The purpose of the Residential Planned Development (RPD) District is to provide a means for encouraging ingenuity, open space preservation, imagination and flexibility in the planning and designing of residential land areas. The RPD regulations provide a controlled flexibility by utilizing objectives and performance standards rather than rigid design requirements, the intent being to encourage developments that possess greater amenities and/or provide greater environmental protection than standard zoning district requirements. It is not the intent of the RPD to allow applications to circumvent the intent of this code to permit residential density, housing types or street and utility layouts which conflict with the comprehensive land use plan of the city or the character of the area. It is furthermore the purpose of the RPD regulations to:
(a) Encourage creative and high-quality developments that are compatible with surrounding land uses, achieve a high degree of pedestrian-vehicular separation and contribute to the overall quality of Avon Lake;
(b) Protect natural features such as wetlands, topography, trees and drainage ways in their existing natural state as much as possible;
(c) Provide for adequate and usable open space;
(d) Provide for a flexible arrangement of buildings, densities and a variety of housing types to meet the needs of the residential market;
(e) Ensure that there are adequate services and infrastructure to serve the proposed development; and
(f) Promote a harmonious design amongst the various elements and uses within the development while mitigating any potential negative impact on surrounding properties.
(Ord. 21-161, passed 12-13-2021)
(a) The intent of the RPD regulations is to provide a means for applying comprehensive and flexible planning and design techniques on properties substantially sized to accommodate such a plan. As such, the minimum size of any RPD project or plan shall be 15 acres. RPD proposals should not be applied to small areas as a means of bypassing traditional district regulations.
(b) An RPD of less than 15 acres may be considered for medium or high-density residential areas as defined by the comprehensive land use plan. Planning Commission and City Council must approve such reduction in size.
(Ord. 21-161, passed 12-13-2021)
(a) Ownership. In order to submit an application for RPD review, the tract or tracts of land included within the proposed RPD shall be in one ownership or control, or shall be subject to a joint application by the owners of all properties included within the proposal.
(b) Review procedure options.
(1) All applications shall be preceded by a pre-application conference pursuant to this chapter.
(2) All applications shall be subject to relevant sections of the common review requirements in § 1214.01: Common Review Requirements.
(3) All applications that are not already within an RPD District shall include a separate application for a zoning map amendment to an RPD District. Such amendment shall be reviewed as part of the RPD development plan.
(c) RPD submission and review procedure.
(1) Step 1 - Pre-application meeting (required). An applicant shall be required to have a pre-application meeting with the Development Review Committee to informally discuss the application and any concept plans. Such meeting shall be subject to § 1214.01(f).
(2) Step 2 - Application. The applicant shall submit an application in accordance with § 1214.01: Common Review Requirements, and with the provisions of this section.
(3) Step 3 - RPD development plan and zoning map amendment.
A. The RPD development plan approval procedure involves a zoning map amendment to rezone the subject property to an RPD with an approved RPD development plan.
B. The procedure for this stage shall comply with the requirements of § 1214.02: Code Text and Map Amendments, including review by the Development Review Committee.
C. In accordance with the zoning map amendment review procedure, the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing to review the RPD development plan and make a recommendation to City Council to approve, approve with modifications, or deny the application. The recommendation shall be made based on review of the application using the criteria contained in § 1222.04: Review Criteria.
D. In accordance with the zoning map amendment review process, City Council shall hold a public hearing on the RPD development plan and zoning map amendment and decide to approve, approve with modifications, or deny the application using the criteria contained in § 1222.04: Review Criteria, of this chapter. If the application is approved, the area of land involved in the application shall be rezoned as an RPD with a related, approved RPD development plan.
E. Such action of City Council shall only require concurring vote of a simple majority of City Council unless the City Council votes to approve, in any form, an application where the Planning Commission recommended denial, in which case the approval shall require a three-fourths majority vote of City Council.
F. In making its recommendations or decisions, the Planning Commission and/or City Council may impose such conditions of approval as are in its judgment necessary to ensure conformity to the applicable criteria and standards of this zoning code and with the Comprehensive land use plan. In so doing, the Planning Commission and/or City Council may permit the applicant to revise the plan and resubmit it as an RPD development plan within 60 days of such action.
