Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2009-02-05 AgendasMeeting Agenda Joint City Council 1~R~~ Planning and Zoning Commission Transit Oriented Development (TOD) North Richland Hills, Texas Work Session Thursday, February 5, 2009 7301 NE Loop 820 6.30 m Pre-Council Meetin Room NUMBER ITEM SUMMARY 1. City Council Call to Order 2. Planning & Zoning Commission Call to Order 3 Discussion and Review of Transit Oriented Development issues and plans around the Iron Horse and Smithfield rail station sites. 4. Adjournment IF YOU PLAN TO ATTEND THE PUBLIC MEETING AND YOU HAVE A DISABILITY THAT REQUIRES SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS AT THE MEETING, PLEASE CONTACT THE PLANNING OFFICE AT (817) 427-6300 AT LEAST 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS WILL BE MADE TO ASSIST YOUR NEEDS. IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 551.001 etc. seq, ACTS OF THE 1993 TEXAS LEGISLATURE, THIS JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA WAS PREPARED AND: POSTED THIS 30th DAY OF January, 2009 AT . =-~oP.M. ---~ By: Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Code Workshop Joint City Council and Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Thursday, February 5, 2009 6:30 p.m. Outline 1. Background and Review of timing of TOD adoption John Pitstick 2. 3 Review and Consensus of Regulating Plans Scott Polikov, Jay Narayana (Historic TOD, TOD Core, General Mixed Use, TOD Residential, Arterial Mixed Use, High Intensity Mixed Use, Freeway Mixed Use) Are you in agreement with the proposed character zones and boundaries? Review and Consensus of Required Street types Scott Polikov, Jay Narayana (Commercial -Main Street, Avenue -Smithfield, Boulder, Combs, TOD General -Boulder, Big Box frontage, Hilltop, Browning, Cardinal extension west, NE Parkway west, north of Main Street, Commercial Avenue -Iron Horse Boulevard at rail station, TOD Boulevard -Iron Horse Boulevard north and south of rail station, TOD Alley, Cottonbelt trail extension) Are you in agreement with the proposed required streets and street types? 4. Review and Consensus of Special Frontage requirements Jay Narayana, Gateway Planning (exception or additional regulation over the character zone standards based on specific location) (Commercial frontage -Iron Horse at rail station, Main Street, Arterial Frontage -Davis, Mid Cities Boulevard Frontage -Iron Horse north and south of rail station Are you in agreement with the proposed special frontage requirements? 5. Review and Consensus of Land Use mixes Scott Polikov, Jay Narayana 6. (Preferred Land Use Mix with ranges and locational criteria within each character zone -distances and adjacencies to existing residential and major roadways) Are you in agreement with the proposed mixes of land uses within each character zone? Input and Direction on Approval and Development Incentive processes (Non-conforming uses, Non-conforming buildings, Special Development Plans, development incentives, performance criteria, bonus approvals, Smithfield Architectural Review Board) Are you in agreement with allowing non-conforming buildings to change based on market conditions or do you want to place controls on required conformance to new building standards? Are you in agreement with utilizing the P&Z Commission and City Council for approval of Special/Incentive Development Plans including incentives and bonus approvals? Would you like to establish an Architectural Review Board to control architectural styles in the Smithfield Historic Core area? John Pitstick Scott Polikov, Gateway Planning 7. Final Direction on TOD Code Implementation Scott Polikov, John Pitstick Do you wish Gateway Planning and City Staff to bring back a final TOD draft code to another joint work session prior to proceeding with final adoption of the Iron Horse and Smithfield TOD Codes? (Staff is recommending mid March joint work session with final draft TOD Code distributed 2 weeks prior to meeting.) TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT (TOD) CODE WORKSHOP MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS NOVEMBER 20, 2008 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Oscar Trevino and Chairman Randy Shiflet at 6:30pm. 2. ROLL CALL PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION: PRESENT Chairman Vice Chairman Ex-Officio ABSENT CITY STAFF Dir. Of Planning & Development Chief Planner Asst. Planner Asst. Dir. Public Works Public Works Mgmt. Asst. Civil Engineer Recording Secretary CITY COUNCIL: PRESENT Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Randy Shiflet Bitl Schopper Steven Cooper Mike Benton Don Bowen Kelly Gent Diana Madar Mark Haynes John Pitstick Eric Wilhite Chad VanSteenberg Greg Van Nieuwenhuize Brad Boganwright Caroline Waggoner Tanya Hope Oscar Trevino Scott Turnage Ken Sapp Suzy Compton Dr. Tim Barth David Whitson Tim Welch Page 1 of 11 11 /20/08 Joint P8z /Council Meeting ABSENT CITY STAFF Managing Director Assistant City Manager Economic Development Dir. Public Information Officer Asst. To City Manager City Secrets ry 3. INTRODUCTION John Lewis Mike Curtis Karen Bostic Craig Hulse Mary Peters Elizabeth Reining Patricia Hudson Mike Curtis explained that the objective of the meeting tonight is for Staff and The Gateway Planning Group to update you on what the City has done so far in looking at the two future rail sites and developing a Transit Oriented Development Code. Mr. Curtis said that the City has defined a planning area for the two rail sites and have generally come up with a development plan within these areas. John Pitstick started the meeting by saying that The City of North Richland Hills has a professional services agreement with Gateway Planning Group to develop a mixed use Transit Oriented Development Code for the Iron Horse and Smithfield areas. During the past two months, Gateway Planning Group and City Staff have been proceeding with the development of a draft code and have had several meetings with property owners, businesses, churches and residents within approximately '/2 mile of each proposed rail station site. The purpose of this work shop meeting is to bring