golden triangle zoning and design guidelines updategolden triangle neighborhood plan –regulatory...

GOLDEN TRIANGLE ZONING & DSG UPDATEGOLDEN TRIANGLE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN – REGULATORY IMPLEMENTATION

Golden Triangle Zoning and Design Guidelines UpdateGOLDEN TRIANGLE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN – REGULATORY IMPLEMENTATION

Zoning/DSG Advisory Committee Meeting #2 – July 18, 2019


Goals for the Meeting

1. Confirm Outcomes from Meeting #2

2. Zoning Alternatives & Buildout Scenarios

3. Introduction to Design Standards & Guidelines Process

4. Next Steps


Committee Protocols

What are the principles that guide an effective process?• Inclusion and respect

• Active listening

• Balanced representation

• Transparency

• Quality information

• Logical and deliberate sequence

• Clear purpose and decision points

• Honesty and trust


Committee Protocols

What are the outcomes from the committee that the process will need?

• Seek consensus

• Be open to compromise on the details if it achieves a higher objective

• Consider the larger goals of the neighborhood, not personal interests

• For topics we can’t resolve, be as clear as possible about the essential

principles so City staff and Council can make the best possible decision

• If we can’t reach consensus, the process (and the City) will still move forward


Meeting #2 Outcomes


Suite of Building Options

• Explore use of different building

forms (rather than a single envelope

as currently exists)• Could better address Plan objectives

• Could apply to different contexts and

include different design requirements

(i.e., small lots vs. large lots)


Tower Form

• Explore use of a Tower form that

restricts building footprint in

exchange for greater height (taller

than current 175-foot limit)

• Ensure podium/tower typology is not

the only form option and allow

flexibility for Tower to come down to

the street

• Consider how towers can be properly

spaced to support views/sunlight at

the street

= =

Max FAR

Max Height

Max FAR Max FAR

Tower Typology


FAR Calculations and Bonuses

• If parking area is included in FAR

calculation, then adjustment to

current maximum may be necessary

(follows trend to include parking in

CPV and Arapahoe Square)

• Evaluate and revise current bonus

system to better address current

neighborhood goals and objectives


Pedestrian Experience• Current Build-To range of 0-5 feet

does not allow enough flexibility for

café seating or residential transitions

• Requirement for non-residential uses

on the ground floor may lead to

vacant storefronts (tread lightly and

selectively on key streets)

• Tall floor-to-floor heights on the

ground floor (~14-16 feet) are

important to establish base datum,

provide appropriate height for

particular use, and allow future

conversion between uses


Building Form Alternatives


Building Form Considerations

• How can new building forms influence

variety in building type and use?

• Lot size

• Height

• Maximum floor area

• Design requirements


Building Form Options

Form 1 (General-Small Lot) Form 2 (General-Large Lot) Form 3 (Point Tower)

Lot Size Smaller Larger Larger

Height Similar to Existing Similar to Existing Taller than Existing

Maximum floor area High Medium Highest

Design requirements Medium High Highest

Purpose Greatest flexibility for

smaller-scale projects and

multiple uses

Introduce additional massing

and design requirements for

larger-scale projects

Greatest massing and

design requirements for

projects that fully maximize

potential entitlement


Preliminary Form #1 – General (small lot)

CONCEPTUAL VALUES/STANDARDS

• Lot Size = < 75-125’ width

• Max Height = 200’ (16-stories)

• Max FAR = 4.0*

• Design Requirements

• Street-level standards (build-to,

transparency, setbacks, etc.)

• Limitation on visible parking**

* Incentives/TDR could increase limit

** Potentially include an existing alternative

through DSG/design review for frontage

to be “integrated into the architecture”


Preliminary Form #2 – General (large lot)

CONCEPTUAL VALUES/STANDARDS

• Lot Size = ≥ 75-125’ width

• Max Height = 200’ (16-stories)

• Max FAR = 4.0*


• Street-level standards

• Limitation on visible parking**

• Upper-story setback at 5-stories

• Upper-story mass reduction

• Open space (street-level, publicly-accessible)

* Incentives/TDR could increase limit

** Remove alternative to wrapped parking


Preliminary Form #3 – Point TowerCONCEPTUAL VALUES/STANDARDS

• Lot Size = ≥ 150’ width

• Max Height = 300’ (no story limit)*

• Max FAR = 4.0**


• Street-level standards• Limitation on visible parking***• Upper-story setback at 5-stories • Upper-story mass reduction• Open space (street-level, publicly-accessible)• Floor plate size and spacing

* Height necessary to achieve equivalent FAR totals with floor plate size limitations

