Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout13.C.1. Residential Pointing Policy CITY OF SHAKOPEE � � � � � J � Mei��ornnd�mr � TO: Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Julie Klima, Plauner ll 12E: Residential Pointing Poliey DATF,: November 15, 201 1 I DISCUSSION �I�he City adopted the Residential Yointiug Yolicy (RPP) in September 200�. "I�he RPP was adoptcd at a time when the City was experiencing tremendous amounts of residential development. The intent of thc RPP was to acliieve a higher quality of develop���ent than was achieved by siinply following the City Code requircments. A copy of the RPP is attachcd for the Council's reference. ' � The RPP was only able to be applied to a small number of residential development p�roposals before the housing market experienced its decliue. In tlie instances where the RPP was applied, the product received was not signilicanUy different from those dcvelo�ment projects completed � pria� to the implementation of the RYP. npplication o1 the RPP also adds an additioital ste}� to the review process, and this n�ay not be viewed as a proactive approach �o promotina and accommodating new devclopments. Staff has discussed the RPP and its adoption with the City Attorney. "Cl�e City Attorney has advised that in ordcr for �l�e RPP to be fully defensiblc. any requirements should either be ' adopted into the City Codc or should be adopted by resolution. At thc timc that the RPP was adop[ed, it was clone so by motion rathcr than by resolution. I Tl�e RPP was drafted largely based on Maple Grove's simillr policy. Staff has had recent discussions with Maple G�ove staff regardi��g their vicws and practices with their ow�� policy. � Maple Grove docs still utilize their policy, however, there are significant diffcrenccs bctwcen its process and Sliakopce's. li� recent discussions with Maple Grove staCf it was learned tl�at at tlie time that Maplc Grovc enacted its policy, it modificd City regulations to require that all residential developments be approved through lhe Planned Unit Developmcnt (PUD) process. �The PUD portion of ll�e ordinance was also amended to require that the pointing policy be applied to all PUD's. As � � ex�lained by Maplc Grove staff, they use the pointing policy 1s a levera�e tool when reviewing new developments. ]nherei�t in tl�at ap�roach is U�at the City Council has provided sta17 with the authority to leverage design and other elements providcd for in fhe policy. I STAFF RECOMMF,NDATION Due to the factors discussed above, and especially in li�l�t of conversations witli the City Attorney. staff recommends that use of tl�e RPP be suspended and that the Planniug Commission and Cit}� Council provide direction as to the elements of the RPP that it would like to see carricd forward into proposed te�t amendmen[s for inclusion in the City's Zonina and/or Subdivision Ordinance. Havin, learned more about how Maple Grove utilizes its pointing policy, i.e. requiring PUDs for all residential developments, it appears to st�afT tl�at approach may be overly cumbersome. It also does not appear to result in uniformly superior subdivision desi;n for I Maple Grove, b�it rather allows tl�em to ne,otia�e specific features on a case by case basis. _ PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At its Novcmber 3 mcetimi, tl�e Plani�ina Commission tmanimously recommended to ilie City Council iliat the use of the RPP be suspended. I In addition. tl�e Commission requested that staff coinpile a comparison of provisions in tl�e RPP and tl�e requirements of Ciry Code. Once this comparison is completed, the Plaunin� Commissioi� intends to further discuss which elements of lhe RPP would be appropriate to cousider as possible amendments to the City Code. 'fhe recommendations of that disciission would be I�orwarded onto tl�e City Counci] at a later date. I ACTION RrQU6,STF,D Offer a i��otion to suspend use of tlie Residential Pointing Po1ic}� effective immediately. I � -��,�'����`��� Julie Klima Planner II h:AccA2011AII-IS\residcntial pointing policy.doc.� � I - -- -- �- - — ---- �— - - .. � City of Shakopee RESIDENTIAL PROJECT SCORING GUIDE Adopted: September 20, 2005 I � i I � C:�Documents and Settines\tvidmar\Local Settings\T�mporary Intemet Files\OLK6C�Project Scoring Guide rev 0805200� l.doc i I Policy Statement: The City of Shakopee, by its City Council, has determined that it is important Eo regulate I the amount a�1d the types of new residential development that occur in the community, and to provide a mechanism by which to insure that the quality of design and materials used in new residential deve]opmenYs in tl�e City is of Che highest caliber possible. Toward that end, the Shakopee City Council has endorsed the use of this Residential Project Scoring Guide (Scoring Guide) by city staffprior to formal consideration of any � proposal for a new residential development by the City Council, or any of its advisory boards and commissions. I Process: I ln order to make sure that this process achieves its intended purpose, the following I criteria must be adhered to; 1. All applicants are responsible for providing complete information as part of their I application(s) so that city staff can adequately evaluate their proposals against � this guide. 