ward 3 residential design standards

Ward 3 Residential Design StandardsReport and Recommendations

City of St. Paul Planning Commission - March 13, 2015

Ward 3 Residential Design Standards

Purpose of Study

To respond to the concern that new single family residential construction in the southwestern part of St. Paul is out of character with the surrounding neighborhood, yet is in conformance with our code. (Resolution 14-1324)

Ward 3 Residential Design StandardsSaint Paul’s Ward 3 Residential Design StandardsZoning Code Study Information Sheet

Revised 11/25/14

Timeline*

August September October November

Resolution 14-1324 Passed

Track Comments & Properties (Ongoing) • Meet with Designers/

Builders Date 10/30 • Assemble Info & Prep

Recommendations• Update Nbhd Plan-

ning Committee 11/5

Prep & Review Recom-mendations with Stake-holders, Revise & Submit Packet to NPC Jan 29th

• NPC recommen-dation to Planning Commission(PC)

• NPC rec to PC to release and set hearing

• Comments to NPC, review again

• Sent to PC, Mayor, City Council

• Four readings at CC

Tour area w/ CM Tolbert’s StaffInput from Mpls CPEDInput from DSI & PED StaffCollect Permit DataResearch Past Policy

Gather Input & ConcernsMeet with HDC - CDC 10/21Meet with M-G HLU 10/22

Review RecommendationsMeet with HDC - CDC and M-G HLU prior to 1/29

Current Dimensional Standards

*Pending approval of a resolution extending the deadline for recommendations by one month

DC Committee Meetings Summarize & request further inputMeet with M-G HLU 11/25

Mike Richardson, City PlannerCity of Saint Paul PEDPhone: 651.266.6621Email: [email protected]

https://stpaul.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=1875579&GUID=4D4941FA-277F-4E83-AAB9-B20F0AA664F9&Options=&Search=

https://www.municode.com/library/#!/mn/st._paul/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=PTIILECO_TITVIIIZOCO

http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/cped/WCMS1P-127384

http://www.stpaul.gov/index.aspx?NID=3441

Helpful Links:

Resolution 14-1324

Legislative Code (Search for 63.110, 66.231, 63.501)

CPED (Minneapolis) Report

St Paul PED Current Activities

December January & Beyond

Timeline

• Presented to NPC 2/4, additional information requested• Presented to NPC 3/4


What I’ve Heard (Abridged)

Residents Builders

Architects City Staff


What I’ve Heard (Abridged)

Residents Builders


• Height and bulk of recent construction (new and additions) is too much.

• Eclectic mix of homes is good, but keep differences within reason

• The pattern of open space around structures defines area

• Character changes block by block• Consider sustainable building methods/designs

• Building homes in demand allows people to live in the city, closer to work

• Many homes that look good on outside are in very bad shape on inside

• Old, but well-maintained houses have a higher value, resulting in less interest from investors due to smaller ROI

• New construction is more energy efficient

• It is not inappropriate to mix styles in a neighborhood

• Keep any changes clear and objective• Neighborhoods are continually evolving• Sustainability is very important

• Consider how easy/difficult it would be to get variances with any new rules

• Changes to code or process should not unreasonably increase review/inspection process


IMPACTFULFAIRSMALL

ADMINISTRATIVE COST

NOTOVERLY

RESTRICTIVE

What I’ve Heard So Far (Abridged)

Residents Builders


• Height and bulk of recent construction (new and additions) is too much.

• Eclectic mix of homes is good, but keep differences within reason

• The pattern of open space around structures defines area

• Character changes block by block• Consider sustainable building methods/designs

• Building homes in demand allows people to live in the city, closer to work

• Many homes that look good on outside are in very bad shape on outside

• Old, but well-maintained houses have a higher value, resulting in less interest from investors due to smaller ROI

• New construction is more energy efficient

• It is not inappropriate to mix styles in a neighborhood

• Keep any changes clear and objective• Neighborhoods are continually evolving• Sustainability is very important

• Consider how easy/difficult it would be to get variances with any new rules

• Changes to code or process should not unreasonably increase review/inspection process

BALANCE


• Construction Activity• Policy• Code• Character• Approach• Recommendations• Dimensional Analysis of Recent Projects

Agenda


Construction Activity


Average area for SF Residential homes in M-G and Highland Park:

Average area for SF Residential homes in M-G and Highland Park built between 2005 and 2013:

Square Feet

Square Feet

1590

2673

Construction Activity

Increasing Size

Ward 3 Residential Design StandardsConstruction Activity

Total New Construction and Addition Activity, 2010-2014


New Single Family Home Construction, 2010-2014


Single Family Addition Construction, 2010-2014


New Accessory Building Construction, 2010-2014


So What?

