Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Affordability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer urges easing garage and parking rules to support market-rate affordable housing
Summary
At a public forum, local developer Joshua Flake urged the commission to remove the 18x18 garage requirement and relax parking and lot‑size rules to make market‑rate multifamily and townhome units more affordable for local workers.
Joshua Flake, a local developer, told the planning commission during the public forum that existing zoning requirements make it difficult to deliver market‑rate housing that is affordable to local workers. "I'm Joshua Flake and, I wanted to propose a couple changes to a few of the codes for multifamily," he said, describing plans for a multifamily development in town intended to provide unsubsidized, lower‑cost units.
Flake said two‑car garage and parking standards push up building footprints and prices. "So we would propose removing that 18 by 18 garage requirement," he said, arguing an 18x18 stall is often unusable and that a square‑footage standard or narrower‑and‑deeper garage would be more practical. He also suggested lowering per‑unit parking requirements and using PUD/PRUD options to allow different design standards that could reduce costs.
Commission members and staff discussed possible alternatives such as planned unit developments, smaller lot widths and shared driveways. A staff speaker illustrated how smaller lot standards and PUD incentives can increase density while requiring design and amenity standards. The staff presentation included example lot sizes (10,000, 9,000, 7,000 and 6,000 square feet) and density estimates — "about 41 units on the 10,000 square foot side," the staff member said — and used construction cost assumptions (about $165 per square foot, $8 per square foot for land and a 10% builder profit) to estimate final prices.
Flake told the commission he employs 25 people and that at least half live outside the city because they cannot find housing. The discussion emphasized options to permit denser housing types, adjust garage/parking dimensions, and use conditional PUD rules that could include affordable‑unit incentives.
The commission did not adopt any code changes during the meeting; members encouraged Flake to submit written proposals for staff and commission review and to return at a future meeting.
