinutesBRIDGE STREET CORRIDOR PLAN JOINT WORK SESSION Thursday, April 14, 2011 Dublin Community Recreation Center — Tallas 6:30 p.m. RECORD OF MEETING The following were present: Council members Mayor Lecklider, Vice Mayor Salay, Mrs. Boring, and Mr. Reiner. Planning & Zoning Commission members Ms. Groomes, Mr. Taylor, Mr. Fishman, Ms. Kramb, Mr. Hardt, and Mr. Budde. Board of Zoning Appeals members Ms. Newell, Mr. Gunnoe, Mr. Todoran. Architectural Review Board members Mr. Karrer, Mr. Currie, and Ms. Bailey. Staff: Ms. Grigsby, Mr. McDaniel, Ms. Readler, Mr. Langworthy, Mr. Hahn, Ms. Ray, Mr. Goodwin, Mr. Phillabaum, Ms. Husak, Ms. Rauch, Ms. Adkins, Ms. Martin, Ms. Cox, Ms. Willis, Ms. Coen, Ms. Burness, Ms. Clarke. Consultants David Dixon, Goody Clancy; Don Elliot, Clarion Associates: Leslie Oberholtzer, Farr Associates; Greg Dale, McBride /Dale /Clarion; Rick Chellman and Jason Schrieber, Nelson \Nygaard; Shane Spencer, EMH &T, and Josh Reinicke, CDM. Mayor Lecklider thanked Council and board and commission members for attending and continuing the Joint Work Session meetings for the Bridge Street Corridor. He administered the oath of office to new ARB Member Tasha Bailey and new BZA Member Brian Gunnoe. Mr. McDaniel introduced the consultants who would be presenting this evening. He noted the purpose of this meeting is to provide Council Members and board and commission members updates regarding the progress made with the Bridge Street Corridor implementation studies. He stated that the first draft of the Bridge Street Corridor Development Code would be distributed later in the evening, and the consultants who worked with staff to draft the Code would provide a brief overview of form -based codes before providing an overview of the structure of the draft Code for Bridge Street. Following the presentation on form -based codes, Rick Chellman of Nelson \Nygaard will provide an introduction to transportation planning issues specific to walkable urban environments such as the Bridge Street Corridor. Mr. Chellman will discuss the transportation planning concepts that would go into the analysis for the Bridge Street Corridor, which will be finalized in July. Mr. McDaniel announced the schedule for the upcoming Joint Work Sessions on May 24 and June 20, and the two public open houses to be held in the DCRC Tallas on Monday, May 2 and Wednesday, June 8. He stated that Council Members and P &Z Commission Members are not requested to take any action on the draft Bridge Street Corridor Development Code or the area rezoning this evening, and that Council will have the option of adopting these at later Joint Work Sessions. Joint Meeting of Council, Planning & Zoning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals, Architectural Review Board April 14, 2011 Page 2 of 8 Mr. McDaniel introduced Don Elliott, a Senior Consultant in Clarion's Denver office who is managing the Bridge Street Corridor Code development. Mr. Elliott is a land use lawyer and city planner with over 25 years of related experience. He has served as project director for major zoning and development code revisions in Detroit, Philadelphia, Winnipeg, Duluth, Kalamazoo, Cedar Rapids, and numerous smaller cities and counties throughout the country. He has also completed land use reform consultancies in India, Russia, and Indonesia; drafted award - winning land use regulations for Denver and Pima County, Arizona; and has spoken and written extensively on a wide variety of land use and legal topics. He holds a master's degree in City and Regional Planning from Harvard University, a law degree from Harvard Law School, and a degree in Urban and Regional Planning from Yale University. Mr. McDaniel introduced Leslie Oberholtzer, a Principal and Director of Planning at Farr Associates -- an architecture, planning, and preservation firm in Chicago. She has an extensive background as a landscape architect and planner, and concentrates professionally on promoting sustainable urbanism through such practices as well designed, walkable neighborhoods; supporting local businesses; and preservation of community history and tradition. She authored the first form -based code adopted in the State of Illinois and continues to focus on coding as a key implementation tool for sustainable communities. Mr. McDaniel introduced Rick Chellman, a principal consultant with Nelson Nygaard who is managing the transportation analysis for the Bridge Street Corridor. He has more than 30 years experience in civil engineering, traffic engineering, surveying, and development planning throughout the United States and to lesser extents in Canada, the United Kingdom, Romania, Central America, the Middle East, and India. In recent years, he has worked extensively on the traffic engineering aspects of Traditional Neighborhood Development, particularly in connection with the matters of street design and external transportation connections. He has authored numerous works on topics related to the transportation implications of traditional neighborhood design. Mr. McDaniel introduced the