• Number of additions far greater than number of teardowns/new homes (by a factor of 8), so need to make sure that recommendations apply to both

• General stability in the level of activity combined with an increase in the urgency and volume of complaints suggests that there is a problem with the type of construction, not necessarily level of activity


Current Policy

Ward 3 Residential Design StandardsCurrent Policy

• Comp Plan & District Plans Solid backing from City’s Comprehensive Plan and District Plans to preserve the character of established neighborhoods, but character is difficult to define

Ward 3 Residential Design StandardsCurrent Policy

• Comp Plan & District Plans LU 1.5 Identify residential areas where single-family, duplex housing, and small multi-family housing predominate as Established Neighborhoods (see Figure LU-B). The City should maintain the character of Established Neighborhoods.

LU 3.4 Prepare citywide infill housing design standards so that infill housing fits within the context of existing neighborhoods and is compatible with the prevailing pattern of development.

H 2.17. Support creativity in the construction of neighborhood infill housing by proactively developing zoning and design guidelines. Develop, with broad public input, citywide infill housing design standards so that infill housing fits well within the existing Saint Paul neighborhood context. Neighborhood groups should be directly involved...


Related Recent Code Changes


• Function of Code Sec 60.103 Intent and purpose [of zoning code]

Particularly relevant to this topic:

(a) To promote and to protect the public health, safety, morals, aesthetics, economic viability and general welfare of the community;

(b) To implement the policies of the comprehensive plan;

(d) To regulate the location, construction, reconstruction, alteration and use of buildings, structures and land;

(e) To ensure adequate light, air, privacy and convenience of access to property



• Function of Code• Initial Action in 2009

January 2009, Council adopts an interim ordinance to preserve character and quality of life. Goes into effect April 2009. Interim design standards were:



• Function of Code• Initial Action in 2009• Interim Design Standards

• Must be a front door facing the street with visible connection to street

• New development should [not must] relate to the design of adjacent traditional buildings in scale and character

• 15% of public-facing elevations must be window and door openings

• 10% of walls on all sides must be window and door openings

• Parking must be off alley if it exists• Garages must not be closer to street than house, must

not exceed 60% of house width, and must not have doors higher than 9’

• Driveways no wider than 12’, except near garage



• Function of Code• Initial Action in 2009• Interim Design Standards• Adopted Design Standards

• Must be a front door facing the street with visible connection to street

• New development should [not must] relate to the design of adjacent traditional buildings in scale and character

• 15% of public-facing elevations must be window and door openings

• 10% of walls on all sides must be window and door openings

• Parking must be off alley if it exists• Garages must not be closer to street than house, must

not exceed 60% of house width, and must not have doors higher than 9’

• Driveways no wider than 12’, except near garage

Condition requiring compatibility with design of adjacent buildings was removed, primarily due to testimony suggesting that the regulation was too ambiguous and subjective



Current Code

Ward 3 Residential Design StandardsCurrent Code

Sec 63.110. Building Design Standards

In addition to design standards already discussed, other requirements are:

• Entry within front third of structure and delineated with design features

• Building materials and architectural treatments on wall facing street must be similar to those on primary facade

• Code - Regulations of General Applicability

Ward 3 Residential Design StandardsCurrent Code

Section 66.231 - Residential Dimensional Standards• Code - Regulations of General Applicability

• Code - Density and Dimensional Standards


Code in Other Cities


MINNEAPOLIS• Three major zoning changes since 2005 (2005, 2007, 2014)• Floor Area Ratio (FAR) limits (0.5)• Defining grade in context of new construction• Maximum lot coverage for all buildings (45% for R1-R3)• Allow larger homes if context is consistent in scale• Height limit (28’), with maximum for ridge (33’)• Point-based site plan review in which certain attributes have certain point

values; a minimum point total is required for approval


SITE PLAN REVIEW RESIDENTIAL POINT SYSTEM

1 - 4 UNITS

EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS

Exterior building materials are masonry, brick, stone, stucco, wood, cement-based siding, and/or glass

BUILDING HEIGHT

Height is within one-half story of the predominant height of residential buildings within 100 feet of site

4 points

4 points

TREES

Total diameter of trees retained or planted equals 3 inches per 1,000 square feet of total lot area

3 points

STREET-FACING WINDOWS

At least 20% of the walls on each floor facing a public street are windows (does not include half stories)

3 points

DETACHED GARAGE

At least 1 off-street parking space per dwelling unit is provided in a detached structure located entirely in the rear 40 feet or 20% of the lot (whichever is greater) and is at least 20 feet from any habitable portion of the principal structure

3 points

BASEMENT

The structure includes a basement as defined by building code

2 points

REAR/INTERIOR SIDE WINDOWS

At least 10% of the walls on each floor facing a rear or interior side lot line are windows (does not include half stories)

1 point

STORMWATER QUALITY CREDIT

Qualifies for and provides proof of receipt of a City of Minneapolis Stormwater Quality Credit