the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council up to date on the progress of planning efforts and to ask for a consensus on the Iron Horse and Smithfield boundaries, request a consensus on the general boundaries and description of character zones with each district and then give staff and our consultants direction on implementation of a Transit Oriented Development Code. The Gateway Planning Group team includes Scott Polikov, President, Jay Narayana, Project Manager, and Milosov Cekic, Architect. Gateway Planning Group was chosen to develop this code following formal mailed copies of a Request for Qualifications to fourteen firms and detailed interviews with three area firms. Gateway Planning has extensive experience in sustainable development codes throughout the state. Mr. Polikov serves as a member on the City of Fort Worth Downtown Design Review Board. Recent local projects completed by Gateway include downtown plans for Burleson, Roanoke and Duncanville. Tonight we will cover the history of the proposed redevelopment of the Iron Horse and Smithfield areas. We will provide input from stakeholder meetings. We will present findings from market demand studies completed by the Fort Worth Transportation Authority for the Iron Horse and Smithfield areas as part of the SW2NE Rail Corridor Study. Gateway Planning will talk about the interest and demand for transit oriented development and hopefully demystify what TOD is. We will be presenting maps that include proposed boundaries for the Iron Horse and Smithfield districts and will also present sub character zones that will provide further refinement of a future code. We Page 2 of 11 11 /20/08 Joint P8~Z /Council Meeting then hope to ask for a general consensus on the proposed districts and zones for the Iron Horse and Smithfield areas. Gateway Planning Group will go over proposed elements of a transit oriented code and then we will ask for general direction regarding implementation of a TOD Code. 4. HISTORY AND BACKGROUND Mr. Pitstick displayed a general Transit Concept Map that was developed in 2003 during the Regional Rail Corridor Study that identified the Iron Horse and Smithfield sites on a regional rail system. The City of North Richland Hills has been interested in mass transit for several years and thought that some day we might have the ability and ridership demand for a potential commuter rail station. The City was surprised when regional planning efforts showed the need and demand for two rail stations. Following the recommendations of the Regional Rail Corridor Study the city hired consultants and developed the Loop 820 Corridor Study. The City Council knew that the widening of Loop 820 was coming and they wanted to be proactive and encourage the right types of development in this corridor. The Loop 820 Plan identified general districts along 820 and one of the districts was the Iron Horse district that identified potential mixed use development around the Iron Horse station site. Most recently the City of North Richland Hills participated in the 2007 SW to NE Rail Corridor Study by the Fort Worth Transportation Authority which continues to show the need and demand for two rail stations in NRH. As a result of regional not local decisions to widen Loop 820 and to utilize the Cotton Belt line for a commuter rail line the City of North Richland Hills updated the Comprehensive Land Use plan in November of 2007 and began plans to hire consultants to develop a development code for Iron Horse and Smithfield. Regional decisions have been made to widen Loop 820 and incorporate the Cotton Belt line as part of a regional rail network. The City is simply responding to larger regional decisions where millions of dollars will be spent on public infrastructure to provide improved transportation and access. The City of North Richland Hills has chosen to be proactive in encouraging mixed use pedestrian oriented development around future transit stations. This work shop is one of many steps in moving toward encouraging development with flexibility for existing businesses and property owners while creating some predictability for future development. 5. STAKEHOLDER INPUT Over the past three months Gateway Planning and City Staff have had four formal work shops and numerous one on one contact with property owners, businesses, churches and residents. Since the Iron Horse and Smithfield areas are different we decided to keep the work sessions separate. On September 29 and again on October 14 we held evening work sessions where we mailed out 239 notices to property owners and businesses generally within '/2 mile of the proposed Iron Horse station. 36 individuals Page 3 of 11 11 /20/08 Joint P&Z /Council Meeting participated in the Iron Horse work sessions. General indications were very positive and most businesses and land owners were supportive of efforts to move forward with development of a transit code. We do have several key property owners and employers including Hilltop Apartments, Sam's Club, Wal-Mart and Triad Financial that will certainly be affected by any new code and we will continue to have ongoing discussions from these key stakeholders and input from any interested property owners. The Smithfield work shops were held on September 30 and October 15. The City mailed out 212 notices for both sessions and had 65 participants. General discussions were also favorable. Key stakeholders included in Smithfield discussions were Bates Container, Marvin Smith, Jim Makens, Smithfield Baptist Church, Smithfield Cemetery Association, Birdville Independent School District, Smithfield Masonic Lodge and Jamison Fence Company. There was a lot of discussion and most were optimistic. One of the primary concerns was fear that Smithfield Elementary School would be displaced as a result of the new development code. Staff met with BISD officials and were told that there are no plans at this time to close Smithfield Elementary and any proposed development code would not restrict the use of schools or other institutional uses. There was one property owner of a vacant land in the Smithfield area that expressed support of transit development if it would help in