Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ca.Affordable Housing.1989I TO: Mayor and Council / THRU: Robert S. Anderson, Jr., City Manager THRU: Amy L. Margerum, Planning Director Qk FROM: Tom Baker, Planning Office RE:. 2nd Reading of the Affordable Housing Zone DATE: October 3, 1989 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office recommend that City Council approve on 2nd Reading Ordinance 59, Series of 1989, creating an Affordable Housing Zone District. The proposed zone district would allow for 30% of the units on -site to be free - market units if 70% are deed restricted affordable units. In order to promote the use of this zone district, we propose that the free - market component be exempt from Residential GMQS competition, but that a cap of 14 units per year be placed on the free - market exemption. Staff and Glenn Horn and Chuck Vidal will be prepared to discuss the issues outlined below on the 9th and prepare any changes to the ordinance for final approval at a future meeting. COUNCIL GOAL: This memo addresses Council's first goal on affordable housing. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: On August 14, 1989, Council held a work session to discuss progress on the AH zone. At that meeting, Council discussed the merits of doing further study to determine whether or not the AH zone was the proper tool with which to reach Council's affordable housing goals. Council and staff determined that although it may not be the perfect tool it was appropriate for the certain areas of the Community. On September 11, 1989, Council approved, on 1st Reading, Ordinance 59, (Series of 1989). At that meeting, Council was concerned that the concept of a 30 -35 percent free market component, exempt from GMQS was too great of an incentive. BACKGROUND: The Planning and Zoning Commission has held four meetings as part of the public.- hearing process for the creation of an Affordable Housing Zone and the City Council has met three times to discuss the Affordable Housing Zone. Staff, including Planning, Attorney, Glenn Horn and Chuck Vidal have met frequently to arrive at a workable solution for the AH Zone. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: There are several areas of discussion, however, the issue of unit mix (free market /affordable) is the most significant. During discussions with P &Z it became apparent that neither P &Z nor staff were comfortable setting a ratio for free market vs. affordable units. This was because we had little information to guide us in this effort. All the variables were subject to change based upon the characteristics of each property: land cost, sale price, construction cost, potential density. With assistance from the private sector, staff was able to perform conceptual economic analyses on some properties, this gave us a ratio which could work on some properties and not on others. After much discussion, staff has focused on a 70:30 affordable /free market mix. This ratio is a comfortable one for staff because it provides the City with a substantial benefit over the 50:50 ratio which GMP averages. In addition to the 70:30 mix, staff finds that the ratios for numbers of bedrooms and floor area can be slightly more flexible. In staff's opinion, a ratio of 60:40 affordable /free market is appropriate for bedrooms and floor area. In terms of the mix of low, moderate, middle and resident occupied staff finds that the review process should define this mix with input from Housing and Planning. This provides enough flexibility for site by site variations. In addition to the unit mix issue, the issue of GMQS Exemption also needs to be addressed. In Glenn's and staff's opinion a GMQS Exemption is essential in order to attract private developers to this tool. The City can use the Affordable Housing Zone District for 100% employee housing projects. If Council agrees that a GMQS Exemption is appropriate for the free - market component, then we suggest that staff and the Attorney's Office work together to develop that language. Currently, staff feels that an exemption for all free market development in the AH zone is appropriate; however, like Council we are concerned about the number of potential exemptions which can be applied for through the AH zone. Therefore, staff suggests that Council create a maximum number of free market exemptions which can be applied for in any given year through the AH zone. Staff suggests that for this year the free market exemption cap be 14 units. This 14 unit cap means that if all exemptions are used and all projects are at least a 70:30 mix, then the AH zone will produce a minimum ,y of 35 affordable units. While this may not seem like a large number of units, over the next 5 years, this option could provide 4 175+ deed restricted units and is an additional tool for provision of affordable housing. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "Move to direct staff to amend Ordinance 59, Series of 1989, creating the Affordable Housing Zone District." CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: TO: Mayor and Council / THRU: Robert S. Anderson, Jr., City Manager �v1/ FROM: Tom Baker, Planning Office RE: 1st Reading of the Affordable Housing Zone DATE: September 11, 1989 SUMMARY: The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning Office recommend that City Council approve on 1st Reading Ordinance , Series of 1989, creating an Affordable Housing Zone District. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: On August 14, 1989, Council held a work session to discuss progress on the AH zone. At that meeting, Council discussed the merits of doing further study to determine whether or not the AH zone was the proper tool with which to reach Council's affordable housing goals. Council and staff determined that although it may not be the perfect tool it was appropriate for the certain areas of the Community. BACKGROUND: The Planning and Zoning Commission has held four meetings as part of the public hearing process for the creation of an Affordable Housing Zone and Affordable Housing Overlay. At their last meeting the P &Z voted to send Council its work on the AH Zone and continue the public hearing to work with staff on the AH Overlay. Currently, staff finds that further work on the AH Overlay will require input from Glenn Horn and Chuck Vidal. The AH Zone is intended to be used in areas which are essentially undeveloped or areas of redevelopment in higher density locations. The AH Overlay is intended for mature neighborhoods which need flexibility regarding housing and also require an extra measure of sensitivity to the neighborhood. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: There are several areas of discussion, however, the issue of unit mix (free market /affordable) is the most significant. During discussions with P &Z it became apparent that neither P &Z nor staff were comfortable setting a ratio for free market vs. affordable units. This was because we had little information to guide us in this effort. All the variables were subject to change based upon the characteristics of each property: land cost, sale price, construction cost, potential density. With assistance from Dick Butera, Jim Adamski and Perry Harvey staff was able to preform conceptual economic analyses on some properties, this gave us a ratio which could work on some properties and not on others. P &Z and staff discussed the issue of unit mix. How much free market vs. affordable housing was appropriate? What should the mix be within the affordable housing category between low, moderate, middle and resident occupied? After much discussion, the P &Z concluded that the unit mix must be flexible and change as the economy changes and as the Community's needs for affordable housing change. Some of the suggestions for retaining flexibility in the unit mix formula were to require the Housing Authority, as part of the annual Housing Guidelines process, to establish the appropriate unit mix for that year. Another was to require the Planning office to establish a new mix on an annual basis. While P &Z came to some closure in their discussion about unit mix, neither staff nor P &Z found it to be the ideal mechanism for dealing with the problem. Since the last Council meeting, staff has met with Dave Myler to discuss the AH zone and the issue of unit mix. One of Dave's ideas is to require an economic analysis of any project using the AH zone and allow the unit mix to be justified based upon that analysis. Then based upon recommendations from staff and P &Z, Council could establish the unit mix for each project. In staff's opinion this approach could work if a maximum percentage figure were established for the free market component. That maximum figure should be significantly below 50 percent because that is the likely percentage attained through Growth Management and staff finds that the Community should receive significantly more benefits from this mechanism because it is likely that the free market units will be exempt from GMQS. Staff finds that 30 -35 percent would be an acceptable maximum figure for the free market component, with the understanding that this figure is not a guaranteed percentage. The actual percentage shall be set during the review period based upon the economic analysis. Further, the 30 -35 percent figure should apply to free market bedrooms and free market floor area; however, free market units, bedrooms and floor area do not necessarily need to be the same percentage, the economic analysis will help establish appropriate percentages for each. Staff finds this approach attractive because it gives the Council the flexibility to look at the merits and economics of each project. Further, staff and P &Z had some concern about the workability of fixing the unit mix across the Community when it was clear that conditions changed from area to area. Finally, the economic analysis approach is similar to an approach used in Boston. In Boston, according to Leslie Lamont, all residential development is required to submit a pro forma to justify the proposal of free market and affordable dwelling unit mix. The pro - formas are also used to help determine how the housing program affects development. In order to adequately evaluate the economic analysis planning staff will need some training and 2 perhaps the Housing Office can assist and be involved in this training effort. In addition to the unit mix issue, the issue of GMQS Exemption also needs to be addressed. Staff has had discussions with Glenn Horn regarding the need for a GMQS Exemption for the free market component of the AH zone. In Glenn's and staff's opinion a GMQS Exemption is essential in order to attract developers to this tool. If Council agrees that a GMQS Exemption is appropriate, then we suggest that staff and the Attorney's Office work together to develop that language. Currently, staff feels that an exemption for all free market development in the AH zone is appropriate. