Loading...
VII.2. Concept Plan Review 102 and 106 11th Avenue South; Krzos November 1, 2022 Council Report 2022-103 102 & 106 – 11th Avenue South Concept Plan Review Proposed Action: As a concept review, this application does not require formal action by the City Council. Rather, the applicant requests feedback on the proposals so they can work toward preparing a future, formal submittal. Any comments provided by the City Council or Planning & Zoning Commission shall be for guidance only and shall not be considered binding upon the City regarding any future, formal application. Overview The applicant, Sachin Chauhan, requests concept plan review for redevelopment of the property at 102 & 106 – 11th Avenue South. The subject property is located at the southwest corner of 11th Avenue South and 1st Street South. The applicant’s plans call for a five-story, 36-unit building. The proposed building would be constructed in the location of two existing residential buildings. The site is currently guided Downtown Center by the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and zoned RX-TOD, Residential-Office Mix Transit-Oriented District (TOD) Center. This memo discusses the City’s zoning and density standards, an analysis of the applicant’s proposal using these standards and a comparison of other buildings in Downtown. The key question for the City to discuss during this meeting is should the City consider deviating from the 100 units per acre density standard? If so, staff recommends discussion identifying priority City goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan that the project should seek to advance or achieve as an offset. Primary Issues to Consider • Background • Public Comment • Zoning and Land Use Review • Potential Review Process Supporting Documents • Applicant’s Plans, & Elevations • Public Comments and Neighborhood Meeting Summary • Zoning Review _____________________ Ryan Krzos, AICP City Planner Financial Impact: $ N/A Budgeted: Y/N ____ Source: _____________ Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): _________________________________________ Notes: 102 & 106 – 11th Avenue South - Concept Plan Review Page 2 BACKGROUND 102 and 106 – 11th Avenue South were originally platted as part of the West Minneapolis subdivision in 1887. The residential structures on both lots were constructed in 1893 per County records. The two lots are each roughly 50 ft in width by 126 ft in depth with a sum total of 12,536 sq. ft. or 0.28 acres. A series of retaining walls elevate the grade surrounding both structures above the street level along both 1st Street and 11th Avenue. The applicant, Sachin Chauhan, has secured a purchase offer to acquire the subject property, and is requesting review of concept plans for development of a five-story, 36- unit, multi-family apartment building. PUBLIC COMMENT The City required the applicant to hold a neighborhood meeting to gather feedback from the community. The meeting was held on October 13th at City Hall. The applicant mailed invitations to property owners and residents within 500 feet of the subject property (the same notification distance required of a typical public hearing). Signage informing the community of a development proposal was also displayed on the site. A summary of the neighborhood meeting is included as an attachment. In addition, the City received three email messages regarding the concept plans, which are also attached. Planning and Zoning Commission Review. The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the concept plans at their meeting on October 25, 2022. The Commission discussed the following items: • Density, with general support of the proposed density; • Vehicle access and circulation in the alley; • Parking requirements and alternative parking demand management; • Building design and location as it relates setbacks and pedestrian orientation; • Potential for sustainability elements, public art, or enhanced pedestrian activation as offset for a potential Planned Unit Development Although concept plan reviews do not require a public hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission allowed those in attendance to provide comments. One member of the public spoke in in favor of the concept plans. ZONING AND LAND USE REVIEW The 2040 Comprehensive Plan – Cultivate Hopkins guides this property as Downtown Center. The City envisions this area as the central economic, social and civic district for Hopkins and the region. Maintaining Downtown Hopkins’ unique identity and sense of place must be a central consideration when planning for future growth. Mixed uses (vertical or horizontal) are encouraged. Overall, this land use category should include medium to larger scale neighborhood and regional uses at minimum densities of 20 to 100 units per acre. Minimum density requirements increase to 75 to 150 units per