Chelsea considers US 280 overlay district

Driving down U.S. 280, it can be difficult to tell the difference between Hoover, Birmingham, Jefferson County and Shelby County. But Chelsea wants to make sure drivers know when they have entered city limits.

The city took the first step toward cultivating a distinct look on the 280 corridor in February when it entered a contract with the Regional Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham to create an overlay district on a portion of U.S. 280. An overlay district is an additional set of zoning regulations which is placed “over” the existing base zoning district.

In this case, the overlay district will apply to the general business district, or B-2, parcels in Chelsea. On a map of the city, those 127 parcels — totaling 681 acres — line the main drag along U.S. 280.

While the general business district is only around 4.75 percent of the total city limits, the overlay district would be a chance to make the main corridor in Chelsea stand out. It gives the chance for a “main street” feel, said RPCGB Principal Planner Lindsay Puckett.

“We say it’s just to create more sense of place, because you’re promoting that consistent use of design elements throughout the design area,” said Puckett, who is also working with Chelsea as it pursues becoming an Alabama Community of Excellence.

At the April Chelsea Business Alliance luncheon, during which Puckett and ACE Team member Nisa Miranda gave an update, Puckett said the overlay district can help “the corridor to look more uniform in appearance and be more aesthetically pleasing, instead of like everywhere Alabama.” They also discussed encouraging a pedestrian feel for the area, which could make it a more welcoming shopping spot.

Puckett said she was first approached by Mayor Tony Picklesimer because he knew neighboring municipalities, including the city of Hoover, Jefferson County and Shelby County, had overlay districts on U.S. 280. He wanted to look at setting up standards for building materials and design guidelines while making that easy to understand, according to Puckett.

At this time, there are not hard and fast design standards for developing a B-2 property in Chelsea, city engineer Keith Hager said at the April 23 Chelsea Planning Commission meeting, where Puckett first formally discussed the overlay district standards. Having these guidelines in place, however, will provide a clearer vision for B-2 development.

“It will give the process more structure, which from my standpoint not only professionally but also from my time sitting on the Planning Commission, structure is a good thing,” said Cole Williams, who serves on the planning commission and works as a civil engineer with Goodwyn, Mills & Cawood. “Right now, we lack structure in that review process, so I won’t say it would streamline the process but it certainly will structure the process so that it is predictable.”

The standards, however, will not force already developed properties to change anything, Puckett said. Of the 127 parcels zoned B-2, about half are already developed and would be grandfathered into the current standards. The 61 undeveloped parcels would have to follow the additional standards. Significant redevelopment at grandfathered properties, however, could trigger the application of overlay standards.

Chelsea is at an opportune time for creating this district, Puckett said, because there is still room to grow on the 280 corridor and a chance to get ahead of some of that development.

“First of all, it helps the applicant and the city staff identify design issues early on in the process, in making sure things are reviewed for compliance early on instead of later in the game,” Puckett said. “It also helps keep those development decisions from being made independently with little or no regard to adjoining properties.”

As they look at standards, Williams said it will be important to mesh with what has already developed in the area and to ensure that it will not deter development.

“To me, it’s important that we’re not trying to create a restrictive covenant or to negatively impact the economics of developing in Chelsea,” Williams said, “but at the same time we want to make sure the city has some extra measures of control on what that corridor looks like in 20 years.”

Standards — which will cover categories such as building design and orientation, architectural and window treatments, screening and fencing and parking — will be stricter than what currently exists in the B-2 zoning, Puckett said, but are not arbitrarily created. 

“We will be building off of Shelby County, Jefferson County and Hoover. They all have a 280 overlay district, but they don’t take it to the next level of some of these architectural treatments,” Puckett said, adding that the standards in neighboring districts include some building orientation or material requirements, just to a lesser degree.

Puckett and her team also looked at the recently approved Alabama 119 overlay district in Alabaster for a baseline.

At the April 23 Planning Commission meeting, Puckett facilitated a “working” discussion of the proposed standards. She presented her proposal for the district and addressed questions and concerns from the Planning Commission. While it was a public meeting, no community members were present.