2. If an applicant(s) feels that criteria may not be applicable to his/her project, the applicant is responsible for; a. Identifying the criteria believed to be inapplicable; and � b. Providing a written explanation for their belief that the criteria are not applicable 3. In order for city staff to consider makin� a recommendation for approval, the I I project must receive at least 60% of the applicable and possible points (excepting bonus points). The number of applicable and possible points may be different from project to project. Project Scoring: Projects are scored on a number of criteria within khe following three categories; , • COMMUNITY SCALE: i.e., the scale of the project relative to the community generally ; � • NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE: i.e., the scale of the projeci on a neighborhood ]evel • UNIT SCALE: i.e., the desie and scale of the residential � themselves units in the project . The maximum possible score is 440 base points. Thus, in the case of a project thal is � , eligible for the maximum possible score in order for city staff to consider a makin� a positive recommendation, a score of 264 points would be required. � I C:�Documents ai�d Settings\Nidmar\Local SettiugstTBmporary Interuet FileslOLK6C1Project Scocing I Guide rev 080820051.doc � I Community Scale Criteria 70 possible points 60 possible base points 10 possible bonus points I � 1) Land Use - The term "land use" refers to the relationsl�ip between land uses I and landfornis in a proposed project and the suirounding land uses and landfornis. � {a) Placement of uses and how they integrate with adjacent uses: 25 points � maximum ' • 5 points will be awarded for locating private parks, open space, conservation I areas, and similar areas adjacent to existing or planned private parks, open space, conservation areas, and similar areas, where there is a choice to locate such areas in a differentlocation. � � l0 points wil] be awarded if there are no resh on public access to private parks, open space, conservation areas, and similar areas. • 5 poinfs will be awarded if the project includes physical Iinkages (such as � trails and sidewalks) to public and quasi-public uses (e.g. parks in adjoining neighborhoods/projects, schools, churches). ' � • 5 points wi]] be awarded for projects that ]ink to adjacent existing or planned developments. � (b) Senior Units - 1 point per senior unit - 25 points maximum ' (c) Collaboration with adjoining land owners - 10 points maximum � Projects will be awardad points for collaborarion if the project application demonstrates that the project plan has bcen developed with adjacent property owners to create a more unified plan of development for the properties. (d) Neighborhood scale commercial and office uses - 10 poiuts maximum ' (Bonus cateJory) Up to ] 0 points will be awarded for projects Yhat incorporate small-scale commercial/office uses Yhat will serve the residents of the project (Prior to City ' Council, staff intends to provide further clarification of what Yhe point thresholds are). � I I I � � I C:�Documents and Settings\rvidma��I.ocal Settings\T�npo�ary Inremet Files\OLR6C�Project Scoring I Guide rev 080820051.doc I - - i i NC1gI1bOCilOOC1 SC818 CI'ItCYIa: 300 possible points base points 70 possible bonus points � I A. Neighborhood Scale - refers to the organization and anangement of uses, physical elements, and natural features within the project. a. Identi�able neighborhood focal points (e.g. Schools, historic structures such as bams and � anaries, monuments, gardens); • Pementage of units within '/< mile of an identifiable nei�hborhood focal point divided by 2 - 10-25% 10 points � 26-50% 10 points 51-75% 10 poinYs I 76-100% 10 points maximum 40 points I b. Distribution of Attached Units; l. 10-?5% of units scatYered throughout the projeet - 5 points I 2. 26-50% of units scattered throughout Yhe project -10 points � 3. S1-75%ofunitsscatteredthrou�houttheprojeet -]5points � 4. 