3. Site Testing I Large Site <br />This is a 34,872 SF site located in COR -MU with River Road frontage, side alley access, and an <br />irregular shaped portion of the site connecting to a neighboring side street. The irregular shape <br />suggests a development strategy aligning with the intent of the code: a building fronting River <br />Road with parking extending across the broad, irregularly shaped rear area of the site. <br />The building scenarios could be rectangular block with units flanking a double loaded corridor, a <br />U-shaped courtyard configuration opening to the south-west, or an L-shaped building with a leg <br />along River Road (shown in diagram). This would likely be a 4 or 5 story elevator -served <br />housing with 12-14 units per floor, depending on unit type. Parking capacity is approximately 38 <br />spaces. With parking reductions this would satisfy the parking requirements for the building at 4 <br />and possibly 5 stories. <br />Draft Code Considerations <br />Consider allowing public active site spaces to qualify as part of the 80% building <br />frontage along River Road. This would allow food or retail uses to open to a courtyard <br />space that increases useable commercial frontage and can create attractive and active <br />spaces along the street. <br />Consider allowing head -in parking off the alley. This alley is wide enough to allow <br />backup space. The addition of head -in parking would support ground level retail in this <br />location. <br />• The setback requirement as it is written translates to a building fagade that must adhere <br />to at least 80% of the build -to line (setback). For further discussion and a proposed <br />modification to the draft code, see below. <br />Overall Assessment, Potential Barriers, and Recommendations <br />With the exception of the specific points below, the proposed RRSC Code Amendments do not <br />present significant barriers to the types of mixed-use, housing, and commercial development <br />envisioned. The Code encourages buildings to be built with street frontage and discourages <br />parking between the buildings and the street. Density ranges and height limitations align with <br />typical building types and construction types. The COR -MU standards are not overly <br />prescriptive in terms of ground floor commercial and allow reasonable flexibility in the amount of <br />commercial. <br />Potential Barriers to Desirable Development <br />1. For development within COR -MU, 9.3865 7(a) requires a minimum of 80 percent of the <br />street facing ground floor building fagade to be built to the minimum front yard setback <br />of 10 feet. <br />a) This translates to a definitive build -to line. Variations in thicknesses of <br />assemblies makes a precise build -to line difficult to achieve in an actual building. <br />It is also challenging for River Road sites having angled frontages relate to <br />property shape, or curved, as was the case in the Small Site study. The same <br />intent would be met if a zone of setback were defined for the required frontage. <br />It could be 3 to 5 feet, which would have the same impact of frontage continuity <br />and provide reasonable flexibility and tolerance for building location. <br />b) The 80 percent frontage requirement precludes street -facing courtyard spaces <br />that have proven to be successful in other commercial districts and would meet <br />Page 3 of 4 <br />Page 16 of 21 <br />