** Incentives/TDR could increase limit

***Remove alternative to wrapped parking


Preliminary Building Form Summary

Form 1 (General-Small Lot) Form 2 (General-Large Lot) Form 3 (Point Tower)

Lot Size < 75-125’ width ≥ 75-125’ width ≥ 150’ width

Height 200’ (16-stories) 200’ (16-stories) 300’ (no story limit)

Maximum floor area 4.0 FAR (+ incentives/TDR) 4.0 FAR (+ incentives/TDR) 4.0 FAR (+ incentives/TDR)

Design requirements Street-level standards

Limitation on visible parking (w/ DSG

alternative)

Street-level standards

Limitation on visible parking

Upper-story setback

Upper-story mass reduction

Open space

Street-level standards

Limitation on visible parking

Upper-story setback

Upper-story mass reduction

Open space

Floor plate size and spacing


FAR Calculations and Incentives


Influence of Parking and FAR

• Desire is to include Parking in FAR calculation

(it contributes to overall massing of the project)

• Parking is currently required by zoning

• May necessitate an increase in current FAR

maximums to accommodate required parking

• Is there a conflict between requiring parking

and then including it in FAR calculation?

• Would reducing or eliminating minimum

parking (as most other Downtown zone

districts) encourage more active uses?


Existing FAR Incentives

• Premiums in existing D-GT zoning allow increase

from 4.0 max up to 6.0 max FAR• Housing

• Affordable housing (substantially less than premium

for market-rate housing)

• Residential support uses (grocery, school, or day care)

• Arts, entertainment, or cultural uses

• Public art

• Rehabilitation of a Historic Structure

• Undeveloped Floor Area from Historic Structure (TDR)

• Design review of entire structure (not a premium, but

allows for maximum of 7.0 FAR)


Existing FAR IncentivesFAR Premium Existing D-GT Zoning Notes

Housing 1:1 sf match, no max

Affordable Housing 0.4 FAR Premium floor area must be dedicated to residential use

Residential Support Use 1:1 sf match, no max Use must be retail food sales, school, or day care

Arts, Entertainment, Cultural

Facility

1:1 sf match, no max

Public Art 0.25 FAR Must equal lesser of 1% construction cost or $500,000

Rehabilitation of Historic

Structure

1:1 sf match, no max Must be a designated Landmark structure

Undeveloped Floor Area

from Historic Structure (TDR)

1.0 FAR max May be transferred from Landmark structure to other

properties within D-GT (may include premium from

Rehabilitation noted above)

* Note, design review is not a premium, but allows for maximum of 7.0 FAR


Potential Revised IncentivesFAR Premium Existing D-GT Zoning Preliminary Concepts

Housing 1:1 sf match, no max • Set a maximum limit to support use of other incentives

or eliminate this as a premium altogether

Affordable Housing 0.4 FAR • Increase value significantly

• Remove maximum

Residential Support Use 1:1 sf match, no max • Increase value

• Expand list of community serving uses

Arts, Entertainment, Cultural

Facility

1:1 sf match, no max • Increase value (or no change)

Public Art 0.25 FAR • Increase value

• Reduce minimum cost to qualify

Rehabilitation of Historic

Structure

1:1 sf match, no max • Increase value

Undeveloped Floor Area

from Historic Structure (TDR)

1.0 FAR max • Remove maximum transfer

• Need to build support for stronger market for TDR

* Design review of the entire structure will be required for all projects (no increase in max FAR)


Potential New IncentivesFAR Premium Preliminary Concepts

Rehabilitation of Character

Building

• Define criteria to create a new tier of designation (working with Landmark team)

• Incentive would be less than Landmark Structures to encourage full designation

• Also include Character Buildings in TDR framework

• Also considering other new incentives for Additional Open Space, Enhanced Mass

Reduction, Highly Active Street Level Uses, etc. but want to balance these with desire

to support a stronger market for Landmark/Character Buildings and TDR.

• Also want to consider the complexity of the new zoning so some existing incentives

may be replaced by others that are more relevant to current needs and goals


Potential Incentive Framework

Base FAR Max = Tier 1 Maximum

Base FAR Max + Incentives or TDR = Tier 2 Maximum

Base FAR Max + Incentives + TDR = Tier 3 Maximum

• Goal is to support a stronger market for

TDR and conservation of existing

buildings (either Landmark or Character)

• Create a multi-tiered system that would

require both incentives and TDR to

achieve maximum entitlement

Base

Maximum

Base

Maximum

Base

Maximum

Incentive or

TDR

Incentive or

TDR

Incentive + TDR



Base

Maximum

Base

Maximum

Base

Maximum

Incentive or

TDR

Incentive or

TDR

Incentive + TDR • Small Lot form has higher potential to discourage

consolidation and provide flexibility on constrained sites

• Point Tower has higher potential to encourage use of

form with highest design standards

• Are we comfortable with a building form with lower

design standards (Small Lot) allowing greater FAR?

