Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council previews major zoning rewrite: fewer single-family districts, ADUs citywide, smaller-lot option
Summary
City staff previewed a comprehensive zoning ordinance rewrite that consolidates single-family residential districts, allows accessory dwelling units citywide, and adds new buffer-yard rules for transitions to smaller-lot subdivisions.
City planning staff previewed a proposed citywide zoning ordinance update that would consolidate residential districts, permit accessory dwelling units (ADUs) across the city and add buffer-yard protections where smaller-lot infill touches established neighborhoods.
Amanda (city planning staff) and Rocky Hinkle (community development director) led the presentation. Staff said the rewrite began in 2020 and reflected stakeholder feedback, a recent housing and demographic study and several years of stakeholder advisory committee work.
Key changes: The draft reduces the number of single-family districts from six to three: RS (standard single-family), RSC (single-family compact, ~5,000 sq ft lots) and RSP (small-lot single-family, minimum 35-foot frontage and 3,500 sq ft lots). The RSP district would include landscape buffer requirements when a small-lot subdivision abuts larger-lot neighborhoods: no buffer if lot widths match, 35-foot buffer when widths differ by 5 to 20 feet, and a 50-foot buffer when differences exceed 20 feet. Staff said the buffer must be a planted landscape buffer with trees and shrubs; paths or trails could be incorporated.
Accessory dwelling units and parking: The draft allows ADUs citywide where lot and setback conditions permit, with a maximum ADU size of 1,200 square feet. The ordinance also reduces some parking minimums and provides alternatives including shared parking, off-site parking agreements and the ability to submit a parking study to justify adjustments.
Planning commission and council input: Planning Commission discussed side-yard setbacks for the larger RS district and recommended consideration of a 10-foot side yard on one side with a 5-foot on the other (versus staff's recommended 5/5); staff noted the 5/5 pattern was commonly requested by developers and offered flexibility. Council asked staff to flag the RS side-yard question for final adoption and requested the team prepare any necessary wind-turbine code language separately for future review.
Next steps: Staff previewed the ordinance and asked council to set it for adoption; council previewed the changes and directed staff to include the planning commission's side-yard concern in the final ordinance packet.