1 point

FRONT PORCH

The structure includes a 70 square foot open and covered front porch which is not enclosed with windows, screens, or walls - provided at least one existing porch exists within 100 feet of the site, guardrails are no more than 3 feet high and 50% opaque, the porch matches the finish and trim of the dwelling, and is not raw or untreated lumber

AT LEAST 17 TOTAL POINTS REQUIRED

6 points

Designs must also comply with all other applicable standards in the Zoning Code

See Section 530.280 of the

Zoning Code for more information

EFFECTIVE 10-1-2014


EDINA• Graduated interior side yard setbacks based on lot width• Specified setback distances for various accessory structures• Height limits for principal structures based on the number of stories and to

highest point on roof; taller allowed on lots greater than 75’• Height limits for accessory structures - 1.5 stories or 18’• Sidewall articulation (min 1’ x 10’) for principal structures with side walls of

a certain length (30’); allows two permitted architectural elements to count towards this requirement

• Projecting bay/box windows, stoops, porches, chimneys, balconies, pilasters, large second story overhang, port-cocheres


PORTLAND, OR• Height limits based on the width of the structure (1.5 X width)• Maximum lot coverage for all buildings – simple percentage for very small

lots (40%), formula for others • Limit height of entrance based on distance from grade (within 4’)• Exterior material standards (primarily address width of siding width so that

each reveal is less than 6”)• Trim width minimum (3.5”)• Minimum eave projection (12”)


SALT LAKE CITY• Height limit based on either maximum height of roof ridge (28’) or the

average height of other principal buildings on the block face• Height limit for buildings with a flat roof (20’)• Maximum sidewall height limits with increases allowed with additional side

yard space (20’ max, increase 1’ for every 1’ side setback)• Additional building height allowed in historic districts with approval by

review board• Maximum total building coverage – higher percentage allowed on smaller

lots (40% for smaller lots, 35% for larger)


Mapping Character


• Look for geographic trends in various characteristics

• Use “issue sites” brought up by residents layered with characteristics to identify where problems may lie