acre within one quarter (1/4) mile radius of a light rail transit station. However, the subject property is not within this area, as the boundary of the buffer lies just to the east across 11th Avenue. Proposed residential density of the concept plan equates to 128.6 units per acre (36 proposed units / 0.28 acres). Accordingly, the principal issue to discuss with the applicant is; whether the proposal should stick to 102 & 106 – 11th Avenue South - Concept Plan Review Page 3 the hard line density requirements, or alternatively, what the City would like to see out of the development to achieve the overall balance of community goals. Examples of developments within this area and their corresponding residential density include; • Ovation Apartments (Former Hopkins Theater): 80 Units/Acre • Moline: 97 Units/Acre • Gallery Flats: 90 Units/Acre • Marketplace Lofts: 64 Units/Acre • Vista 44: 50 Units/Acre • The Burnes Building (Formerly known as Raspberry Ridge II): 44 Units/Acres • Marketplace & Main: 39 Units/Acre • 134 – 11th Ave S: 54 Units/Acre • 110 – 11th Ave S: 57 Units/Acre In addition to use and density standards noted above, the 2040 Comprehensive Plan includes goals and policies to help guide the community when considering future development proposals. For greater context, these goals and policies are categorized under four environments - Built, Natural, Social and Economic. A summary of goals and polices that can help inform the review and discussion of this concept plan are provided in the section below. Built Environment Goals. Built environment goals address the areas of land use, housing and transportation. They guide future growth to the City’s mixed-use center (including Downtown) but at a scale and character consistent with Hopkins existing neighborhoods. Development should be transit-oriented and reinforce Hopkins’ unique identity and sense of community through high quality urban design. It should include appropriate transitions between areas of the city where there are potential incompatibilities in land use or scale. Natural Environment Goals. Natural environment goals relate to natural systems and resources and include guidance on building and site efficiency. These goals recommend development be sustainable by supporting transit, bicycle and pedestrian activity; encouraging sustainable building techniques; and energy and water use efficiency. Social Environment Goals. The social environment is defined as human interaction and engagement in the community. It includes sections on quality of life and sense of community and addresses such topics as public services and facilities, education and equity. The sections on public health, community connections, and arts and culture are most relevant to the proposed concept plan. These goals call for development to be designed to support active and healthy lifestyles and include art or other culturally distinctive elements to define a sense of place and blend into the fabric of the community. Economic Environment Goals. The economic environment covers the economy, jobs, businesses, income and poverty and affordability. It includes sections on economic development and competitiveness and guidance for Downtown Hopkins as the city’s economic hub. The Downtown goals most relevant to the proposed concept plan recommend development grow the residential and jobs populations in downtown, attract specialty retailers and focus commercial development along 102 & 106 – 11th Avenue South - Concept Plan Review Page 4 Mainstreet. Zoning Review. Much of the details of the development is not known at this early stage and as the plans get further refined, there are a number of key Zoning items that will need to be addressed: • Parking – As proposed the development would provide one vehicle stall per unit; 1.2 stalls per unit are required. The Code would allow the applicant to seek a modification to this requirement as described in the potential review process section below. • Front and Street Side Setbacks – the plans do not appear to comply with the 7.5 ft maximum front setback (along 11th Avenue), and portions would not comply with the 5 ft minimum street side setback (along 1st St). • Design details enhancing the pedestrian experience along 11th Avenue South and 1st Street South. Specifically, the project will need to meet transparency requirements and the building design requirements that ensure visual variety in the treatment of facades along longer portions of the building. Additionally, the site will need to meet the site design standards; in particular the stipulated landscape plantings and streetscaping. A more comprehensive assessment of the proposed concept plans against the provisions of the Zoning Code is provided in the Zoning Review attachment. POTENTIAL REVIEW PROCESS Based on the applicant’s concept plan, staff anticipates this project will need