To: Honorable Mayor and Members of Town Council
From: Tara Vargish, Assistant Director of Development Services
Title
Discussion/Direction: Buffering Between Dissimilar Residential Uses
Body
________________________________________________________________________________
Executive Summary
Town Council, after holding a public hearing concerning the proposal of single-family attached units adjacent to existing single-family detached homes, requested that staff look at the Town Code and bring back information to Town Council regarding potential separation requirements between different types of residential development. Staff is proposing to develop a new chapter in Title 17 that would be similar to the existing chapter that governs the “interface” between residential developments and non-residential developments. Staff is seeking discussion and direction on the elements of the proposed interface regulations between dissimilar residential developments.
Discussion
Background
Currently, the Town regulates the “interface” between residential developments and non-residential developments in Chapter 17.50 Residential/Nonresidential Interface Regulations. This code was adopted to protect the public health, safety and welfare by establishing regulations to mitigate the impacts between these two different land uses and activities. It is recognized that it is impractical to completely hide an entire building or land use, however the buffering requirements are intended to create a visually interesting interface between these two different uses and promote compatibility. The buffers and design standards established in this existing chapter are intended to increase the visual attractiveness of nonresidential uses and to provide a visually interesting buffer between the two uses. These existing regulations also recognize that some areas of Town are designed to have mixed uses, with residential and nonresidential uses intermingled and are not subject to these regulations. Examples of these areas are the Downtown Overlay District and planned development areas such as the Meadows Town Center where residential uses are planned to be next to, or sometimes in the same building as, nonresidential uses.
Proposed Changes
Staff has been reviewing potential criteria to mitigate the impacts between residential uses that are dissimilar to each other. Staff is proposing to define the “dissimilar residential interface” as the area where single-family detached housing is located next to duplexes, triplexes, quadraplexes and/or multifamily housing. In addition, dissimilar residential interface is also when duplexes, triplexes, and/or quadraplexes are proposed next to multifamily housing.
Buffers and design standards established in the proposed Chapter are intended to help assure that dissimilar residential properties are separated by a visually attractive and a visually interesting interface. While it may be impractical to completely hide an adjacent residential building, property or use, this proposed chapter promotes a compatible interface to include part or all of the following:
1. Minimize the visibility of adjacent dissimilar residential uses and activities through building orientation and screening.
2. Create a visually attractive transition between dissimilar residential properties with the use of walls, fences, berms and/or landscaping.
Similar to the existing Residential/Nonresidential Interface Regulations, staff is proposing that these dissimilar residential interface regulations also recognize that some areas of Town are designed to have mixed uses, with different types of residential uses purposely intermingled and are not subject to these regulations. Examples of these areas are the Downtown Overlay District and planned development areas such as the Meadows Town Center where residential uses of different types are planned to be next to each other.
Consideration should also be given to the R-1, R-2 and R-3 districts in Town that have been platted and planned to mix different residential types in the same areas. Therefore, these proposed regulations would most often apply to areas of Town where two different planned developments are next to each other and have different residential uses proposed.
The existing Residential/Nonresidential Interface Regulations specify an exact dimension of the buffer width, however the proposed dissimilar residential interface language does not. This may allow a much wider range of latitude for Town Council to address separation issues between dissimilar residential developments. However, this may negatively impact the certainty that our development partners in Castle Rock rely upon to design and submit plans that meet established criteria metrics prior to a public hearing.
Both the proposed Dissimilar Residential Interface language and the existing Residential/Nonresidential Interface regulations are attached for review.
Staff is seeking discussion and direction on the elements of the proposed interface regulations between dissimilar residential developments.
Attachments
Attachment A: DRAFT DISSIMILAR RESIDENTIAL INTERFACE
Attachment B: TITLE 17.50 RESIDENTIAL/NONRESIDENTIAL INTERFACE REGULATIONS