Loading...
5 - Information Item, Preliminary alternative development plans for the Jay Road/47th Street and KalMEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Toor and Members of City Council FROM: Ronald A. Secrist, City Manager Peter Pollock, Plam~ing Director Ruth McHeyser, Director oF Long Range Pianuing Susan Richstone, Senior Planner DATE: May 7, 2002 SUBJECT: Information Item: Preliminary altemative development plans far the Jay Road/47th Street and Kalmia Avenue praperties Enclosed please find a copy of the Report to Planning Boazd on the 47`h and Jay and Kalmia Properties Planning Studies. On March 21, the Planning Boazd reviewed and provided direction on the attached report that includes altemarive development plans, a descriprion of the planni~ig process, and an analysis of the altemarive plans that have been developed for the properties. A summary of the Planning Board's comments and the staff recommendations are provided below. Please feel free to contact me at richstones('iuci.bouldeiā€¢.co.us or 441-3271. The purpose of the meeting was for the Planning Board to provide direction that will assist the property owners in preparing a concept plan for submittal to the city. The Board was asked to respond to the following quesfions: Which of the options provide the best opportunity for balancing the goals of: a diverse mix of housing types, compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood, and significant affordable housing? What does Plamiing Board view as the priorities for community benefit from these annexations? In particulaz, how should the desire for more park land be balanced with the desire for a significant amotmt of pem~anently affordable housing? 3. How important does the Planning Board think the street connections to Jay Road and St. Petersburg are? 4. Does the Board think it is appropriate to pursue a Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map change for any of the properties? SUMMARY OF PLANNING BOARD COMMENTS PB Member 47~' and Jay No road connection to St. Petersburg or Jay No buffer along Jay John Spitzer No commercial corner Supports: -pedestrian path bordering 4 Mile neighborhood on north -traffic circle at 47`h St. entrance Kalmia Supports: - park in Option A - density in Option B - streets and alleys in Option C: wants alleys and through slreets, not street frontage of garage doors, carriage houses above garages, explore commercial use on Kalmia Stay within BVCP density BVSD needs to receive benefit of MR Use new urUanist principles density on their site Explore ma~c. sq. ft. unit size Explore max. sq. ft. unit size No road connection to St. Petersburg Wants to see affordable housing or Jay Alan O'Hashi Miniitvze buffer along Jay Affordable housing important Likes pedestrian path bordering 4 Mile neighborhood on north Keep lower density LR+ densiry No need to connect St. Petersburg Macon Cowles Supports Jay Rd. connection Change trail adjacent to 4 Mile to an No commercial comer No need to connect St. Petersburg Beth Pommer Supports: - Jay Rd. street connection Doesn't laiow if he would support BVCP change Likes park in Option A Concerned about wvts on east re: AIZ Wants alley-loaded garages, streets that connect, straight streets, avoid cul- de-sacs, no "garagescape", no 3 caz garages, variety of azchitecture (both Likes road connections, alleys in Option C Supports density between Options A andB - Opdon B housing diversity Concemed about units flnmediately Option C is too dense adjacent to AIZ Doesn't support St. Petersburg road Don't loading all of density to ne of connec6on properties - dish-ibute better to sw Tina Nielsen Doesn't know about connection to Jay Likes Option C street grid; add alleys and get rid of cul-de-sacs Okay to increase density Wants BVSD to get benefit of housing density on their site PB Member 47'" and Jay Kalmia Likes central green space Priority is affordable housing; Dcesn't No St. Petersburg road connection see need for significant addiuonal park Jay Road connection is needed - land; smaller parks are fine connect to Savannah Ct BVSD - full benefit of density Thom Krueger Need better connections to surrounding Supports density in B, gridded street area (lots to west); more connecrions in pattern in C general Why not 3, 6-plexes? Future of Jay, KaLnia, Palo Pkwy. Deal with larger aiea:: 28'" to Diagonal, Iris to Ja . Sympathetic to neighborhood on St. As much affordable housing as Petersburg possible; housing for seniors Likes pocket park BVSD needs to realize fiill benefit of 5imon Mole No commercial comer housing designation Needs more info on AIZ Supports density in B; gridded street Some buffering needed on Jay; doesn't pattem in C like fencing along 4 Mile Neighborhood cafe More info re: lazger transportation context, future of Ja Swnmarv: - No St. Petersburg road connecrion - Need more information on Jay Rd. connec6on, transportation issues in general - Need to determine appropriate treatment along Jay Road - Affordable housing as priority for community benefit - Stay within BVCP density at Jay and 47i°; support some moderate increase on Kalmia properties - Gridded street pattem with alley-loaded garages - No commercial comer - If there is addi6onal public pazkland, severa] Plannnig Board members preferred Oprion A. although some members had questions about the benefits of the addiuonal acre south of the creek; pocket park is a good altemative - Don't want