selling their property soon. It is their contention that their property would not develop until the rail station was up and running and they want to sell now and not wait. They have fears that any new regulations would prohibit them from selling their property soon. We also want to express to P&Z and City Council that several properties will be affected including churches and several businesses and staff will continue to receive input and have ongoing discussions with any interested property owners. Mayor Trevino asked if it were just a pipedream that there would be a commuter rail running up and down the corridor? Mr. Pitstick answered that the commuter rail will happen. Mayor Trevino stated by 2013 there will be commuter rail. The long range plan is for the rail to run south of the TCU campus into Burleson heading out to Addison and Rowlett. It will be a whole Cottonbelt Line across the north end of the region. Mayor Trevino stated that there will be a commuter train running through North Richland Hills regardless if we have a station or not. Mr. Pitstick stated that Loop 820 will be widened as well. The decisions for the commuter train and the widening of Loop 820 are regional decisions that The City of North Richland Hills has had input on. Mr. Pitstick stated that he supports Planning & Zoning and City Council's direction to be proactive because if we did nothing we would tend to see a sea of parking. It's understood that we have to be flexible to the current businesses but we if we do nothing then what the other cities and communities throughout the region and nation have found is that they have a sea of parking lots, and park and ride locations but no one will stop and do anything within the community. Mr. Pitstick stated that The City of North Richland Hills will continue to have stakeholder input throughout the process and that the website will continue to be updated with any new information as it comes about. Page 4 of 11 11 /20/08 Joint P&Z /Council Meeting 6. MARKET DEMAND STUDY Mr. Pitstick stated that we have been fortunate enough to be an important part of the SW2NE Rail Corridor Study with 2 out of 15 stations along this proposed commuter rail line that hopes to open in 2013. As part of efforts funded by The "T" we received rail station planning as well as specific market demand studies for both Iron Horse and Smithfield areas. EPS (Economic & Planning Systems) out of Denver, Colorado was hired as a subcontractor to URS to perform a market demand study for each proposed rail station site. EPS is a national firm that has performed other transit oriented development market demand studies for the Denver, Phoenix and San Francisco areas. We have a lot of existing retailers and employers in the Iron Horse area. Studies show continued potential for up to two million square feet of office and retail in the Iron Horse area as well as four hundred thousand square feet of retail entertainment; up to eighteen hundred residential dwelling units. Specific studies are available. The timeframe for the Southwest /Northeast studies is 2030. There is a significant demand in the Iron Horse area. We have to protect the employers that we have out there now and help transition and bring on new employers. Studies show in the Smithfield area that there is a demand for fifty thousand square feet of retail and entertainment; up to one thousand residential dwelling units. Mr. Pitstick envisions the Smithfield area to be similar to a downtown Grapevine or Cranbury area. 7. TOD INITIATIVE Scott Polikov introduced himself and gave some background on previous projects that he has been a part of. Scott Polikov discussed the TOD Initiative and displayed a power point presentation. Topics discussed for the TOD Initiative were taking advantage of the market demand, leveraging transportation investments, coordination of property owners, and preparing for but not relying on rail transit. Mr. Polikov displayed a graph on the advantages of TOD Development and discussed Conventional Development versus Transit Oriented Development. Mr. Polikov stated that transit means to him that it's a "walkable" transportation choice not necessarily with rail but it encourages alternative transportation including walking. Studies shows that most people in Texas will not walk more than one eighth of a mile. The option to walk to and from home or work to a rail station or park and ride is critical in the terms of design. Mayor Trevino had a general discussion on the one eighth mile walking distance. Page 5 of 11 11 /20/08 Joint PS~Z /Council Meeting 8. PROPOSED TOD AREAS AND CHARACTER ZONES CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING AND ZONING CONSENSUS Jay Narayana came forward to discuss the proposed TOD Areas and Character Zones. Ms. Narayana displayed maps showing the Illustrative Plan and Required Streets. The maps showed where the proposed rail stations would be placed and also the proposed Character Zones would be. For the Iron Horse Illustrative Plan Map, Ms. Narayana showed on the map where the proposed rail station platform would be placed, the recommendation for required streets, and also the Character Zones. The following characteristics were discussed for each character zone: Historic Core: ^ Preserve and reinforce existing historic fabric ^ Provide appropriate in-fill and architectural design standards ^ 1-2 story heights ^ Mix of commercial, upper story residential uses, and major public gathering places TOD Core: ^ Potential for new higher intensity, mixed use development ^ Maximum 4 stories; average 3 stories ^ Mix of commercial, civic, residential uses, and major public gathering places TOD Residential: ^ Provide redevelopment of key sites that provide transitions from the TOD core to adjoining neighborhoods ^ 1-2 story heights ^ Range of urban residential uses -brownstones, live-work, courtyard residential buildings General Mixed Use: ^ Potential for a wide variety of mixed use development -could include office uses, live-work, light industrial fabrication studios, mixed residential and retail / restaurant uses ^ Maximum 3 stories, generally 1-2 stories ^ Allow existing auto-oriented uses to