HomeMy WebLinkAboutJon WardleBRIGHTON
May 2, 2019
Bill Parsons
Planning Supervisor
Community Development Department
City of Meridian
33 E. Broadway Avenue
Meridian, ID 83642
Re: 2019 UDCTextAmendment
Dear Bill
We have reviewed the updated UDC text amendments before the Planning & Zoning Commission tonight.
I am hoping to attend the hearing, but because of a prior commitment, I will arrive late (and could quite
possibly miss the hearing). In case I do not make it, I would like to have the following items presented to
the Planning and Zoning Commission for their consideration.
11 -2A -3(B)(3). Minimum Street Frontages. As modified, a common driveway would not be allowed with
Private Streets. This perhaps is a cleanup item related to 11 -3F -4(A)(6). However, havingjust built a
community with all private streets, and intending to do more in Meridian, we feel that this restriction is
unnecessary. A Common Driveway functions the same as an alley, with the noted exception that
Common Driveways limit the number of homes that can use it for access. Private Streets have a very
specific set of standards, and function the same as public streets with the noted exception that they are
privately maintained. Eliminating the ability to have a Common Driveway with Private Streets is not
needed.
Requested Action. Modify the language in BLUE to:
11 -2A -3(B)(3). Properties taking access from a common driveway do not require street
frontage, but said common driveway shall connect to an abuttine Public
street or orivate street.
Table 11-3C-6. Required Parking Spaces for Residential Use. We appreciate the changes regarding
parking standards, and modifying the standards for 1 and 2 bedroom single family residential units to be
the same is a very good improvement. However, upon further review and internal analysis, the
elimination of the "Age Restricted" parking category will create excessive parking requirements related to
age restricted housing demand and suPPly.
Based on national data, our research, current development and construction planning, and end user
interaction for both attached and detached age restricted projects, we have found that the demand is
much less than a typical residential use. This is further supported by studies and documented within ITE's
(International Transportation Engineers) Parking Generation Manual, 5" Edition. ITE has studied parking
generation and demand for two applicable land use categories (excerpts included as exhibits):
BRIGHTON -2929W. Navigator Drive, Ste. 400, Meridian, ID 83642
www.brightoncorp.com 208-378-4000
May 2, 2019
Page 2
• Land Use 252—Senior Adult Housing—Attached
• Land Use 223—Affordable Housing—Senior
Demand per Dwelling Unit* in
Supply per Dwelling Unit*
LAND USE Urban/Suburban setting
in Urban/Suburban setting
252— Senior Adult Housing .61 Spaces perdu
0.9 perdu
223 —Affordable Housing Senior .36 Spaces per du
1.3 Spaces per du
ora e or Car ort
0.7 spaces per bedroom
*Note: Number of bedrooms is irrelevant given the age restriction of the owner / occupant.
Senior Adult Housing (Land Use 252) is further defined by ITE "... consists of attached independent living
developments, including retirement communities, age restricted housing, and active adult communities.
This type of housing for active senior adults can take the form of bungalows, townhouses and apartments.
These developments may include limited social or recreational services. They generally lack centralized
dining and on-site medical facilities. Residents in these communities live independently, are typically
active, and may or may not be retired."
By eliminating the age restricted category from the table, these senior housing projects will be subject to
typical single family or multi -family requirements, both of which will significantly increase the supply
beyond the actual demand. We request that the age restricted category be returned to the table, but
separate from Nursing and Residential Care Facility.
Requested Action. Create a new Senior Housing — Age Restricted Category in the table in BLUE:
Use and Form
Namber of Bedrooms
fteauired Parking Spaces
Unit)
Senor Housing—
1_
1 per dwelling unit at least 1 in
Age Restricteda
ora e or Car ort
dwelling unit at least 1
aa_ora e or car ort
11 -3G -3(B). Qualified Open Space. We recognize the City's desire to maintain and enhance the quality of
open space within our community. We too have the same concern. However, the biggest issue we have
with the proposed change is the removal of the landscape buffers and parkways on Arterials and
Collectors from the Qualified Open Space calculation. This approach is counter-productive to Meridian's
livability, because roadway buffers and parkways with detached sidewalks on Arterials and Collectors
benefit the entire City, and not just new development. However, elimination of the landscape buffers on
collectors and arterials is punitive, and we should anticipate fewer parkways, detached sidewalks and
minimal landscape improvements within the buffers.
If the City wants to maintain buffers and parkways, but exclude them from the calculation, we request
that the overall common open space percentage be decreased in at least a proportional amount required
by the UDC. Additionally, common open space could be scaled for different types of residential uses.
One approach to improve the quality of qualified open space is to reward developments that have
proposed an enhanced lifestyle, recreation and circulation amenities, and additional landscape
May 2, 2019
Page 3
improvements within buffers and parkways. We might find that the quality of these enhancements
justifies a decrease in the quantity of common open space.
