Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes CC - 03/11/2013 - MINS 03 11 13 WS (Migrated from Optiview)l Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, March 11, 20 l3 at 6:00 pm Page 1 of 10 This summary is provided as a convenience and service to the public, media, and staff. It is not the intent to transcribe proceedings verbatim. Any reproduction of this summary must include this notice. Public comments are noted and heard by Council, but not quoted. This document includes limited presentation by Council and invited speakers in summary form. This is an official record ofthe Milton City Council Meeting proceedings. Official Meetings are audio and video recorded. The Work Session of the Mayor and Council of the City of Milton was held on March 11,2013 at 6:00 PM, Mayor Lockwood presiding. Councilmembers Present: Councilmember Matt Kunz, Councilmember Bill Lusk, Councilmember Lance Large, Councilmember Karen Thurman, Councilmember Burt Hewitt. Councilmembers Absent: Councilmember Joe Longoria. Mayor Lockwood: • Work Sessions are an informal setting to update Council on business items. • No votes will be taken during these sessions. l • There are seven (7) items on our Agenda tonight. • Public comment is allowed that is germane to an Agenda Item. • If you wish to speak you are required to fill out a comment card and turn it into the City Clerk staff. • Public comment will be allowed for a total of 10 minutes per agenda item and no more than 2 minutes per person. • Public comment will be heard at the beginning of each Item. • Once the item is called, no other comment cards will be accepted. Sudie Gordon, City Clerk, read Agenda Item #1. 1. Discussion ofRZ12-18 -To amend Chapter 64, Article VI, Division 2, AG-l (Agricultural District) as it pertains to fencing. (Presented by Kathleen Field, Community Development Director) l Kathleen Field, Community Development Director: We are going to look at all three of these text amendments at the same time (RZ12-18, RZ12-19, and RZ13-02) because they are all associated together. The Mayor and Council approved changes to the AG-l district regarding fencing on March 19,2012. Since that time, it has come to the Council's attention that the new requirements may not be appropriate for all properties zoned AG-I. Staffwas directed to research how to allow different types of fencing, other than equestrian, but still keep the overall rural feel of the city. We are proposing the following type of fencing within the AG-l district. When lots abut exterior streets, equestrian type fencing will be required. Work Session ofthe Milton City Council Monday, March 11,2013 at 6:00 pm Page 2 of 10 JHowever, fences along rear or side property lines adjacent to exterior streets are required to have a visual buffer so that they cannot be scene from the public street. In terms of interior or platted subdivisions and non-subdivision lots, the Community Development Director has approval of non-equestrian fencing with a maximum height of 55 inches from average grade along the front of interior subdivision streets or platted subdivision lots. Any type of fencing along the side or rear of lots within subdivisions is allowed. The maximum height should not exceed eight feet. Councilmember Burt Hewitt: Would it be an easy process for someone to come in and have their fencing approved by you? Kathleen Field: Yes, of course. We just want to make sure that all the fencing in a subdivision is uniform for that particular subdivision. Councilmember Matt Kunz: Are we requiring lots that do not have any fencing now to have to build a fence? Kathleen Field: Fencing only has to be built if it is required when a lot is developed. If a pre-existing lot does not already have fencing, then it is not required. J Councilmember Karen Thurman: Is fencing only required if a lot is zoned AG-I? What if a lot is zoned CUP? Kathleen Field: We have RZ12-19 in order to handle those types of circumstances. RZ12-18 only deals with the AG-l district, but we realized there are other residential type districts that also need coverage. The specific fencing guidelines for those districts are addressed in another section in the ordinance. Sudie Gordon, City Clerk, read Agenda Item #2. 2. Discussion ofRZ12-19-To amend Chapter 64, Article II, Division 8, as it pertains to fencing and walls. (Presented by Kathleen Field, Community Development Director) Kathleen Field, Community Development Director: RZ12-19 refers to all zoning districts. J. It outlines the same requirements as the AG-I district in regards to privacy or non-equestrian fences along the rear or side property lines in which a visual buffer is required. The Community Development Director has the authority to approve all non-equestrian fencing. l l l Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, March 11,2013 at 6:00 pm Page 3 of 10 It allows any type of fencing along the side, rear, or platted subdivision or non-subdivision lots unless adjacent to an exterior street, in which case, an opaque fence would be required to have vegetation. It also prohibits the use of chain-linked fencing along right-of-ways with the exception of storm water facilities or recreational courts. In addition, barbed wire fencing is prohibited with the exception of legitimate agricultural uses. Sudie Gordon, City Clerk, read Agenda Item #3. 