Horace planning commission pauses overlay work after council tables mixed‑use height change

The Horace Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday held a wide‑ranging workshop on proposed mixed‑use height reductions and the possible use of overlay districts, but commissioners said they will wait for the city council to act before finalizing any overlay rules.

Chair opened the July 8 meeting and turned the discussion over to Jace, planning staff, who said the mixed‑use ordinance had been heard by the city council and that the council decided to table the item to its July 21 meeting after receiving testimony from developers and real estate representatives. "Until city council makes their decision on what they feel is right for the mixed use district, let's say if they do settle on 3 stories, then that potentially changes how all these overlay districts function and look completely different," Jace said.

Developers and their representatives urged the commission to favor targeted overlay districts rather than broad baseline reductions. Chris Mack of Christiansen Companies, who said he represents land along key corridors, recommended tailoring overlays by sections (for example, permitting taller buildings away from main frontage while keeping lower heights and stronger design standards along entry corridors). "You can do sections of town," Mack said, describing overlay boundaries measured from the center line back several hundred feet.

Travis Vobili, a commercial real estate agent and Horace resident, warned that broadly lowering base height limits and then requiring Planned Unit Developments for exceptions would deter buyers and users because of the significant upfront time and legal costs of PUDs. "PUDs scare the crap out of all kinds of developers and all kinds of users," Vobili said, and he urged the commission to consider percentage‑based overlays or other tools that allow some vertical development without forcing a full PUD for every project.

Commissioners described a two‑phase approach under consideration: phase one to lower the baseline height (the working baseline discussed was 35 feet) and phase two to craft overlay districts that selectively permit greater height, density bonuses, or design exceptions in targeted locations. Several commissioners emphasized balancing resident preferences—many of whom oppose large four‑story buildings on corridor edges—with the economic realities developers face. "We have to meet in the middle between what's going on there and what people want here and figure out how to blend the two," one commissioner said.

Staff and commissioners discussed technical details raised by the public comments, including an initial overlay depth of about 400 feet from corridor center lines used for scoping, and the possibility of structuring overlays with density bonuses tied to first‑floor commercial requirements. Jace said draft proposals for three additional districts with overlay concepts are scheduled for review and public comment on July 22, but final direction hinges on the council's July 21 decision.

No formal zoning changes were approved at the July 8 meeting. Routine business motions to approve the meeting agenda and the June 24 minutes were adopted by voice vote at the start of the session, and the meeting was adjourned after the long‑range planning discussion.

Next steps: staff asked participants to submit written input via email to Jace so commissioners can consider suggestions before the July 22 packet, and the commission will revisit overlay language after the council resolves the mixed‑use ordinance at its July 21 meeting.