the approvals listed below. The applicant should use feedback from the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council to prepare these applications. • Site Plan Review • Administrative Lot Combination. The two lots would have to be combined into a new lot as shown on the concept plan. This process may not necessarily require additional review by the Planning & Zoning Commission or approval by the City Council. • Approvals from the Nile Mile Creek Watershed District. • Potentially a Conditional Use Permit for alternative compliance to reduce the vehicle parking ratio. Alternatively, a Planned Unit Development may also be pursued with parking as a deviation – see below. Planned Unit Development. The purpose of a Planned Unit Development is to allow flexibility from traditional development standards in return for a higher quality development. Even though the City of Hopkins recently adopted new zoning regulations, this site has unique characteristics including the property elevation and limited footprint which may justify a planned unit development approach. Typically, the City looks for a developer to exceed other zoning standards, building code requirements or meet other goals of the Comprehensive Plan. In exchange for the flexibility offered by the planned unit development, the applicant is expected to detail how they intend to provide a higher quality development or meet other City goals. The typical list of items the City considers when evaluating the use of a planned unit development for this site includes, but is not limited to, the items listed below. • Enhanced architectural design and building materials 102 & 106 – 11th Avenue South - Concept Plan Review Page 5 • Natural resource protection and storm water management • Pedestrian and bicycle facilities in excess of minimums • Affordable housing • Enhanced sustainability or livability elements • Energy conservation and renewable energy • Open space preservation • Enhanced landscaping, streetscape, public art, or buffering ENGINEERING COMMENTS The Engineering and Public Works Department has reviewed the applicant’s concept plan and offers the following comments. • A traffic study will need to be completed to determine any impacts the development will have to adjacent streets and the transportation network. There are other planned developments adjacent to this site and the study should take into account the anticipated impacts from those in the analysis. • A review of the City’s sewer capacity in the vicinity and water model will need to be completed. There are other planned developments adjacent to this site and the review should take into account the anticipated impacts from those in the analysis. • The site is within the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District and the applicant will need to obtain a storm water permit from the District. RECOMMENDATION As a concept review, this application does not require formal action by the City Council; however, the Council should discuss the proposal, particularly as it relates to density and the zoning requirements, so the applicant can work toward preparing a future, formal submittal. ±0.00' 1 Ground Level +14.00' 2 1st Level +25.16' 3 2nd Level +36.31' 4 3rd Level +47.47' 5 4th Level +58.63' 6 Roof SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"1 Front Elevation ±0" 1 Ground Level +14'-0" 2 1st Level +25'-1 7/8" 3 2nd Level +36'-3 3/4" 4 3rd Level +47'-5 5/8" 5 4th Level +58'-7 1/2" 6 Roof SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"1 Side Elevation 1 Ryan Krzos From:Krissandra Anfinson <krissandraaa@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, October 12, 2022 2:22 PM To:Ryan Krzos; sachin@usinternet.com Cc:Jeff Johnson Subject:[EXTERNAL] 102 & 106 11TH AVENUE SOUTH comments Hello,     We have lived at 113 12th Ave South for 13 years and share the alley with 102 and 106th 11th Ave. We are opposed to  the proposed development of the single family homes in 102 and 106 11th Ave being turned into an apartment building.  Please reject this proposal.    We are a single family home already in the middle of a very congested block. Another apartment on that corner would  exacerbate the issues we already experience with lack of parking and high traffic in the alley.     There is no street parking and this will increase noise and traffic on 12th Ave south, our shared alley and on 1st st. Even  with the proposed underground parking and light rail, there is no way that alley could support the amount of traffic and  deliveries needed to support the development. All of this traffic will spill over to 1st and 12th streets and negatively  impact the current residents.     With two apartments going up within a block of our home, we have no interest in adding a third. It is unreasonable to  ask that we live in a construction zone on all three sides. If there is construction on 1st and 12th Ave, how are we  supposed to even drive on our street to get to our homes? This is unreasonable of the city to ask of the residents of 12th  Ave South.     