3. Discussion ofRZ13-02 -To amend Chapter 64, Zoning Ordinance, Article 1, in General, Sec. 64-1 Definitions. (Presented by Kathleen Field, Community Development Director) Kathleen Field, Community Development Director: RZ13-02 refers to exterior streets; however, we did not have a definition of exterior streets so this establishes a definition. An exterior street refers to a street, either public or private, that is not located within a subdivision or final plat. Councilmember Bill Lusk: Are we going to define the differences between fences and walls? Robyn MacDonald, Principal Planner: We do not have a different definition for fences and walls. They both have the generic definition. Usually, when we address walls or fences in an ordinance they are categorized together. Sudie Gordon, City Clerk, read Agenda Item #4. 4. Discussion ofRZ13-03 -To delete Article VII, Division SA-Deerfield Plan of the Highway 9 Overlay District and concurrently adopt a new Article XX, DeerfieldlHighway 9 Form Based Code. (Presented by Kathleen Field, Community Development Director) Kathleen Field, Community Development Director: As you know, we completed the Route 91 Deerfield LCI Plan on April 23, 2012. Subsequent to that, we began the initiative to put a Fonn-Based Code with a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) section into this area so we could use the new overlay zoning to implement the plan. This has gone through a significant public review process. We had a Stakeholder Committee that worked with us and we held several community meetings. In addition, it went through a joint meeting of the Design Review Board and Planning Commission, as well as, a meeting of the Planning Commission for their review and approvaL The two consultants that helped us with this project are here tonight. Caleb Racicot is with the firm ofTSW which performed the actual coding of the Fonn-Based Code. Rick Pruetz is our TDR expert who will explain the TDR section of this overlay. Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, March 11,2013 at 6:00 pm Page 4 of 10 ] Caleb Racicot: I have been working with the Greater Deerfield Community for the past six months in developing this Form Based Code. We used a similar process that we implemented to develop the Crabapple Form Based Code. We started by looking at the existing zoning in the Deerfield area and the type of private covenants that already existed. We also looked at how we could take the template of the smart code and create something that was very different from the small town village feel of Crabapple. We really wanted to focus on how we could use some of the higher density mixed-use development envisioned in the LCI plan. We identified the transect zones using T2 for areas that were intended to stay ruraL T3, T4, T5, and T6 identified higher intensity development areas. We also wanted to identify subdivisions that were partially in the LCI study area and give them special district zoning. We have recommended rezoning the pink area on the handout in front of you to T6. T6 is a fairly high intensity mixed-use district. The commercial properties along State Route 9 and some of the multi-family properties north of Webb Road have been coded T5 and T5 Limited. The only difference between these two codes is that the T5 is general commercial permission and the T5 Limited is fairly restricted. We have proposed zoning the areas along Cogburn Road and portions of western Webb Road as T2, T3, and T4. J There are several fundamental differences between the Crabapple Form Based Code and the Deerfield Form Based Code. You will recognize that the Deerfield area today is more heavily developed and has a lot of auto oriented corridors with fairly wide roadways. We had to create a special provision that accounts for this which we refer to as A and B Grid streets. This identifies which streets in the community are more important for pedestrian orientation and which ones are less important. A Grid roads are roads that are more walkable and held to a higher standard. B Grid roads are roads that are not as walkable or pedestrian friendly. The overall character of the regulating plan is very different between Crabapple and Deerfield. The regulating plan is a subset of the zoning map that refers to how the specific requirements of this Form Based Code apply to Deerfield. Therefore, we mapped things that were referred to in the LCI such as the creation of a Greenway Network throughout the community, the creation of public park spaces along creeks, and the addition of street connectivity. We also spent a lot of time thinking about public standards which refers to the type of streetscape that is given to public roads. We developed specific standards for every roadway which are consistent with the covenants and compatible with the LCI vision. We incorporated bike lanes, sidewalks, and pedestrian facilities. We also mapped certain civic spaces or green spaces that existed in the community. We incorporated the current requirements for landscape strips and some fences in certain corridors in the J area. These were required on certain streets and not on others as part of the initiative. l Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, March 11,2013 at 6:00 pm Page 5 oflO Article 4 of the code refers to the requirements that are allowed to occur on each lot. l Because Deerfield is very built out today, we created some graphics that showed how existing non­ conforming uses could be retrofitted over the long term to be compatible with the LCI vision and the code. We also incorporated the standard Form Based Code terminology regarding the shape of buildings, how buildings sit on a lot, the width of the lot, and special provisions for State Route 9. Even though the LCI plan tried to make State Route 9 more walkable than it is today, unfortunately, there are a lot of big buildings that are set back very far from the street that will remain