Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fairview planning commission forwards revised new development code to commissioners after extensive debate
Summary
After a lengthy public hearing and debate, the Planning Commission voted 7–2 to forward an amended new development code (PC726) to the Board of Commissioners, including language letting staff or the commission designate hilltop and ridgetop areas and lowering a steep‑slope undisturbed‑percent threshold from 90% to 80%.
The Fairview Planning Commission on Feb. 10 closed a public hearing on the proposed new development code (PC726) and voted to forward a recommended, amended draft to the Board of Commissioners after detailed debate and several amendments.
During public comment, architect and resident David Binham urged a careful review, saying the proposed code was "very extensive" and could prohibit common design features and materials unless modified. Developer Joey Wallace asked about vested rights and whether projects in current design phases should follow the new code or existing rules; staff advised such vested‑rights questions require legal counsel.
Staff then read a list of 11 proposed edits and additions to the draft code for the commission’s recommendation. The list included: separating first reading/public hearing/second reading as distinct Board meetings; formalizing public participation and developer‑led meetings; allowing planned overlay development for commercial projects greater than 20 acres; adding limited use standards for automotive uses (including a spacing rule tied to road frontage); modifying hilltop and ridgetop rules; standards for decentralized wastewater and buffers for city parks; adjusting traffic study thresholds; increasing building width caps for certain commercial building types; rules for pickup parking locations; and lowering the steep‑slope undisturbed requirement from 90% to 80%.
Commissioners focused substantial attention on hilltop/ridgetop definitions and the steep‑slope standard. After discussion, the commission amended item five so that hilltop and ridgetop designations would not hinge on a fixed elevation threshold (875 ft.) but instead could be designated by city staff or the planning commission at the time of review. Commissioners said this change gives staff or the commission discretion to identify sensitive ridges or hilltops rather than relying solely on a numeric elevation cutoff.
A separate amendment to strike item three (which would have allowed commercial projects over 20 acres to use a planned overlay development) passed, and the commission voted on the overall package as amended. The commission recorded a 7–2 vote in favor of recommending the amended draft PC726 to the Board of Commissioners (vote recorded as 7 yes, 2 no). Commissioners noted the document represents a major overhaul of the zoning and development regulations; staff and commissioners agreed further refinements and graphics (illustrations of driveway widths and steep‑slope examples) would help the Board and the public.
Next steps: the commission’s recommendation and the amended draft will be transmitted to the Board of Commissioners for consideration at its upcoming meetings, including separate readings as described by staff. Staff said any additional edits could be made before the Board’s second reading.
