Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Charlotte planning department seeks wide UDO changes to ease ADUs, allow markets and update waste rules
Summary
City planning presented a broad Unified Development Ordinance text amendment to implement the 2040 plan, proposing revised ADU size rules, expanded by‑right outdoor markets, new solid‑waste thresholds and removal of a state‑conflicting rezoning waiting period. Council asked staff for follow‑ups on ADU templates and accessibility.
City planning staff on Feb. 16 presented petition 2025‑118, a wide-ranging text amendment to the city’s Unified Development Ordinance meant to implement goals in the Charlotte 2040 comprehensive plan.
Planning staff said the amendment would change rules across 25 of 39 UDO articles. On accessory dwelling units (ADUs), staff said “the heated floor area of the ADU shall not exceed 600 square feet or 70% of the total floor area of the principal residential use, whichever is greater. However, they can in no case can they be more than 1000 heated square feet.” The change is designed to give flexibility where smaller principal homes make earlier percentage limits impractical, staff said.
The amendment would also allow outdoor/farmers markets by right in additional districts (ML‑1, ML‑2, IC‑1 and IC‑2 and OFC/OG), a change staff said would expand access to fresh food in areas currently zoned for industrial or commercial uses.
On solid‑waste standards, the amendment proposes city‑provided rollout collection eligibility for projects of one through 11 dwelling units and clarified requirements for projects of 12 or more units, where on‑site dumpster pads or city dumpster service may be required but exceptions exist for duplexes, triplexes and quads that front public streets.
Staff told council the UDO must also be amended to remove language that conflicts with recent state law (House Bill 926), which eliminated local waiting‑period limits on refiling development applications; the amendment strikes that waiting period to avoid a state/local conflict.
Council members pressed staff on implementation details. Council member Dimple Ajmera and others asked whether the city is developing preapproved ADU templates and whether templates will include accessibility (ADA) features; planning staff said template work is ongoing in coordination with Housing and Neighborhood Services and that single‑story ADU templates should be ADA‑compliant, with a follow‑up report to provide specifics and timelines.
Planning staff also said they had engaged the UDO advisory committee and held virtual community outreach in January. No speakers signed up for the public hearing portion of this item. Staff recommended approval of the text amendment, saying it aligns with the adopted comprehensive plan and facilitates implementation of its goals.
The council closed the public hearing and asked staff to provide additional details on ADU templates, accessibility considerations and timelines for any procedural streamlining that might accompany future UDO updates.