first speaker, Don Elliott. He noted that Council, board and commission members, and members of the public would have the opportunity to ask questions of the consultant teams following the presentations. Don Elliott, Clarion Associates, commented regarding form -based codes in general prior to talking about the code drafted for the Bridge Street Corridor. He works on both form -based and non - form -based codes in his practice, and in his opinion, the goal is to find the right combination of form -based and non - form -based elements to achieve the vision for a community and get a plan done, based on its particular context. When he and Leslie Oberholtzer and Greg Dale of McBride /Dale /Clarion came to Dublin, they did not come with a foregone conclusion that this code should be form - based. However, the more they studied the Vision Plan and talked with staff and Goody Clancy, they concluded form -based elements should certainly be incorporated, but some conventional zoning elements, such as uses and districts, should also be used. Mr. Elliott stated form -based codes are based on the premise that one can analyze land use patterns depending on how rural or urban the location. There are a set of parameters that should be addressed to create a great urban location. He explained that form -based codes Joint Meeting of Council, Planning & Zoning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals, Architectural Review Board April 14, 2011 Page 3 of 8 require more detail than standard, Euclidean zoning, but do not require negotiation every time as is typical of many planned unit development district processes. Instead, form -based codes attempt to codify the basic detail elements that are necessary for creating great places. Mr. Elliott explained that form -based control focuses on the fabric of an area, such as block sizes, street types and furnishings, walkability, street enclosure, building height, and overall character, rather than specific uses. The concept that streets are important, along with the relationship of buildings to streets is also a critical point of form -based codes. In general, the form of the place is relatively more important than the regulation of the use of a building. Mr. Elliott stated that form -based codes are designed to create urban places. To create urbanism, development is coded for building and frontage types, articulating the types of elements the building needs to have to relate to the street and other buildings. Additionally, there needs to be broader and more general use controls because a lot of uses will come and go from a building. Form -based codes are very effective in signaling to developers the types of buildings and their relationships to the street that we want to see when creating the types of places that are envisioned for the Bridge Street Corridor. Leslie Oberholtzer, Farr Associates, explained that form -based codes specify building types depending on their context, and for that reason, are very different from conventional zoning codes. Form -based codes also look different than other codes. For example, everything one needs to know about the requirements for a building type is located on a single page spread to provide information in a user - friendly manner. Ms. Oberholtzer explained that instead of a setback line, form -based codes often require a 'build -to zone,' which requires buildings to be built up to a certain line versus anywhere behind a setback line. This build -to zone results in bringing buildings up to the street. Parking is subsequently located behind the building, which results in a walkable sidewalk and street. She said form -based codes also look at the transition from the street to the interior of the building, and as an example, buildings may need to be more transparent so people can see in or out of buildings, which creates a livelier pedestrian experience. Ms. Oberholtzer stated that form -based codes are built from the ground up for each community because they are tailored to the specific context. In terms of walkability, they look at the number of intersections per square mile and the scale of block sizes, and make sure that those factors are incorporated into the code. Open space types are always included to make sure there is a variety public space within the area. Mr. Elliott concluded Dublin is known for high quality, the bar has to be set high, and the code for the Bridge Street Corridor is no exception. He stated that Dublin needs to work toward densification and permitting more uses for walkability. He noted that the desire is to achieve greater predictability through the review process, and this is something that cities all over the country are increasingly looking to incorporate into their codes. The less predictability, the longer it takes for development to occur, and developers are increasingly looking for places that are conducive to development. Everyone strives to optimize quality and minimize time and ambiguity. Joint Meeting of Council, Planning & Zoning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals, Architectural