Option #1 Option #2

Base FAR Max 4.0 5.0 (General – Small Lot)

4.0 (General – Large Lot)

6.0 (Point Tower)

Base FAR Max + Incentives or TDR + 4.0 (General – Small Lot)

+ 3.0 (General – Large Lot)

+ 5.0 (Point Tower)

+ 3.0

Base FAR Max + Incentives + TDR + 2.0 + 2.0



Option #1 Option #2

Base FAR Max 4.0 5.0 (General – Small Lot)


6.0 (Point Tower)

Base FAR Max + Incentives or TDR 8.0 (General – Small Lot)


9.0 (Point Tower)

8.0 (General – Small Lot)


9.0 (Point Tower)

Base FAR Max + Incentives + TDR 10.0 (General – Small Lot)


11.0 (Point Tower)

10.0 (General – Small Lot)


11.0 (Point Tower)


Build-out Scenarios


Build-out Scenarios

ASSUMPTIONS

• Range of Lot Sizes (13 total)• 3 lots = <18750 sf

• 3 lots = 18750-25000 sf

• 2 lots = 25000-37500 sf

• 2 lots = 37500-50000 sf

• 3 lots = >50000 sf

• Maximum Entitlement (w/ incentives)• Existing Zoning

• General Only

• General & Point Tower

• Recent Project Trends• Same three scenarios at a range of project

intensities consistent with recent

development trends


Existing Conditions

N


Existing Zoning – Max Entitlement

N


Potential Zoning w/ General Form Only – Max Entitlement

N


Potential Zoning w/ General & Tower Form – Max Entitlement

N


Existing Zoning – Recent Project Trends

N


Potential Zoning w/ General Form Only – Recent Project Trends

N


Potential Zoning w/ General & Tower Form – Recent Project Trends

N


Existing Conditions

N


Existing Zoning – Recent Project Trends

N


Potential Zoning w/ General Form Only – Recent Project Trends

N


Potential Zoning w/ General & Tower Form – Recent Project Trends

N


Design Standards & Guidelines


Coordinating & Merging Downtown DSG’s


Downtown DSG – Mid 2020 completion


Downtown DSG – Long Term


GT Plan recommendations to be considered in DSG’s

• Pedestrian-friendly street level design and ground floor activation

• Building façade articulation and transparency requirements

• Upper-story setbacks to be compatible with the existing diverse range of building scales

• Mass reductions to preserve access to views and sunlight

• Incentivize preservation of historic buildings, update inventory of existing historic resources and identify at risk historic buildings


GT Plan recommendations to be considered in DSG’s

• Provide site specific Key Streets design features (see street segments identified by the plan)

• Provide recommendations for public plazas and parks that are part of new development

• Incentivize development of small-scale, cozy “pocket parks” that serve a wide range of users, including kid-friendly areas and dog parks

• Require existing surface parking to provide minimum lighting and landscaping


GT DSG’s recommendations to be considered in Downtown DSG’s


GT DSG’s recommendations to be addressed in Downtown DSG’s


GT DSG’s recommendations to be considered in Downtown DSG’s


DSG Development Timeline

Existing Context

and Problem ID

Zoning/Design Tools

and Alternatives

Preferred Zoning/

Design Strategy

Drafting and

Public Review

Adoption

Process

WE ARE

HERE

February 2019

Public Mtg #3

Review of Draft Public HearingsApril 2019

Public Mtg #1September 2019

Public Mtg #2

Aligning DSG Draft with the release of

Zoning Public Review Draft

DSG Draft

Development

DSG Draft

Public Review


Next Steps


Next Steps

• Community Open House #2 Wednesday, September 25 – 5:00-7:00 pmDenver Community Credit Union, 1041 Acoma St, 3rd Floor

• Zoning/Design Tools and Alternatives

• Advisory Committee Meeting #4Thursday, November 21 – 3:00-5:00 pmWebb Building, 201 W Colfax Ave, Room 4.F.6

• Review refined zoning tools and alternatives• Review street level activation and open space tools• Design Standards and Guidelines update


Thank you!

golden triangle zoning and design guidelines updategolden triangle neighborhood plan –regulatory...

Documents