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "Move to approve Ordinance -� q , Series of 1989, creating the Affordable Housing Zone District on 1st Reading as amended." CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: ah.zone.ord.memo.cc.lst �4 �V vy \ V 3 V\ ORDINANCE NO. 5 1 (SERIES OF 1989) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AMENDING CHAPTER 24, ARTICLE 5, DIVISION 2 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE TO CREATE A NEW SECTION 5 -208, AFFORDABLE HOUSING (AH) ZONE DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council (hereinafter "the Council ") has received the recommendations of the Aspen Planning and zoning Commission with respect to amendments to the requirements for the creation of an Affordable Housing (AH) zone district; and WHEREAS, the Council recognizes that the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has held a public hearing for the creation of this zone district on March 28, June 13, July 11 and July 25, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Council is aware that in order to accomplish their affordable housing goals a zoning tool such as the Affordable Housing zone is essential; WHEREAS, the Council has held public work sessions on the Affordable Housing zone on June 8 and August 14, 1989; and WHEREAS, both the Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission recognize the importance of affordable housing to preserving the fabric of the Community; and WHEREAS, in 1987, the draft Affordable Housing Production Plan identifies a 250 unit affordable housing shortfall; and WHEREAS, the Affordable Housing zone district is part of the City's implementation strategy for the Affordable Housing Production Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That Article 5, Division 2 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations be amended by the creation of a new Section 5 -208, Affordable Housing (AH) zone district which shall read as follows, and the renumbering of all subsequent sections in this Division accordingly: Sec. 5 -208 Affordable Housing (AH). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District is to provide for the use of land for the production of low, moderate and middle income affordable housing and Resident Occupied Units. The zone district also permits a limited component of free market units to off -set the cost of developing affordable housing. The Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District is intended for residential use primarily by permanent residents of the Community. Recreational and institutional uses customarily found in proximity to residential uses are included as conditional uses. Lands in the. Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District should be scattered throughout the City to ensure a mix of housing types, including those which are affordable by its working residents; at the same time the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District can protect the City's neighborhoods from rezoning pressures that other non - community oriented zone districts may produce. 2 Further, lands in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District should be located within walking distance of the center of the City, or on transit routes. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. 1. Residential uses restricted to low, aNO moderate, midetk w�+D income affordable housing guidelines must comprise 2.e, at least 60 percent of the unit mix of the development. Middle income units and Resident Occupied Units may comprise up to 20 percent of the unit mix of the development. Free market development may comprise up to 20 percent of the unit mix of the development. Residential uses may be comprised of single - family, duplex and multi- family dwelling units; 2. Home occupations; and 3. Accessory buildings and uses. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Art. 7, Div. 3. 1. Open use recreation site; 3 2. Day care center; 3. Satellite dish antennae; and 4. Dormitory D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and condi- tional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. 3/ 1. Minimum lot size (sq.ft.): f, 000 2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (sq.ft.): Detached residential dwelling: 3,000 Duplex: 3,000 For multi - family dwellings on a lot of 27,000 sq. ft. or less or for lots of 43,560 s.f. or less when approved by special review pursuant to Art. 7, Div. 4, the following sq. ft. requirements apply: studio: 300 1 bedroom: 400 2 bedroom: 800 3 bedroom: 1,200 Units with more than 3 bedrooms: one (1) bedroom per 400 square feet of lot area. For multi - family dwellings on a lot of more than 27,000 sq. ft. the following sq. ft. 4 requirements apply: studio: 1,000 1 bedroom: 1,250 2 bedroom: 2,100 3 bedroom: 3,630 Units with more than 3 bedrooms: one (1) bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot area. 3. Minimum lot width (ft.): 40 4. Minimum front yard (ft.): principal building: 10 accessory building: 15 5. Minimum side yard (ft.): The minimum side yard for single - family and duplex dwellings is 0 ft. for each side yard; 15 ft. total minimum for both side yards. (Minimum side yard shall be 5' for yards which are continous to any zone district other than Affordable Housing.) The minimum side yard for multi - family dwellings shall be 5 feet. 6. Minimum rear yard (ft.): principal building: 10 accessory building: 5 7. Maximum height (ft.): 25; increasable up to 30' by special review pursuant to Art. 7, Div.4. 8. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot 5 (ft.) 5 9. Percent of open space required for building site: to be established by special review pursuant to Art. 7, Div. 4; open space may be used for off - street parking by special review, pursuant to Art.7, Div. 4. 10. External floor area ratio (applies to conforming and nonconforming lots of record). Lot Size (SO. Ft.) DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS Allowable 0- 3,000 50 sq.ft. of floor area for each 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 1,500 sq.ft. of floor area. 3,000- 6,000 1,500 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 20 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,100 sq.ft. of floor area. 6,000- 9,000 2,100 sq.ft. of floor area, :7 plus 10 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area,,_ up to a maximum of 2,400 sq.ft. of floor area. 9,000+ 2,400 sq.ft. of floor area. IIllla(1W.4 Lot Size Allowable (SO.Ft.) SO.Ft. 0- 3,000 60 sq.ft. of floor area for each 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 1,800 sq.ft. of floor area. 3,000- 6,000 1,800 sq.ft. of floor area, - plus 30 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,700 sq.ft. of floor area. 6,000- 9,000 7 2,700 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 20 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 3,300 sq.ft. of floor area. 9,000+ 3,300 sq.ft. of floor area. MULTI- FAMILY Allowable Lot Size SO. Ft. 0- 27,000 s.f 1.1:1 27,001 s.f- 43,560 s.f .36:1, increasable to 1:1 by special review, pursuant to Art. 7, Div. 4. 43,561 s.f- 3 acres .36:1 > 3 acres- 6 acres .33:1 > 6 acres- 9 acres .30:1 > 9 acres- 18 acres .27:1 0 >18 acres .24:1 11. Internal floor area ratio: no requirement E. Off - street parking requirement. The following off - street parking spaces shall be provided for each use in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. 1. Residential uses: established by special review pursuant to Art. 7, Div. 4. The maximum number of parking spaces required shall not exceed 1 space /bedroom or 2 spaces /dwelling unit whichever is less. 2. All other: N /A. Section 2. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 3. Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to affect any right, duty or liability under any ordinance in effect prior to 9 the effective date of this ordinance, and the same shall be continued and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4. A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the day of 1989, at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing notice of the same shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the , 1989. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk day of William L. Stirling, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 1989. William L. Stirling, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk ah.zone.ord.cc.ist.read 10 UL D MEMORANDUM TO: Amy, Tom and Leslie FROM: David Myler DATE: September 29, 1989 RE: Amendments to Ordinance 58 of 1989 1. Delete the existing Section 4 and insert new language which reads as follows: The Council hereby authorizes an exemption from the administrative delay described herein in order to allow the processing of any application for rezoning, subdivision or other development approval, even though such application contemplates the demolition of one or more duplex or multi - family residential dwellings, provided that the application calls for and commits the owner of the affected property to the reconstruction of not less than 1008 of the existing habitable floor area and not less than 1008 of the existing bedrooms as affordable housin The mix of affordable housing, as between low, middle an oderate income or resident occupied, shal a determined in the course of review and approval of any application submitted pursuant to this exemption. 2. I am suggesting the deletion of the penalty provisions set forth in the existing Section 4, since I believe that the prohibition against an owner's ability to obtain a building permit is unenforceable. 