there for quite a while. So, we had to create zoning language for State Route 9 which would allow those buildings to remain in operation. In addition, we felt it was very important to enhance the requirements for City Council to approve apartments. We realize that growing the tax base is very important so we created standards relevant to how apartments can be approved. One of those standards is that apartments can only be built within the T5 and T6 zoning areas which are located in the Deerfield area and along Hwy. 9. In addition, they can only be approved by a use permit and as part of a mixed-use setting. We also created some very detailed use-permit standards that the City Council can refer to when considering apartments. In the future, we may also want to consider requiring townhomes or row houses to obtain a use permit. Today, there is a two-story height limit within the State Route 9 Overlay and some slightly higher height limits within the Deerfield area. We determined that the two-story height limit is not advisable for most of the area. So, we proposed that zones T2, T3, and T4 allow three-story buildings zoned T4 Open, allow four-story buildings for T5 and allow much higher buildings for T6. However, based on stakeholder input, we recommended a two-story height limit for the area north of Stonecreek Church indicated on the regulating plan. The most talked about issue regarding this Form Based Code was the height limits for the area. The LCI Plan referred to a transition in density from Highway 9 north to GA400 but the issue was not specifically addressed. We decided to take the T6 designation which is only in Deerfield Proper. As a general rule, buildings could be 16 floors east of Morris Road and then step down to 12 floors and then, finally, step down to four floors within the T5 properties along Highway 9. In order to implement this decision, we created an amendment to the regulating plan and also created some text within the Form Based Code which specifically addresses this issue. The height amendment will achieve the LCI vision of going from lower to higher height and will allow the city to grow the tax base in a fairly compact area. Finally, in Article 4 we incorporated the city's equestrian fencing requirements, as well as parking, landscaping, lighting, and sign ordinance requirements. We also substantially enhanced the city's requirements for architecture based on the feedback from stakeholders, the Planning Commission, and the Design Review Board. l Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, March 11,2013 at 6:00 pm Page 6 of 10 ]Councilmember Karen Thurman: How was the stakeholder group determined? I have heard from the community that it was not a representative group that included the residents of the area. Kathleen Field: We try to identify major landowners and representatives from Homeowner Associations. We ask Councilmember to recommend citizens who would like to be a part of a stakeholder group. And, we ask all the Boards and Commissions to refer a representative. We also contact citizens who have been active in our community and have knowledge of the area. We try to keep the group between 12-14 people. Bill Lusk, Councilmember: Could you please give a brief overview of the type of lighting that will be used in this overlay district. Caleb Racicot: We require all developments to submit a lighting plan to the Community Development Director. The lighting plan contains provisions to ensure that the sight is well lit. We also addressed how bright certain light fixtures could be. We prohibited sodium vapor neon colored lights. I don't think we incorporated any specific brands. Councilmember Lusk: J Is there a specific style of lighting that is required to be used? Caleb Racicot: Yes, we included the specific lighting that was included in the current Highway 9 Overlay code. Councilmember Lusk: Is the height of the fixtures going to be standard? Caleb Racicot: Poles must be between 12 and 28 feet. Councilmember Thurman: In my opinion, townhomes need to have a use permit. I also think daycares need a use permit. Councilmember Lusk: Regarding storm water management facilities, most of the developments in the Deerfield area today uses a common detention facility. Could we continue to use those existing facilities to accommodate future development? ~~~: J.We can certainly look into that and possibly offer TDR credits for companies who are willing to do so. , I would now like to introduce Rick Pruetz who is our TDR expert. l Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, March 11,2013 at 6:00 pm Page 7 of 10 Rick Pruetz: l The TDR components of the Deerfield code are very similar to the ones for Crabapple. The areas where you want to conserve land are referred to as Sending Areas. The areas where additional development are appropriate are referred to as Receiving Areas. It is a voluntary program in both areas. In the Sending Area, one of the options is to record an easement which allows TDRs to be created. In the Receiving Area, a person can build up to baseline density or they can exceed the baseline density but only by using TDRs. In the Deerfield area, we wanted to create smart growth development in the receiving areas but also accomplish the desire for green space such as parks and trails. How does a property owner know if their property qualifies as a sending area? It is mapped out in the Deerfield area. The sending sites are the T2 zones, open space zones, civic spaces, and green spaces. Open space option means the property owner continues to own the land but they are willing to reduce their development potential. To qualify