Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Code Update topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultant Jackie Berg proposes mixed‑residential district and residential‑infill overlay in Draper code update
Summary
Consultant Jackie Berg presented preliminary recommendations to unify Draper’s zoning and subdivision codes and proposed a mixed‑residential base district aligned with medium‑high density (≈4–8 DU/acre) plus a floating residential infill overlay to increase housing variety while preserving neighborhood compatibility.
Jackie Berg, the planning consultant retained for Draper’s code rewrite, told the joint council and planning‑commission session that the project’s goal is to combine the city’s zoning (Title 9) and subdivision (Title 17) regulations into a single, clearer land‑development code. “The purpose of tonight's meeting is to, discuss the key findings from our preliminary recommendations report and get direction from you all on whether we are moving in the right direction,” Berg said.
Berg summarized outreach efforts (a Jan. 10 open house with about 19 attendees, an online questionnaire open November–March, and stakeholder interviews with developers, architects and board members) and described the central recommendation: establish a mixed‑residential (MR) base district aligned to the medium‑high density land‑use category and create a floating residential infill overlay that property owners could request to increase housing intensity. She said the MR category would align with the medium‑high land‑use designation and noted the medium‑high land‑use band is roughly 4–8 dwelling units per acre.
Council members pressed for limits on where the MR district could be used. One member said, “I think this community has carried its load of density at this point,” and worried about applying a new tool broadly; others responded that the MR district could be limited by a map‑amendment review and that an overlay offers an extra procedural control. Berg and staff emphasized the difference between codified base‑district standards (which provide predictable review criteria) and development agreements (which are negotiated case‑by‑case): a codified district reduces repeated negotiation and associated liabilities while giving the city clearer standards.
Berg also proposed a minimum mix requirement as one possible control (for example, a proportion of single‑family detached units), and said staff would return with district‑specific standards and map‑application options. The council generally agreed to continue developing the MR concept and to examine whether an overlay or base district (or both) best meets Draper’s goals for compatibility and predictability.
The council will see draft chapter language and district parameters at a future meeting for detailed review before any map changes are proposed.