04/D2 TO: Mayor and Council THRU: Robert S. Anderson, Jr., City Manager / R zy_,_ FROM: Tom Baker, Acting Planning Director J'n0 RE: Affordable Housing Zone DATE: August 14, 1989 SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends that Council discuss this item and set a work session date to continue our work on the AH Zone /Overlay. BACKGROUND: The Planning and Zoning Commission and staff have held four public hearings to discuss the creation of an Affordable Housing Zone and Affordable Housing Overlay. The zone is intended to be used in areas which are essentially undeveloped or areas of redevelopment in higher density locations. The overlay is intended for mature neighborhoods which need flexibility regarding housing and also require an extra measure of sensitivity to the neighborhood. In an effort to expedite the process the P &Z has put forward their thinking regarding the AH Zone, (see attachment 1). As part of this process staff has had internal discussions and discussions with Glenn Horn regarding the direction of this zone district. Currently, staff has two concerns: First, will the creation of two zoning mechanisms (zone and overlay) create confusion and cause developers problems regarding the selection of the appropriate mechanism? Second, Glenn Horn and Chuck Vidal have not reached the point where they can contribute their analysis to the formation of these mechanisms. In terms of the first concern, there are several aspects of creating two tools which trouble Alan. Alan's concerns revolve around clarity and flexibility. There is the potential of confusion over which tool to use (zone or overlay). Further, the Council and Community want flexibility and the zone district mechanism may not provide the flexibility required for unit mix. In terms of the second concern, Glenn and Chuck are not at the point where they can make suggestions to us regarding the make -up of the zone district or overlay. According to Glenn, each site seems to have different needs and any tool must be flexible enough to provide for those needs. Glenn has said that it is important that any free market component of this zone or overlay be exempt from GMQS. Staff agrees that a GMQS Exemption for the free market component is necessary, but the City must be careful to keep the free market mix below 50% (perhaps significantly below 50 %). The 50% guideline is developed from our experience that GMP competition will provide the City with a 50 %/50% free market /affordable mix. Based upon Alan's comments, staff is considering developing one tool for Affordable Housing. That tool can be similar to the old Residential Bonus Overlay (RBO) which gave special consideration to each zone in terms of dimensional requirements and uses. Staff has not had the opportunity to pursue this idea, we hope to be prepared to discuss it at a Council work session. The following is P &Z's and staff's thinking regarding the AH Zone. AFFORDABLE HOUSING ZONE DISTRICT Affordable Housing (AH). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District is to provide for the use of land for the production of low, moderate and middle income affordable housing and Resident Occupied Units. The zone district also permits a limited component of free market units to off -set the cost of developing affordable housing. The Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District is intended for residential use primarily by permanent residents of the Community. Recreational and institutional uses customarily found in proximity to residential uses are included as conditional uses. Lands in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District should be scattered throughout the City to ensure a mix of housing types, including those which are affordable by its working residents; at the same time the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District can protect the City's neighborhoods from rezoning pressures that other non - community oriented zone districts may produce. Further, lands in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District should be located within walking distance of the center of the City, or on transit routes. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. 1. Residential uses restricted to low income affordable housing guidelines at least 60 percent of the uni t development. Middle income units Occupied Units may comprise up to and moderate must comprise mix of the and Resident 20 percent of the unit mix of the development. Free market development may comprise up to 20 percent of the unit mix of the development. Residential uses may be comprised of single - family, duplex and multi- family dwelling units; Note: this section was a concern to the P &Z because it was not flexible in terms of the unit mix. 2. Home occupations; and 3. Accessory buildings and uses. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Art. 7, Div. 3. 1. Open use recreation site; 2. Day care center; 3. Satellite dish antennae; and 4. Dormitory D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and condi- tional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. 1. Minimum lot size (sq.ft.): 4,000 2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (sq.ft.): Detached residential dwelling: 3,000 Duplex: 3,000 For multi - family dwellings on a lot of 27,000 sq. ft. or less or for lots of 43,560 s.f. or less when approved by special review pursuant to Art. 7, Div. 4, the following sq. ft. requirements apply: studio: 300 1 bedroom: 400 2 bedroom: 800 3 bedroom: 1,200 Units with more than 3 bedrooms: one (1) bedroom per 400 square feet of lot area. For multi - family dwellings on a lot of more than 27,000 sq. ft. the following sq. ft. requirements apply: studio: 1,000 1 bedroom: 1,250 2 bedroom: 2,100 3 bedroom: 3,630 Units with more than 3 bedrooms: one (1) bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot area. 3. Minimum lot width (ft.): 40 4. Minimum front yard (ft.): 3 principal building: 10 accessory building: 15 5. Minimum side yard (ft.): The minimum side yard for single - family and duplex dwellings is 0 ft. for each side yard; 15 ft. total minimum for both side yards. (Minimum side yard shall be 5' for yards which are continous to any zone district other than Affordable Housing.) The minimum side yard for multi - family dwellings shall be 5 feet. 6. Minimum rear yard (ft.): principal building: 10 accessory building: 5 7. Maximum height (ft.): 25; increasable up to 30' by special review pursuant to Art. 7, Div.4. 8. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (ft.): 5 9. Percent of open space required for building site: to be established by special review pursuant to Art. 7, Div. 4 Note: P &Z's opinion is that the open space which remains on the site must be usable; open space may be used for off - street parking by special review, pursuant to Art.7, Div. 4. 10. External floor area ratio (applies to conforming and nonconforming lots of record). Lot Size (SO.Ft.) DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS Allowable 0- 3,000 50 sq.ft. of floor area for each 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 1,500 sq.ft. of floor area. 3,000- 6,000 1,500 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 20 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,100 sq.ft. of floor area. 6,000- 9,000 2,100 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 10 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,400 sq.ft. of floor area. 9,000+ 4 2,400 sq.ft. of floor area. DUPLEX Lot Size Allowable (SO.Ft.) SO.Ft. 0- 3,000 60 sq.ft. of floor area for acres each 100 sq.ft. in lot area, > 6 acres- up to a maximum of 1,800 acres sq.ft. of floor area. 3,000- 6,000 1,800 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 30 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,700 sq.ft. of floor area. 6,000- 9,000 2,700 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 20 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 3,300 sq.ft. of floor area. 9,000+ 3,300 sq.ft. of floor area. MULTI- FAMILY Allowable Lot Size SO.Ft. 0- 27,000 s.f 1.1:1 27,001 s.f- 43,560 s.f .36:1, increasable to 1:1 by special review, pursuant to Art. 7, Div. 4. 43,561 s.f- 3 acres .36:1 > 3 acres- 6 acres .33:1 > 6 acres- 9 acres .30:1 > 9 acres- 18 acres .27:1 >18 acres .24:1 11. Internal floor area ratio: no requirement f.7 E. Off - street parking recruirement. The following off - street parking spaces shall be provided for each use in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. 1. Residential uses: pursuant to Art. parking spaces space /bedroom or is less. 2. All other: N /A. ah.zone.cc established by special review 7, Div. 4. The maximum number of required shall not exceed 1 2 spaces /dwelling unit whichever 11 TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Tom Baker, Acting Planning Director < ?fig RE: Affordable Housing Zone /Overlay DATE: July 25, 1989 PURPOSE: The purpose of this item is to continue our discussion on the Affordable (Resident) Housing zone /overlay. As P &Z is aware, we are pursuing both an AH zone and an AH overlay. The zone is intended to be used in areas which are essentially undeveloped or areas of redevelopment in higher density locations. The overlay is intended for mature neighborhoods which need flexibility regarding housing and also require an extra measure of sensitivity to the neighborhood. The purpose of each of these tools is to create the incentive and opportunity for the private and public sectors to produce and preserve affordable housing. Affordable Housing Zone - As you are aware the AH zone has evolved from a 100 percent affordable zone district to a mixed affordable /free market zone. This was done after discussion with City Council about how difficult it was to make affordable projects break even financially. Staff has used the Billings property as a guide and construction costs which were verified by Dick Butera, Jim Adamski and Perry Harvy. Changes other than the free market mix include adding dormitory as a conditional use; allowing the lot size to increase beyond 27,000 s.f. up to 43,560 by special review for the highest density option; reducing the minimum distance between buildings to 5 ft.; reducing the open space requirement to 25 percent and allowing parking in the open space; and increasing the allowable FAR for lots between 27,001- 43,560 s.f. to 1:1 by special review. Following is the proposed AH zone district. AFFORDABLE HOUSING ZONE DISTRICT Affordable Housing (AH). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District is to provide for the use of land for the production of low, moderate, middle income housing and Resident Occupied Units, (as defined by the Housing Authority) along with a minor component of free market units to off -set the cost of developing affordable housing. Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District is for residential use primarily by permanent residents of the Community. Recreational and institutional uses customarily found in proximity to residential uses are included as conditional uses. Lands in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District should be scattered throughout the City to ensure a mix of housing types, including those which are affordable by its working residents; at the same time the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District can protect the City's neighborhoods from rezoning pressures that other non - community oriented zone districts may produce. Further, lands in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District should be located within walking distance of the center of the City, or on transit routes. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. 