The houses at 102 and 106th are in live able condition and should be preserved. Single family homes are in short supply.  We have been in support of the Vista and Ovation projects and agree that Hopkins should have a diverse array of  housing options. Please continue to identify undeveloped and underutilized buildings to create housing. Destroying any  single family homes is a loss to the whole community. Hopkins doesn’t have more land to build single family homes.  Once you turn bulldoze houses into apartment, we will never get them back. This is a waste.      There are enough apartments. We already live in between four of them. Don’t destroy homes just so some developer  can turn a profit. Please reject this proposal.     Thank you for your time,     Jeff Johnson  Krissandra Anfinson  113 12th Ave South  Hopkins, Mn 55343    1 Ryan Krzos From:Nate Merrill <natemerrillmn@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 11, 2022 1:22 PM To:Ryan Krzos; sachin@usinternet.com Cc:Laura Merrill Subject:[EXTERNAL] Concerning 102 & 106 11TH AVENUE SOUTH Ryan & Sachin, Thank you for your letter regarding the proposed development at 102 & 106 11th ave south. I have been a resident of 125 12th ave south for 13+ years. Ryan, I am on record in both supporting Vista44 and the Ovation project. I support increased density and smart urbanism. I belive that smart urbanism includes traffic controls as density jncreases. Additionally, my understanding is we are trying to preserve our single family housing inventory as a city; this project clearly is not preserving single family housing. I am deeply concerned about adding additional density in this area without a comprehensive plan for controlling traffic at 1st street and 11th Ave south (and 1st and 12th). That is a difficult intersection to negotiate as it is — and the new developments at Vista44 and Ovation is only going to drive more vehicle traffic. Negotiating the alley behind my house and that is behind 102/106 is already difficult with the current apartment buildings and their associated parking lots. Additionally, street parking is the safest way to access my house for my children and elderly relatives. This new development would almost certainly increase street parking utilization on 12th Ave south (of which is already utilized by 4 apartment buildings) on the block. I'd like to see approval for Sachin's project with the following conditions being met by the city's traffic department or the developer: - Permit parking for single family residences on 12th Ave south, permits not to be issued to the apartments on 11th or 12th. - Zebra stripes and 4way stop at 12th Ave south and 1st street - Additional parking capacity added to Sachin's project or a reduction in the number of housing units. - Redevelopment of the 11th ave and 1street intersection with pedestrian bump outs, limiting 1 lane of traffic in all 4 directions directions. -Nate 1 Ryan Krzos From:Eric Anondson <xeoth@icloud.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 25, 2022 4:15 PM To:Ryan Krzos Subject:[EXTERNAL] Feedback for Knollwood North proposal, and 11th Ave proposal Hello!  Regarding the proposal on 11th avenue  I am highly in favor of this proposal as well. I cannot see how 36 units will have any impact on traffic at this intersection  that carries less than 4200 vehicles per day (per MNDOT counts) on 11th Avenue. But this intersection has no demand  for four lanes north and south. This must be a priority to reduce this from 4 lanes to at least 3 lanes. Even better just 2  lanes north south.  Eric Anondson  53 Jackson Ave South  102 & 106 11th Ave S, Hopkins Neighborhood Meeting Meeting Date: October 12, 2022 Meeting Time: 6:00 pm Location: Hopkins City Hall, Raspberry Room Presenters: Sachin Chauhan (Developer) & Fernando Lino (Architect) 6:10 pm Meeting Start Sachin Chauhan presented document “102 & 106 11th Ave S Multi-Unit Building REV 2.pdf” thru 11” x 17” documents on easel 6:30 pm Question & Discussion Session • QUESTION: How do you address parking with a new building? o Building proposal includes parking for each unit • QUESTION: Existing alley supports 1-way traffic for adjacent residents, will that change? o Existing concern (not a new one due to proposed building) o Building proposal includes offset so that there is space between building and driveway • EXISTING CONCERN: Too much traffic at 11th Ave & 1st Street o Participant suggested ‘bumps’ and/or ‘cross walk stripes’ to slow down traffic • QUESTION: Other apartment buildings sometimes leave the garbage dumpsters out, how will you address that? o Building proposal includes enclosed storage for dumpsters • QUESTION: Is the building creating too many rentals in the city? o Building proposal would result in increased property tax revenue, which would in turn help keep single family house property tax lower and result in more money for Hopkins school systems o We offered a few additional benefits by the city adding more rentals:  More resident to maintain a vibrant downtown Hopkins economy  Helps meet a metro wide housing shortage  Helps achieve higher density goals o Participant countered with “What is wrong with more rentals. I started out renting in Hopkins, now I have purchased a single-family home in Hopkins”. 