Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning And Open Space topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County planners propose R‑1/R‑5 zoning rewrite, add open‑space minimums and design standards
Summary
Planning staff presented proposed changes to R‑1 and R‑5 residential districts, including a new 10% open‑space minimum for R‑1, a 25% requirement for higher‑density districts, accessory‑dwelling limits and sidewalk/entrance‑feature guidance; commissioners and staff discussed tree preservation, buffers and a separate tree ordinance.
Planning staff presented a draft rewrite of the county's low‑density (R‑1) and higher‑density (R‑5) residential zoning rules at a July 15 work session, proposing new development standards intended to preserve neighborhood character and require usable open space in future subdivisions.
Chelsea Furnall, planning manager, told the board the R‑1 district remains intended to “preserve and protect the character of that low density residential neighborhood” and that the minimum lot area would stay at 12,000 square feet where public or community water and sewer are provided. She said the draft limits principal residences to one per lot and allows one accessory dwelling unit (ADU) per principal residence; the ADU would be restricted to 75% of the principal dwelling’s square footage.
The steering committee that reviewed drafts recommended adding development standards not currently in R‑1, Furnall said. Those include a 10% open‑space requirement for R‑1 and a 25% open‑space requirement for denser districts such as R‑2, R‑3 and R‑5. Furnall also described sidewalk triggers — sidewalks would be required when a developer provides public water and sewer and builds denser subdivisions — and an allowance for “design entrance features” that permit minimal clearing in required buffers when staff determines the feature contributes to overall aesthetic cohesion.
Commissioners and staff spent substantial time discussing tree preservation, enforcement of buffers and inspection timing. Commissioners asked how to prevent wholesale clearing of trees before subdivision controls apply; Furnall and colleagues noted the subdivision rules apply when property is platted, which can occur after preliminary clearing, and said staff intends to return with a separate draft tree ordinance that would include a combination of requirements and incentives (for example, credits for preserving large trees or canopy), arborist involvement and a tree survey requirement before clearing. Furnall said the steering committee recommended that open‑space credits be weighted to encourage hardscape amenities (playgrounds, courts, pools) and that ponds should be limited to meeting no more than 25% of an open‑space requirement unless they provide continuous public shoreline or trails.
On buffer widths, Furnall said the draft treats the higher use across a right‑of‑way as controlling and establishes 30 feet as a baseline, with a recommendation to extend certain frontages to 50 feet where appropriate. Commissioners pressed for clearer site inspection timing; staff described adding an early erosion‑control and buffer delineation inspection to ensure silt fences, construction fencing or other true delineation is in place before clearing.
Furnall said the planning staff will bring a longer, dedicated session to the board to work through the proposed zoning changes in depth; commissioners discussed possible dates in August to hold an extended workshop.
The presentation was informational; no formal zoning ordinance amendments were adopted at the July 15 meeting.
Ending: Staff will return with refined drafts (including a separate tree ordinance and an open‑space policy with calculated credits for amenities and trails) and schedule an extended, day‑long workshop before the next round of ordinance readings.