1. Residential uses restricted to low and moderate income guidelines as defined by the Aspen /Pitkin Housing Authority must comprise at least 60 percent of the unit mix of the development. Middle income units and Resident Occupied Units, as defined by the Aspen /Pitkin Housing Authority, may comprise up to 20 percent of the unit mix of the development. Free market development may comprise up to 20 percent of the unit mix of the development. Residential uses may be comprised of single - family, duplex and multi - family dwelling units; 2. Home occupations; and 3. Accessory buildings and uses. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Art. 7. Div. 3. 1. Open use recreation site; 2. Day care center; and 3. Satellite dish antennae. 4. Dormitory D. Dimensional reouirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and condi- tional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. 1. Minimum lot size (sq.ft.): 4,000 2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (sq.ft.): Detached residential dwelling: 3,000 Duplex: 3,000 For multi - family dwellings on a lot of 27,000 2 sq. ft. or less (lot size can be increased to 43,560 sq. ft. by special review.) The following sq. ft. requirements apply: studio: 300 1 bedroom: 400 2 bedroom: 800 3 bedroom: 1,200 Units with more than 3 bedrooms: one (1) bedroom per 400 square feet of lot area. For multi - family dwellings on a lot of more than 27,000 sq. ft. the following sq. ft. requirements apply: studio: 1,000 1 bedroom: 1,250 2 bedroom: 2,100 3 bedroom: 3,630 Units with more than 3 bedrooms: one (1) bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot area. 3. Minimum lot width (ft.): 40 4. Minimum front yard (ft.): principal building: 10 accessory building: 15 5. Minimum side yard (ft.): The minimum side yard for single - family and duplex dwellings 0 ft. for each side yard; 15 ft. total minimum for both side yards. (Minimum side yard shall be 5' for yards which border other zone district.) The minimum side yard for multi - family dwellings shall be 5 feet. 6. Minimum rear yard (ft.): principal building: 10 accessory building: 5 7. Maximum height (ft.): 25 8. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (ft.) : 5 9. Percent of open space required for building site: 25 percent; open space may be used for off - parking by special review. 10. External floor area ratio (applies to conforming and nonconforming lots of record). Lot Size (SO. Ft. ) 0- 3,000 DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS 3 Allowable SO. Ft. 50 sq.ft. of floor area for each 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 1,500 sq.ft. of floor area. 3,000- 6,000 1,500 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 20 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,100 sq.ft. of floor area. 6,000- 9,000 2,100 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 10 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,400 sq.ft. of floor area. 9,000+ 2,400 sq.ft. of floor area. DUPLEX Lot Size Allowable (SO.Ft.) SO.Ft. 0- 3,000 60 sq.ft. of floor area for each 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 1,800 sq.ft. of floor area. 3,000- 6,000 1,800 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 30 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,700 sq.ft. of floor area. 6,000- 9,000 2,700 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 20 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 3,300 sq.ft. of floor area. 9,000+ 3,300 sq.ft. of floor area. Lot Size 0- 27,000 s.f 27,001 s.f- 43,560 s.f MULTI- FAMILY Allowable SO.Ft. 1.1:1 4 .36:1, increased to 1:1 by special review 43,561 s.f- 3 acres .36:1 > 3 acres- 6 acres .33:1 > 6 acres- 9 acres .30:1 > 9 acres- 18 acres .27:1 >18 acres .24:1 11. Internal floor area ratio: no requirement E. Off - street parking requirement. Off - street parking requirements shall be set by Special Review pursuant to Article 7, Div. 4. The maximum number of parking spaces required shall not exceed 1 space /bedroom or 2 spaces /dwelling unit whichever is less. Affordable Housing Overlay - The Affordable Housing overlay is designed to give maximum flexibility, but retain control over development. In discussions with Glenn Horn (Housing Authority consultant) we determined that each site is different and it is likely that a different mix of tools will be required to effectively deal with each site. Based upon this premise staff proposes to craft the AH overlay similar to the City's old SPA overlay. The old SPA overlay varied the following requirements: open space, minimum distance between buildings, maximum height, minimum front yard, minimum rear yard, minimum side yard, minimum lot width, minimum lot area, use, FAR, parking and minimum lot area per dwelling unit. The AH overlay can vary all of these zone requirements, however, staff does not anticipate that uses other than residential need to be allowed. If we use a tool this flexible, then staff suggests that application of the AH overlay be a four -step process conceptual/ final (like SPA). Further, this type of overlay will not lend itself to a city -wide overlay approach, rather it must be done on a site by site basis. A suggestion which Glenn Horn made regarding the AH overlay was to evaluate 6 scattered sites and determine what needs to be done to make them work. Once a list is developed for each site, we can determine if common areas exist and use that as a foundation for the AH overlay. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that P &Z send the AH zone /overlay to Council with specific suggestions for changes in the zone district, if necessary and specific direction regarding the approach the overlay should take. 5 roE; 5cs` cl.`t \ ��OJ ,R-(S 3.br, ti s. is o ©� Mid // 3��fo 1 I loaf'. n idca�Z -A.S 5.�Sa,oOO m�cA $,pap_ moci. (o�,000 C)OAAZ ;nes '4 3a, 12 -�sSo, oo,-D.., :Ck 10� �21,aco w,: a, .Cn ktsg. LA ; CCQ3,00� ,M;Q 5 abr cio s-'. , ci �a, 00� 3tA41;Ms /5, 000s4 jai 1 �^' � 1, 000 rn, Ck /-/Soo F.A. may. 15 Su;�le1:�1S,oC�oS� into 60, into S 4, is l roc)„ Qon uS �a,000 R -Co go fA a qa. xbr ► i:m Qo 'S4• ¢CLrd-".tol-e. 144o sS. q m SLI,Dad M-15 4500FA 3..c( .26r.W" clap b-F Q:(6.- &abjt 18oEn, (7r-i 8S So ®S So 45 too \ ��OJ 1 4' fry. r,, TO: Aspen City Council Housing Authority FROM: Glenn Horn and Chuck Vidal THRU: Tom Baker, Acting Planning Director Jim L. Adamski, Housing Director RE: Planning For Affordable Housing: Update Introduction and Summary This memorandum updates you on our progress in developing additional local affordable housing. We are seeking your comments regarding proposed selection criteria for affordable housing sites. sites. During the past two weeks we have worked cooperatively with the staff to inventory potential affordable housing sites within the original Aspen Townsite, Smuggler, Riverside and Ute Avenue areas. Simultaneously, we have been working on the Billings parcel. Chuck Vidal will report to you on the Billings parcel at the work session. This memorandum provides background for the work session by addressing the following issues: 1. Review of planning approach; 2. Inventory Summary; 3. Housing Objectives; 4. Conflicting Community Goals 5. Housing Preservation and Production Techniques; and 6. Affordable Housing Site Selection Criteria. Review of Planning Approach As you recall from our outline, we are pursuing several approaches to the housing problem. We are addressing known potential housing sites such as the Billings and Bavarian Lodge parcels and simultaneously searching for new sites to pursue within the Aspen Area. We anticipate several new affordable housing projects to be identified and pursued from our search. We may possibly recommend and draft legislation to enable projects to proceed. Inventory Summary We initiated the inventory within the original Aspen Townsite and additions. The inventory for the City limits is complete with the exception of Aspen Grove, Knollwood, Eastwood and Snowbunny. The site selection area will be expanded to the entire Aspen Area in the next few weeks. At this point in the process, we have not applied any selection criteria to the inventory to narrow the field. We anticipate the inventory will decrease in size significantly as we apply selection criteria. Originally, we intended to present the detailed inventory at this meeting. Instead, we have decided to present only the results of the inventory and keep the details confidential. We are reluctant to release the locations of individual sites for fear of irritating individual property owners and increasing real estate speculation. The entire inventory including site pictures can be made available to the City Council on a confidential basis. Table 1 summarizes the inventory to date. The inventory contains 51 developed and undeveloped parcels selected by driving down every street in Aspen. Site selection has been subjective. All noteworthy historic sites have been excluded. Under Utilized Vacant sites 8 14 Table 1 Inventory Summary Parcel Types Potential Tear Down Sites SF DUP 4 D.U. Lodges MF* 19 * Building containing 16 dwelling units Source: Chuck Vidal and Glenn Horn, July 9, 1989 1 Table 2 identifies in which neighborhood the sites are located. Table 2 Location of Sites by Neighborhood Neighborhood Number of Sites ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- West End 16 Smuggler 2 East Side 17 Shadow Mountain 16 Total 51 Source: Chuck Vidal and Glenn Horn, July 9, 1989 Housing Objectives Working on the inventory and looking at real estate subject to severe speculative development pressure confirmed that the two objectives of the community housing program should be: 1. Affordable housing preservation; and 2. Affordable housing production. An Affordable housing preservation program may not be as politically acceptable as affordable housing production, however they are equally important objectives of the housing program. We believe our effort should focus on both objectives. Conflicting Community Goals It is clear to us the community objectives of growth rate control, provision of services including parking, adequate parks, recreation and open space and preserving the scale of the community may conflict with housing preservation and production. The conflict between growth rate and housing production may not be resolvable. To increase the affordable housing inventory the community may have to: 1. Borrow from future years quotas; or 2. Increase the growth residential growth quota. Affordable housing production will significantly increase demand for community facilities, particularly parks, open space, trails and recreational facilities. The City should resist the temptation to utilize parks and open space land for housing because the City already owns the land. The City's effort to produce affordable housing needs to be matched by an effort to enhance parks and recreational facilities which are utilized by the locals far more then second home owners. Utilizing parks and open space land for affordable housing will compound the problem. Preserving the scale of the community is perhaps the most sensitive problem affecting affordable housing production