Review Board April 14, 2011 Page 4 of 8 Mr. Elliott stated that in addition to building form, transportation and storm water need to be treated differently in an urban environment. Mr. Elliott summarized his team's task in drafting the code for the Bridge Street Corridor was to stay true to the Vision, optimize the strengths of form -based codes, and coordinate with the other consultant teams to ensure that the Bridge Street Corridor plan can be implemented. He is confident they have achieved these objectives. Rick Chellman, Nelson \Ny4aard, stated that many of the best places in the world were developed before the car. Through the 1940s and 1950s, subdivisions were historically planned to be spread out and allow for quick escapes to accommodate a fear of air attacks. Many subdivision regulations still have these ideas embedded in their subdivision standards. He noted the minimum radii for streets were created in the 1940s. Mr. Chellman stated that, although vehicles have drastically changed, the street standards have not, which makes it easier for cars to speed down streets, resulting in unsafe pedestrian environments. Reducing speeds is critical, particularly in areas with high pedestrian activity. Mr. Chellman noted that if a car or truck strikes a pedestrian at 20 mph or less, the person is typically not fatally injured, but if a pedestrian is hit by a vehicle going 30 mph or faster, fatality rates increase greatly. Mr. Chellman stated that once interconnected streets are built, there are multiple ways of moving from one point to another, which is important when trying to provide pedestrian and bicycle connectivity. Streets should not be built wider than they need to be; often, 20 feet is adequate. "Queuing streets" allow two -way traffic on local neighborhood streets, with on- street parking on one side. Since opposing traffic is infrequent, vehicles yield to one another where there are parked cars without adding unnecessary pavement. Mr. Chellman explained that "park once" districts allow people to park their cars one time and have access to multiple locations. When a development is not friendly to pedestrians, such as large parking lots, people tend to drive from one location to another rather than walk, even over short distances. Mr. Chellman stated many cities are looking for ways to revitalize their downtowns, and street design is receiving an increasing amount of interest, particularly with providing "complete streets" for pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles. Great streets are great places, and that is what is hoped for in the Bridge Street Corridor. Mr. Chellman said that in many countries, key design principals involve pedestrian, transit, bicycle, and motor vehicle facilities in that order; in the US, the design is typically focused on vehicles first. "Sharrows" are markings on the pavement to inform cars that bikes may be present and provide bicyclists a safe area in which to ride. "Cycle tracks" are bike spaces located at the level of the sidewalk away from the parked cars and moving cars. These lanes allow for bicycle safety for riders at every age and skill level. Mr. Chellman concluded by summarizing the preliminary analysis the Nelson Nygaard team has begun to look at in the Bridge Street Corridor and noted further results would be presented at the next Joint Work Session. Joint Meeting of Council, Planning & Zoning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals, Architectural Review Board April 14, 2011 Page 5 of 8 Mr. Elliott stated he would like to provide a brief overview of the draft Bridge Street Corridor Development Code. He stated before his team started drafting the Code, they first conducted a series of interviews with stakeholders, property owners, and City Council and Board and Commission members to understand how the Code should be drafted. He summarized there is excitement about the Bridge Street Corridor plan, and a desire to see it implemented, although there is some caution regarding the potential magnitude of change. Despite the concerns, there is a general recognition the Bridge Street Corridor plan is a long -term, complex project that will be implemented through thousands of individual decisions over many years, and even decades. Mr. Elliott added there is also a recognition that Dublin needs a development review process that is more predictable and efficient, like many other communities, but there is some reluctance to move away from the discretionary review process because the community feels higher quality development has historically been a product of this process. Mr. Elliott said that some of the common themes they heard was there is a clear desire to see more and higher quality green space throughout the Corridor than what appears to be shown in the Vision Plan, and Historic Dublin should be preserved and enhanced, along with the Scioto River and the Indian Run. Mr. Elliott presented a graphic showing the proposed zoning districts for the Bridge Street Corridor and explained the districts were derived from the