Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutRMUD Town Council_Language by topic_2015_1215DCDP Combined Comments and Suggested Language 12/15/2015 The document includes comments from individual Councilors, staff commentary, and actual ordinance language. Staff suggestions are included in red, and ordinance language is also underlined. 1. Open Space Buffers, Plans and Step backs: S. Falkoff Comments: Keep the 100' buffer for Greenough Blvd but if the applicant can demonstrate that encroaching on this open space would lead to a significantly better project, the square footage that is used must be replaced by twice as much permeable open space elsewhere. This increased open space is in addition to the 20% open space required. Add a buffer around Arsenal Park. Include language to encourage improving the park and integrate it better into the surroundings, perhaps in section 2.61 DCDP Discussion — An important component of safe and welcoming parks includes "eyes on the park" which can be provided by residential uses adjacent to park lands. An option to address the concerns noted above while preserving the ability to activate park lands would be to modify Note P, to limit develop within a buffer and encourage new open space. It is also crucial that private sites that are being redeveloped plan for successful public and private accessible open space and look to the context of the surrounding areas and public opens space to ensure improved open space networks throughout the RMUD zone. The language originally proposed by J. Bockian suggests a buffer be created near Arsenal Park. The language would require a 100' buffer for all new buildings. This could have ramifications for redevelopment of the Arsenal Mall buildings as well as other sites. The Master Plan process addresses some of the concerns and other buffer language should be considered under Note P. DCDP Suggested Language considering Falkoff and Bockian suggestions - Section 5.05(p) No residential or mixed commercial residential structure shall be allowed within twenty-five (25) feet of any OSC district boundary and no industrial or commercial structure within fifty (50) feet of an OSC district boundary if it is located on a parcel greater than twenty-five thousand (25,000) square feet; if less than twenty-five thousand (25,000) square feet the required district setback shall apply, except in the RMUD. Specifically, in the RMUD, by Special Permit, a project may incorporate publically accessible open space to offset required setbacks, with reduced setbacks to be no less than existing adjacent buildings on the same lot or adjacent lots. At a minimum, the allowance for reduced setbacks shall include consideration of improving adjacent public parkland with public access and amenities for community uses in proposed private open space within a project. Wage DCDP Combined Comments and Suggested Language 12/15/2015 Section 5.18.c (7) Minimum Open Space: All new developments shall have at least 20 percent (20%) of the total site area devoted to Open Space; required setbacks shall be considered as part of the total area for Open Space. The required Open Space shall not be used for parking, loading, or roadway purposes. Fifty percent (50%) of the required Open Space shall be publicly accessible. There shall be a 100 -foot wide open space area parallel to Greenough Boulevard. Through a Master Plan Special Permit, existing structures may be expanded within this 100 -foot area, but in no instance may an addition encroach closer to Greenough Boulevard than the existing structure, and as part of a Master Plan, a request may be made for existing or new buildings to encroach up to twenty-five (25) feet into this area. The square footage used within the open space area shall be replaced by twice as much pervious open space elsewhere within the Master Plan site, and contiguous to publically accessible open space. This increased open space is in addition to the 20% required open space. 2. OPEN SPACE PLANS: (g) Authority and Procedure:2) Application: [add] 5.18(g)(2)k. Open Space plan, including location, size, characteristics (pervious vs impervious), uses and public accessibility of all open space areas. 3. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: SECTION 5.18 (a) Intent and Purpose 7) Encourage Smart Growth and Low Impact Development using "green" building practices that encourage energy efficiency, manage storm water, protect the riparian habitat and are planned, designed, constructed, and managed to minimize adverse environmental impacts. 4. STEP BACKS: S. Falkoff Comment: Add stepback requirements for tall buildings that are either on the street or directly abutting the river. Perhaps make the language parallel to the provisions in PSCD 5.16 (6) D and E. DCDP suggestion — Add a new Section within Section 5.18.c.8 — Setbacks: d) Any structure within fifty (50) feet of Open Space Conservancy (OSC) zoned land shall be required to incorporate appropriate setbacks, step backs, and/or other techniques, in keeping with adopted Design Guidelines, to mitigate potential impacts on environmentally sensitive areas. At a minimum, any proposed structures greater than fifty five (55) feet in height within this area shall have additional height step backed a minimum of fifteen (15) feet from the structure/ building's main facade. 