and preservation because it is somewhat subjective. We pose the following questions for the Council to respond to at the work session to assist us in developing an understanding Council's direction. Should sub - standard existing affordable housing on under - utilized sites be preserved (i.e. Billings) in an effort to maintain scale and the character of Aspen ; or should such housing be razed and replaced with modern affordable housing with less character? Would some of the recently constructed large residences in the East Side (i.e. Hopkins and Hyman Avenues) or in West End (i.e North Avenue, Victoria Place [Agate]) be more acceptable or acceptable to the community if they housed four, five or six studio, one, or two bedroom affordable housing units? We recognize it is difficult to general level without specific seeking a general direction from specific sites will lend themsel,� respond to these questions on a projects to consider. We are the Council and understand that es to specific design solutions. Housing Preservation and Production Techniques At this point we are not sure of the techniques to be utilized to preserve and produce affordable housing. We suspect techniques will evolve as we become involved with individual projects. However, it is apparent that to achieve the community housing objectives the City may have to do one of the following: Create new legislation standards or development density, parking, open dedications and water tap Financially subsidize production projects; and compromising development fees such as: permitted space, setbacks, park fees; housing preservation or 3. Exempt some free - market dwelling units from GMQS if they are part of a affordable housing project. These are techniques which we shall analyze as mechanisms to develop affordable housing. Affordable Housing Site Selection criteria We are seeking you direction regarding affordable housing site selection criteria. Please keep in mind site selection will not be an exclusively objective, quantitative process. The process will probably be based upon a combination of quantitative and qualitative factors. We propose the following selection criteria for your consideration: 1. Financial feasibility; 2. Location; 3. Proximity to essential public services; 4. Site availability; 5. Neighborhood compatibility including factors such scale and parking impacts; and 6. Likelihood of redevelopment for speculative purposes. 7989. CC bl,,& ja., . g, GG 14,v, Prdjl- 6(1�- jln ` �,� - E" 20 �r j" f wj 4 6, r," t- dL` - C_AO r r' O _ - =_ ,! nFA / // Al',, , q �/, / � _� z,4 r-4-, - � . � G � r Q � T o ,_ Jl F- -Air Y - 35Z2/ Lo AFFORDABLE HOUSING ZONE DISTRICT Affordable Housing (AH). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District is to provide for the use of land for the production of low, moderate and middle income housing and Resident Occupied Units, (as defined by the Housing Authority) free from speculative investment influence. The Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District is for residential use by permanent residents of the Community. Recreational and institutional uses customarily found in proximity to residential uses are included as conditional uses. Lands in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District should be scattered throughout the City to ensure a mix of housing types, including those which are affordable by its working residents; at the same time the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District can protect the City's neighborhoods from rezoning pressures that other non - community oriented zone districts may produce. Further, lands in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District lands should be located within walking distance of the center of the City, or on transit routes. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. 1. Residential uses restricted to low, moderate and middle income guidelines as defined by the Aspen /Pitkin Housing Authority must comprise at least 80 percent of the unit mix and floor area of the development. Resident Occupied Units, as defined by the Aspen /Pitkin Housing Authority, may comprise up to 20 percent of the unit mix and floor area of the development. Residential uses may be comprised of single - family, duplex and multi - family dwelling units; 2. Home occupations; and 3. Accessory buildings and uses. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Art. 7, Div. 3. 1. Open use recreation site; 2. Day care center; and 3. Satellite dish antennae. D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and condi- tional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. These dimensional requirements may be varied by Special Review pursuant to Art. 7, Div. 4. Applicant's proposing to subdivide to take to take advantage of FAR and /or density increases are prohibited. 1. Minimum lot size (sq.ft.): 4,000 2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (sq.ft.): Detached residential dwelling: 3,000 Duplex: 3,000 For multi - family sq. ft. or less 43,560 sq. ft. following sq. ft studio: 1 bedroom: 2 bedroom: 3 bedroom: Units with more than 3 bedroom per 400 square For multi - family dwellings than 27,000 sq. ft. the requirements apply: studio: 1,000 1 bedroom: 1,250 2 bedroom: 2,100 3 bedroom: 3,630 Units with more than 3 bedrooms: one (1) bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot area. 3. Minimum lot width (ft.): 40 4. Minimum front yard (ft.): principal building: 10 accessory building: 15 5. Minimum side yard (ft.): The minimum side yard for single - family and duplex dwellings 0 ft. for each side yard; 15 ft. total minimum for both side yards. The minimum side yard for multi - family dwellings shall be 5 feet. 6. Minimum rear yard (ft.): principal building: 10 accessory building: 5 7. Maximum height (ft.): 25 8. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (ft.) 10 9. Percent of open space required for building site: 25 percent. 10. External floor area ratio (applies to conforming and nonconforming lots of record). dwellings on (lot size can by special requirements 300 400 800 1,200 3 lot of 27,000 be increased to review.) The apply: bedrooms: one (1) feet of lot area. on a lot of more following sq. ft. DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS Lot Size Allowable (SO.Ft.) SO. Ft. 0- 3,000 50 sq.ft. of floor area for each 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 1,500 sq.ft. of floor area. 3,000- 6,000 1,500 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 20 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,100 sq.ft. of floor area. 6,000- 9,000 2,100 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 10 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,400 sq.ft. of floor area. 9,000+ 2,400 sq.ft. of floor area. DUPLEX Lot Size Allowable (SO.Ft.) SO.Ft. 0- 3,000 60 sq.ft. of floor area for each 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 1,800 sq.ft. of floor area. 3,000- 6,000 1,800 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 30 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,700 sq.ft. of floor area. 6,000- 9,000 2,700 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 20 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 3,300 sq.ft. of floor area. 9,000+ 3 3,300 sq.ft. of floor area. Lot Size 0- 27,000 s.f 27,001 s.f- 43,560 s.f 43,561 s.f- 3 acres > 3 acres- 6 acres > 6 acres- 9 acres IwL0INilC2 QVIJO M Allowable SO. Ft. 1.1:1 .36:1, increased to 1:1 by special review .36:1 .33:1 .30:1 > 9 acres- 18 acres .27:1 >18 acres .24:1 11. Internal floor area ratio: no requirement E. Off - street narking requirement. The following off - street parking spaces shall be provided for each use in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District, subject to the provisions of Art. 5, Div. 3. Off - street parking requirements may be varied by Special Review pursuant to Article 7, Div. 4 up to a maximum of 1 space /bedroom or 2 spaces /dwelling unit whichever is less. affordable.) 4 TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Tom Baker, Planning Office RE: Affordable Housing Zone District DATE: March 26, 1989 PURPOSE: The purpose of this item is to continue public discussion on the Affordable Housing Zone District. As you know the purpose of this zone district is to provide the City with a zone other than R /MF or R /MFA which allows higher density development for affordable housing. The reason staff is initiating this discussion is we have been getting inquiries about providing affordable housing on parcels scattered throughout the Community which are not zoned R /MF. Many of these parcels are small sites where rezoning to R /MF or R /MFA may set an undesirable president. NOTE: If the P &Z desires the term Affordable can be augmented with another term, perhaps Resident (Affordable Resident Housing is the term being proposed for use in the County's Code). Since our last meeting, staff has discussed this subject with several individuals concerned about providing incentives for affordable housing. The results of those meetings has been the identification of several issues or limiting factors for providing affordable housing. Those factors are: 1. The need to provide a free market component in the zone district to off -set the cost of land and perhaps the ability to exempt the free market units from GMQS; 2. The need to provide relief from the high cost of water tap fees; 3. The need to reduce the off - street parking requirements for a project which can mitigate this impact in another fashion; 4. What are appropriate FAR, side yard and lot size? In terms of including a free market component in the AH zone (perhaps exempt from GMQS), we began evaluating a 90:10 or 80:20 split. We soon came to the conclusion that due to economics,if this idea were going to be successful, the split would need to be much greater, perhaps 70:30 or 60:40. We reached this conclusion because of the community's experience with the old 70:30 provision of the code which allowed GMQS Exemption for the 30% free market component of a project if 70% of the project was affordable housing. To my knowledge, the only project which attempted to take advantage of this code provision was the Marolt property proposal. If the 70:30 did not attract investors in an earlier era, it is even less likely to do so in today's market. The idea of a 60:40 affordable, free market split was unattractive and resembled the R /MF zone in many ways. Remember that to be competitive in the GMP, projects are already providing 50 or 60 percent affordable housing. If we grant this exemption, then there will be no reason to compete. Further, the idea of instituting another GMQS Exemption did not seem to be appropriate given existing concerns about growth. Finally, the group had some doubts about ever being able to satisfy the free market forces with