transition to uses that support the transit station Arterial /Highway Mixed Use: ^ Generally 1-2 stories ^ Parking allowed along the arterial street ^ Limited to commercial uses (retail and office) Page 6 of 11 11 /20/08 Joint P8.Z /Council Meeting High Intensity Mixed Use: ^ High rise office and residential uses; some ground floor retail uses ^ Intended for large scale employment uses ^ 6 stories maximum; 4 stories average ^ Structured parking The character zones illustrated on the Illustrative Plan map for Iron Horse displayed the character zones of: TOD Residential, Highway Mixed Use, General Mixed Use, High Intensity Mixed Use, and TOD Core. For the Smithfield Illustrative Plan Map, Ms. Narayana showed on the map where the proposed rail station platform would be placed, the recommendation for required streets, and also the Character Zones. Ms. Narayana had a power point presentation with slides to define each character zone. Mike Curtis asked Council and Commission members to be looking at the maps while the zones were being described so that they could make a consensus on what is being recommended and feel comfortable with their decision. Mayor Trevino asked Mike Curtis how the cornerstones of the Smithfield area would incorporate into the plans? Ms Narayana answered that during the design phase that Gateway Planning identified the key factors that they would want to preserve. Mr. Polikov stated that Gateway was in total agreement with wanting to preserve the downtown Smithfield area. Chairman Shiflet asked about the use of Arterial /Highway Mixed Use? Ms Narayana answered that they decided that the Arterial and Highway Mixed Use is has a semantic difference however the character of the development would be similar. Councilman Sapp asked about the TOD Residential in the Smithfield area and stated that there needs to be a plan for egress. Councilman Whitson asked if high rise residential would work in North Richland Hills? Mr. Pitstick asked Council and Commission for a consensus on the boundaries and Character Zones for Iron Horse? Chairman Shiflet asked the Planning and Zoning Commission if they had any comments, questions or concerns in regards to Iron Horse? Commissioner Mike Benton asked how far into Iron Horse will the transition be for the rail would be? Page 7 of 11 11 /20/08 Joint P8Z /Council Meeting Commissioner Kelly Gent asked what the interchange would be like after the 820 expansion and also the reasoning behind taking the industrial area north of Browning and west of Iron Horse out of the TOD plan? There was discussion between Ms Narayana and Council and Commissioners regarding Councilman Benton and Gent's questions. It was discussed to change the TOD Residential to General Mixed Use south and west of Browning; and includes the General Mixed Use designation on the vacant industrial property north of the rail line. Chairman Shiflet asked about separating the arterial highway uses? Councilman Welch asked about working in an incentive for high intensity mixed use? Generally Council and Commissioners agree on the boundaries. Chairman Shiflet asked about the February 5, 2009 date? Mr. Pitstick stated that the draft code should be available on that date and that the Council and Commissioners would meet again that date. Council and Commissioners agreed on the Character Zones of Iron Horse as long as there is a differentiation of the Arterial for Smithfield and Freeway for Iron Horse. Mr. Polikov discussed Odell Street east of Davis. He explained that the north side of Odell is residential while the south side of Odell is industrial. Mr. Polikov suggests that we encourage a light industrial environment on the south side of Odell with higher development standards so that the development that faces the street is more of the live- work type environment. Mr. Pitstick commented that the City of North Richland Hills wants to preserve the street along Smithfield to make it pedestrian oriented. The question was asked about what was guiding the boundary between the Historic Core and the TOD core? Mr. Pitstick answered Main Street, the rail station, and the cemetery. Mr. Polikov discussed Mid Cities Blvd and Davis Blvd being Arterial Mixed Use. Mr. Polikov stated it's a policy question but wondered if the City of North Richland Hills would want to encourage high density in that area with a potential for mid rise offices. While looking at the Illustrative Map for Smithfield, Dianna Madar asked about Parkview and Chapman and what the green space represented on the map. Mr. Pitstick stated that a gentleman came in and wants to develop that property as R-1-S. Page 8 of 11 11 /20/08 Joint P&Z /Council Meeting Commissioner Schopper stated he thought the Smithfield district should be west of Davis Blvd. and the Hometown district be east of Davis Blvd. Chairman Shiflet asked about the General Mixed Use on the east side of Davis Blvd and wanted clarification on the uses and if the same uses that are allowed today will be allowed plus more with the new Character Zones? Chairman Shiflet asked that if we agree on this General Mixed Use inclusion that it would not preclude that person from asking for an upgrade to the Arterial. Is this correct? Mr. Polikov asked what he meant by an upgrade? Chairman Shiflet said that he sees the Arterial as an area where you would have less residential and more commercial offices, restaurants and retail. Mr. Polikov said that we could put a mechanism in place for that. There was general discussion in regard to the General Mixed Use and possibly even converting a portion of that to Arterial Mixed Use on the east side of Davis Blvd. Mr. Polikov discussed maintaining the integrity of the trail connection. Mr. Shiflet discussed that you cannot cross the trail on Davis Boulevard but that there will be a signalized intersection at the trail and perhaps to the north as far north as Odell Street. Mayor Trevino stated that we will find a way to get our customers from one end of the street to the other. Mr. Pitstick discussed the extension of Cardinal Lane from a pedestrian environment. Planning and Zoning Commissioners were all in agreement with the boundaries and character