Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning And Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Second reading of wide zoning changes advances no farther after no second; planning concerns remain
Summary
Council heard a second reading of proposed zoning ordinance amendments affecting residential and commercial density, permitted uses and height limits; the motion to adopt received no second and did not proceed. Planning staff and public commenters urged more outreach and education before decisions.
The council held a second reading on an ordinance that would change how maximum residential density is calculated across several zoning districts, add planned developments as permitted uses in some categories, and raise the maximum height for the R‑3 district to three stories (not to exceed 50 feet).
The ordinance, as described in the agenda summary, would: change calculations from net acres to gross acres in some residential districts; cap R‑3 residential density at 16 dwelling units per gross acre where applicable; add planned development projects and neighborhood commercial permissions in certain districts; add in‑patient medical facilities as a conditional use in the B‑4 community commercial zone; and amend the schedule of dimension and area regulations. The full ordinance text was made available in the city clerk’s office.
Councilmember Kim Minkie made the motion to adopt after the second reading, but the motion received no second and therefore did not advance. Planning staff and public commenters had earlier urged more public engagement and additional education on planned unit developments (PUDs) and density calculations. Planning Director Holden Fleming told the council that planning staff has fielded many developer applications and that state law now requires ministerial administrative approval for applications that meet objective development standards (House Bill 443, effective July 1). Fleming said the office is reviewing the zoning and subdivision language to remove subjective language where possible and will bring proposed textual changes and outreach material back to the council.
Why it matters: The ordinance would change how densities are calculated and the allowed scale of development in several zones. Planning staff noted that most development proposals are revised during review to meet regulations, and that state statute now requires administrative approvals for projects that meet code standards without variances. Several public commenters urged slower, broader outreach and small‑area planning on sensitive topics such as cemetery expansion and neighborhood impacts.
Outcome: No adoption vote occurred because the motion lacked a second. The ordinance remains on the agenda for future consideration pending additional review and public engagement.