7:20 pm Meeting End (no additional questions or concerns) ZONING REVIEW: 102 & 106 - 11th AVENUE SOUTH REDEVELOPMENT Review Date: October 25, 2022 PROJECT DECRIPTION: Redevelopment of two residential lots containing existing structures: Proposed five-story building with basement and first level parking, interior common amenity spaces, and 36 apartments. BASE ZONE: RX-TOD PROPOSED USE: Multi Family BUILDING TYPES ALLOWED: General Building, Row Building COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Downtown Center BUILDING TYPE SELECTED: General Building EXISTING USE: Residential LARGE PUD REQUIRED? No DEADLINE FOR ACTION N/A ZONING MAP Review Key  Meets or exceeds regulation N/A Regulation does not apply  Does not meet regulation Cond. Met per conditions ? More Information Needed PUD PUD/Variance Deviation ARTICLE 3 MIXED-USE ZONES Section of Code Regulation REVIEW NOTES 102-350 REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL BUILDING TYPES  102-350(a) PERMANENT STRUCTURES Structures are permanent.  102-350(b) ONE BUILDING PER LOT Concept shows one principal building. ? 102-350(c) TREATMENT OF YARDS All yards must consist of landscape areas, patio space, or sidewalk space, unless otherwise expressly stated ? 102-350(d) TRASH, RECYCLING, REFUSE LOCATIONS Location of utilitarian items to be identified as plans are refined. Trash storage room is proposed inside the building.  102-350(e) FRONT STREETS 11th Avenue is the designated front street abutting this lot. ? 102-350(f) MINIMUM PEDESTRIAN AREA Where the area from the back of curb/edge of pavement to the lot line is less than 12 feet, the setbacks shall be measured from 12 feet off the back of curb/edge of pavement. An existing conditions survey is needed to verify if additional pedestrian area will be needed along 11th Avenue or 1st Street. 102-380 GENERAL BUILDING TYPE REGULATIONS (RX-TOD Zone) Section of Code Regulation REVIEW NOTES 102-380(d) BUILDING LOCATION  120-380(d) MULTIPLE PRINCIPAL BUILDINGS Allowed not proposed.  120-380(d) FRONT STREETWALL 80% min.; all of the front of the building is in the build-to line. Side setback are not included in this measurement.  120-380(d) FRONT STREET SETBACK 7.5 ft. min, 15 ft. max. along 11th Avenue South; Shown as between 3 and 5 ft from assumed front property line. Additional pedestrian area required per 102-350(f) may need to be included.  120-380(d) NON-FRONT STREET SETBACK 5 ft. min., 15 ft. max along the 1st Street South side. Most of the building is setback 5 ft from assumed property line, however portions are depicted with a 3 ft setback. Additional pedestrian area required per 102-350(f) may need to be included.  120-380(d) SIDE SETBACK 5 ft. min along south property line; 5 ft proposed.  120-380(d) REAR SETBACK 0 at 20-ft. alley; subject site abuts a 14 ft alley, therefore 6 ft rear setback required and proposed. ? 120-380(d) IMPERVIOUS SITE COVERAGE 80% max. ? 120-380(d) ADDITIONAL SEMI-PERVIOUS COVERAGE +15% - In addition to the 80% hardcover, 15% of the site may be semi-pervious, i.e. green roof, porous pavement, etc. 102-380(e) PARKING & ACCESSORY STRUCTURES  120-380(e) PARKING & DRIVEWAY ACCESS LOCATION Required off alley or non-front street; Alley driveways shown ?  120-380(e) DRIVEWAY SIZE & NUMBER 22 ft maximum driveway width Max. 1 access per development per street. No street access shown.  120-380(e) ATTACHED GARAGE SETBACK Required 20 ft. min. behind front facade in rear of building; First floor structured parking is positioned ~24 ft to the rear of the 11th Avenue front façade.  120-380(e) ATTACHED GARAGE DOOR LOCATION Proposed on rear as is required  120-380(e) SURFACE PARKING No Surface parking proposed  120-380(e) ACCESSORY STRUCTURES No Accessory Structures proposed 120-380 (f) HEIGHT  120-380(f) HEIGHT 2 stories min, 10 stories max; five stories proposed  120-380(f) ALL STORIES HEIGHT 9 ft. min., 14 ft. max.; All stories between 11 ft and 14 ft 120-380 (g) ROOFS  120-380(g) ROOF TYPES Flat, parapet, pitched allowed; parapet depicted  120-380(g) TOWER A building tower is allowed, but not proposed 120-380 (h) STREET FACADES ? 120-380(h) TRANSPARENCY: FRONT FACADES 20% min; Transparency not quantified. ? 120-380(h) TRANSPARENCY: NON-FRONT FACADES 18% min; Transparency not quantified.  