zones for the Smithfield district. Commissioners discussed changing a portion of the General Mixed Use along Davis Blvd to Arterial Mixed Use. Council Members were all in agreement with the boundaries and character zones for the Smithfield district. Councilwoman Compton stated however that she did not want to see a division on Davis Blvd. She did not want to see one side of Davis Blvd versus the other side. Ms. Compton wants to see both sides tie together to compliment each other. Ms. Compton stated that there are many residents on both sides of Davis Blvd that feed into both Smithfield Elementary and Middle Schools. Making the Smithfield district General Mixed Use will allow for some tie in. The Historic area of the Smithfield district is not a very big area when we talk about bringing in a lot of people to use the rail station and visit our community. Ms. Compton stated that we would have to have something on the east side that will compliment the west side and that the cosmetic aspect has to play a Page 9 of 11 11/20/08 Joint P8Z /Council Meeting key factor. Ms. Compton stated that we cannot have a hodge-podge on one side and the other pristine. 9. TOD CODE ELEMENTS Mr. Polikov discussed the TOD Code Elements. The following characteristics were discussed for each TOD Code Element: Land Use: ^ Use matrix to be created ^ Regulated by character zones ^ Consistency with land use requirements Building Disposition: ^ Placement and location of building on the lot relative to streets and adjoining properties ^ Set backs and building footprints ^ Specific to each character zone Building Configuration: ^ Height and bulk of buildings ^ Adjacency standards to existing residential uses and neighborhoods ^ Specific to each character zone Building Types: ^ Permitted by character zone ^ Building standards for each building type established Architectural Standards: ^ For commercial and residential buildings ^ Functional standards for doors, windows, facade elements ^ Architectural style standards for Historic Core only to ensure consistency within existing context Parking Standards: ^ Location of parking on the lot ^ Number of spaces ^ Specific to each character zone and by street frontage ^ Shared parking management Public Realm Standards: ^ Street types including cross sections and land use context ^ Standards for location and type of open spaces in each character zone Page 10 of 11 11 /20/08 Joint PB~z /Council Meeting 10. FINAL DIRECTION ON TOD CODE IMPLEMENTATION Mr. Polikov discussed that the proposed next steps for TOD Code Implementation would consist of: ^ Continued coordination with stakeholders ^ Coordination between staff and consultants ^ Draft code workshop on February 5, 2009 ^ Formal implementation process March /April 2009 ADJOURNMENT There being no other business, the meeting adjourned at 9:30p.m. Page 11 of 11 11 /20/08 Joint P8~Z /Council Meeting ~~CHI,q~ ~ ;~ ~:, rEXPS Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Codes for Iron Horse and Smithfield Gateway Planning and City Staff continue to develop draft Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Codes for the Iron Horse and Smithfield districts. This worksession is set up to review and seek consensus on regulating plans to move forward with adoption of formal ordinances. The Iron Horse and Smithfield boundaries have been revised and further definition of each character zone has also been estab{fished. The Transit Oriented Code adoption is a direct result of the development of future rail station sites and the ongoing development of the Southwest to Northeast Rail Corridor. City Council is also very familiar with the need to fund regional rail and is hoping to be successful in convincing the Texas Legislature in allowing differing funding sources to support Rail North Texas. This TOD effort has also been tied to potential sustainable development grant funding from the North Central Texas Council of Government (NCTCOG). Originally we were informed that the Sustainable Development grant would require that cities have sustainable development codes in place by May, 2009 to be eligible for this grant funding. A recent work shop at COG reveals that the application deadline has been moved to August 31, 2009. This change will give North Richland Hills more time to adopt the TOD codes and still be eligible to apply for a portion of the $12.4 million available for western region projects. At this point Gateway Planning and City Staff have not developed a complete and final TOD Code and will need review and consensus from P&Z and City Council on a few issues. We hope to receive consensus from both bodies at the worksession on the following issues. -Character Zones and Boundaries -Required Street Types -Special Street Frontage Requirements -Mix of Land Uses -Direction on treatment of Non-conforming Buildings -Appeals, Incentives and Bonus Approval Process -Potential Architectural Review Board for Smithfield Historic Core area Consensus from the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council will allow Gateway Planning to proceed with the final draft of Iron Horse and Smithfield TOD Codes. Within a month to six weeks following this session, staff would like to send out the final draft document to both bodies and potentially hold a final joint work session prior to formal ordinance approval. Of course staff and Gateway Planning will continue to seek input from key businesses and property owners in this process. Ongoing efforts will continue based on City Council direction. The primary goal in developing a new TOD Code is to be flexible to current businesses and residences while still creating predictability for encouraging sustainable mixed use development around transit stations at Iron Horse and Smithfield. Iron Horse and Smithfield Proposed Land Use Mixes Historic TOD • Preserve and reinforce existing historic fabric • Provide appropriate in-fill and architectural design standards • 1-2 story heights • Mix of commercial, upper story residential uses, and major public gathering places Land Use Mix Retail/ Office Residential Public/Open Other Character Zone Restaurant Space (institutional, etc Historic Core