incentives and regardless of how many incentives were provided more would always be requested. Perhaps the P &Z said it best when Jim Colombo and others stated that we should attempt to direct market forces (speculation) in areas the community finds appropriate (oranges instead of watermelons). One way that we may be able to off -set some of the cost of land is by allowing Resident Occupied Units in this district. Resident Occupied Units are dwelling units which are available to permanent residents of the Community with no price or income restrictions. It may be appropriate for projects in the AH Zone to consist of an 80:20 affordable, resident occupied mix with a cap of 20% on the FAR allowed for the Resident Occupied Units. This is an area of discussion in which the Housing Office should participate because enforcement may be complicated and to determine if they feel these units are needed. In summary, staff finds that it is important to retain the 100% affordable /resident nature of the AH Zone. Water tap fees have become a burden on affordable housing projects, however, the City's land use code is not the appropriate instrument to resolve this problem. Council has already been made aware of this issue during discussions of Ordinance 47. Off - street parking requirements are expensive to meet and often are credited as one of the reasons that affordable housing projects are not feasible. In staff's experience, the location of a development can significantly effect the amount of traffic which is generated by the development. For example, Centennial and the Smuggler area in general do not experience the typical "rush hour" traffic phenomenon which can be expected from an area with that number of dwelling units. In staff's opinion, that is because residents of that area do not rely on the automobile as their only means of transportation: walking, biking and free transit on 20 minute headway are also primary means of transportation to work and recreation. In terms of parking (storage of the automobile) Centennial's parking lots are always full. Therefore, in staff's opinion, the location of a 2 development can mitigate traffic impacts, but car parking (storage) is still needed. The question becomes how can a development deal with the parking needs of the project in a more cost effective way than is typically the case. Suggestions to do this include: 1. Park on the street- this approach will likely result in neighborhood opposition to all AH rezonings. 2. Allow a certain percent of the required open space to be used for surface parking- this would need to be addressed on a case by case basis taking into account the size of the project and available open space in the immediate area. 3. Allow the stacking of automobiles as a way to reduce the space required for parking- this approach could work if there is a coordinated management approach to parking automobiles. 4. The development could have an off site holding lot - This approach could work with appropriate transit to and from the holding area. Again special management would be needed. At this time, staff recommends 1 sp /br up to a maximum of 2 sps /unit plus 10% for guest parking. This can be reduced by special review and staff can develop special review criteria based upon discussion at the public hearing. In terms of FAR, a request was made to consider allowing 1:1 FAR for multi - family lots of 27,001 sf - 43,560 sf by special review. This may be a reasonable request if we can develop some appropriate special review criteria; however, .75:1 may be more reasonable for parcels of this size. One criteria that P &Z indicated may be appropriate is that a certain percent of the project should be in the low and moderate income category. For discussion purposes, we suggest that 50% of the project shall be low income and 25% moderate income. In terms of single - family and duplex lots, staff finds that FAR should be substantially reduced from the free - market zones given the nature of housing in this zone district (Affordable and Resident Occupied). In terms of minimum side yard, staff finds that the typical approach to side yard setbacks is too rigid. Rather, we propose no minimum side yard, but a total side yard minimum of 15 ft. This will allow developers to take advantage of zero lot line concepts and provide usable yards on smaller lots. 3 In terms of lot size, staff proposes that P &Z consider reducing the standard 6,000 sf minimum to 4,000 sf. Staff finds that the combination of reduced FAR, side yard and lot size will help make the AH Zone flexible for Affordable /Resident Occupied housing. CONCLUSION: Staff is taking a "go slow" approach to the AH Zone. We do not want to curtail enthusiasm for affordable housing by accepting poor quality projects. Staff also agrees with P &Z's contention that the Community should direct speculation into areas that are desirable, in other words the AH Zone is an orange and we should not try to make it a watermelon. The following is a draft of the AH Zone. AFFORDABLE HOUSING ZONE DISTRICT Affordable Housing (AH). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District is to provide for the use of land for the production of low, moderate and middle income housing and Resident Occupied Units, (as defined by the Housing Authority) free from speculative investment influence. The Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District is for residential use by permanent residents of the Community. Recreational and institutional uses customarily found in proximity to residential uses are included as conditional uses. Lands in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District should be scattered throughout the City to ensure a mix of housing types, including those which are affordable by its working residents; at the same time the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District can protect the City's neighborhoods from rezoning pressures that other non - community oriented zone districts may produce. Further, lands in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District lands should be located within walking distance of the center of the City, or on transit routes. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. 1. Residential uses restricted to low, moderate and middle income guidelines as defined by the Aspen /Pitkin Housing Authority must comprise at least 80 percent of the unit mix and floor area of the development. Resident Occupied Units, as defined by the Aspen /Pitkin Housing Authority, may comprise up to 20 percent of the unit mix and floor area of the development. Residential uses may be comprised of single - family, duplex and C. multi - family dwelling units; 2. Home occupations; and 3. Accessory buildings and uses. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Art. 7, Div. 3. 1. Open use recreation site; 2. Day care center; and 3. Satellite dish antennae. D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and condi- tional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. These dimensional requirements may be varied by Special Review pursuant to Art. 7, Div. 4. Applicant's proposing to subdivide to take to take advantage of FAR and /or density increases are prohibited. 1. Minimum lot size (sq.ft.): 4,000 2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (sq.ft.): Detached residential dwelling: 3,000 Duplex: 3,000 For multi - family dwellings on a lot of 27,000 sq. ft. or less (lot size can be increased to 43,560 sq. ft. by special review.) The following sq. ft. requirements apply: studio: 300 1 bedroom: 400 2 bedroom: 800 3 bedroom: 1,200 Units with more than 3 bedroom per 400 square For multi - family dwellings than 27,000 sq. ft. the requirements apply: studio: 1,000 1 bedroom: 1,250 2 bedroom: 2,100 3 bedroom: 3,630 Units with more than bedroom per 1,000 area. 3. Minimum lot width (ft.): 4. Minimum front yard (ft.): principal building: accessory building: 5. Minimum side yard (ft.): single - family and duplex 5 40 bedrooms: one (1) feet of lot area. on a lot of more following sq. ft. 3 bedrooms: one (1) square feet of lot 10 15 The minimum side yard for dwellings 0 ft. for each side yard; 15 ft. total minimum for both side yards. The minimum side yard for multi - family dwellings shall be 5 feet. 6. Minimum rear yard (ft.): principal building: 10 accessory building: 5 7. Maximum height (ft.): 25 8. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (ft.): 10 9. Percent of open space required for building site: 25 percent. 10. External floor area ratio (applies to conforming and nonconforming lots of record). Lot Size (SO.Ft.) DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS Allowable SO. Ft. 0- 3,000 50 sq.ft. of floor area for each 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 1,500 sq.ft. of floor area. 3,000- 6,000 1,500 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 20 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,100 sq.ft. of floor area. 6,000- 9,000 2,100 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 10 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,400 sq.ft. of floor area. 9,000+ 2,400 sq.ft. of floor area. DUPLEX Lot Size Allowable (SO.Ft.) SO.Ft. 0- 3,000 60 sq.ft. of floor area for each 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 1,800 sq.ft. of floor area. 3,000- 6,000 1,800 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 30 sq.ft. of floor area 2 for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,700 sq.ft. of floor area. 6,000- 9,000 2,700 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 20 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 3,300 sq.ft. of floor area. 9,000+ 3,300 sq.ft. of floor area. MULTI- FAMILY Allowable Lot Size SO.Ft. 0- 27,000 s.f 1.1:1 27,001 s.f- 43,560 s.f .36:1, increased to 1:1 by special review 43,561 s.f- 3 acres .36:1 > 3 acres- 6 acres .33:1 > 6 acres- 9 acres .30:1 > 9 acres- 18 acres .27:1 >18 acres .24:1 11. Internal floor area ratio: no requirement E. Off - street narking requirement. The following off - street parking spaces shall be provided for each use in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District, subject to the provisions of Art. 5, Div. 3. Off - street parking requirements may be varied by Special Review pursuant to Article 7, Div. 4 up to a maximum of 1 space /bedroom or 2 spaces /dwelling unit whichever is less. affordable.) 7 r- i ryio 0 kA MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Tom Baker, Planning Office J6 RE: Affordable Housing Zone District DATE: June 2, 1989 PURPOSE: The purpose of this item is to continue the public hearing for the creation of an Affordable Housing zone district. At P &Z's March 26, 1989 meeting staff brought forward an Affordable Housing zone which resembled the R /MF zone. During that meeting, a number of comments were made: 1. Required open space should be reduced to 20 %. 