Ford Pkwy

Montreal Ave

Highland Pkwy

Shepard Rd

7th St

Randolph Ave

Snel

ling

Ave

Edgcumbe Rd

Miss

Rive

rBlv

d

Clev

elan

d Av

e

Lexi

ngto

nPk

wy

FAR in R1-R4

NotInCharacter InCharacter FAR

0.0000 - 0.1770

0.1771 - 0.2445

0.2446 - 0.3193

0.3194 - 0.4262

0.4263 - 0.8012

Character Mapping

Ward 3 Residential Design StandardsCharacter Mapping

WARD 4

WARD 2

WARD 1

Ford Pkwy

Montreal Ave

Highland Pkwy

Shepard Rd

7th St

Randolph Ave

Snel

ling

Ave

Edgcumbe Rd

Miss

Rive

rBlv

d

Clev

elan

d Av

e

Lexi

ngto

nPk

wy

Year Structure Built

Before 1900

1900 - 1925

1925 - 1950

1950 - 1975

1975 - 2000

After 2000

Age of Structures in Ward 3 Zoned R1-R4

Source: Ramsey County and City of Saint Paul

Date: 9/2014 0 1,600 3,200800 FeetDistrict Council Boundary

E

WARD 4

WARD 2

WARD 1

Ford Pkwy

Montreal Ave

Highland Pkwy

Shepard Rd

7th St

Randolph Ave

Snel

ling

Ave

Edgcumbe Rd

Miss

Rive

rBlv

d

Clev

elan

d Av

e

Lexi

ngto

nPk

wy

Year Structure Built

Before 1900

1900 - 1925

1925 - 1950

1950 - 1975

1975 - 2000

After 2000

Age of Structures in Ward 3 Zoned R1-R4



E

• Physical environment followed similar pattern

• New replacing old in northern half


WARD 4

WARD 2

WARD 1

Ford Pkwy

Montreal Ave

Highland Pkwy

Shepard Rd

7th St

Randolph Ave

Snel

ling

Ave

Edgcumbe Rd

Miss

Rive

rBlv

d

Clev

elan

d Av

e

Lexi

ngto

nPk

wy

No Garage Present

Garage Present

Garage Presence in Ward 3



E

WARD 4

WARD 2

WARD 1

Ford Pkwy

Montreal Ave

Highland Pkwy

Shepard Rd

7th St

Randolph Ave

Snel

ling

Ave

Edgcumbe Rd

Miss

Rive

rBlv

d

Clev

elan

d Av

e

Lexi

ngto

nPk

wy

No Garage Present

Garage Present

Garage Presence in Ward 3



E

• Only trait common to most properties


WARD 4

WARD 2

WARD1

Cleveland Ave

Lexington Pkwy

7th St

Miss River Blvd

Ford

Pkw

y

Mon

trea

l Ave

High

land

Pkw

y

ShepardRd

Snelling Ave

Rand

olph

Ave

Edgc

umbe

Rd

Exterior MaterialsIn Ward 3

ESource: Ramsey County and

City of Saint PaulDate: 12/12/14

0 1,500 3,000750 Feet

Exterior Materials

No Data

Aluminum/vinyl

Asbestos

Block

Brick

Frame

Masonry & Frame

Stone

Stucco

District Council Boundaries

WAR

D 4

WAR

D 2

WAR

D1

Clev

elan

dAv

e

Lexi

ngto

n Pk

wy

7th St

Miss

Rive

rBlv

d

Ford Pkwy

Montreal Ave

Highland Pkwy

ShepardRd

Snel

ling

Ave

Randolph Ave

Edgcumbe Rd

Exte

rior M

ater

ials

In W

ard

3

E

Sour

ce: R

amse

y Co

unty

and

Ci

ty o

f Sai

nt P

aul

Date

: 12/

12/1

4

01,

500

3,00

075

0Fe

et

Exte

rior M

ater

ials

No

Dat

a

Alu

min

um/v

inyl

Asb

esto

s

Blo

ck

Bric

k

Fram

e

Mas

onry

& F

ram

e

Sto

ne

Stu

cco

Dis

trict

Cou

ncil

Bou

ndar

ies

• General trends, but multiple materials peppered throughout


WAR

D 4

WAR

D 2

WAR

D1

Clev

elan

dAv

e

Lexi

ngto

n Pk

wy

7th St

Miss

Rive

rBlv

d

Ford Pkwy

Montreal Ave

Highland Pkwy

ShepardRd

Snel

ling

Ave

Randolph Ave

Edgcumbe Rd

Hom

e St

yles

In W

ard

3

E

Sour

ce: R

amse

y Co

unty

and

Ci

ty o

f Sai

nt P

aul

Date

: 12/

12/1

4

01,

500

3,00

075

0Fe

et

Hom

e St

yles

No

Dat

a

Bun

galo

w

One

And

3/4

Sto

ry

One

Sto

ry

Spl

it/en

try

Spl

it/le

vel

Two

Sto

ry

Dis

trict

Cou

ncil

Bou

ndar

ies

WARD 4

WARD 2

WARD1

Cleveland Ave

Lexington Pkwy

7th St

Miss River Blvd

Ford

Pkw

y

Mon

trea

l Ave

High

land

Pkw

y

ShepardRd

Snelling Ave

Rand

olph

Ave

Edgc

umbe

Rd

Home StylesIn Ward 3



0 1,500 3,000750 Feet

Home Styles

No Data

Bungalow

One And 3/4 Story

One Story

Split/entry

Split/level

Two Story


• General trends, but multiple styles peppered throughout


WARD 4

WARD 2

WARD1

Cleveland Ave

Lexington Pkwy

7th St

Miss River Blvd

Ford

Pkw

y

Mon

trea

l Ave

High

land

Pkw

y

ShepardRd

Snelling Ave

Rand

olph

Ave

Edgc

umbe

Rd

Living AreaIn Ward 3



0 1,500 3,000750 Feet

Square Feet of Living Area

436 - 1561

1562 - 2636

2637 - 9153


WAR

D 4

WAR

D 2

WAR

D1

Clev

elan

dAv

e

Lexi

ngto

n Pk

wy

7th St

Miss

Rive

rBlv

d

Ford Pkwy

Montreal Ave

Highland Pkwy

ShepardRd

Snel

ling

Ave

Randolph Ave

Edgcumbe Rd

Livi

ng A

rea

In W

ard

3

E

Sour

ce: R

amse

y Co

unty

and

Ci

ty o

f Sai

nt P

aul

Date

: 12/

12/1

4

01,

500

3,00

075

0Fe

et

Squa

re F

eet o

f Liv

ing

Area

436

- 156

1

1562

- 26

36

2637

- 91

53

Dis

trict

Cou

ncil

Bou

ndar

ies

• General trends, but this map shows gradient of the same characteristic. Contrasts are evident.