G. Preliminary subdivision plat approval may occur concurrently with the RPD development plan approval if permitted by the Code Administrator. If submitting plats for subdivision review simultaneously with the RPD development plan, the plats shall be subject to all applicable subdivision standards and requirements including the applicable review process.
(4) Step 4 - Site plan review and/or zoning permit issuance.
A. Zoning permits shall not be issued until the lot or applicable subdivision has been fully recorded in the office of the Lorain County Recorder’s office and public improvements have been installed in accordance with the applicable subdivision regulations.
B. For development activities where site plan review is required, the applicant shall be required to received site plan review prior to issuance of a zoning permit.
(d) Time limit.
(1) Any RPD development plan shall be valid for a period of two years after the date of approval by City Council. If no development has begun (development being defined as the start of construction of the required public/private improvements as shown on the approved RPD development plan for one or more phases of the project) within two years from the date of approval, such approval shall lapse and be of no force and effect.
(2) Two one-year extensions of the time limit set forth in division (d)(1) of this section, may be granted by the Planning Commission if such extension is not in conflict with the most current comprehensive land use plan and that such extension is in the best interests of the entire community. The developer/owner shall apply for an extension and shall state the reason for the extension.
(3) If an approved RPD development plan lapses as provided in this section, the RPD development plan shall be considered void. Notice of such lapse shall be filed by the Planning Commission and forwarded to the City Council.
(4) Voiding of the RPD development plan shall not rezone the property. After such plans are voided, the Planning Commission, City Council, or property owners may initiate a rezoning to a base zoning district in accordance with § 1214.02: Code Text and Map Amendments, or the property owner, or their agent, may resubmit an RPD development plan in accordance with the procedures of this chapter.
(e) Changes to approved RPDs.
(1) An RPD shall be constructed and completed in accordance with the approved RPD development plan including all supporting data and conditions. The RPD development plan and supporting data, together with all recorded amendments, shall be binding on the applicants, their successors, grantees and assignees, and shall limit and control the use of premises (including the internal use of buildings and structures) and the location of structures in the RPD as set forth therein.
(2) Where a property owner on a lot in an RPD seeks a variance from the applicable standards for an individual property that will not apply to any other property in the RPD, the property owner shall request such variance in accordance with § 1214.09: Variances.
(3) Any request to change or otherwise modify the approved RPD development plan as it applies to more than one property owner, shall be reviewed based on whether the change is considered major or minor, in accordance with this division.
A. Major changes reviewed by Planning Commission and City Council. Where an applicant proposes any of the following, the applicant shall submit a revised RPD development plan that will be subject to the same review as a new RPD, in accordance with § 1222.03: RPD Submission and Review Procedure:
1. Expansion of an existing RPD beyond the limits of the RPD Development plan approval; or
2. Proposed changes to the uses or density that will result in an increase in residential dwelling units of more than 5% of the total dwelling units approved as part of the original RPD development plan.
B. Major changes reviewed by Planning Commission only. The following changes shall require approval by the Planning Commission following a public hearing unless the Code Administrator determines that changes are not significant enough to substantially alter the originally approved plan:
1. Changes in the development plan relative to the arrangement of lots, the layout of streets or circulation patterns, the size, configuration and location of common open space, and changes in any approved elements of the RPD; and
2. Amendments to the conditions that were attached to the RPD development plan or RPD development plan approval.
C. Minor changes reviewed by the Code Administrator.
1. Minor changes are those proposed by the developer/owner which do not disturb or affect the basic design and approved RPD development plan, and which are essentially technical in nature, as determined by the Code Administrator, shall be reviewed administratively by the Development Review Committee. The Development Review Committee shall make a recommendation to approve or deny the change to the Code Administrator who shall have the authority to make a final decision.
2. The Code Administrator shall have the authority to forward the action to the Planning Commission in the case that the recommendation is to deny the change.
3. Examples of minor changes include, but are not limited to, changes in the intensity of lighting, changes to individual floor plans, changes to the siting of an individual building on a lot within approved setbacks, changes in the size and location of water and sewer lines within approved easements, engineering changes that do not alter street or lot layouts, and changes in the location and number of fire hydrants.
