Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing And Climate topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Flagstaff staff seek guidance on code changes to meet housing and carbon goals; accessibility raised by commission
Summary
City sustainability and housing staff briefed the Commission on a land-availability and code-analysis project that models how code changes or incentives could help meet the city's 10-year housing and carbon neutrality goals; commissioners pressed for clarity on accessibility versus affordability.
Genevieve Pearthree, sustainability staff at the City of Flagstaff, told the Commission the project links the city’s 10-year housing plan and carbon neutrality plan and that the consultant team is developing options for code changes and incentives. “The 10-year housing plan aims to reduce the affordable housing need in our community by half over 10 years,” Pearthree said, and the carbon plan “aims for carbon neutrality by 02/1930 through reducing our greenhouse gas emissions by 44%.”
Pearthree said the project has two active parts: a completed land-availability and site-suitability study, and an in-progress code analysis phase that will present “final recommendations for code changes” after the consultant refines options. “We’re kind of in this high level analysis phase… we are gonna be seeking direction from city council in terms of where we go in our next phase,” Pearthree said.
The staff presentation outlined barriers identified in the code diagnostic report including parking and street width standards, incentives, tree and slope protections, winter parking rules, and other standards that affect housing production and sustainable development. The consultant has modeled scenarios that compare optimizing incentives for sustainable design and affordable housing versus changing base code standards or focusing on market-rate production to estimate how close each path would get the city to its housing and climate goals.
Commissioners focused questions on accessibility for residents with disabilities within affordable housing. Commissioner Rachel asked whether a share of the affordable units could be set aside or required to meet accessibility or ADA standards, noting that “I’m getting shut out of a lot of those affordable housing units simply because… they're not completely ADA accessible.” Pearthree said the city’s affordable-housing agreements typically cover income limits and unit mix but do not currently carve out a fixed percentage of units for accessibility; she recommended pursuing building-code and development-agreement options and suggested staff could follow up with code officials and return with more detail.
Commissioner Sherry Dobson and others pointed to existing models and federal requirements. Dobson cited examples like integrated housing plans used in other cities and suggested the consultant review models such as Austin’s integrated housing approach. A commissioner liaison also noted the Fair Housing Act and the requirement to provide reasonable accommodations when a tenant requests them.
Pearthree outlined next steps: staff will seek council direction (approximately by June), hold public outreach including a June 13 community conversation, and return with more detailed recommendations from the consultant. No formal Council action was taken at this meeting; staff asked the Commission for feedback to inform the consultant’s next phase.