WARD 4

WARD 2

WARD 1

Ford Pkwy

Montreal Ave

Highland Pkwy

Shepard Rd

7th St

Randolph Ave

Snel

ling

Ave

Edgcumbe Rd

Miss

Rive

rBlv

d

Clev

elan

d Av

e

Lexi

ngto

n Pk

wy

MU

RR

AY S

T

FIELD AVE

CLE

VE

LAN

D A

VE

S

DELANO PL

SAUNDERS AVE

EDG

CU

MB

E R

D

SUM

NE

R S

T

WORCESTER AVE

PALACE AVE

MONTREAL AVE

BAYARD AVE

PINEHURST AVE

SCHEFFER AVE

ELEANOR AVE

FIELD AVE

MACGOFFIN AVE

EDGCUMBE RD

MUNSTER AVE

ROME AVE

HO

WE

LL S

T N

PLE

AS

ANT

AVE

MO

OR

E S

T

WIL

DE

R S

T N

FIN

N S

T S

SAINT CLAIR AVE

EDGCUMBE RD

EDG

CU

MB

E R

D

YORKSHIRE AVE

ELW

AY S

T

ELEANOR AVE

ALBION AVE

OTTO AVE

CAM

BR

IDG

E S

T

HO

WE

LL S

T S

MA

CA

LES

TER

ST

BAYARD AVE

SHEPARD RD

BENHILL RD

LINWOOD AVE

STANFORD AVE

JEFFERSON AVE

WELLESLEY AVE

BERKELEY AVE

JEFFERSON AVE

RANKIN ST

MADISO

N ST

MIS

SIS

SIP

PI R

IVE

R B

LVD

S

LEX

ING

TON

PK

WY

S

SUE

ST

BOHLAND PL

SYN

DIC

ATE

ST

S

WH

EE

LER

ST

S

ALB

ER

T S

T S

MIL

TON

ST

S

DAV

ER

N S

T

FAIR

VIE

W A

VE

S

CR

ETIN

AV

E S

SAR

ATO

GA

ST

S

PAS

CAL

ST

S

WO

OD

LAW

N A

VE

MORGAN AVE

SHERIDAN AVE

WO

OD

LAWN

AVE

ALTON ST

FORD PKWY

HIGHLAND PKWY

PORTLAND AVE

HILLCREST AVE

RACE ST

SHEPARD RD

LEX

ING

TON

PK

WY

N

CLE

VE

LAN

D A

VE

N

WH

EE

LER

ST

N

WILD

ER ST S

ASHLAND AVE

PORTLAND AVE

SAINT PAUL AVE

JAMES AVE

RANDOLPH AVE

DEW

EY

ST

PRIO

R A

VE

N

SAINT PAUL AVE

PRINCETON AVE

NORFOLK AVE

SUE

PL

MIL

TON

ST

S

SARGENT AVE

FAIRMOUNT AVE

LINCOLN AVE

HAMPSHIRE AVE

GAN

NON

RD

HIGHLAND PKWY

MONTREAL AVE

WH

EE

LER

ST

S

BOHLAND AVE

CO

LBY

ST

FIN

N S

T S

JUNO AVE

ASHLAND AVE

SUMMIT AVE

WATSON AVE

LINWOOD AVE

GRAND AVE

SCHEFFER AVE

BAYARD AVE

LINCOLN AVE

HARTFORD AVE

WATSON AVE

BAYARD AVE

NILES AVE ARMSTRONG AVE

WELLESLEY AVE

JUNO AVE

SUMMIT AVE

GOODRICH AVE

JAMES AVE

JULIET AVE

BERKELEY AVE

JULIET AVE

SARGENT AVE

PALACE AVE

SCHEFFER AVE

FAIRMOUNT AVE

LINCOLN AVE

FORD PKWY

JUNO AVE

FAIRMOUNT AVE

ELEANOR AVE

BAYARD AVE

GOODRICH AVE

OSCEOLA AVE

WATSON AVE

NILES AVE

JUNO AVE

GOODRICH AVE

JUNO AVE

JAMES AVE

WORDSWORTH AVE

FAIRMOUNT AVE

NILES AVE

OSCEOLA AVE

RID

GE

ST

SARGENT AVE

FIELD AVE

OSCEOLA AVE

HIL

LTO

P L

N

PALMER P

L

HARTFORD AVE

BENSON AVE

STEWART AVE

THURE AVE

BORDNER PL

RAMLOW PL

ITASCA AVE

FORD PKWY

LOMBARD AVE

HIGHW

AY 5

MORGAN AVE

WATSON AVE

IVAN WAY

BENSON AVE

MONTREAL WAY

INTE

RS

TATE 35E

7TH S

T W TO

SB

I35E

SNE

LLIN

G A

VE

S RACE ST

ROCKWOOD AVE7TH ST W

ROGERS ST

MO

UN

T C

UR

VE

BLV

D

WO

OD

LAW

N A

VE

AMH

ER

ST ST

RET

UR

N C

T

DOROTHEA AVE

MO

NTC

ALM

PL

PRIO

R A

VE

S

HO

MER

ST

CR

ETIN

AV

E N

INTE

RS

TATE 35E

KEN

NE

TH S

T

AYD

MILL R

D

CROSBY FARM RD

ALAS

KA A

VE

CO

LETT

E P

L

BEECHWOOD AVE

EDGCUMBE RDAY

D M

ILL RD

OTI

S L

N

OTIS AVE

MORGAN AVE

SUMMIT AVE

COLVIN AVE

NORFOLK AVE

PLEASANT AVE

FAR in R1-R4FAR

0.0000 - 0.1770

0.1771 - 0.2445

0.2446 - 0.3193

0.3194 - 0.4262

0.4263 - 0.8012

WARD 4

WARD 2

WARD 1

Ford Pkwy

Montreal Ave

Highland Pkwy

Shepard Rd

7th St

Randolph Ave

Snel

ling

Ave

Edgcumbe Rd

Miss

Rive

rBlv

d

Clev

elan

d Av

e

Lexi

ngto

n Pk

wy

MU

RR

AY S

T

FIELD AVE

CLE

VE

LAN

D A

VE

S

DELANO PL

SAUNDERS AVE

EDG

CU

MB

E R

D

SUM

NE

R S

T

WORCESTER AVE