for this option, you must have a minimum of five acres outside ofthe Deerfield site and a minimum of two acres within the Deerfield area. You must also record a perpetual easement that reduces the density of a maximum of one dwelling unit per parcel or for 25 acres, whichever is greater. The other option is for the property owner to deed the property to the city for parkway, trail, or civic space purposes. The minimum site has to be one acre for this to occur. The property owner would receive 1.5 TDRs if the area is designated as civic space or 1.25 TDRs if it is designated for park or greenway purposes. The property owner would receive one TDR per unconstrained acre that is placed under easement and one TDR for four constrained acres placed under easement. A constrained acre is undevelopable land. One aspect that is different in the Deerfield area versus the Crabapple area is that a person can gain four bonus building units per TDR. The far northern comer of the Deerfield area where there is a two-story building height limit cannot be a TDR receiving area. Councilmember Lance Large: The city just bought property at Bell Memorial Park. Can the city sell this property as a TDR? Rick Pruetz: Yes, after the ordinance is adopted it does allow for that. Councilmember Large: Have we had any TDR activity in Crabapple? Kathleen Field: About six weeks ago we had our first Public Infonnation Meeting about TDRs. It took our attorneys awhile to put all the legal documentation together that will be required for the TDR process. We have received a lot of questions about TDRs especially from developers and landowners. Councilmember Burt Hewitt: What exactly is civic space? l Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, March 11,2013 at 6:00 pm Page 8 of 10 . JRick Pruetz: Civic space is a classification given to a site that is very important so it is given higher value. We would really like to encourage property owners to create sending sites for those areas. They are areas that are truly ideal for park or public squares. If civic space becomes a sending site, then bonus TDR credits are gIven. Councilmember Large: What is a building unit? Rick Pruetz: A building unit is either one residential unit or 2,250 square feet of non-residential floor area. Sudie Gordon, City Clerk, read Agenda Item #5. 5. Discussion of RZ13-04-To amend Article VII, Division 5, State Route 9 Overlay District, Section 64-1069(a), Regulations; applicability. (Presented by Kathleen Field, Community Development Director) Kathleen Field, Community Development Director: J This is in anticipation of the approval of the Form Based Code. Upon approval, we would delete the Deerfield Area from the Route 9 Overlay, located on the map in front of you, and the remaining area would be reflected in the purple area on the map. Sudie Gordon, City Clerk, read Agenda Item #6. 6. Discussion ofRZ13-05 -To adopt a new Use Permit within Article IX, Division 5, Miscellaneous Uses, Section 64-1839 -Apartments. (Presented by Kathleen Field, Community Development Director) Kathleen Field, Community Development Director: This is in regard to use permits required for apartments as outlined in the Crabapple Form Based Code. The standards by which use permits can be granted has not been established. So, the information in front of you is staff's recommendation for those standards. These standards will apply to both the Crabapple and Deerfield Form Based Code. Sudie Gordon, City Clerk, read Agenda Item #7. 7. Discussion ofRZ\3-07-To amend Article XIX Crabapple Fonn Based Code, Article 5 Standanls J and Tables, Table 9 Specific Function and Use. (Presented by Kathleen Field, Community Development Director) l l l Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, March 11,2013 at 6:00 pm Page 9 of 10 Kathleen Field, Community Development Director: The current Crabapple Form Based Code and the proposed Deerfield Hwy. 9 Form Based Code contemplate assisted living, convalescent, personal care, nursing, and hospice homes to be permitted "by right" within T4, T4 Open, and T5 transect zones. After the Crabapple Form Based Code was adopted, staff realized that the above mentioned uses were not included in Table Nine. We have taken the text in the Form Based Code and included it in Table Nine. Councilmember Thurman: Should those types of housing be allowed "by right" in the T4 zone or should they be required to obtain a use permit? Rick Pruetz: Buildings in the T4 zone have to comply with the small building size which is a three floor maximum height restriction. There is also a maximum lot size and a maximum building size. So, restrictions are in place in the T4 zone where massive buildings would not be allowed. Councilmember Lusk: How are you addressing fencing in the Deerfield area? Kathleen Field: The four board fencing is required along the major roadways. Councilmember Lusk: Parallel or crossbar? Kathleen Field: We did not specify. The overlay gives them a choice; however, you could decide tonight not to give citizens a choice. Councilmember Hewitt: I like uniformity but I think it is too late to specify a particular type of fencing now. Robyn MacDonald, Principal Planner: When we put together the fencing guidelines for the overlay, the stakeholders wanted to give citizens a choice. They wanted more of a variety of fencing instead of every fence in the city looking exactly the same. PUBLIC COMMENTS (None) ] Work Session of the Milton City Council Monday, March 11,2013 at 6:00 pm Page 10 of 10 After no further discussion, the Work Session adjourned at 7:24 p.m. Date Approved: March 18,2013. Sudie AM Gordon, City Clerk Joe Loc J J