Range min/max) 15%-35% 15%-35% 15%-35% 5%-10% 20%-25% Preferred 25% 25% 25% 5% 20% TOD Core • Potential for new higher intensity, mixed use development • Maximum 4 stories; average 3 stories • Mix of commercial, civic, residential uses, and major public gathering places Land Use Mix Retail/ Office Residential Public/Open Other Character Zone Restaurant Space (institutional, etc TOD Core Range(min/max) 15%-35% 20%-40% 20%-40% 5%-10% 0%-20% Preferred 25% 30% 30% 5% 10% TOD Residential • Provide redevelopment of key sites that provide transitions from the TOD core to adjoining neighborhoods • 1-2 story heights • Range of urban residential uses -brownstones, live-work, courtyard residential buildings Land Use Mix Retail! Office Residential Public/Open Other Character Zone Restaurant Space (institutional, etc TOD Residential Range(min/max) 5%-15% 5%-35% 35%-65% 10%-15% 0%-20% Preferred 10% 20% 50% 10% 10% General Mixed Use • Potential for a wide variety of mixed use development -could include office uses, live-work, light industrial fabrication studios, mixed residential and retail/restaurant uses • Maximum 3 stories, generally 1-2 stories • Allow existing auto-oriented uses to transition to uses that support the transit station Land Use Mix Retail/ Office Residential Public/open Other Character Zone Restaurant Space (industrial, institutional, etc General Mixed (some Use industrial) Range min/max) 5%-30% 5%-25% 30%-60% 5%-10% 10%-30% Preferred 15% 15% 45% 5% 20% Arterial/Highway Mixed Use • Generally 1-2 stories • Parking allowed along the arterial street • Limited to commercial uses retail and office Land Use Mix Retail/ Office Residential Public/Open Other Character Zone Restaurant Space (industrial, institutional, etc Arterial/Highway (min res (some Mixed Use above 1st industrial) Range(min/max) 30%-70% 10%-50% floor) 0%-10% 5%-25% Preferred 50% 30% 0% 5% 15% High Intensity Mixed Use • High rise office and residential uses; some ground floor retail uses • Intended for large scale employment uses • 6 stories maximum; 4 stories average • Structured parking Land Use Mix Retail/ Office Residential Public/Open Other Character Zone Restaurant Space (institutional, etc High Intensity Mixed Use Range(min/max) 5%-25% 30%-90% 0%-40% 5%-10% 0%-5% Preferred 10% 60% 20% 5% 5% Special Frontage Requirements In order to address specific requirements and transitions based on street frontage and adjacency, the following Special Frontage Requirements as established in the Regulating Plan shall apply to both Station Areas: i. Commercial Frontage: This requirement establishes mandatory commercial uses along the ground floor of all buildings to a depth of 40' as measured from the front building line. Commercial uses include retail, restaurant, office, lodging, personal service, financial institutions, and other non-residential uses. ii. Arterial Fronta~(Davis and Mid-Cities : For all buildings and building sites designated as Arterial Frontage in the Regulating Plan, the following rules apply: a. A building setback of a minimum of 20 feet shall apply along the designated frontage. Of the 20' setback, 15 feet shall be dedicated to a landscaped parkway. The required sidewalk may be permitted in the required landscaped parkway. b. Surface parking lots no deeper than 70' as measured from the front landscaped parkway may be permitted. c. Commercial driveways that meet the city and TxDOT design criteria are permitted. d. Structured parking fronting on the street. Setback standards in (1) apply for structured parking. iii. Boulevard Frontage (Iron Horse): For all buildings and building sites designates as Freeway Frontage in the Regulating Plan, the following rules apply: a. Setbacks and build-to-zones shall be based on the underlying character district. b. Surface parking lots no deeper than 70' may be permitted so long as its frontage along the boulevard is no more than 50% of the lot frontage (see figure below) c. Driveways shall be limited to a maximum of 24' in width and one driveway per every 200 feet of block frontage. Bou{ov~d Boulevard Frontage Requirements City of North Richland Hills Draft TOD Code 1 /3 0/09 TOD Development Incentive Plan • Intended to provide development flexibility for applicants that meet certain criteria based on the specific Character Zone: (separate application filed as a Special Development Plan) o Consolidate multiple properties for a comprehensive development plan o Subject property is large enough to have significant impact on the TOD (size of property to be based on Character Zone) o Development is requesting development incentive • incentives for development to include: o Flexibility to alter land use mix o Flexibility to amend boundaries of individual Character Zones and alignment of required streets o Flexibility to amend development standards and street design standards (based on how the specific project fits the TOD goals) o Density bonus (for residential) o Height bonus o Shared parking with city/public facilities o Other -city participation in infrastructure improvements • Review/approval of incentives to be based on the extent to which the project meets the city's vision for a successful TOD. Specific Public Benefits from the proposed development should be evaluated: o Amount of commercial area over the preferred percentage for that Character Zone o Provision of structured parking that can be shared, if any o Provision of a range of residential uses including lofts, apartments, townhomes, and live-work o Provision of a range of civic/open space amenities including squares, plazas, and greens o Provision of appropriate transitions to adjoining neighborhoods and linkages to future development opportunities j i ~~ ,z~ ~ Q ~ o ~~ W z ~ ? z Q Z U w ` ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ LL 2 0 U 1 Q p U ~ 0 ~ ~ V OQ UG W J J W Ij < v m ~ acan ~~ a~ a m A Wj r Q ~ .~_.. ._.... E i ~' ,~ w ~ ~ w w w` ~ ~ ~a ~~;, ,'; -y'c vri vii w w 2 Z ~ ~ Oi ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ i i u N ,F'' ~ ~ °w a ~ o o; oW a ~ W a Qo Q u o oz do U W U ~ J J O J W V ', ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (9 t7 ~ t~ ~ z ~ ~ ~ ^ U% ~ ^ o~ ^ r- M 0 i .