Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners question language that could 'discourage' housing, press for ADU residency clarity and parking rules
Summary
Several commissioners told consultants they are uncomfortable with draft language that could be read as discouraging housing not directly connected to transit; they also pressed for clearer residency rules tied to ADU incentives and specifics on parking‑reduction criteria and proximity measurements.
During the discussion of the 50% draft of Basalt's land‑use code rewrite on March 3, multiple commissioners expressed concern about wording that they said might unintentionally limit affordable housing and sought clearer parameters for accessory dwelling unit (ADU) incentives and proposed parking reductions.
"I'm uncomfortable with the idea of discouraging any sort of housing, even if transit's difficult," said Commissioner Cindy Hersshfield, who recalled past cases where provisions tied too tightly to transit accessibility appeared to limit housing opportunities. Hersshfield asked whether the draft's phrasing was effectively discouraging projects rather than requiring mitigation or alternative access strategies.
Consultants responded that the draft language is informed by the town master plan and that the intent is to require applicants to demonstrate how a project would provide access or mitigation — not to ban development. Jessica Garrow, principal at Design Workshop, said staff and the consultant team will clarify that the code should focus on how people get to services and transit rather than create categorical prohibitions.
Commissioners also debated ADU incentives and residency requirements. One commissioner said accelerated ADU review should come with a residency requirement: "If you're going to get an accelerated process, the town should get something for that." Garrow noted that at a recent council second reading, council chose not to add a residency requirement for standard incentive units but that deed‑restricted incentive units and 100% affordable projects would include restrictions; she said the topic will be revisited in the broader rewrite.
Parking reductions drew detailed scrutiny. Consultants described five criteria for up to 25% reduction: proximity to transit, shared parking arrangements, high‑quality pedestrian and bicycle facilities, transportation demand management measures (for example, unbundling parking and shared parking agreements), and consideration of surrounding on‑ and off‑street parking conditions. Commissioners questioned how to define "proximity" and whether it should be measured as walking distance or "as the crow flies." One commissioner recommended allowing offsite shared parking if multimodal measures are met.
No formal policy changes were adopted; staff and consultants said they will return with clearer draft language, specific options for residency or deed restrictions tied to ADU incentives, and proposed measurements for transit proximity and parking reductions in the forthcoming 90% draft.