2. Parking in required open space may be appropriate if landscaping and design considerations are adequate. 3. Resident Occupied Units may comprise 20 % -25% of the total project. 4. All development in the AH zone is deed restricted. 5. We should strive for more units than bedrooms. 6. Perhaps we can look at a lot area /occupant ratio. 7. District needs to be flexible with unit mix. Do not create a mandatory unit mix for district (low, middle, moderate). 8. If possible, concentrate on low and moderate units. 9. Applicant should be guided by the Housing Office as to the project unit mix. 10. Zero lot line may be a good concept to employ, but appropriate setbacks should be employed on the perimeter of the development. NOTE: Staff has attached the March 26th memo to this memo. AH Overlay -- Since our last meeting staff has had time to review our thinking about the direction we have been taking on the AH zone. Further, it has become evident that the City Council expects the AH zone to be a major tool for addressing the housing problem. Given these facts staff has begun to explore the concept of an AH Overlay. The reason for the AH overlay is to ensure that the development which is created is compatible with the neighborhood. Staff has some concerns that a zone district with specific area and bulk requirements will not be flexible enough to conform to the character of the neighborhood. Due to time constraints in the office, staff will make a presentation of the advantages and disadvantages of the overlay concept at the meeting. P &Z and the public can then make comments and staff will prepare a follow -up memo for the meeting on June 13. The June 13th meeting will be a continuation of the public hearing and P &Z will have a minimum of one hour to discuss the AH overlay /zone concept. ah.pz K TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Tom Baker, Planning Office RE: Affordable Housing Zone District DATE: March 26, 1989 PURPOSE: The purpose of this item is to continue public discussion on the Affordable Housing Zone District. As you know the purpose of this zone district is to provide the City with a zone other than R /MF or R /MFA which allows higher density development for affordable housing. The reason staff is initiating this discussion is we have been getting inquiries about providing affordable housing on parcels scattered throughout the Community which are not zoned R /MF. Many of these parcels are small sites where rezoning to R /MF or R /MFA may set an undesirable president. NOTE: If the P &Z desires the term Affordable can be augmented with another term, perhaps Resident (Affordable Resident Housing is the term being proposed for use in the County's Code). Since our last meeting, staff has discussed this subject with several individuals concerned about providing incentives for affordable housing. The results of those meetings has been the identification of several issues or limiting factors for providing affordable housing. Those factors are: 1. The need to provide a free market component in the zone district to off -set the cost of land and perhaps the ability to exempt the free market units from GMQS; 2. The need to provide relief from the high cost of water tap fees; 3. The need to reduce the off - street parking requirements for a project which can mitigate this impact in another fashion; 4. What are appropriate FAR, side yard and lot size? In terms of including a free market component in the AH zone (perhaps exempt from GMQS), we began evaluating a 90:10 or 80:20 split. We soon came to the conclusion that due to economics,if this idea were going to be successful, the split would need to be much greater, perhaps 70:30 or 60:40. We reached this conclusion because of the community's experience with the old 70:30 provision of the code which allowed GMQS Exemption for the 30% free market component of a project if 70% of the project was affordable housing. To my knowledge, the only project which attempted to take advantage of this code provision was the Marolt Property proposal. If the 70:30 did not attract investors in an earlier era, it is even less likely to do so in today's market. The idea of a 60:40 affordable, free market split was unattractive and resembled the R /MF zone in many ways. Remember that to be competitive in the GMP, projects are already providing 50 or 60 percent affordable housing. If we grant this exemption, then there will be no reason to compete. Further, the idea of instituting another GMQS Exemption did not seem to be appropriate given existing concerns about growth. Finally, the group had some doubts about ever being able to satisfy the free market forces with incentives and regardless of how many incentives were provided more would always be requested. Perhaps the P &Z said it best when Jim Colombo and others stated that we should attempt to direct market forces (speculation) in areas the community finds appropriate (oranges instead of watermelons). One way that we may be able to off -set some of the cost of land is by allowing Resident Occupied Units in this district. Resident Occupied Units are dwelling units which are available to permanent residents of the Community with no price or income restrictions. It may be appropriate for projects in the AH Zone to consist of an 80:20 affordable, resident occupied mix with a cap of 20% on the FAR allowed for the Resident Occupied Units. This is an area of discussion in which the Housing Office should participate because enforcement may be complicated and to determine if they feel these units are needed. In summary, staff finds that it is important to retain the 100% affordable /resident nature of the AH Zone. Water tap fees have become a burden on affordable housing projects, however, the City's land use code is not the appropriate instrument to resolve this problem. Council has already been made aware of this issue during discussions of Ordinance 47. Off - street parking requirements are expensive to meet and often are credited as one of the reasons that affordable housing projects are not feasible. In staff's experience, the location of a development can significantly effect the amount of traffic which is generated by the development. For example, Centennial and the Smuggler area in general do not experience the typical "rush hour" traffic phenomenon which can be expected from an area with that number of dwelling units. In staff's opinion, that is because residents of that area do not rely on the automobile as their only means of transportation: walking, biking and free transit on 20 minute headway are also primary means of transportation to work and recreation. In terms of parking (storage of the automobile) Centennial's parking lots are always full. Therefore, in staff's opinion, the location of a `a development can mitigate traffic impacts, but car parking (storage) is still needed. The question becomes how can a development deal with the parking needs of the project in a more cost effective way than is typically the case. Suggestions to do this include: 1. Park on the street- this approach will likely result in neighborhood opposition to all AH rezonings. 2. Allow a certain percent of the required open space to be used for surface parking- this would need to be addressed on a case by case basis taking into account the size of the project and available open space in the immediate area. 3. Allow the stacking of automobiles as a way to reduce the space required for parking- this approach could work if there is a coordinated management approach to parking automobiles. 4. The development could have an off site holding lot - This approach could work with appropriate transit to and from the holding area. Again special management would be needed. At this time, staff recommends 1 sp /br up to a maximum of 2 sps /unit plus 10% for guest parking. This can be reduced by special review and staff can develop special review criteria based upon discussion at the public hearing. In terms of FAR, a request was made to consider allowing 1:1 FAR for multi - family lots of 27,001 sf - 43,560 sf by special review. This may be a reasonable request if we can develop some appropriate special review criteria; however, .75:1 may be more reasonable for parcels of this size. One criteria that P &Z indicated may be appropriate is that a certain percent of the project should be in the low and moderate income category. For discussion purposes, we suggest that 50% of the project shall be low income "and 25% moderate income. In terms of single - family and duplex lots, staff finds that FAR should be substantially reduced from the free - market zones given the nature of housing in this zone district (Affordable and Resident Occupied). In terms of minimum side yard, staff finds that the typical approach to side yard setbacks is too rigid. Rather, we propose no minimum side yard, but a total side yard minimum of 15 ft. This will allow developers to take advantage of zero lot line concepts and provide usable yards on smaller lots. 3 In terms of lot size, staff proposes that P &Z consider reducing the standard 6,000 sf minimum to 4,000 sf. Staff finds that the combination of reduced FAR, side yard and lot size will help make the AH Zone flexible for Affordable /Resident Occupied housing. CONCLUSION: Staff is taking a "go slow" approach to the AH Zone. We do not want to curtail enthusiasm for affordable housing by accepting poor quality projects. Staff also agrees with P &Z's contention that the Community should direct speculation into areas that are desirable, in other words the AH Zone is an orange and we should not try to make it a watermelon. The following is a draft of the AH Zone. AFFORDABLE HOUSING ZONE DISTRICT Affordable Housing (AH). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District is to provide for the use of land for the production of low, moderate and middle income housing and Resident Occupied Units, (as defined by the Housing Authority) free from speculative investment influence. The Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District is for residential use by permanent residents of the Community. Recreational and institutional uses customarily found in proximity to residential uses are included as conditional uses. Lands in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District should be scattered throughout the City to ensure a mix of housing types, including those which are affordable by its working residents; at the same time the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District can protect the City's neighborhoods from rezoning pressures that other non - community oriented zone districts may produce. Further, lands in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District lands should be located within walking distance of the center of the City, or on transit routes. