Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDepartment Report 12-18-18 11 CARMEL PLAN COMMISSION DEPARTMENT REPORT DECEMBER 18, 2018 2. Docket No. 18100007 OA: UDO Patch Amendment The applicant seeks to amend the Unified Development Ordinance in order to (A) amend the standards for Fences, Bufferyards, Parking, Bicycle Parking, General Yard Standards and Waivers of Development Standards; (B) amend Article 9: Processes and Article 11: Definitions; and (C) correct a variety of errors and omissions from the conversion to the Unified Development Ordinance format. Filed by the Department of Community Services on behalf of the Carmel Plan Commission. *Updates to the Department Report are noted in blue text. Project Overview: Please view the informational packet for the proposed ordinance and a detailed summary of each amendment. This proposed ordinance amendment updates a variety of sections throughout the entire UDO. Most of the proposed revisions are not substantive in nature, in other words, are not written to change the intent of the standards. However there are a handful of proposed amendments that would alter the current standards. We believe most of the amendments are self-explanatory coupled with the November 9 Memo. Substantive Amendments: Although the proposed amendments cover a wide range of topics, we expect most of the discussion will occur surrounding the substantive amendments. The details are highlighted in gray in both the ordinance draft as well as the November 9 Memo. Below is further explanation: 1. Fence Standards: While the most of the existing fence standards have been in place for decades, fence permitting has only been in place since January of 2017. Over the course of reviewing applications, discussing with homeowners and the issuance of over 500 fence permits, we believe a few adjustments would help with some common citizen requests while also maintaining the intended aesthetic standards. Corner lots interior to subdivisions: Allow existing 6’ fences to be replaced along one of the local streets at the side/rear of a home. Current height standard is 42”. Collector/Arterial/Parkways: Exempt fences from the 25% open visibility requirement if they do the 6’ setback and landscaping option that would allow for a 6’ fence rather than 42”. Keystone Parkway: Allow fences up to 8’ without the 25% open visibility. Allow director approval of additional 24” in cases where the topography is low. Current height standard is 42”. 2. Commercial Bufferyards: A reduction in planting requirements has been requested by the Urban Forester, especially in Ornamental Trees and Shrubs. With limited space, competing with utilities and drainage, it is difficult to accommodate the amount of plantings prescribed. After further discussion with the Urban Forester, only the Bufferyard C & D shade & evergreen plantings are proposed for reduction in an effort to closer match this planting table with the Residential Bufferyard table in Section 5.20. The proposed reductions of ornamental trees and shrubs remains as originally proposed. 3. Residential Bufferyards: Adjustments in the Bufferyard widths and planting requirements has been requested by the Urban Forester, including proposed increases in Bufferyard widths and Shade/Evergreen plantings. Similar to commercial Bufferyards, the Urban Forester has requested reductions in the Ornamental Tree and Shrub quantities. After further discussion with the Urban Forester, Bufferyard width revisions are no longer proposed. In addition, the plantings for Bufferyards B & C have been adjusted to match the Commercial Bufferyard table in Section 5.19. 4. C1 & C2 District Parking Requirements: A majority of the parking in C1 & C2 Districts is provided by the Redevelopment Commission as part of project agreements, so it makes sense to allow the CRC to have full discretion over the parking requirements as the primary approval body. The previous zoning ordinance provided for reduced parking in the C2 District; however those reductions were inadvertently omitted from the UDO. 12 5. Parking for Mixed Uses: The ordinance currently states that parking spaces shall equal the sum of the various uses computed separately. However, this does not take into account for uses on the same site with different peak hours (e.g. office and residential). The proposal allows for a 25% reduction in vertical mixed use projects with different peak use times. Waivers of up to 35% would remain an option, and of course, development standards variances could provide further relief. 6. Bicycle Parking: Office Uses: We propose to increase the Short-term bicycle parking requirement for Offices to 1 space per 10,000 square feet (rather than 20,000 square feet). The current requirement would have been adequate assuming the long-term bicycle parking was also a requirement. However, we failed to adjust the requirement after the long- term parking was “encouraged” rather than required. Hotel Uses: We propose to add a separate standard for Hotels, which have previously been negotiated on a case by case basis. The short-term standard would be 1 space per 30 guest rooms, minimum of 4 spaces. In this case we are proposing a long-term requirement of 1 space per 15 guest rooms, minimum of 4 spaces. This would be the only use that would require long-term bicycle parking. These standards are in line with other cities we researched and we believe are appropriate with the increasing Bicycle Tourism in Hamilton County. Additional Suggestion since the Committee Meeting (Line 72): It has been suggested by a member of the public that the R3 District corresponds better with the Urban Residential land classification. Because the R3 District has a maximum density of 5 units per acre and is currently concentrated in the Old Town and Home Place areas on the zoning map, staff agrees with this suggestion. November 20 Meeting Recap: Staff presented the proposed ordinance amendment document, focusing on the substantive changes. There were no comments from the public or from the Commission members. The proposal was sent to the Commercial Committee for further review and discussion, and the full PC will have final authority on a recommendation to City Council. December 4 Commercial Committee Meeting Recap: The Committee reviewed the proposed amendments line by line with staff providing background and explanation where needed. Staff outlined further discussion with the Urban Forester and some additional adjustments to better match the two Bufferyard Planting tables in Sections 5.19 and 5.20. The Committee shared concerns with the proposed reduction in parking for vertical mixed uses; however, it was assured this reduction would be case by case at the Director’s discretion and not automatically the entire 25%. Ultimately, the only revisions to the ordinance were the addition of a cross- reference in the Fence and Wall Standards, and the adjustments outlined for the Bufferyard planting tables. The proposal was returned to the Plan Commission with a favorable recommendation. Recommendation: After all comments and concerns are addressed, the Department of Community Services recommends the Plan Commission sends this item to City Council with a Favorable Recommendation.