PALACE AVE

MONTREAL AVE

BAYARD AVE

PINEHURST AVE

SCHEFFER AVE

ELEANOR AVE

FIELD AVE

MACGOFFIN AVE

EDGCUMBE RD

MUNSTER AVE

ROME AVE

HO

WE

LL S

T N

PLE

AS

ANT

AVE

MO

OR

E S

T

WIL

DE

R S

T N

FIN

N S

T S

SAINT CLAIR AVE

EDGCUMBE RD

EDG

CU

MB

E R

D

YORKSHIRE AVE

ELW

AY S

T

ELEANOR AVE

ALBION AVE

OTTO AVE

CAM

BR

IDG

E S

T

HO

WE

LL S

T S

MA

CA

LES

TER

ST

BAYARD AVE

SHEPARD RD

BENHILL RD

LINWOOD AVE

STANFORD AVE

JEFFERSON AVE

WELLESLEY AVE

BERKELEY AVE

JEFFERSON AVE

RANKIN ST

MADISO

N ST

MIS

SIS

SIP

PI R

IVE

R B

LVD

S

LEX

ING

TON

PK

WY

S

SUE

ST

BOHLAND PL

SYN

DIC

ATE

ST

S

WH

EE

LER

ST

S

ALB

ER

T S

T S

MIL

TON

ST

S

DAV

ER

N S

T

FAIR

VIE

W A

VE

S

CR

ETIN

AV

E S

SAR

ATO

GA

ST

S

PAS

CAL

ST

S

WO

OD

LAW

N A

VE

MORGAN AVE

SHERIDAN AVE

WO

OD

LAWN

AVE

ALTON ST

FORD PKWY

HIGHLAND PKWY

PORTLAND AVE

HILLCREST AVE

RACE ST

SHEPARD RD

LEX

ING

TON

PK

WY

N

CLE

VE

LAN

D A

VE

N

WH

EE

LER

ST

N

WILD

ER ST S

ASHLAND AVE

PORTLAND AVE

SAINT PAUL AVE

JAMES AVE

RANDOLPH AVE

DEW

EY

ST

PRIO

R A

VE

N

SAINT PAUL AVE

PRINCETON AVE

NORFOLK AVE

SUE

PL

MIL

TON

ST

S

SARGENT AVE

FAIRMOUNT AVE

LINCOLN AVE

HAMPSHIRE AVE

GAN

NON

RD

HIGHLAND PKWY

MONTREAL AVE

WH

EE

LER

ST

S

BOHLAND AVE

CO

LBY

ST

FIN

N S

T S

JUNO AVE

ASHLAND AVE

SUMMIT AVE

WATSON AVE

LINWOOD AVE

GRAND AVE

SCHEFFER AVE

BAYARD AVE

LINCOLN AVE

HARTFORD AVE

WATSON AVE

BAYARD AVE

NILES AVE ARMSTRONG AVE

WELLESLEY AVE

JUNO AVE

SUMMIT AVE

GOODRICH AVE

JAMES AVE

JULIET AVE

BERKELEY AVE

JULIET AVE

SARGENT AVE

PALACE AVE

SCHEFFER AVE

FAIRMOUNT AVE

LINCOLN AVE

FORD PKWY

JUNO AVE

FAIRMOUNT AVE

ELEANOR AVE

BAYARD AVE

GOODRICH AVE

OSCEOLA AVE

WATSON AVE

NILES AVE

JUNO AVE

GOODRICH AVE

JUNO AVE

JAMES AVE

WORDSWORTH AVE

FAIRMOUNT AVE

NILES AVE

OSCEOLA AVE

RID

GE

ST

SARGENT AVE

FIELD AVE

OSCEOLA AVE

HIL

LTO

P L

N

PALMER P

L

HARTFORD AVE

BENSON AVE

STEWART AVE

THURE AVE

BORDNER PL

RAMLOW PL

ITASCA AVE

FORD PKWY

LOMBARD AVE

HIGHW

AY 5

MORGAN AVE

WATSON AVE

IVAN WAY

BENSON AVE

MONTREAL WAY

INTE

RS

TATE 35E

7TH S

T W TO

SB

I35E

SNE

LLIN

G A

VE

S RACE ST

ROCKWOOD AVE7TH ST W

ROGERS ST

MO

UN

T C

UR

VE

BLV

D

WO

OD

LAW

N A

VE

AMH

ER

ST ST

RET

UR

N C

T

DOROTHEA AVE

MO

NTC

ALM

PL

PRIO

R A

VE

S

HO

MER

ST

CR

ETIN

AV

E N

INTE

RS

TATE 35E

KEN

NE

TH S

T

AYD

MILL R

D

CROSBY FARM RD

ALAS

KA A

VE

CO

LETT

E P

L

BEECHWOOD AVE

EDGCUMBE RD

AYD

MILL R

D

OTI

S L

N

OTIS AVE

MORGAN AVE

SUMMIT AVE

COLVIN AVE

NORFOLK AVE

PLEASANT AVE

FAR in R1-R4FAR

0.0000 - 0.1770

0.1771 - 0.2445

0.2446 - 0.3193

0.3194 - 0.4262

0.4263 - 0.8012


What is Floor Area Ratio (FAR)?


WARD 4

WARD 2

WARD 1

Ford Pkwy

Montreal Ave

Highland Pkwy

Shepard Rd

7th St

Randolph Ave

Snel

ling

Ave

Edgcumbe Rd

Miss

Rive

rBlv

d

Clev

elan

d Av

e

Lexi

ngto

nPk

wy

Percent Lot Coverage

< 15%

15% - 25%

25% - 35%

> 35%

Percent Lot Coverage of Primary Structures Zoned R1-R4 in Ward 3



E

WARD 4

WARD 2

WARD 1

Ford Pkwy

Montreal Ave

Highland Pkwy

Shepard Rd

7th St

Randolph Ave

Snel

ling

Ave

Edgcumbe Rd

Miss

Rive

rBlv

d

Clev

elan

d Av

e

Lexi

ngto

nPk

wy


< 15%

15% - 25%

25% - 35%

> 35%




E

WARD 4

WARD 2

WARD 1

Ford Pkwy

Montreal Ave

