Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff presents proposed townhouse definition changes to allow more 'missing middle' options; commission gave preliminary approval
Summary
Planning staff proposed removing a lot‑line requirement from the townhouse definition and adjusting side‑yard/setback and minimum-lot-size rules to enable more 'missing middle' housing forms; staff said fire and life‑safety codes would remain unchanged. The commission discussed construction and utility implications and gave preliminary approval to move forward.
Planning staff presented a package of zoning amendments aimed at expanding options for townhouses, semi‑detached homes and smaller lot configurations to advance 'missing middle' housing.
Staff explained the primary proposed change: removing the requirement that a townhouse unit sit on a lot line so developers could place multiple attached units on a single lot with shared utilities rather than requiring separate platted lots for each unit. "We're not proposing any amendments to fire safety, life safety, any of that," the staff presenter said, noting the International Fire Code and building codes would still apply.
The presentation said removing a mandatory lot line would allow developers to choose construction types that meet building‑code separation standards (for example, two independent two‑hour firewalls) without triggering separate utility connections and lot plats that raise development costs. Staff also outlined proposed adjustments to minimum frontage, lot size scaling and condominium/common association requirements when lot lines are used for sales.
Commissioners asked technical questions about stacked townhouses, when sprinklers would be required, and how setbacks would be calculated. One commissioner said the change could reduce the cost of infrastructure by allowing single utility runs across attached units. A developer example from the Promenade townhomes was cited to show that narrower middle units can be comfortable and more affordable.
The item was presented as preliminary; the commission offered feedback and preliminary support and advanced the proposal for further review.
Why it matters: The amendments are intended to widen the range of housing options and potentially reduce development costs that can impede production of smaller, more affordable units.
Next steps: Staff will continue work on R‑4 and other districts, coordinate legal/code language for lot-line vs. non lot-line scenarios, and return with updated draft language.
