Lafayette planners, consultants unveil first draft of land-use code focusing on districts, setbacks and uses

City of Lafayette planning staff and consultants presented the first module of a proposed land‑use code rewrite at a March working‑group meeting, outlining new base zoning districts, revised dimensional standards and a reorganized use table intended to implement the city’s Legacy Lafayette comprehensive plan.

The draft, prepared by Clarion Associates and described to the Planning Commission working group, condenses some existing zones, splits the current M‑1 industrial district into multiple industrial tiers, and creates clearer tables that map each proposed district to future land‑use categories in Legacy Lafayette. Gabby Hartz, a senior associate with Clarion Associates, told the group the project team aims to produce a consolidated code by late this year after three drafting modules and phased public outreach.

The rewrite’s stated goals include making the code more user friendly for residents and applicants, rightsizing the development review process, and providing more predictable outcomes, Hartz said. Elizabeth Gardner, the project manager, explained the draft will be released in modules: Module 1 (districts and uses), then development standards (parking, building design) and finally administration and procedures. Gardner said staff hopes to start targeted community engagement late this month and early next month on key issues rather than hand the full code to the entire community at once.

Key technical changes described in the draft: - District reorganization: Several current districts are combined or retitled; the M‑1 industrial district is proposed to be split into multiple industrial subtypes to match differing industrial land uses and standards on the ground. - Dimensional standards: The draft consolidates minimum lot area, principal and accessory setbacks, lot coverage and building height in summary tables at the start of the districts chapter. The draft expands lot‑coverage allowances in several places to avoid unduly constraining infill redevelopment and introduces setback averaging (to average street‑front setbacks between adjacent buildings in some contexts). - Height and setback exceptions: The draft proposes limited height exceptions for chimneys, elevator overruns, rooftop mechanicals and similar elements (a working number presented was up to 10 feet above principal height for such elements) and parapets/screening up to about 4 feet above the roofline; those figures are draft and may change. - Use table and use‑specific standards: The existing use table was reorganized by residential, public/civic, commercial and industrial uses. The draft reduces reliance on special‑use review by adding defined use‑specific standards (for example, limits on size or hours where a use is near residential areas) so some uses can be permitted by right while meeting compatibility standards.

Consultants highlighted several new defined use types: courtyard dwellings, live‑work dwellings (ground‑floor work space with living area above), artisan industrial, food‑truck courts, neighborhood cafés and neighborhood retail (examples of neighborhood‑serving commerce the draft would allow in limited locations), EV charging stations, and rooftop and ground‑mounted solar.

Darcy Thomas, chair of the Planning Commission, emphasized the project intent: "We want the land‑use code to reflect Legacy Lafayette and be easier for staff, applicants and residents to use." The draft also seeks to reduce the number of legacy Planned Unit Development (PUD) anomalies by converting many PUDs to base zoning, while retaining a limited PUD option for projects that deliver specific community benefits, Gardner said.

Staff noted technical issues that still need resolution, including mapping proposed districts to the current zoning map, how PUDs with embedded tables will be converted, and finalizing which districts allow which housing types. The presentation flagged that accessory dwelling unit (ADU) standards are being updated separately to comply with an incoming state law and will be merged into the draft once finalized.

No formal action or votes were taken at the working‑group meeting; consultants and staff asked members to submit comments on the online draft and said they will bring refined options back for further discussion. The project team expects to brief City Council on the project status at an upcoming council meeting and continue iterative public engagement before presenting a consolidated code for final review.

Next steps: staff will refine Module 1 based on the working‑group feedback, prepare outreach materials and visual examples for the public, and return to the group and council with more detailed proposals for districts, standards and conversion mechanics.