~ '~ 0 ~ C ~ Q V C . ~ ~ ~ oC . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~~ r ~..I _; ~ :__-, ' ~ ~ _ ~ 0 • ~ ~ ~ }~ V ('O a 3° ~~ '~"~ c a ~° 0 0 N ti N W 0 W Q a U ~ ~~ ~ Z 0 2 U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q o W z I o~ o (~ ~ ~ ~ W W ~ j d N ~ 20C W ~ g ~ ~ aW ON z } > H I ~ ~ V O Q ~ U 4 W J J Y V ~ ~ ~ w A ~ ~ W --~ ~ ~ ''wi W ~ ~~ w w ~~ cn N W w w o O ~ ;i ~' ~ ~o a a o 03 00 N! ~ ~ w, a aZ g w o oZ oZ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W! ~ y U Uw U ~ JO w ~ ~ F+~i 1 W W~ W m ~ ~Q ~~ j ~ ~ ~0 ~ W W~ WO ~ ! 8 ~ ~ ~ oW ~ o W Wa WW H t7 ~ I U U ~ U ~ (7 C9 ~ t9 ~ ~:: s t ..... i O ~ ~ ~ ° O v ~ ._ .~ •- a V, ~ ~ c (/~ o - : z ~~ z ~ ~~ ~ ~ o = o ~ % / j ~ o ~~ as .- oC ` c~ a O o~ ~_ C C a as ~noNS Dina ~. U p N7` 7 J 1 ~`.. ~ 3 \ ~ ~~ I / - ~ '~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ \\ Y ~~ \ ~~ i ~ ~ ~ \ \\ ~~~ ~~ ~\ ~~ ~ ~~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o o N 0 ,~ ~~~-~' z ,, ~, ~ ~_ _ ,, r ti~ .~.... / ~ • _ _ ~~ T V r N Draft, January 30, 2009 Historic TOD Zone Development Standards zv a Property Line Primary Street Building minimum 15' Building maximum 2 stories (see #3) Accessory building 2 stories max. (see #3) Ground floor finish 12" max. above O level sidewalk First floor ceiling 12' min. clear height Upper floor(s) ceiling 9' min. clear height r ~~ a ~ ~i M '~?' i a i ~t~~ it ra ~ ~~~ - ~ @ ~ t ~ ~ r ~ ~+i s ~ ~ ~~ Land Use Min. % of Max. % of Preferred building area building area Retail/Restaurant 15% 35% 25% Office 15% 35% 25% Residential 15% 35% 25% Civic excl. reli ious 5% 10% 5% Other (incl. religious) 20% 25% 20% Building Types Shopfront Civic building Residential Loft Live/Work Notes #1 -Side setbacks shall be based on minimum fire separation required between buildings, if applicable #2 -Corner building street facades must be built to the BTZ for a minimum of 30' from the corner along both streets. #3 -Attics and mezzanines less than 7' (avg.) height shall not be counted as a story. #4 -All development that exceeds 6,000 sq.ft. of building area or more than 2 acres of property shall meet the mixed use criteria. #5 -Mansard roofs are not permitted #6 -All buildings in the Historic TOD shall meet the Architectural Standards in Section 8. #7 -Any frontage along a public street (except alleys) not defined by a building at the BTZ shall be defined by a 4' high masonry or living fence. 1~Page Character Zone Development Standards Key ----••-••• Property Line ------- Setback Line Build-to Zone Building Area ~;~ ,, . Setback Side 0' (see #1) Rear Adjacent to SF residential 15' Adjacent to any other use 10' O Building Form of building built to primary 80% (min.) street BTZ (see #2) of building built to secondary 40% (min.) street BTZ (see #2 ,~_ _ ,~ ~~ ,, ~. Block face dimensions 600' (maximum) Block perimeter 1,600' (maximum) Lot Width 200' (max.) Lot Depth 200' (max.) Lot coverage 90% (max.) Residential density 18 du/ac (max.) City of North Richland Hills TOD Code 1 1 1 i i 1 1 ---~1 O 1 1 I ~ 1 I ~ _.._..~..-..~.._.._.._.._.._.,_.._..-..-..-..-.._.. _.. L.._.._. ~ .. _.._.._.._. Property Line Sidewalk Primary Street ~,. ~ ~* ~4 .,_ . ~ s~ . ;~ .fi'_ 1 Jyy 1 Q ~ O id ~ i ~ i Iv i O~ ~ ~~ I I 1 i 1 f Key -••-••-••• Property Line Parking Area Location (distance from property line) Front setback 25' O Side setback 0' O Secondary street 10' O setback Rear setback 5' Q Required Spaces Ground Floor Uses under 3,000 sq.ft. No off-street parking req'd Uses over 3,000 sq.ft. 1 space/300 sq.ft. Upper Floors Residential uses 1 space/unit; 0.5 space/studio Other uses 1 space per 350 sq.ft. Notes #8 -Parking driveway 20' max. width #9 - On corner lots, driveway shall not be O located on a primary street. #10 -Shared driveways and cross access easements are encouraged between lots to minimize curb cuts. #11 -Parking may be provided off-site within 1,200 feet or as shared narking. #12 - _ of the City of NRH Zoning Ordinance shall apply for design ofoff-street parking areas. City of North Richland Hills TOD Code Primary Street Key -••-••-•-- Property Line Encroachment Area Location Front 6' max. ~;/ Secondary street 4' max O Rear 3' max. Notes #13 -Canopies, awnings, signs, and balconies may encroach over the BTZ and setback areas as indicated in the shaded areas. 2~Page Character Zone Development Standards Draft, January 30, 2009 Draft, January 30, 2009 General Mixed Use Zone Development Standards P Y I I 1 I ~ C ~J C? I Y+ ~~ ~ ! O cn i a i ~~.~, Property Line Primary Street Key -••-••---- Property Line ------- Setback Line Building minimum 15' Buildin maximum 3 stories g (see #3) Accessory building 2 stories max. (see #3) 12" max. above sidewalk for Ground floor finish commercial O level ,, .., ~ min. for resident a 18 Build-to Zone Building Area First floor ceiling 12' min. clear for commercial height 10' min clear for residential ~~~,~, . , a '~` ~ ~ Upper floor(s) ceiling 9' min. clear height Build-to Zone (BTZ) (Distance from property line to edge of the zone) Front (Primary Street) 5' - 20' Land Use Min. % of Max. % of Preferred building area building area Front (Secondary Street) 5' - 20' = _RetaiURestaurant _ ~______ 5% 30% 15% Office 5% 25% 15% Setback Residential 30% 60% 45% x 10% 5% ious 5% Civic excl. reli ~ Side 5' see #1 ( ) ~ ---~ Other (industrial) 10% 30% 20% Rear Location Standards Adjacent to SF residential 15' O • Existing residential neighborhoods shall be buffered by Adjacent to any other use 10' residential uses in the General Mixed Use zone to a depth of 100' • Commercial uses (except live-work) shall be located within 200' Building Form of Davis Boulevard in the Smithfield TOD of building built to primary 60% (min.) © All development that exceeds 10,000 sq.ft. of building area or street BTZ (see #2) more than 4 acres of property shall meet the mixed use criteria. of building built to secondary 40% (min.) © Building Types street BTZ (see #2 Shopfront Civic building ~~' ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~'~ -~~ ~ ~ ~~~° Residential Loft Townhouse i 000' s 1 i k f di l Live/Work Detached house mum) (max , mens on B oc ace Block perimeter 3,600' (maximum) Notes #1-Side setbacks shall be either 5' or based on minimum fire Lot Width 400' (max.) separation required between buildings, if applicable #2 -Corner building street facades must be built to the BTZ for a Lot Depth 400' (max.) minimum of 15' from the corner along both streets. #3 -Attics and mezzanines less than 7' (avg.) height shall not be Lot coverage 75% (max.) counted as a story. Residential density 24 du/ac (max.) #4 -Mansard roofs are not permitted #5 -Any frontage along a public street (except alleys) not defined by a building at the BTZ shall be defined by a 4' high masonry or living fence. City of North Richland Hills 3 ~ P a g e TOD Code i l " Character Zone Development Standards Draft, January 30, 2009 i i i 0-- • Property Line Sidewalk Primary Street _..; I I ;~ IJ i~ ;Q ~a i O' .., ~~..