76-100% of units scattered throuehout the proiect -�0 noints � 30 pts. max. c. Creation of open space - amangement of structures is used to create � useable open space accessible to the public - 40 points maximum d. Vehicular access from the rear or below grade - 5 points mazimum I I e. Three or more styles of structure where attached housing is included in the � project - 5 points maximum � £ Six or more styles of structure where detached housing is included in the � project - 10 points maximum � g. Attached units are not visible from arterial roadways - 5 points maximum � h. Landscaping to buffer homes from arterial and collector roads - 10 points maximum � i. Interior perimeter roads are not parallel to arterial or collector roadways I 5 points maximum � j. Home fronts face arterial or collector roadways - 10 points maximum I k. Grid or modified grid street pattern - 5 points maximum , 1. Sidewalks provided on both sides of the street - 5 points maximum I m. Cul de sacs are open-ended (i.e. pedestrian and bicycle connections are provided to arterial and collector roadways - 5 points maximum I n. Internal landscaping that exceeds City Code requirements by more than 1 � percent - I point for each percentage above ] O 1% of ordinance requirements - 5 points maximum o. Park dedication � � 1. The park is a focal point of the project 10 points maximum 40 points maximum I 2. Percenta�e of units within Yq mile of a park divided by 2 - 10-25% 10 points � C:�Documents a�d Settin,s\tvidmar�I.ocal Setfings\T�mpoiary I�ternet Files\OLK6C�Project Scoring � Guide rev 080820051.doc I � � i � i � � 26-50% I O points � 51-75% ]Opoints 76-100% ] 0 �oints � maximum 40 poiots � 3. Proposed park land is appropriately sized to meet the identified park � activities or need 15 points maximum i 55 points maximum i i 4. Trails i I 2. Trails are provided that connect to other existing trails, neighborhood or I I nearby retail and/or services 15 points maximum I � 3. Trails witl�in the project are either looped, or compleYe a loop with other i i existing trails (Bonus Category) 15 points maximum � 4. Trails are not proposed fo be counted as a part of khe park dedication i requirements to be met under City Code (Bonus Category) i 15 points maximum � � 4. Trails to be constructed by the developer upfront, if determined by the City to � be desirable 10 points maximum � � 55 points maximum � i i total I p. Greenways i I 1. The project proposal identifies Greenway corridors to be preserved consistent I with those identified in the City's greenway plannin� documents, and I � specifes the mechanism(s) that would be used to identify (si�nage) and i � preserve them (e.g. conservation easements in favor of the City, conservation � easements in favor of the MVDNR or nonprofit entity dedicated to the preseivatio� of greenways and natural open space, gives the City fee fitle to � the corridor, ete. � ) IS points maximum i 2. Provides greenway areas that connect to other identified greenway areas � � (Bonus CaYegory) 10 points maximum � 3. Have submitted a detailed restoration and management plan i � (Bonus Category) 15 points maximum I i 40 points maximum � � q. Natural Features: (e.g.. springs, creeks, lakes, wetlands, bluffs, hilltops, � , woodlands) � L The project proposal identifies natural feaYUres to be preserved (rather than � miti�ated), and specifies the mechanism(s) tl�at woald be used to identifv � � (sio age) and preserve them. � � 15 points maximum i ' 2. Have submitted a detailed restoration and management plan i � (Bonus Cate�ory) 15 poinYS masimum i 30 points maximum i I i I I C:�Documents aod Settings\tvidmar\Local Settings\T�iporary Intemet Files\OLK6C1Project Scoriitg � Guide rev 0808200� I.doc � I Unit Scale Criteria - 90 possib�e aase Points , I. Guarantee that model fagade treatments will not be repeated within "X" fots of i each other; i a. I fot between the same model - 2 points i �, b. 2]ots betwee�� the same mode] - 4 points � , c. 3 lots between the same model - 6 points � i d. 41ots between fhe same model - 8 points i e. 5 lots between the same model - 10 points � " f. 6]ots between the same mode] - 20 points � � ' i 2. Creation of a pattern book that provides detailed descriptions and depictions of i che organization of the neighbm•hood, unit architecture and materials, colors of i � materials to be used, Iandscaping, or other proposed improvements zo � � points (if provided) � i � 3. Architectural Elements: � i a. Front porches provided that front on either a street or green space i ' outside t6e entry area - Points equal Percentage of Units � � [e.g. 100%, 50%] in the neighborbood with parches divided by 5 - � � 20 points maximum i � b. Garages set back at least as far as the front face of the structure, or side- � loaded. � ' Points equal Percentage of Unifs in the neighborhood meeting criteria divided ' by 5 20 points maximum , c) Use of brick, stone, oi• stucco. , Points equal Percentage of UniYs in the neighborhood utilizing materiais I divided by ] 0 10 points maximum � � i i i � i � , � I � " i i i � i � ' i i C:�Documeuts and Settin,s\tvidmar\Local Settings\T�iporary Intemet Files\OLK6C�Pmject Scocing i Guide rev 080820051.doc i