BVSD to lose housing units - Design concerns STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Land Use 47th and Jay City plarn~ing staff believes that Option B is most successfiil in balancing the goals of providing a dive~se mix of housing types, compa6bility with the adjacent neighborhoods and the existing character of Jay Road, and significant affordable housing. Staff questions the appropriateness of the buffeis along Jay Road and north of Four Mile Creek in Option A. Jay Road already has a]azge right-of-way, and an additiona170-foot planted buffer is probably excessive. Typically, the city would require landscaping within the existing right-of-way. In the case of the trail connection on the south edge of the property, this parallels the sidewalk along the firontage of the lots, and seems redundant to the on-street sidewallc connection. Staffbelieves it is important to provide an appropriate setback/buffer/entryway treatment at the comer of Jay and 47`h at this key entryway to the city. StafF does not support the commercial comer shown in Option B. 'fhis location is at the edge of the city and is not centrally located to provide convenience shopping to this neighborhood. The neighborhood has a grocery store and significant shopping district south of Iris, less than one mile from most of the neighborhood, and less than two miles away for the remainder. Option C does not provide a good mix of housing units, and the massing of multi-unit buildings along Jay Road is not consistent with the eJtisting neighborhood character or the character of Jay Road. The number of units proposed in Option B is consistent with the number of units that would be allowed by the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan L.and Use Map. However, the ]ocarion of the different unit types varies from the designations on the map. Staff would not recommend puisuing a four-body map change for this site in order to increase the density, since we think that the overall number of units indicated in the Comprehensive Plan is appropriate. However, depending on the particulars of the actual development proposal, it may be appropriate to pwsue a two-body land use map change to reconfigure the medium density and low density designations. Kalmia properties City planning staffbelieves that Option B is most succe9sful overall in balancing the goals of providing a diverse mix of housing types, compatibility with the adjacent neighborhoods and the existing character of Jay Road, and significant affordable housing. Neither Options A or C pmvide enough diversity in housing unit types. The massing and concentration of multi-plex buildings in the northeastem part of Option C is not consistent with the e~sting neighborhood character. Staff believes the configuration of the pazk expansion in the northeastem portion of Option A is more successfu] than the configuration in Option B. Staff believes that it will be necessary to pwsue Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map changes for some portions of the three easternmost pazcels in order to achieve a diversity in housing wvt types and significant affordable housing. Staff recommends leaving the westemmost property as low density residential since this properiy will not be moving fonvazd with annexation at this time. 4 2. Community Benefit Pem~anendy affordable housing and the dedication of park land are the key community benefits that have been discussed to date for these annexations. Staff believes these sites provide the opportwvty for both significant affordable housing and pazk land dedication. However, given the size of tfiis annexarion, it is probably not reasonable to request that the developers dedicate two and one half acres of land for expansion of the city park and practice fields in addirion to providing 40- 60% of the housing units as permanenUy affordable. The Parks Board will discuss the various options on Monday, March 18, and staff will provide the Plam~'vig Board with their recommendation at the March 21 meeting. 3. Transportatian The Four Mile Creek and Orange Orchazd neighborhoods oppose vehiculaz connecrion to St. Petersburg and Jay Road. This is a very emotional issue for the neighborhood, as Plauuing Board Irnows from the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan hearings last yeaz. The city transportarion staff analysis indicates that the benefits from the St. Petersburg street connection are relatively minor. The traffic study will better assess traffic volumes that would use a proposed St. Petersburgvehicular connecfion. However, this is not an issue that we should expect the traffic study to "solve." Instead, staff requests that the Board weigh the relatively small benefits of the vehicular connection of St. Petersburg with the concerns expressed by the neighborhood. In order of priority, Jay Road is a more important transportarion connection. City staff views the Jay Road connecrion as more important, although county staff is concemed about additional access to Jay Road. Staff recommends that the Plantung Board withhold a final conclusion regazding access to Jay Road until a final haffic study is completed and staff membeis from the city and the county can discuss access not only for this lot but also future development along Jay Road. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: 47'h and Jay and Kalmia Properties Planning Studies S:~PLAN\Cc-items\WIP\sr507cc.wip.doc