~.a • Encroachments are permitted into any required yard and may © occupy no more than 50% of that yard. • Canopies, awnings, signs, and balconies may not encroach over the roe line. r ~~ t - r W ~ 4 ~_ v A development may be eligible for the following bonuses: • A 10% increase in residential density for every 5% increase in commercial land use over 15% of the development Key -••-••-••• Property Line Parking Area Location (distance from property line) Front setback 25' Oi Side setback 0' (next to commercial) O 5' (next to residential) Secondary street 10' Q setback Rear setback 5' Q Required Spaces All uses (except residential) 1 space/300 sq.ft. Residential uses 1 space/1 bedroom unit and studio; 0.5 for every additional bedroom Notes #6 -Parking 24' max. driveway width #7 - On corner lots, driveway shall not be O located on a primary street. #8 -Shared driveways and cross access easements are encouraged between non-residential lots to minimize curb cuts. #9 -Parking may be provided off-site within 1,200 feet or as shared parking. A shared parking plan has to be approved by the City Manager or his/her designee. #10 - _ of the City of NRH Zoning Ordinance shall apply for design of off-street parking areas. Any non-residential use in the GMU Character Zone located adjacent to an existing single-family detached residential use shall meet the following standards (see figure below): • Height of the building at the rear setback line shall be no more than 2 stories. • A 20' wide visual screen with a 6' high fence shall be installed at the property line adjacent to the existing residential use. • Building mass shall be stepped down along the residential edge • Ground and roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screen from view of adjoining residential use and public rights-of--way Residential Adjacency Standards for non- residential uses in the GMU Character Zone CREATE VISUAL SCREEN WITHIN IOYEARS -- SCREEN MECHANTCALEQUIPMENT ROOFTOP MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT RESIDENTIAL. USE .~ STEP BUILDING MASSING DOWN ALONG RESIDENTIAL EDGE City of North Richland Hills TOD Code 4~Page Character Zone Development Standards Draft, January 30, 2009 Building Type Matrix Character Zone Historic TOD Core Gen. TOD Res. Arterial Freeway High Core Mixed Use MU MU Intensity Buildin T e MU 1. Shopfront building P P P P/C (corner P P P commercial uses only) ~ ~: _< { ~~ ~~ ~. ~~, ., 2. 3-Story Mixed Use (loft building) NP P P P/C (corner P P P commercial on1Y) ~:~A. ~ ; ~ # r *, ~i e '~~, 4 ~ ~ r ~~0 °:> ~ ~ "~ f ~3y i y*+ o ~' ~ ~i. w t, ~~ ~ t *~_~ •9i t 'r ti'~ ~ 4 ;'.~ ~r! c~ ~~~' ., ~ ~ R 1 3. 4-Story Mixed Use (loft building) NP P NP P/C (corner P P P commercial only) ,: r ;~. "'~~ , {9 • 1 ~, Y d.i f ~ .. - P ~ ~ . `4 ~rF .~. ". q w. h • i,i m,~ '~ }.f e { x ~ I ~ ~~~ rt ~ ~~ ~ d.., J` iI f~ •, 1k yAe 4. 2-story live-work P P P P/C (corner P NP NP commercial only) ~r -~ . l: 3 d~ ~A ~ t, ~yp~ Y ~+, ... • ~~~ Y _j i e. "ty, "iF . ' ®}~.a r R5 ~ ~ j ~ 0*~` ~~ a y j ~.i ,. ~r ,~°~~" m •v City of North Richland Hills 5 I P a 9 e TOD Code Character Zone Development Standards Draft, January 30, 2009 Character Zone Historic TOD Core Gen. TOD Res. Arterial Freeway High Core Mixed Use MU MU Intensity Buildin T e MU 5. Apartment building NP P P P NP NP NP _. _ __ _ f f ~ j j - '`-~ ~ p ;., ~..,,, ~ , j' .~ q~ '~ ~~ ~y~ ~ ~ a : r ,• . '~ i '~' ' _ i ,~, ~ ~ 6. Multi-unit house NP P P P NP NP NP ~, 1 ,--~,.. ,t~ 1 ~, M +I { p~ y , , d.., fr t ~ Y4 S R ~~ V J1~ ~, ,i ~ `! ~ ~ . ~ ~' ~ . 7. Townhouse NP P P P NP NP NP ,~ - ~_., a ~ ,~°., . __ __., .._ ~ , ~, i.. y~ ~' ' ~" 7 t .. r ~~~~~ 1 ~ ~', ~.. ~ ~ r ~ . l y~ ~ ^, ~ ~ ~ / . ' ~ ~ , 1 ~~ ~ ..` `.~ ~ ~ti ~ ~~ ' ti * i i ti _ ~A~4 ~~~~' ft ,,~ 1 ,~ 1.,,~~... M ~ +v ,'~ . w~ . 8. Detached house NP NP P P NP NP NP _~ K ~ ~• ~ ~' ~ ,~' -~ - -~,... . , t ~ ~~., ; ~ ~~ ~ , / a ,/ I ,/ ~, . ` ~. ~ ; ; ,~, ~ ,, ~~ ,~. ,~ ' ~ ''`` 'll±r~ ~A ~ f '`..~ ~u 9. Commercial buildin hi h rise NP NP NP NP P P P City of North Richland Hills 6 ~ P a g e TOD Code Character Zone Development Standards Commercial "Main" Street ~~ ,~ __ ,. BTZ ~ Sidewalk Parking , Travel Travel Parking j Tree Sidewalk BTZ Lane Lane Well 5' ' 12' 8' 10' 10' 8' 6 6` 5° 60' R-O-W i. -R City of North Richland Hills TOD Code Street Design Standards Avenue ,,~!L,, Smithfield Rd., Boulder Dr. ~ ~ t 5' _-~•~ g~ -,~_ g' --l~ g' _ _ 11 ` --girt ___ 11 ~ _ _._ .~ _ _ g" _ _--+~ .__.._- 15~ _.._ . _ 5' - Yard 'Sidewalk Parkway Parking Travel Lane Travel Lane Parking Sidewalk BTZ BTZ ~ s~d~a~k~ Parking; ~lan~~ Laney Parkingl ~~idewa~k BTZ ,.,,..,_. ......_,20"...m._.~._..,..,,.a--+f.-~'~..a.•5'-rte g' e,.,,,a 11' •••~ _ 11' r-~.i $' ,~ 11' ~--~.~•~~__.~_~Q~,_.__..,_.._.n..._. January ~9, P 1 ~~~'~~ age ,~ Planning Group City of North Richland Hills TOD Code Street Design I Standards TOD Boulevard Iron Horse Blvd. N & S of Rail Station :Trail easement ~ s req'd _ J ~, 'C ~ 4' C{~~I as d J: O: ~~ a • o ~ ~ a: .. afr m e r o Setba k `~ T ~' ~4t " front building: b facade ;_...~. Si~~ pkwy Trave Lanes Median Travel Lanes Pkwy Trai BTZ w 11'- 11~ 12' -11'-- -11' 6' 10 10'7! ~ 6' 6' 10'- .__-~__ ._80' R-O-W- ~..._ TOD Alley - Screen for surface parking ~~"~~-- Flat curb .+ __ _ .. 16' Pavement _ -_ _-.__.~_ 20' R-Q-W _ _ __ - ~~1~i1` January 29, 20G - Page 2 ~jateway N~~--~