Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Flagstaff staff outline zoning changes: higher by‑right density, FAR caps and incentives for affordable units
Summary
At a public workshop city staff proposed increasing allowed housing density across most zoning districts, testing floor‑area‑ratio (FAR) caps to shape unit sizes, and strengthening incentives for affordable housing while leaving detailed choices to further community input.
City zoning staff presented a package of “code concepts” aimed at increasing housing supply while shaping what types of units get built. Tiffany Antal, the city’s zoning code manager, walked the workshop through staff proposals and the draft decision points the project team will carry forward for further public discussion and refinement.
Antal said staff recommend increasing density allowances across most residential zones—while retaining the R1N (single‑family neighborhood) and excluding the largest low‑density rural residential (RR) and estate residential (ER) zones from immediate by‑right increases as drafted. Staff told the room they would calibrate density increases to each zone and pair them with measures to encourage “missing middle” products (duplexes, triplexes, townhomes) rather than only larger, luxury single‑family homes.
To give developers implementation certainty while still shaping unit size, staff proposed testing floor‑area‑ratio (FAR) limits in place of or alongside current lot‑coverage controls. Antal said FAR caps limit total usable floor area on a lot and can encourage smaller unit footprints and a broader mix of studios, one‑bedrooms and two‑bedrooms instead of many large multi‑bedroom units. Several residents and planners said FAR is technical and asked staff to provide example visuals and site plans; planners and developers in the room asked for more modeling to show how FAR would affect real projects.
On affordable housing, staff recommended increasing overall density allowances for all housing—rather than limiting bonuses only to subsidized projects—and improving the effectiveness of density bonuses and other incentives targeted to affordable development. Staff and workshop participants noted state law limits some local authority (for example, around mandatory affordability or certain subdivision controls), so city incentives would need to be calibrated to local grant, tax‑credit and public‑land strategies.
Why it matters: changes to by‑right zoning and adoption of FAR would change what can be built without a lengthy rezoning or conditional‑use review. Antal said policy direction from the workshop will be used to refine code amendments; staff warned that parcels are already moving through sales and rezoning processes and urged timely action.
Quotes from the meeting: “We would recommend increasing density in all areas,” Antal said, while cautioning that the rural and estate residential districts may require a different approach. On FAR she added, “It is a regulatory tool that regulates development intensity by limiting the amount of usable floor space.”
Ending: staff said they would return to council in late summer with refined code concepts and examples and asked the public to review follow‑up materials and example site plans that show how FAR, density increases and bonuses would work in practice.