Highland Pkwy

Shepard Rd

7th St

Randolph Ave

Snel

ling

Ave

Edgcumbe Rd

Miss

Rive

rBlv

d

Clev

elan

d Av

e

Lexi

ngto

nPk

wy


< 15%

15% - 25%

25% - 35%

> 35%




E


• Suggests that contrast related to SF (total and lot coverage) is significant.


Potential Approaches


# of Homes

Some Characteristic



# of Homes

Some Characteristic

Out of Character



# of Homes

Some Characteristic

Out of Character

We currently have dimensional standards that control the limits



# of Homes

Some Characteristic

Option 1: Change Limits

Pros: StraightforwardCons: Broad Stroke/Blunt



# of Homes

Some Characteristic

Option 2: Context-Sensitive

Prevents these from being adjacent by having limits based on what is nearby

Pros: Finer-Grained; responsive to conditionsCons: High administrative cost, differing construction possibilities depending on location



# of Homes

Some Characteristic

Option 3: Design/Style Controls

Limits types/styles for all homes in certain area

Pros: High degree of controlCons: Subjective; high administrative cost



Option 1: Change Limits

# of Homes

Some Characteristic



Zoning Recommendations


1. Create Overlay District (Chapter 67)2. Define “Sidewall” and “Sidewall height” (Sec. 60.203)3. Height reduction unless additional side setback is given (Sec. 66.231)4. Sidewall height limit within a certain distance of a lot line (Sec. 66.231)5. Sidewall articulation for exterior walls of a certain length (Sec. 63.110)6. Introduce total maximum lot coverage for all structures (Sec. 66.232, Sec. 63.501)7. Allow greater height if consistent with the context of nearby houses. (Sec. 66.231)8. The height of new construction can match the height of a demolished structure (Sec. 66.231)9. Require additions to adhere to window/door opening minimums (Sec. 63.110)10. Add exceptions for expansion in nonconforming setback areas (62.105)



Time

Scale & Massing

Currently allowed

Existing character}



Scale & Massing

Currently allowed

Existing character

Examples will show that these recommendations would have a moderate direct impact on some recent construction. In addition, the recommendations reducing the potential building envelope that remains between what has been built recently and what is possible.

}


Time


W A R D 4W A R D 4

WARD 2WARD 2

W A R D 1W A R D 1

W A R D 3

Clev

elan

d A

veCl

evel

and

Ave

Lexi

ngto

n Pk

wy

Ford Pkwy Ford Pkwy

Montreal Ave

Highland Pkwy Highland Pkwy

Shepard Rd

Shepard Rd

7th St

7th St

Randolph Ave

SnellingA

ve

Snel

ling

Ave

Edgc

umb

eRd

Edgc

umbe

Rd

Edgc

umbe

Rd

Miss

RiverBlvd

Miss River Blvd

Lex i

ngto

nPk

wy

East Grand AvenueStudent Housing

Neighborhood Impact

Planning District 14




Planning Distric

t 15

Planning Distric

t 9

PlanningDist

ric

t 15

Planning Dist

rict 9

Proposed SWR Southwest Residential Infill Overlay District ENRHP Historic District

Local Historic District

Proposed Overlay Zoning District

Current Overlay Zoning Districts

Planning Districts

Council Wards

Source: City of Saint Paul Department of Planning and Economic DevelopmentDate: 2/24/2015

Document Path: K:\GIS\MapRequests\Ward3_2014\Mike's Maps\ProposedSouthwestResidentialInfill_OD.mxd

Excludes HPC DistrictIncludes northwest corner of M-G

Overlay District



Proposed:Building sidewall. Any exterior wall that is less than forty-five (45) degrees from parallel to a side lot line.