120-380(h) BUILDING ENTRANCES LOCATION One per every 120 ft. on front façade; 11th Avenue side requires a minimum of one entrance and one is proposed.  120-380(h) ENTRANCE TRANSITION TYPE A Stoop entrance type is Required. See 102-730 (c) ? 120-380(h) GROUND STORY ELEVATION The ground story must be between 18 in. and 30 in. above grade or between 30 in. and 4 ft. with a visible basement, except in floodplain locations. Ground elevation not identified, but appears to be met with significant re- grade of site.  120-380(h) HORIZONTAL DIVISIONS WITH SHADOW LINES Horizontal shadow lines to run a min. 80% of length of facade. One division is required within 3 ft. of the top of any story between the basement and 3rd. Appears to be met with material change above first story.  120-380(h) VERTICAL DIVISIONS WITH SHADOW LINES One vertical division is required per every 120 ft. of street façade. Multiple bays with shadow lines depicted on elevations. 102-380 (i) SUPPLEMENTAL GENERAL BUILDING REGULATIONS N/A ? 120-380(i)(1) FRONT STREETWALL EXCEPTIONS No street facing courtyard proposed Maximum setback may be expanded up to 20 feet for a maximum of 20% of the facade to allow for permanent outdoor seating or outdoor dining area; N/A 120-380(i)(2) THROUGH-LOTS Subject site is not a through lot. N/A 120-380(i)(3) STORY SETBACKS AT N OR NX N/A. No N or NX zoned property abuts the site. N/A 120-380(i)(4) VISIBLE BASEMENTS For basement levels located more than 3 ft. above grade, street facades must meet the transparency regulations. N/A 120-380(i)(5) ADDITIONAL STORY HEIGHT (IX-TOD & IX-S) N/A. Site is not zoned IX. ARTICLE 7 BUILDING DESIGN Section of Code Regulation REVIEW NOTES 102-720 PARAPET ROOF TYPE    102-720(c)(1) PARAPET HEIGHT Minimum parapet height is 1.5 feet with a maximum height of 6 feet; parapet appears to be approx. 2 ft tall A shadow line must be located within 2 feet of the top of the uppermost story. A shadow line must be located at the top of the parapet. Shadow lines appear to be provided. See 102-16210 for definition of shadow line  102-720(c)(2) OCCUPIED BUILDING SPACE No portion of the parapet appears to include occupied building space. ? 102-720(c)(3) ROOFTOP APPURTENANCES Any rooftop appurtenances must be located towards the rear or interior of the parapet roof. Rooftop appurtenances should be located such that the parapet blocks their view from the sidewalk across the street. 102-730 (c) STOOP ENTRANCE TYPE ? 102-730(c)(1) STOOP SIZE Stoop is the required entrance type for the General Building Type in the RX-TOD Zone. A stoop is a small, open platform that may include a canopy or roof cantilevered off the building and may or may not be elevated above the sidewalk. Stoops must be a minimum of 4 feet wide and 3 feet deep. Proposed entrance appears to meet this requirement. ? 102-730(c)(2) RAMPS Where feasible, ramps should be incorporated at the principal building entrance and designed as an integrated part of the stoop, with rails matching any provided on steps. Ramp is depicted, no railing shown. 102-740 FAÇADE MATERIALS ? 102-740(b) MAJOR STREET FACADE MATERIALS Allowed major façade materials are listed in Table 7-1 for General Building Type in the RX-TOD Zone: Full Dimension brick, architectural Concrete Masonry Units, Stone, 2-3 layer cement-based stucco. A brick patterned material is depicted. Full brick is required, thin brick or veneer are not considered a major material. ? 102-740(b)(1) STREET AND OTHER FRONT FACADES Major materials must be applied to a minimum of 65% of all street or other front facades, not including window and door areas. Material percentages not provided. ? 102-740(b)(2) SIMPLICY OF FACADE MATERIALS A single major façade material must be used for each building façade segment, 60-foot or larger. ? 102-740(b)(4) SIDE AND REAR FACADES When side yards between two buildings are a total of 5 or more feet in width, major materials must be applied along that side facade from the front of the building a distance equal to the width of the side yard, as measured perpendicularly between the two side facades. Interior side elevations not provided. N/A 102-740(b)(5) ORIGINAL FACADE MATERIALS Applicable to modifications of existing buildings with brick or stone facades. N/A to this site. ? 102-740(c) MINOR STREET FACADE MATERIALS A maximum of 35% of each street or other front façade surface, not including window and door areas, may be composed of minor facade materials. Material percentages not provided. Example minor materials include composite wood, fiber cement, and architectural metal ? 102-740(d) SIDE & REAR FACADE MATERIALS All interior side and rear (non-street) facades not located on a rail or trail line must be faced in a major facade material, a minor facade material, or a material as allowed in Table 7-3. Rear and interior side elevations not provided. ? 