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. 1. Residential uses restricted to low, moderate and middle income guidelines as defined by the Aspen /Pitkin Housing Authority must comprise at least 80 percent of the unit mix and floor area of the development. Resident Occupied Units, as defined by the Aspen /Pitkin Housing Authority, may comprise up to 20 percent of the unit mix and floor area of the development. Residential uses may be comprised of single - family, duplex and 4 multi - family dwelling units; 2. Home occupations; and 3. Accessory buildings and uses. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Art. 7, Div. 3. 1. Open use recreation site; 2. Day care center; and 3. Satellite dish antennae. D. Dimensional requirements The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and condi- tional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. These dimensional requirements may be varied by Special Review pursuant to Art. 7, Div. 4. Applicant's proposing to subdivide to take to take advantage of FAR and /or density increases are prohibited. 1. Minimum lot size (sq.ft.): 4,000 2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (sq.ft.): Detached residential dwelling: 3,000 Duplex: 3,000 For multi - family dwellings on a lot of 27,OOC sq. ft. or less the following sq. ft. requirements apply: studio: 300 1 bedroom: 400 2 bedroom: 800 3 bedroom: 1,200 Units with more than 3 bedrooms: one (1) bedroom per 400 square feet of lot area. For multi - family dwellings on a lot of more than 27,000 sq. ft. the following sq. ft. requirements apply: studio: 1,000 1 bedroom: 1,250 2 bedroom: 2,100 3 bedroom: 3,630 Units with more than 3 bedrooms: one (1) bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot area. 3. Minimum lot width (ft.): 40 4. Minimum front yard (ft.): principal building: 10 accessory building: 15 5. Minimum side yard (ft.): The minimum side yard for single - family and duplex dwellings 0 ft. for each side yard; 15 ft. total minimum for both side 5 yards. The minimum side yard for multi - family dwellings shall be 5 feet. 6. Minimum rear yard (ft.): principal building: 10 accessory building: 5 7. Maximum height (ft.): 25 8. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (ft.): 10 9. Percent of open space required for building site: 35 percent. 10. External floor area ratio (applies to conforming and nonconforming lots of record). DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS Lot Size Allowable (SO.Ft.) SO. Ft. 0- 3,000 50 sq.ft. of floor area for each 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 1,500 sq.ft. of floor area. 3,000- 6,000 1,500 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 20 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,100 sq.ft. of floor area. 6,000- 9,000 2,100 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 10 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,400 sq.ft. of floor area. 9,000+ 2,400 sq.ft. of floor area. DUPLEX Lot Size Allowable (SO.Ft.) SO.Ft. 0- 3,000 60 sq.ft. of floor area for each 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 1,800 sq.ft. of floor area. 3,000- 6,000 1,800 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 30 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. 6 in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,700 sq.ft. of floor area. 6,000- 9,000 2,700 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 20 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 3,300 sq.ft. of floor area. 9,000+ 3,300 sq.ft. of floor area. MULTI- FAMILY Allowable Lot Size SO.Ft. 0- 27,000 s.f 1:1 27,001 s.f- 43,560 s.f .36:1, increased to .75:1 by special review 43,561 s.f- 3 acres .36:1 > 3 acres- 6 acres .33:1 > 6 acres- 9 acres .30:1 > 9 acres- 18 acres .27:1 >18 acres .24:1 11. Internal floor area ratio: no requirement E. Off - street narking requirement. The following off - street parking spaces shall be provided for each use in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District, subject to the provisions of Art. 5, Div. 3. Off - street parking 'requirements may be varied by Special Review pursuant to Article 7, Div. 4. 1. All residential uses: 1 space /bedroom up to a maximum of 2 spaces /dwelling unit plus 10 percent. affordable.l 7 A-1 k, TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Tom Baker, Planning Office Jg RE: Affordable Housing Zone District Discussion DATE: February 17, 1989 PURPOSE: The purpose of this item is to begin discussions regarding an Affordable Housing Zone District. The purpose of this zone district is to provide the City with a zone other than R /MF or R /MFA which allows higher density development for affordable housing. The reason staff is initiating this discussion is we have been getting inquiries about providing affordable housing on parcels scattered throughout the Community which are not zoned R /MF. Many of these parcels are small sites where rezoning to R /MF may set an undesirable president. Tonight's discussion will help staff determine if an Affordable Housing Zone District is necessary. If staff receives a favorable response tonight, then we will schedule a public hearing for this new zone district in March. The following is a draft of a potential AH Zone. AFFORDABLE HOUSING ZONE DISTRICT Affordable Housing (AH). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District is to provide for the use of land for the production of low, moderate and middle income housing. (as defined by the Housing Authority) free --from - s}zseulat' 3XQ invect=-nt ^F'll^ ^ ^° The Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District is for residential use by Peru.- - ++CCresidents'' of the Community. Recreational and institutional uses customarily found in proximity to residential uses are included as conditional uses. Lands in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District should be scattered throughout the City to ensure a mix of housing types, c are affordable at the same time the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District can protect the City's neighborhoods from rezoning pressures that other non - community oriented zone districts may produce. Further, the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District lands should be located within walking distance of the center of the City, or il 4 4 1, 4% on transit routes. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. Aspen/Ratkin Housing r. -- - Residential uses includ' single - family, duplex and multi - family dwelling units r1c � ,k_ To Ju— tAolc } 2. Home occupations; and 3. Accessory buildings and uses. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Art. 7, Div. 3. 1. Open use recreation site; 2. Day care center; and 3. Satellite dish antennae. D_ Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and condi- tional uses in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District. These dimensional requirements may be varied by Special Review pursuant to Art. 7, Div. 4. 1. Minimum lot size (sq.ft.): 6,000 2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (sq.ft.): Detached residential dwelling: 3,000 Duplex: 3,000 For multi - family dwellings on a lot of 27,000 sq. ft. or less the following sq. ft. requirements apply: studio: 300 1 bedroom: 400 2 bedroom: 800 3 bedroom: 1,200 Units with more than 3 bedrooms: one (1) bedroom per 400 square feet of lot area. For multi - family dwellings on a lot of more than 27,000 sq. ft. the following sq. ft. requirements apply: studio: 1,000 1 bedroom: 1,250 2 bedroom: 2,100 3 bedroom: 3,630 Units with more than 3 bedrooms: one (1) bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot area. 3. Minimum lot width (ft.): 60 4. Minimum front yard (ft.): principal building: 10 2 accessory building: 15 5. Minimum side yard (ft.): The following side yard requirements apply to detached residential and duplex dwellings only: Lot Size ( sq.ft) 0 -4500 4500 -6000 C1411hID Minimum Size for each side yard (ft.) 6.7 Total of both side yards (ft.) 10 ft. 5 10 ft. , plus 1 foot for each additional 300 s. ft. of lot area, to a maximum of 15 feet of total side yard. 5 15 ft., plus 1 foot for each additional 200 S.ft. of lot area, to a maximum of 20 feet of total side yard. The minimum side yard for multi- family dwellings shall be 5 feet. 6. Minimum rear yard (ft.): principal building: 10 accessory building: 5 7. Maximum height (ft.): 25 8. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (ft.): 10 9. Percent of open space required for building site: 35 percent. 10. External floor area ratio (applies to conforming and nonconforming lots of record): DETACHED RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS Lot Size Allowable (SO.Ft.) SO. Ft. 0- 3,000 80 sq.ft. of floor area for each 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,400 sq.ft. of floor area. 3,000- 9,000 2,400 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 28 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum 3 of 4,080 sq.ft. of floor area. 9,000- 15,000 4,080 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 7 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq. ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 4,500 sq.ft. of floor area. 15,000- 50,000 4,500 sq.ft. of floor area plus 6 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 6,600 sq. ft. of floor area. 50,000+ 6,600 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 2 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft in lot area. DUPLEX Lot Size Allowable (S4.Ft.) S4.Ft. 0- 3,000 90 sq.ft. of floor area for each 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 2,700 sq.ft. of floor area. 3,000- 9,000 2,700 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 30 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in, lot area, up to a maximum of 4,500 sq.ft. of floor area. 9,000- 15,000 4,500 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 7 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 4,920 sq.ft. of floor area. 15,000- 50,000 4,920 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 6 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft. in lot area, up to a maximum of 7,020 sq.ft. of floor area. 50,000+ 4 7,020 sq.ft. of floor area, plus 3 sq.ft. of floor area for each additional 100 sq.ft Lot Size 0- 27,000 s.f 27,00,0 s.f- 3 acres > 3 acres- 6 acres > 6 acres- 9 acres > 9 acres- 18 acres >18 acres in lot area. MULTI- FAMILY Allowable SO. Ft. 1:1 // yf { l /�� S� /zwa4k) .36:1 .33:1 30:1 .27:1 24:1 11. Internal floor area ratio: no requirement E. Off - street parkin requirement. The following off - street parking spaces shall be provided for each use in the Affordable Housing (AH) Zone District, subject to the provisions of Art. 5, Div. 3. Off- street parking requirements may be varied by Special Review pursuant to Article 7, Div. 4. 1. All residential uses: 1 space /bedroom. 5