Building sidewall height. The vertical height of the building sidewall measured from grade to the top of the wall plate on the sidewall.

Bottom of eaveTop of wall plate

Sidewall Definitions



Proposed:On lots less than fifty (50) feet wide, building height shall be limited to twenty-six (26) feet. A building may exceed this if set back from the side setback lines a distance equal to the additional height.

Height Reduction

Max Envelope



Proposed:Within twelve (12) feet of a lot line, building sidewall height shall be limited to twenty-two (22) feet. For structures with flat or shed roofs, the vertical height of parapet walls is included in this calculation.

Sidewall Height



Proposed:Sidewall articulation is required for building faces that exceed thirty-five (35) feet in length. Articulation shall be in the form of a structural projection of at least one (1) foot in depth and six (6) feet in length, and must extend from grade to the eave.

Sidewall Articulation




These would be allowed, but wouldn’t count toward requirement

Doesn’t have to be 1’ x 6’



Proposed:The total coverage of all structures shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of any zoning lot.

Lot Coverage



Proposed:Maximum building height can be exceeded if it can be demonstrated that more than fifty (50) percent of residential buildings within one hundred and fifty (150) feet of the property exceed the current maximum building height. The maximum building height may be the average of the single family residential building heights that exceed the maximum in the sample.

Extension of Max Height



Proposed:New construction on a lot that requires the demolition of a home can match the height of the building that it replaces. Building height of the existing building must be verified with an inspector prior to demolition.

Height Match for Demolished Properties



Proposed:For buildings with a living area increase of at least one hundred and twenty (120) square feet, above grade window and door openings shall comprise at least ten (10) percent of the wall area added, or above grade window and door openings shall comprise at least ten (10) percent of the total area of all exterior walls.

Opening Minimums for Additions



EXCEPTIONS FOR EXPANSION IN NONCONFORMING SETBACK AREAS

• Input from DSI• Any changes will likely result in some increase in variance requests• Considering this and increase in variance requests due to changes

in Sec. 62.105 (to not allow vertical or horizontal expansion in nonconforming setback areas), allow exceptions for conditions such as:

• The addition is on the back of the building or fills in a jog on the side of the building, and

• The footprint of the addition does not exceed 500 square feet, and• The roof pitch on the front third of the building is not altered, and• The addition does not add a full story.

• Approval from neighbors per language in report

OR



• Encourage program similar to BLEND Awards • Develop Home Alteration Guidebook similar to that found in Golden Valley• Incentivize high-performance design (exterior materials, windows, insulation)• Introduce design assistance program

ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS



Potential Effect on Example Properties


Property Lot Size (SF, Incl. Alley)

Principal Foot-print (SF)

Principal % Accessory Foot-print (SF)

Total %

Height Length Sidewall Ht (Right)

Sidewall Ht (Left)

2114 Jefferson 5215 1433 27.5% 528 37.6% 45.5 20'-0"

Would require sidewall articulation on one side





Total %


Sidewall Ht (Left)

1871 Lincoln 6000 2076 34.6% 0 34.6% 26'-6" (Rt) 40.0 (Rt) 20'-0" 25' - 6"

Would require sidewall articulation on one sideOK - 6’ Side Setback

Potentially too tall de-pending on grade calc.





Total %


Sidewall Ht (Left)

1329 Hartford 5400 1140 21.1% 324 27.1% 28'-0" ~48’ 22'-0"

Would require side-wall articulation

Would be too tall because within 6’ of lot line

Maximum Sidewall Ht





Total %


Sidewall Ht (Left)

299 Pascal 5420 1466 27.0% 0 27.0% 23'-6" ~55’ 19'-0"

Would be required to demonstrate 10% total openings






Total %


Sidewall Ht (Left)

1721 Stanford 5418 1334 24.6% 660 36.8% 25'-6" (Ap-prox)

47 19'-0"






Total %


Sidewall Ht (Left)

2129 Eleanor 5320 1187 22.3% 440 30.6% 24'-0" (Ap-prox)

~47’ 21'-4" 21'-4"

Articulation potentially required on right elevation; NOT required on left because face is broken


Questions?

ward 3 residential design standards

Documents