ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION JULY 9, 2019 AGENDA Introductions and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
ZONING CODE ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION JULY 9, 2019 AGENDA Introductions and Opening Statements RPC Timeline and Goals Mr. John Greiner Postmaster Centralized Delivery Presentation of Topics by RPC Staff Various Topics
2
An opportunity will be given to provide feedback via microphone after each question but also, please use provided feedback slips and leave them in the box in the back when leaving or email any feedback to rpc@cityofclarksville.com
3
2018
2020
(after July 1)
2021
in line with the comprehensive plan
2019
Vision Statement: To preserve and promote the unique characteristics of Clarksville - Montgomery County to provide for a diverse community with a dynamic balance of agriculture and commerce. Mission Statement: The Regional Planning Commission directs development in Clarksville and Montgomery County in a transparent manner that maximizes the use of valuable resources, ensures orderly land use, and guides infrastructure placement to support and sustain a rich quality of life for all citizens.
4
Bridge the gap of time from 2019 till the Growth Plan & Comprehensive Plan are finalized (late-2021) Provide flexibility in the zoning code to achieve more affordable options through greater density where appropriate, both for new construction or infill redevelopment, thereby slowing sprawl
Update or clarify several underutilized zones. Have a 2-way dialogue with our customers and the public. Continue to improve the built environment of Clarksville & Montgomery County.
Issue: Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) are used for
creative projects by allowing the developer to determine what the best density and setbacks are for their project. Requires RPC & Elected Body approval. PUDs currently require 25% open space which is more than a cluster subdivision (15%) and is the largest cited reason no PUDs are developed. Direction:
units/acre since all plans require approval the applicant can state why the density requested is appropriate.
with fire department and other department approvals.
a more reasonable amount like 5% or allow for a combination
5
Issue: R-5 is a very underutilized zone. It is basically R-4 for
There is one R-5 parcel totaling 9.5 acres in the entire city. Direction: With R-6 being our newer successful infill zone for single family homes on lots as small as 2,500 SF. There needs to be a higher density Multi-Family zone that meets the needs of a growing community. We would propose R-5 become similar to R-4 but with >16 units/acre maximum and a minimum lot size of 6,000 – 8,000 SF to accommodate “stacked quads” as opposed to “side by sides”. This zone, and R-4 should also check to make sure the flexibility of stacked multi-family units, townhomes, and garden apartments or patio homes is allowed. Minimum lot width and setbacks will need to be changed for R-4 and R-5 to promote parking in the side and rear.
6
Issue: The UGB should closely mimic the city zoning due to the presence of urban services. R-2 was removed from the county zoning resolution 20 years ago. In order to promote better density, thereby slowing suburban sprawl, R-2 and R-2 clustering should be reintroduced into the UGB where water and sewer can accommodate it. The issue is lots <8,000 SF must have residential sprinklers (including attic) in the county. (5.6.3 (12) d). Direction: Working with the county building and codes and county fire (EMA) we would propose reducing the minimum to 6,000- 7,000 SF lots but keep the 10 foot (or possibly 8.5-9 foot side setbacks) to avoid fire spread side to side, which is the issue. The backyard of some lots could be reduced without any noticeable changes to the neighborhood. Some homeowners, especially retirees and single mothers, want a suburban single-family neighborhood lifestyle with lower maintenance lots.
7
6,000 SF lots are either 50’X120’ or 60’X100’ (or some combination in between) A Floor Area Ratio (FAR) could be introduced on lots <8,000 SF to avoid having 3,000 SF homes on 6,000 SF lots. A ratio of .40 - .50 (or 40-50% of lots size) is appropriate for this area. 6,000 SF Lots = 7.26 Units/Acre Gross 9000 SF Lots = 4.84 Units/Acre Gross
Issue: In the zoning code a staff level site plan only has to
meet one of the following:
The grey area of linking any development to a platted subdivision parcel is not clear enough. Direction: Update section 5.10 to make it clear what a staff level site plan is. The staff believes the following is a good benchmark to meet all of these requirements to qualify as a staff level:
In addition, the fee schedule will be updated to change the Multi-Family fee from $350 to $300.
8
Issue: Buffers are inflexible with some minor exceptions.
Waivers can be sought from the RPC from some but not all
to 35 foot buffers which are not always needed or conducive to surrounding development. This will provide for flexibility due to topographic constraints and allow for alternatives when active recreation or nearby uses (such as paths to schools) deem it necessary. Direction: Develop a process (with code updated language) to allow buffer requirements to be reduced with cause or alternatives by the Director of the RPC and Planning Commission Approval. Sample text: “For Preliminary Subdivision or Site Plan submissions, alternative landscape buffer methods or design acceptable to the Regional Planning Commission Staff and Director may be approved by the Regional Planning Commission”.
9
Issue: Only “guest houses” are permitted upon review by
the City Board of Zoning Appeals and cannot be rented. Direction:
Also known as granny flats, backyard cottages, in-law suites, and basement/garage apartments, accessory dwelling units (ADUs) allow for affordable added density in legacy neighborhoods. ADUs provide flexible rental housing options for students, seniors, the disabled, and short-term workers. ADUs can be an income- generating use that is compatible with legacy neighborhoods. They are small in size and are a tool to prevent urban sprawl. They can help increase housing stock without additional land or strain on infrastructure. Propose the creation of an ADU overlay within the CBID to allow secondary units on lots meeting certain requirements. They would be limited in scale and could require parking or have compatibility standards for design. We could test them by allowing a maximum number per year & per person over a two-year period. ADUs are supported by the AARP, NAR, and NAHB, and have become increasingly utilized nationwide, including Tennessee, over the last decade.
10
Issue: There is a need for new multi-family dwelling units. Rezoning requests can be difficult to obtain in some places largely due to perception. Direction: Improving the built environment may reduce some of the public complaints when developing new multi-family housing. This would involve updates to the exterior and lot minimum design standards. Items to look at: exterior finishes and materials, landscaping, and site development.
11
Issue: There are numerous typos, incorrect or outdated citations, and other minor changes that should take place if the codes are being updated. Direction: In some places in the codes it says “Lot” instead of “Unit”. We will be looking at the use charts and making minor changes or additions if needed – working with city / county building and codes departments. New state regulations involving hemp for instance. Further clarify the front (and side) setbacks for new construction on older neighborhood streets. Current calculation is difficult. It is intended to make new construction match existing neighborhoods.
12
This is YOUR opportunity to help the RPC, city, and county identify areas where the zoning code could be improved for a better built environment or edited for ease and clarity.
can ask questions of the staff for clarification but please try to form your comments into a statement
building codes, or customer service or turn-around times of other departments.
something after please email rpc@cityofclarksville.com or use the comment forms provided today.
13
14
This was a first in a series of meetings to work on the zoning code. The next meeting will be in mid-Autumn. The RPC believes in transparency and believes all stakeholders need to be involved in the process to at least voice concerns. Facts and data are important to us. This helps us make the most informed decisions and recommendations. If you think of something else after this discussion please do not hesitate to email us! rpc@cityofclarksville.com