general use categories shown in the Bridge Street Corridor Vision Plan. The draft Bridge Street Corridor Development Code encompasses Sections 153.057 through 153.066 of the Dublin Zoning Code after the Planned District provisions, so it would not be a separate stand -alone document — it would be directly integrated into the existing Zoning Code. He noted there would be 11 different zoning districts that were designed to be unique to the Corridor and not to be used elsewhere in the city. The first four zoning districts (BSC Residential, BSC Office Residential, BSC Office, and BSC Commercial) were intended to be the most general and the most similar to regular zoning districts, with heavier reliance on the use table and site development standards. The next three zoning districts (BSC Historic Core, BSC Historic Residential, and BSC Historic Transition) were intended to protect the existing scale and character of the Historic District, with the exception that the BSC Historic Transition District would be intended to start transitioning toward higher impact development around the edges of the Historic District. The BSC Historic Transition District, along with the BSC Indian Run and BSC Sawmill Center Districts are intended to be the districts focusing the most on form -based elements, with a high level of placemaking standards. He said these areas are prime for form -based coding since they are largely consolidated areas controlled by limited property owners, which can also make larger scale, coordinated development easier to achieve. The BSC Vertical Mixed Use and BSC Public Districts are special districts. The first section, 153.059, Uses, includes a table showing all of the uses permitted in each district, followed by specific standards and limitations for certain uses. Section 153.060, Lots and Blocks, includes requirements for interconnected streets, maximum block sizes, access configuration, typical lot dimensions, street frontage requirements, and pedestrian access. Section 153.061, Street Types, is still largely in draft form since much of the information that will be contained in this section is still being coordinated with Joint Meeting of Council, Planning & Zoning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals, Architectural Review Board April 14, 2011 Page 6 of 8 Nelson \Nygaard. This section will include requirements for typical street elements, bicycle facilities, fire access, on- street parking, curb radii, and crosswalks. Section 153.062, Building Types, is divided into two parts. The first part includes general architectural requirements, including controls for roof types, building materials, building entrances, windows, balconies, and other design details. The rest of the section includes requirements for specific building types, from Single Family Detached to Mixed Use Buildings and Parking Structures. Mr. Elliott explained that Section 153.063, Neighborhood Standards, includes specific placemaking standards for properties in large, contiguous ownerships. Each "neighborhood" includes a conceptual map and text laying out key features to create the most urban, most mixed -use, and most walkable "anchors" for the Bridge Street Corridor. Section 153.064, Open Space Types, includes requirements for a variety of open spaces appropriate for an urban environment, including pocket parks, greens, squares, plazas, parks, and greenways. Section 153.065, Site Development Standards, includes requirements that are most typical of conventional zoning codes, including parking and loading, landscaping, fencing, walls, and screening requirements, exterior lighting, signs, and stormwater regulations (cross - referenced with Chapter 53 of the City's Code). Section 153.065, Development Review and Approval Procedures, outlines the review and approval process. Development Plan approval is the first step, required for larger, more complex projects, with specific approval criteria. Site Plan approval includes criteria for administrative approval and is required for all projects. Standards for administrative departures and minor modifications are also included in this section. And Section 153.066, the last section of the Bridge Street Code consists of Definitions. Mr. Langworthy offered to respond to questions regarding any of the presentations, or regarding the draft Bridge Street Code. Council, board and commission members in attendance had the following questions: • What is the legal basis and history of form -based codes? Mr. Elliott explained that form -based codes have the same legal foundation in land use law as any other land development code or zoning code. Although form -based codes are generally a newer type of regulatory instrument, as long as they continue to uphold property owners' rights through due process and specific review standards, they are a valid regulatory tool. Form -based codes are used most often to either preserve an existing form and character of a district or a defined area, such as the Historic District, or to require that future development occurs in a way that creates