A few concerns arose during the discussion, including what the threshold would be before a developed property would be brought under the overlay district. In the Alabama 119 overlay district, for example, a redevelopment adding 25-50 percent more floor area would mean parking and screening standards would apply to that property. 

Building standards and architectural treatment, however, would not have to change, according to a graphic provided by Puckett.

Any “major” redevelopment, which adds more than 50 percent to the floor area or to the value of the property, would have to comply with all of the overlay district standards.

Planning commissioners seemed to express approval for setting a threshold, although the percentage of change was not agreed upon. They also asked about areas that were destroyed in a storm or natural disaster, to which Puckett emphasized that those property or business owners would have a set amount of time as a grandfathered entity in order to rebuild.

After recommending moving buildings closer to the street and placing parking behind or to the side of buildings, once again encouraging a pedestrian feel, Puckett said, the question of how parking would be handled at big box stores, such as a hardware store, also arose.

“We don’t expect to see another Walmart, but we could see a Home Depot or a Target, we could see another grocery development,” Picklesimer said.

In the case of those businesses — which typically have a large amount of parking in front of the building — Puckett said there would probably need to be a variance for larger developments. 

Overall, however, the planning commission said they were ready to make a few tweaks and move on to the next step of the process.

“I think that this is wonderful, but at the same time we also have to be careful that we don’t push [development] away as well,” city councilor Scott Weygand said. 

To ensure affected parties are included in the conversation, the Planning Commission plans to hold a public involvement meeting where landowners and the development community can discuss any concerns with the plan. From there, Puckett will develop a final plan to be approved by the planning commission.

While there was not a set timeline for those meetings, Puckett said the overall process of developing an overlay district can take several months.

Jumping off point: Suggested standards in Chelsea overlay district

At the April 23 Chelsea Planning Commission meeting, RPCGB Principal Planner Lindsay Puckett suggested several standards to include in the overlay district. While these were just points of discussion, rather than final regulations, Puckett said they were a good jumping off point for planning. 

The commission will be able to make adjustments and is planning to listen to public input before finalizing the overlay district. 

► Building setbacks: Setbacks are the minimum and maximum distances required between a building and a property line. They can be set for the front, back and sides of a building.

A 50-foot minimum setback on the front and 25-foot minimums on the sides and rear have been proposed. Puckett also discussed the option of setting maximum setbacks to prevent “a sea of parking” in front of buildings and to further develop a “main street” and walkable feel.

► Minimum first floor height: Puckett proposed setting a minimum first floor height of 14 feet “to create a more welcoming experience.” The taller structures would encourage walkability.

► Architectural treatment standards: These standards would refer to the types of materials used on buildings, the combination of materials, permitted colors and other facets of how a building looks. Puckett suggested the following:

» Avoid monotonous building materials and walls.

» Construct facades that are varied and include large windows.

» Establish a minimum percentage of glass or transparency that must be included on the front of a building.

» Limit building to three colors.

» Avoid building materials such as metal, vinyl, aluminum, stamped/applied stone, plastic and plywood.

» Avoid awning materials made of plastic, fabric or glossy material. Encourage longer awning lengths.

» Buildings located at the intersection of two streets should “address” both streets.

► Screening, fence and wall standards: These standards include both building materials and regulations on what needs to be screened from view. Puckett suggested the following:

» Screen service and loading areas, trash containers and mechanical units from view. 

» Prohibit the use of chain link, plastic, wire or unpainted cinder blocks as a wall or fence.

► Parking standards: This includes placement of on-site parking, encouraging shared parking and standards for lighting and landscaping. Puckett suggested surface parking be located behind or on the side of buildings, sharing parking between buildings or stores, landscaping around and inside of parking lots and using shorter lighting fixtures.

► Access standards: Access standards dictate the numbers of driveways off of a main road, encouraging “frontage roads,” shared driveways and cross access. By making these changes, Puckett said it can minimize traffic issues along U.S. 280. 

► Grading and drainage standards: Puckett encouraged establishing materials and height standards for retaining walls and prohibiting open ditches and drainage structures. Rather, she suggested using subsurface drainage structures, which are covered by grassed swales, and look more like landscaping than concrete pipelines.