5. HEIGHT: Several comments have been received regarding concerns related to building height. Staff supports the concept of considering greater building height as part of a Master Plan submittal, but understand the concern of no limitations, and support a discussion of a maximum. 2IPage DCDP Combined Comments and Suggested Language 12/15/2015 5.18.c.5.b. Maximum height of building: For new construction, 55 feet by Special Permit or 79 feet by Master Plan Special Permit, or, by Master Plan Special Permit within a defined mixed -use project using adopted Design Guidelines and the allowed FAR of 2.0 to determine height up to a maximum of 130 feet, provided the project includes a diversity of building heights. 6. MASTER PLAN PROCESS and PERMIT: Various comments amending the language are included below Section 5.18(a) Intent and Purpose (modify the following sections) Q Allow development at a density, scale and character appropriate to define a corridor that is a major gateway for the Town; Additional height may be appropriate in such Gateway Locations where consistent with Watertown's economic development goals, and the adopted Design Guidelines, as they may appropriately apply to development in the RMUD; Additional density and/or reduced parking space requirements may be appropriate in the District where consistent with the goal of reducing traffic congestion and improving multi-user transit services and in compliance with a Transportation Demand Management policy adopted by the Town. 3) Enhance quality of life, including promoting the development of a high quality public realm: • which is aesthetically pleasing and consistent with Watertown's Design Guidelines • that provides a well -articulated pedestrian environment which implements Complete Street concepts and adopted Complete Streets Policies • that promotes porous frontages which create connections to surrounding neighborhoods and the Charles River • which includes public art. 7jEncourage Smart Growth and Low Impact Development using "green" building practices that encourage energy efficiency, manage stormwater, protect the riparian habitat, and are planned, designed, constructed, and managed to minimize adverse environmental impacts. 8) Encourage development that accommodate and promote multi -modal access. Section 5.18.g.2 - Application: A Petitioner proposing to construct or substantially alter two or more buildings, including structured parking, may seek approval of the overall project through a Master Plan Special Permit. An application for a Master Plan Special Permit shall include, at a minimum, for each proposed new building, structural alteration of an existing building, or principal use outside of a building: 3IPage DCDP Combined Comments and Suggested Language 12/15/2015 (modify Section b. as follows) Section 5.18.g.2.b. Building elevations showing principal building entrances, overall building massing, rooflines, and general fenestration patterns and will require multiple three-dimensional elevations; Applications for one or more buildings greater than 79' in height shall include design details for such building(s) sufficient to enable a decision whether height above 79' is appropriate given the massing of the proposed building(s) and the location in relation to other buildings, streets and open spaces, including public open spaces adjacent to the site. 7. MINOR AMENDMENTS Why was the language about defining substantial changes dropped from this draft? Question addressed, no amendment requested. DCDP Staff response - This criteria was too broad at 10% and it is standard practice to request a review of changes by Planning Staff as to whether a project will require further Board review to determine if a change is substantial. 8. TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS: Comments from Councilor Falkoff and Dushku. Amend the following section: ARTICLE II DEFINITIONS [add] SECTION 2.82 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN (or TDM Plan) A set of procedures, policies and practices which, when taken as a whole, are intended to reduce the number of single occupant vehicle trips traveling to or from a site, and which includes quantifiable goals and a plan for the collection of data to measure achievement of goals. SECTION 5.18 REGIONAL MIXED USE DISTRICT [RMUD] (second paragraph) As the Town's primary commercial corridor, the eastern portion of Arsenal Street has some of the largest retailers in the region. With sufficient private and public infrastructure thisThis area warrants greater density in light of the size of the geography and its catalytic and transformative potential