inviting streets and places for pedestrians. • How can State Route 161 become walkable, and how is traffic calming addressed through the transportation analysis? Mr. Chellman explained a variety of techniques can be used to make State Route 161, or Bridge Street, feel more walkable. Providing alternative vehicular routes or connections Joint Meeting of Council, Planning & Zoning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals, Architectural Review Board April 14, 2011 Page 7 of 8 across the Scioto River will allow vehicular traffic to be more dispersed and less reliant on Bridge Street. Where appropriate, on- street parking can help create a buffer zone between cars and pedestrians, so that pedestrians do not feel cars are rushing by close to the sidewalk. Where on- street parking cannot occur, street trees, benches, planters, and other design elements can also help create those visual barriers between cars and pedestrians. Building form also helps reduce traffic speeds, because as drivers' view sheds are narrowed by buildings enclosing the street, they naturally tend to drive slower and are more likely to take note of things and activities occurring along the periphery. • How does the form -based code process actually work? Are there other communities in which this type of code has been used successfully? Mr. Elliott explained there are other communities that have adopted form -based codes in recent years. At one level, cities like Miami and Denver have adopted city -wide form -based codes, while others such as Duluth, Minnesota and West Evanston, Illinois have adopted form -based codes for specific areas. In many cases, however, there has not been much development to date that has actually gone through the process since many communities adopted form -based codes around the time that the economic downturn occurred. However, Mr. Elliott indicated he would work with staff in identifying communities that have gone through the process, adopted form -based codes, and actually applied them to development projects. • What other infrastructural improvements will be necessary in the Bridge Street Corridor? Mr. Langworthy responded that staff has also retained consultants to study the water distribution system, the sanitary sewer system, and stormwater management for the Bridge Street Corridor, in addition to the transportation network. He stated that Mr. Chellman and the other consultant teams would be prepared to present their preliminary findings on potential infrastructure improvements at the next Joint Work Session on May 24, 2011. He encouraged Council, board and commission members, and stakeholders to contact staff with any questions about the draft Bridge Street Corridor Development Code, and that written comments be submitted to Planning. He noted staff would continue to work on the draft Code as progress is made on Nelson \Nygaard's work on the transportation study, since much of the form -based code is based on the development's relationship to the street network. Mr. Langworthy introduced David Dixon, Goody Clancy and Associates, who made a few concluding statements. David Dixon, Goody Clancy and Associates commended Council, board and commission members, and stakeholders on their dedication to continuing the Joint Work Session meeting format, which allows everyone to stay well informed on the planning work being completed for the Bridge Street Corridor. He noted Dublin continues to receive a lot of interest and attention at the national level, including at the recent national conference of the American Planning Association in Boston this year, because of how smart and progressive this plan is. Mr. Dixon said Dublin continues to position itself well to capture market opportunity and implement the Bridge Street Corridor Vision with the studies that have been commissioned Joint Meeting of Council, Planning & Zoning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals, Architectural Review Board April 14, 2011 Page 8 of 8 and the caliber of consultants that have been retained. He commented that form -based codes like the draft Bridge Street Corridor Development Code are key elements in establishing exciting, walkable, urban development. This type of code is being used increasingly by many other communities to produce these types of places. Flexibility in particular will create opportunities and set the stage for exciting, walkable, urban development. He added that the street network and street designs Nelson \Nygaard will be working to produce are also critical to establishing a highly connected street network geared toward bicycles and pedestrians. He recommended that Council, board and commission members and stakeholders should read through the Bridge Street Code and consider how all of the pieces fit together with the Vision Plan, and how all of this correlates to the market findings that Sarah Woodworth and Laurie Volk presented early in the Bridge Street Corridor process. Mayor Lecklider thanked everyone for attending. The workshop was adjourned. (Meeting record compiled by Planning staff)