We do not believe that focusing narrowly on the Qualified Open Space with this UDC update is the right
approach. The entire Article related to Common Open Space and Site Amenity Requirements needs to be
analyzed in whole to get an improvement to the UDC, and not just a short-term modification. We commit
to put in the time and effort to sufficiently analyze, make recommendations, and return to the Planning
Commission on the entirety of this Article, and not just a part.
Requested Action. We request that modifications to the Qualified Open Space category be tabled
until all of 11-3-G (Common Open Space & Site Amenity Requirements) can be reviewed, analyzed
and re -submitted in whole, not in part, by stakeholders. Areas to consider during the review and
analysis:
• What percentage of the buffers and parkways contribute to the overall calculation of common
open space?
• Should the Common Open Space requirement be reduced by percentage of buffers and
parkways?
• How much common open space is needed in comparison to the size of lots (i.e., larger lots
require less common open space compared to high density)?
• Does a uniform open space percentage across all residential uses make sense?
• What values are placed on qualified site amenities (i.e., does a clubhouse and pool have the same
value as shade structure and picnic table)?
I appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on these items, and respectfully request your
consideration.
Brighton Development Inc.
5l�onat n D. Wardle
P ent
Enclosures: ITE Parking Generation Manual, 511 Edition
• Land Use 252 Senior Adult Housing
• Land Use 223 Affordable Housing
rd Deviation
of Vanatimi'
7(28%)
Land Use: 262 Senior Adult Housing—Attached
Description
senior adult housing consists of attached independent living developments, including retirement
communities, age -restricted housing, and active adult communities This type of housing for active
senior adults can take the form of bungalows, townhouses, and apartments. These developments
may include limited social or recreational services. They generally lack centralized dining and on-site
medical facilities. Residents in these communities live independently, are typically active (requiring
little to no medical supervision) and may or may not be retired. Congregate care facility (Land Use
253), assisted living (Land Use 254), and continuing care retirement community (Land Use 255) are
related uses.
The minimum age thresholds for the study sites in the database are not known. It would be expected
that a development with an age restriction of 55 would include more households with an employed
resident than would a development with an age restriction of 65. How this age restriction affects
parking demand cannot be determined from the available data.
,all sampe aa
�n Additional Data
The average parking supply retic for the three study sites in a general urban/suburban setting and
with parking supply information is 0.9 spaces per dwelling unit.
The sites were surveyed in the 2000s in Pennsylvania.
It is expected that the number of bedrooms and number of residents are likely correlated to the
parking demand generated by a residential site. Parking studies of multifamily housing should
attempt to obtain information on occupancy rate and on the mix of residential unit sizes (i.e., number
Of units by number of bedrooms at the site complex). Future parking studies should also indicate the
number of levels contained in the residential building.
Source Number
43^.
acv
Land Uae Descriptions and Data Plots Me
As
}`!
�
.
� •!!
: .
! A; 0r,.
oma.
! e;•||)�
2
,-,..,,
ON
Land Use: 223 Affordable Housing
Description
AHordable housing incudes all multifamily housing that is rented at below market rate to households
Mat include at least one employed member. Eligibility to live in affordable housing can be a function
of umited household income and resident age. Multifamily housing (low-rise) (Land Use 220),
multifamily housing (mid -rise) (Land Use 221), and multifamily housing (high-rise) (Land Use 222)
are related land uses.
Additional Data
Fame majority of study sites in this land use code, 100 percent of the dwelling units are considered
affordable_ For residential study sites that provide a mix of market value and affordable units, the
study sites with at least 75 percent of the dwelling units designated as affordable are also included in
this land use database.
Separate data plots and statistics are presented for subsets of the affordable housing database:
sites with income limitations for its tenants, sites with minimum age thresholds for its tenants
(i.e., senior housing), and sites comprised entirely of single -room -only units.
The average parking supply ratios for the study sites with parking supply information are as follows:
a In a general urban/suburban setting, 1.3 spaces per dwelling unit (28 sites) and 0.7 spaces per
bedroom (9 sites)
. In a dense multi -use urban setting, 0.6 spaces per dwelling unit (28 sites) and 0.3 spaces per
bedroom (26 sites)
e In a center city core setting, 0.3 spaces per dwelling unit (6 sites) and 0.3 spaces per bedroom
(6 sites)
The sites were surveyed in the 1990s and the 2010s in California, Connecticut, District of Columbia,
Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Oregon.
It is expected that the number of bedrooms and number of residents are likely correlated to the
Parking demand generated by a residential site. Parking studies of multifamily housing should
attempt to obtain information on occupancy rate and on the mix of residential unit sizes (i. e., number
of units by number of bedrooms at the site complex). Future parking studies should also indicate the
number of levels contained in the residential building.
Source Numbers
314, 514, 533, 535, 536, 537, 539, 541, 579, 582, 585, 586
Land Lae Descriptions and Data Plots 135