for the region. The scale of development in this area merits greater height, massing and signage requirements for new construction commensurate with its role as a regional attraction and destination. New section 5.18 (h) Circulation: Special consideration shall be given to infrastructure and design that will create direct public bicycle and pedestrian path connections with adjacent public bicycle or pedestrian paths, and that minimizes continuous linear frontage separating such paths. Traffic Safety and Infrastructure Maintenance Fund: Include Bockian language re: Traffic safety and Maintenance fund (why had it been dropped?). DCDP Comment: This addresses only intersections and is outdated in its entirety. The current review processes includes a broader 4IPage DCDP Combined Comments and Suggested Language 12/15/2015 approach to traffic improvements and includes more mitigation than required by this Section. Councilor Dushku comments - a. Require TMA membership for developments over a certain size. Staff recommends that any Master Plan Special Permit will have to address TMA as part of their application. b. As a requirement for developments along MBTA routes wishing to build to heights over 5 stories/55 feet or to an FAR over 1.5, the development must provide substantial transit infrastructure improvements that will speed bus passage through the corridor (e.g. an off -bus fare collection station, dedicated transit/HOV lanes, traffic signal prioritization technology, etc). While rider amenities like shelters and furniture are also encouraged, these are not deemed as applicable under this requirement. Staff would not assume that the solutions mentioned are always preferred, or at the control of an applicant, so while we agree that projects should and will contribute to improvements, we would not suggest the language as drafted. c. Require dedicated and reserved parking spaces for vanpool and bike commuter parking for new developments over a certain size. Aspects of this also may be a good idea in certain situations, but staff wouldn't make this a blanket requirement, and instead would support this where appropriate on a case by case basis. 9. Bicycle access - d. Require accompanying off-street bike lanes along all new streets and driveways over a certain length. Not always appropriate, so would amend the suggestion to "where appropriate." e. Require the creation of separated and well -demarcated bicycle lanes on Arsenal Street, Arlington Street and Coolidge Road for any new developments along those major streets. While a good goal, creation of dedicated bike lanes need to be done on a broader scale than individual projects. Language could be added to do so where part of a broader network planned by the Town. 51Page DCDP Combined Comments and Suggested Language 12/15/2015 10. Parkinq- f. Require unbundling of parking costs for rental or purchased housing units in new residential areas, Add language for large mixed use projects. g. Require parking lot ingress/egress counter technology in new parking areas (structured & surface) Need to be cognizant of limitations, i.e. surface lots with multiple entrances, but can work well for structured parking. h. Require paid parking in commercial areas. Is not practical in all situations, shouldn't be blanket ordinance language. 11. UTILITY LINES - Require underground utility lines on all new developments as per previous council referral to PW committee. If not possible to do on a parcel -by - parcel basis, create a fund that developers should pay into for a future corridor -wide project. Developers usually are unable to bury lines for their frontage alone, so this is appropriate to consider on a larger scale, and therefore can also be funded through one of the mechanisms that the Council is already considering, however projects will do this internal to their site, consistent with eventual burying of lines. The funding options the Town is considering include funding the improvements with property owner participation, but until the Town decides how to proceed it is premature to require this as a matter of zoning. 12. SIGNAGE- Require way -finding signage for multi -use paths, parklands and transit stops within and around new developments over a certain size. Staff supports this, and envision it being addressed through the signage master plan. 13.AFFORDABLE HOUSING Watertown Housing Partnership suggested language Inset at Section 5.18, subsection (q) and re -letter existing section (q) to become section (h): (g) "Affordable Housing: An application for a Master Plan Special Permit shall provide at least fifteen percent (15%) of the total dwelling units as affordable housing and otherwise be consistent with the requirements of Section 5.07." While staff agrees with the sentiment to increase affordable housing, we believe that this is a policy that is appropriately applied Town wide, and applying it to only one zoning district could create an unfair advantage in the marketplace. 6IPage