4. The Code Administrator shall notify the Planning Commission of all such approved minor changes.
(f) Revocation.
(1) In the event of a failure to comply with the approved plan or any prescribed condition or approval, including failure to comply with the stage development schedule, the Planning Commission may, after notice and hearing, revoke the approval of the RPD development plan. The Planning Commission shall at the same time recommend whether to maintain the RPD zoning district or the rezoning of the properties to another zoning district.
(2) The revocation shall become final 30 days after City Council passes an ordinance to rezone the property to a non-RPD zoning category or a decision by the Planning Commission to revoke the approved plans but retain the RPD zoning.
(3) Where the RPD zoning remains without an approved RPD development plan, the property owner or agent shall be required to submit a new RPD development plan in accordance with the review procedures of this chapter.
(g) Recording. The recording of the subdivision related to the RPD approval shall be done in the same manner as outlined in § 1214.05: Major Subdivisions.
(Ord. 21-161, passed 12-13-2021)
All RPD applications shall be reviewed based on the following general criteria and the applicable review body shall consider such criteria in the creation of their specific findings when making recommendations and decisions regarding RPD applications:
(a) The proposed development is in conformity with the goals, policies and any applicable recommendations of the Avon Lake comprehensive land use plan;
(b) The proposed development meets the intent and spirit of this code and all other applicable city ordinances or adopted plans;
(c) The development provides an environment of stable character that promotes a harmonious relationship between land uses within the site and a harmonious relationship with surrounding development, utilizing adequate buffers where necessary;
(d) The proposed development provides a development pattern which preserves and utilizes the natural topography, geologic features, scenic vistas, natural vegetation and natural drainage patterns of the site;
(e) The proposed development maximizes the opportunity for privacy within residential areas and minimizes nuisances between residential areas and other land uses;
(f) The proposed development, while compatible with its surroundings, provides a more diverse environment for living, shopping and/or working than would be possible under strict application of the standard minimum design requirements of other districts provided within this code;
(g) The proposed development promotes greater efficiency in the use of land and does not impose an undue burden on public services and facilities such as fire and police protection, public works, schools, water supply and wastewater disposal due to excessive population densities;
(h) The proposed development is not likely to result in significant adverse impacts upon the natural environment, including air, water, noise, stormwater management, wildlife, and vegetation, or such impacts will be substantially mitigated;
(i) The proposed development is accessible from public thoroughfares adequate to accommodate the traffic which will be imposed on them by the proposed development, and the proposed streets and parking areas within the site are adequate to serve the proposed arrangement and densities of land uses;
(j) The proposed development minimizes pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle conflicts;
(k) The proposed development provides a higher quality and more useful design of landscaping and open space and amenities than would normally be required under the strict application of existing zoning and subdivision requirements;
(l) The proposed development contains such proposed covenants, easements, association by-laws and other such provisions as may reasonably be required for the public health, safety, and welfare;
(m) The proposed development is designed in such a way that each individual section of the development as well as the total development, can exist as an independent section capable of creating an environment of sustained desirability and stability or that adequate assurance has been provided that such an objective shall be attained;
(n) Where common open space is required, appropriate arrangements with the applicant have been made which will ensure the reservation of common open space as identified on the RPD development. If deemed necessary by City Council during the RPD development plan review process, City Council may require the applicant to hold bond to ensure the successful and proper reservation of open space. Furthermore, the RPD development plan shall demonstrate how the open spaces shall be duly transferred to a legally established homeowners’ association or has been dedicated to the city or another public or quasi-public agency for preservation and maintenance;
(o) Appropriate agreements with the applicant have been made to ensure the proper completion of public improvements in compliance with Title Four, Platting and Subdivisions, of the code of ordinances of Avon Lake, Ohio;
(p) The proposed development can be substantially completed within the time specified in the schedule of development submitted by the developer; and
(q) The RPD plans have been transmitted to all other agencies and departments charged with responsibility of review and any identified issues have been considered and reasonably addressed by the applicant.
(Ord. 21-161, passed 12-13-2021)
Loading...