102-740(f) APPROPRIATE GRADE OF MATERIALS All doors, windows, and hardware must be of commercial grade quality. ? 102-740(g)(1) CHANGES IN FACADE MATERIALS Changes in façade materials, whether major materials or minor materials, should occur mainly at concave corners or changes in facade planes.  102-740(g)(2) MATERIALS HIERARCHY A hierarchy of materials must be maintained on the building facade, where "heavier", articulated unit materials (brick, concrete masonry units, stone) are located at the base of the facade and "lighter", constant surface materials with fewer seams (stucco, panels) are located above those on the facade. Brick depicted on based with light materials above. ? 102-740(g)(3) SHADOW LINES ON SURFACES Shadow lines must delineate changes in materials with solid materials of a thickness that is greater than 1.5 inches, such as cast stone, masonry, or stone 102-750 FACADE ELEMENTS ? 102-750 (b) WINDOWS All windows, with the exception of ground story storefront systems and glass curtain wall systems, shall be recessed with   ? ? the glass a minimum of 2 inches from the facade surface material or adjacent trim. A minimum of 70% of street façade windows must be vertically oriented. All windows appear vertically oriented. Reflective glass and glass block are prohibited on street and other front facades. No Glass block shown. A minimum of 70% of all street facade upper story windows must be operable. Ground story storefront glass and glass curtain wall systems are not required to be operable. For masonry construction, the expression of lintels must be included above all windows and doors by a change in brick coursing or by a separate detail or element. ? 102-750(c) AWNINGS & CANOPIES Awnings or canopy shall provide at least 8 feet of clearance over any walkway and 15 feet of clearance over vehicular areas. One front awning depicted. ? 102-750(d) BALCONIES Balconettes are depicted and are allowed and do not count towards the maximum permitted amount of balcony on a street facade. A balconette is a platform and door that are less than 18 inches deep. Otherwise, balconies must be a minimum of 4 feet deep and 5 feet wide. N/A 102-750(e) SHUTTERS Any shutters must meet size and material requirements. No shutters depicted. ? 102-750(f) SECURITY GRILLS & BARS Exterior security bars and grills are prohibited. Interior grills must be retractable and hidden when retracted. None Shown. ? 102-750(g) PRINCIPAL ENTRYWAY Principal entrances to the building must be clearly delineated through one or more design features in Section 102-750(g). Depicted entry has an awning and transom lights. N/A 102-750(h) ARCADE DESIGN No Arcade proposed ? 102-750(i)(2) GROUND STORY AT SLOPING FACADES FOR NON-STOREFRONTS Retaining walls shall not exceed 30 inches in height except along a maximum 8-foot section of frontage.  102-750(j) BUILDING VARIETY buildings 90 feet in length or greater, as measured along any street or front facade, must treat that frontage in segments of 50 feet or less with the building variety standards in 102- 750 (j)(3). 1st St Side exceeds 90 ft.  102-750(k) ARTICULATION OF STORIES Window placement on street facades must be organized by stories per the transparency regulations. Windows are arranged by floor. Shadow lines can be used to delineate stories. N/A 102-750(l) VISTAS Vistas (an open space or a street terminating) are not present at this site  102-750(m) GARAGE DOORS Requirements are applicable to garage doors included on any street facade. Garage doors proposed on non-street facades. 102-760 UTILITY EQUIPMENT ? 102-760(b) MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT IN BUILDING Mechanical equipment shall be located within the building, unless the applicant demonstrates that locating the equipment within the building would conflict with the equipment’s function. ? 102-760(c) ROOFTOP MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT Any rooftop mechanical equipment is to be screened or setback ? 102-760(d) MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT ON STREET FACADES Mechanical equipment and utility appurtenances shall not be located on a street facade unless the applicant demonstrates that locating the equipment in a different location would conflict with the equipment’s function. Any equipment or appurtenance approved on a facade shall be located consistent with the standards of this section. ? 102-760(e) MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT ON OTHER HORIZONTAL FACADES Mechanical equipment, such as electrical transformers and air conditioners, located on the ground, decks, or horizontal surfaces other than the roof shall be located consistent with the standards of this section. ARTICLE 8 LANDSCAPE & SITE DESIGN Section of Code Regulation REVIEW NOTES ? 102-810(b) VISIBILITY AT INTERSECTIONS A 30 ft by 30 ft vision triangle, free from walls, fences, plants, or trees in excess of 30 inches above the abutting curb line shall be provided. ? 