Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Multifamily Setbacks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Marion County panel approves R‑3 multifamily setback and height clarification
Summary
The Land Development Regulation Committee unanimously approved an amendment adding a height limit for multifamily (R‑3) buildings adjacent to single‑family homes, limiting multifamily height to twice the height of the nearest single‑family residence within 100 feet while allowing a minimum 30‑foot height.
Get email alerts on the Zoning Multifamily Setbacks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Land Development Regulation Committee voted unanimously to recommend an amendment to Marion County’s land development code clarifying height and separation requirements for multifamily (R‑3) properties adjacent to single‑family homes.
The committee approved adding a new subsection to the multifamily R‑3 standards that restricts a multifamily structure located within 100 feet of an existing single‑family dwelling to a maximum height of twice the height of the closest single‑family residence, and that the provision “allows for a minimum of 30 feet in height.” The amendment was moved and seconded by members of the committee and passed unanimously.
The change was described by Growth Services staff as a technical correction necessary because the previous round of buffer updates did not include the advertised change to Section 4.20.11 (R‑3 classification) during earlier public hearings. Staff explained the intent is to preserve a proportional height relationship where multifamily development abuts single‑family lots, while preserving a minimum allowable height of 30 feet so the requirement is not interpreted as an absolute cap below that level.
No members of the public commented on the R‑3 setback/height item during the public hearing. The committee chair confirmed the item had been advertised (proofs of publication were submitted for the meeting), a motion was made to approve the amendment as presented, and the motion passed unanimously.
Committee members indicated the approved language reflects what was discussed in prior workshops and that staff would reconcile a missing “not less than” clause that had been omitted from some circulated redline versions before forwarding the recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners.
The committee returned to other agenda items after the vote.
