Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-22-18 City Commission Packet Materials - A1. UDC Edits Discussion and Zone Text Amendment Initiation - SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 10/22/2018 BOZE MAN MT Planning Discussion & Direction on BOZEMAN"T Proposed UDC Edits • Policy Discussion and specific code changes as detailed in the memo dated October 22,2018. • No decision at this time.If Commission directs staff to work on these issues and amendments,staff will develop draft language for consideration which will follow the standard text amendment process and be back before the Commission for consideration. Discussion & Direction on pl. Zrg AN Proposed UDC Edits • Policy Discussion 1. SUP for on-site alcohol sales in 0-2M. 2. Cash-in-lieu of parkland density cap. 3. Detached household porch encroachment,enclosure,and meeting garage location. 4. Establish presumption that uses within districts and also within adjacent districts are compatible. 5. Define development context. 1 10/22/2018 BUZEMAN"` Discussion & Direction on Proposed UDC Edits • Policy Discussion 1. SUP for on-site alcohol sales in 8-2M. What is the issue? ✓ Consistency with other similar commercial zoning districts ✓ Administrative efficiency Discussion & Direction on BOZ E MAN"` Proposed UDC Edits • Policy Discussion 2. Cash-in-lieu of parkland density cop. What is the issue? ✓ Does the maximum density cap apply to an acre or that portion being developed? ✓ Support of porks program ✓ Effect on infill and greater density ✓ Housing affordability ✓ Example:A acre site with 12 apartments,R-4 district BOZEMA Discussion & Direction on {gan.... '"` mg Proposed UDC Edits • Policy Discussion 2. Cash-in-lieu of parkland density cap. ✓ R-4 density cap of 12 DU/Acre. <_acre Acre Area 0.5 1.0 Density 6 12 Parkland 0.03 0.03 Dedication 0.18 acres 0.36 acres Park value(sq/ft) $1.50 $1.50 Cash-in-lieu $11,761.20 $23,522.40 2 10/22/2018 Discussion & Direction on i3OZEMAN"' %annin9 Proposed UDC Edits • Policy Discussion 3. Detached household porch encroachment,enclosure,and meeting garage location.' What is the issue? ✓ Garage entrance must be subordinate to front door. ✓ Reduced front setbacks w/revised code ✓ Is the intent to ollow an enclosed porch to qualify as the"front fogade"of a residential building? 'Please note the code reference In stall memo should be No.5.not No.a as gsled. Discussion & Direction on mnn,nnnin ANM7 %ag Proposed UDC Edits • Policy Discussion 4. Establish presumption that uses within districts and also within adjacent districts are compatible. What is the issue? ✓ CImiftc Commission intent for application of code. ✓ Emphasize importance of review criteria during development review. Discussion & Direction on BOZEMAN"T %ommng Proposed UDC Edits • Policy Discussion 5. Formal definition of development context. What is the issue? ✓ For some,everything. ✓ The term is purposefully vague due to variability of context for any given development proposal. ✓ Please refer to the policy discussion memo No.5 for more detail. 3 10/22/2018 Discussion & Direction on B04 It tHN" %vnning Proposed UDC Edits • Proposed code changes: ❑ 17 proposed code modification,edits and changes are suggested. ❑ Not all suggested changes warrant their own slide.For expediency,staff is only highlighting those edits Community Development deemed more than a ministerial change. Discussion & Direction on BOZEMAN"T %arming Proposed UDC Edits • Proposed code changes: 1. Minimum lot area&width in the R-2 district* What is the issue? v As written,the R-2 district is more permissive than R-3&R-4. ✓ City code Is generally progressive in dimensional standards. ✓ R-2 lot area should be restricted to 5,000 sq/ft without an alley "Only lot width Is listed In memo.lot area Is the primary issue to correct. BOZ E M^ "T Discussion & Direction on %orr,rg Proposed UDC Edits • Proposed code changes: 5. Setback&height encroachment. What is the issue? ✓ Some uncertainty about application and interaction with other sections ✓ Generally reducing setbacks. ✓ Greater residential intensity. ✓ What can encroach vs.be required to stay back from property line 4 10/22/2018 Discussion & Direction on BOZEMANNT Ncnning Proposed UDC Edits • Proposed code changes: 8. Landscape block frontage. What is the issue? ✓ Should we heat apartment buildings differently than detached single-household buildings for placement along the street? ✓ Effect on development character and coordination with other standards. Discussion & Direction on BOZEMAN"' n�n _ Proposed UDC Edits • Proposed code changes: 13.Structured parking facilities What is the issue? ✓ The City is seeing more buildings with integrated structured parking. ✓ How should the City interpret this language? A. BOZEMANMT Public Comment annnmg Comment has been received and been fonvarded to the Commission. Recommendation Direct staff to proceed with the proposed edits and provide guidance on the policy discussion. 5 10/22/2018 Discussion & Direction on BOZ E MAN"' Plvnning Proposed UDC Edits • Policy Discussion and specific code changes as detailed in the memo dated October 22,2018. • No final decision at this time.If Commission directs staff to work on these issues and amendments,staff will develop draft language for consideration which will follow the standard text amendment process and be back before the Commission for consideration. c y Planning G .9 C 0.� E E '�x.o.�ma".aaE=3fnu' A+B+C+D+E+F+G+H+I+J+K+L+M+N+O+P+Q+R+S+T=100 Where a value may be less than 0 Where each value may not be less than 0 Where each value must be at least X Where no value may be more than Y 6