North Logan workshop previews form‑based code for city center; draft expected in 30–45 days

North Logan planning commissioners, city council members and consultants held a public workshop April 24 to review a proposed form‑based code for the city center and to solicit public feedback. Consultants said a draft of the code and supporting graphics will be circulated within 30 to 45 days, with a goal of adoption work continuing through the summer.

The presentation framed form‑based code as a tool to regulate building form and street interaction rather than uses. The presenters said the code will define a city‑center core and two transition districts (east and west) that set differing heights and building‑type expectations so the core can support mixed‑use, walkable development while buffering adjacent residential neighborhoods.

Why it matters: the code would replace much of the case‑by‑case design negotiation with a regulating plan and written standards intended to produce predictable building frontage, transparency, block sizes and public realm treatments. Staff and consultants said that approach is meant to encourage mixed use and walkability while giving developers clearer rules to follow.

Consultants described the major elements the code will address: form district boundaries, frontage types tied to arterial/collector/local streets, building types and massing, public‑realm elements (streetscape, sidewalks, bicycle facilities), and design‑specific rules (fenestration, signage, materials). They emphasized that the regulations would be implemented as a zoning district: "It's still a zone," a presenter said, "so the property is still in a zone. This zone being a form based zone." (Speaker 3, Presenter.)

Key points from the workshop

- Districts and heights: The code would create a central or civic core allowing the greatest height (consultants discussed three to six stories in parts of the core) and two transition districts to the east and west with lower heights and different building types to buffer neighborhoods. Consultants recommended limiting eastern transition heights to two to three stories to preserve the canal edge and adjacent single‑family areas.

- Ground floor uses and transparency: The presenters recommended protecting active ground‑floor uses on primary frontages. They proposed strict transparency and blank‑wall limits — "you should have a minimum of 60, 70 percent transparency on the First Floor," a presenter said — to keep sidewalks lively and provide window shopping and visual interest (Speaker 3, Presenter).

- Parking: The consultants said the form‑based approach typically uses maximum rather than minimum parking requirements and supports shared parking strategies. For North Logan, they recommended a residential parking range of roughly 1.5 to 1.75 spaces per unit and a non‑residential baseline (about 1 space per 500 square feet) for off‑street parking, while noting on‑street parking provides additional capacity. "We would like to see 1 and a half, 1 and 3 quarters per unit, and then probably 1 for 500 for all the other spaces," the presenter said (Speaker 3, Presenter).

- Parking structures and funding: Speakers discussed parking decks as potential future capital projects that could be bonded or built through public‑private partnerships. Consultants noted developers sometimes share the cost; in other local examples a developer carried much of the deck cost and later catalyzed additional interest.

- Open space and public realm: The code would address shared open spaces, pocket parks and pedestrian corridors. Consultants said the goal is functional landscaping and usable public space rather than ornamental plantings. Publicly owned plaza elements (light poles, restrooms, signage) would be required to meet the same visual standards as private development within the center.

- Design controls, signage and materials: The presentation emphasized consistent materials and building articulation to achieve the New England–inspired character described in the city center master plan. Consultants recommended limiting excessive signage and sandwich boards to reduce visual clutter.

- Transition and view protections: Presenters outlined a possible "transitional height plane" to protect adjacent single‑family areas — for example, a 50‑foot zone near the canal where building mass would step back at a prescribed angle before taller portions could rise.

- Uses to exclude or limit: Participants discussed geographic limits on less‑preferred uses (vape shops, adult‑oriented businesses, payday lenders) and suggested confining such uses to peripheral streets rather than primary frontages. The group also discussed limiting ground‑floor residential on primary core frontages to maintain retail/restaurant activity.

- Ownership vs. rental: Consultants noted the code regulates form, not tenure. They said zoning cannot require owner‑occupied versus rental units; ownership objectives would require other tools such as development agreements or incentives.

Process and next steps

Consultants described a pre‑application/preapproval step, a formal application and possible design‑review committee steps for proposals that fall outside the adopted standards. They said the project team will draft a code outline and graphics and circulate them to staff and the public within roughly 30–45 days for initial feedback. "Within the next 30 to 45 days, you'll have a draft of the code," a presenter said (Speaker 3, Presenter). The team said work on public review and formal adoption could continue through the summer, with a tentative planning schedule that could include more formal hearings and adoption steps later this year — "probably gonna be August," one speaker said.

Public input opportunities will include written feedback on the draft materials and public hearings as the draft code is refined. Staff said they will distribute the FAQ and draft PDF materials and accept written comments; the presentation materials and an eight‑page FAQ were available to attendees.

What the workshop did not decide

No formal zoning changes or votes occurred at the workshop. Attendees and staff discussed policy choices (e.g., exact height limits, the geography of transition zones, and precise transparency requirements) that will be resolved in the draft code and subsequent public hearings.

Next steps cited by staff and consultants include preparing the draft code and graphics, circulating them for comment, refining the regulating plan and then beginning formal public hearings and adoption steps.