Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council narrows Vision 43 focus areas and asks policy questions on housing, height and step-backs
Summary
Planning staff recommended removing one focus area from Vision 43, outlined proposed boundaries for three focus areas along Highway 43, and presented three policy questions for council direction: require housing in new development, require a two-story minimum, and require height step-backs adjacent to residential zones.
Planning staff presented an update on Vision 43, the Highway 43 corridor planning effort, asking council to confirm proposed focus-area boundaries and to consider three policy questions that would guide a future mixed-use code. Staff recommended removing Focus Area 2 (a church property) from the project because recent state law and code changes provide alternative pathways for affordable housing development on such properties.
The presentation outlined proposed boundaries for Focus Areas 1, 3 and 4 and described additions suggested by a project working group and the planning commission. Staff said the focus areas are intended to define where zoning changes could open opportunities for pedestrian-friendly mixed-use redevelopment without forcing owners to take action.
Staff then asked council to consider three discrete policy choices: whether to require a housing component in new development within focus areas; whether to require a minimum two-story height; and whether to require step-backs where taller new development abuts residential zones. Staff offered to return with pros and cons on each and to place the items on a near-term agenda for further discussion.
"Should new development within the focus area boundaries be required to include a housing component?" the presenter asked, noting the question could apply to a hypothetical large redevelopment such as a Walmart site. Councilors asked for a briefing on pros and cons and indicated they wanted time to "marinate" on the policy choices before returning them for formal direction.