102-820 LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION Notes to follow the specified landscape installation regulations required on submittal drawings. ? 102-830 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE The owner is responsible for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of all landscaping required by code ? 102-840 EXISTING TREES A survey of existing trees on the site is required, which is to include identification of significant and contributing trees. Tree protection is required. ? 102-850 GROUND VEGETATION All unpaved areas of any lot in any other zone must be covered by planting bed per 102-850 (b) or grass per 102- 850 (c) or a combination of planting bed and grass. ? 102-860 SITE TREES One medium or large tree is required per 3000 square feet of yard area. ? 102-870 STREETSCAPE DESIGN The requirements of this section apply to development of new streets and development on all lots with 200 feet or more of street frontage on existing streets or the City may assess a fee-in-lieu of streetscape for deposit in the city’s streetscape fund. ? 102-880 STREET SIDEWALKS Sidewalks or multi-use paths must be provided along all street frontages, located within the public right-of-way. Sidewalk along 1st is required. ? 102-890 INTERNAL SITE SIDEWALKS Sidewalks must connect between all building entrances to all public sidewalks, including at least one connection to each street-frontage sidewalk abutting the site. ? 102-8100 STREET TREES Each lot is required to have one tree for every 40 feet of street frontage with a minimum of one street tree per street frontage, and must be located between the curb and sidewalk, a minimum of 2 feet and a maximum of 10 feet off the back of curb ? 102-8110 FRONTAGE BUFFERS A frontage buffer is required when on-site vehicular parking, loading, outdoor storage, and/or other activities abut the street N/A 102-8120 SIDE & REAR BUFFERS A side and rear buffer is required along the side and rear lot lines where transitions between certain zones occur N/A 102-8130 INTERIOR PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE All off-street surface parking lots with more than 10 spaces and/or more than one drive aisle must meet the interior parking lot landscape regulations. ? 102-8140 SCREENING OF REFUSE & UTILITY AREAS All dumpsters, loading areas, open storage, refuse areas, mechanical equipment, and utility appurtenances must be screened ? 102-8150 OUTDOOR LIGHTING No lighting depicted in drawings. ARTICLE 9 PARKING & MOBILITY Section of Code Regulation REVIEW NOTES  102-920 OFF-STREET PARKING – MOTOR VEHICULAR MINIMUMS & MAXIMUMS Minimum for Multi-family: 1.2 enclosed stalls per unit No Maximum; 36 units require 43 enclosed stalls. Plans propose 36 enclosed stalls. Applicant encouraged to pursue a reduction per Alternative Compliance per Section 102-940 (i) ? 102-920 OFF-STREET PARKING – BICYCLE MINIMUMS Minimum for Multi-family: 1.1 stalls per unit. With 90% as long-term. ? 102-940 PARKING REDUCTIONS & CREDITS Applicant can pursue a reduction per Alternative Compliance per Section 102-940 (i)  102-950 LOCATION OF OFF-STREET PARKING Except as otherwise expressly stated in this article, required off-street parking areas must be located on the same lot as the building or use they are required to serve. ? ? 102-960 PARKING AREA LAYOUT & DESIGN Parking areas must be designed to allow vehicles to enter and exit a street and cross public sidewalks in a forward motion Parking stalls may be standard or compact ? ? 102-970 ELECTRIC VEHCILE SUPPLY EQUIPMENT Proposal includes residential off-street parking areas with 36 Parking Spaces. Requires Level 1 or Level 2 electric vehicle charging stations for at least 5% of provided parking spaces. At least one of the electric vehicle charging stations provided must be accessible to a vehicle parked in an accessible parking space. An additional 10% of the spaces must be EV-ready. ? 102-990 BICYCLE PARKING Short-term bicycle parking must be located on the subject lot, unless the city approves a proposal to allow private bicycle parking facilities to be located in the right-of-way. Long-term bicycle parking spaces must: − Be located with direct access by the bicycle rider, with no more than 50% of the required spaces requiring the use of stairs or elevators; − May not be located in dwelling units or on dwelling unit balconies; − Must protect the entire bicycle, its components and accessories against theft and inclement weather, including wind-driven rain and snow. − Must be designed to allow bicycles to be securely locked to a bicycle rack in: A bike storage room that is accessible only to authorized users and has at least 2 electrical outlets; or a bicycle locker with a separate access door for each bike; or an attended bike storage room.