Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet - December 1, 2009 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA December 1, 2009 - 6:00 p.m. `~. Next Planning Commission Resolution No. 770 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL Connie Moczygemba, Chuck Piland, Pat Beck, Mike Oliver, Justin Hurley, Tim Schmeusser and Keith Wangle III. CORRESPONDENCE IV. MINUTES -Review and approval of October 6, 2009 Planning Commission Minutes V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES VI. BUSINESS Pgs. 1 - s A. File No.10002. A public hearing to consider a conditional use permit to occupy and operate a martial arts/gymnastics/dance studio within the Mountain View Plaza shopping center. The proposed use is located within a C-4, Tourist and Office Professional zoning district. The physical address is 1350 Plaza Blvd., Suite C (Mountain View Plaza) and is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map 37S 2W 02D, Tax Lot 1202. Applicant: America's Best Kids, Inc. VII. DISCUSSION A. Residential Zoning & Regional Plan B. Form Based Zoning VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS IX. MISCELLANEOUS X. ADJOURNMENT City of Central Point Planning Commission Minutes October 6, 2009 I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 6:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL Commissioners Chuck Piland, Pat Beck, Justin Hurley, Mike Oliver, Tim Schmeusser, and Keith Wangle were present. Commission Connie Moczygemba was absent. Commissioner Piland chaired the meeting. Also in attendance were: Tom Humphrey, Community Development Director; Don Burt, Planning Manager; Dave Jacob, Community Planner; Connie Clune, Community Planner; and Didi Thomas, Planning Secretary. III. CORRESPONDENCE -There was one piece of correspondence distributed in connection with the first business item on the agenda. Binders containing relevant selected readings from the Urban Land Institute were distributed to each planning commissioner, compliments of Justin Hurley. Don Burt, Planning Manager, suggested that commissioners read the first three sections right away. IV. MINUTES Justin Hurley made a motion to approve the minutes of the September 1, 2009 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Tim Schmeusser seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Oliver, yes; Hurley, yes; Beck, yes; Schmeusser, yes; Wangle; yes. Motion passed. V. PUBLIC APPEARANCES There were no public appearances. VI. BUSINESS A. File No. 10001. A public hearing to consider a tentative plan application for the purpose of creating a ten (10) lot residential subdivision to be known as Mid Valley Subdivision, located south of the existing North Valley Estates Unit No. 3. The 2.14 acre property is located in an R-1-6 Residential Single Family zoning district (Jackson County Assessor's map 37S 2W 3BB, Tax Lots 3419 and 3500). The proposed project has been Planning Commission Minutes October 6, 2009 Page 2 designed to connect the north and east sections of Willow Bend Way, thus completing connectivity of this residential street. Applicant: Bob Fellows Construction, LLC; Agent: Richard Templin, Richard Templin Surveying There were no conflicts or ex parte communications to disclose. Mike Oliver had made a site visit. Connie Clune, Community Planner, explained that the flood determination letter for the proposed property dated August 25, 2009 was distributed to commissioners as additional information only. There is no special hazard to the property proposed for development. Ms. Clune presented a staff report and stated that the design of the proposed 10-lot subdivision would be similar to the surrounding subdivision that was built in 1997. Willow Bend Way will be improved utilizing standards to conform to the existing street, and all lots will take access from Willow Bend Way. The existing driveway access from Highway 99 will be eliminated upon completion of the frontage improvements to include a meandering sidewalk to conform with the existing improvements which were made at the time of construction of North Valley Estates, Unit 3. Ms. Clune added that there were no issues in connection with this tentative plan. The public portion of the hearing was opened and the applicant, Bob Fellows, came forward and advised that the project is a fill-in project with similar architecture to those dwellings in the immediate vicinity. The proposed homes would be between 1300 - 1800 square feet and all would be single level. Mr. Fellows added that the property was originally excluded from the PacTrend development of North Valley Estates as it was owned by an estate. The public hearing was then closed. Justin Hurley made a motion to approve Resolution 769, a resolution approving the tentative plan fora 10-lot subdivision to be known as Mid Valley Subdivision located south of North Valley Estates, Unit 3 on 2.14 acres (Jackson County Assessor's map 37S-2W-03BB, Tax lots 3419 and 3500) based on the standards, findings, conclusions and recommendations stated in the staff report. Mike Oliver seconded the motion. ROLL CALL: Oliver, yes; Hurley, yes; Beck, yes; Schmeusser, yes; and Wangle; yes. Motion passed. B. File No. 09025(3). Urbanization Element Technical Memo (Final) Planning Manager Don Burt presented and reviewed a finalized version of the urbanization element technical memorandum, stating that this technical memorandum would supersede all others previously distributed to commissioners. Mr. Burt stated that that the urbanization element provides an excellent basis for understanding the regional plan. The goals, population projections and land use ratios contained in the urbanization element are very important to the establishment of a baseline and sets the broad Planning Commission Minutes October 6, 2009 Page 3 parameters and policies that the City will operate with over the planning horizon, using 2010 as a starting point. The Regional Plan is based upon the doubling of the regional population over a 50-year period, and not just a doubling of the population within each individual city. Population projections have been taken from figures furnished by Jackson County. Based on these projections, the urbanization element defines the land use needs to accommodate growth. The projected land use distribution and ratios for moving forward are based on historical projections. Redevelopment, Mr. Burt pointed out, would become a key component over the course of the planning period. Commissioner Hurley requested that a provision for the monitoring and adjustment of ratios in five (5) year cycles be added to Industrial and Parks & Open Space as well as the other categories represented. Mr. Burt said that he could expand the definition of industrial which would take the burden off of commercial land. A motion was made by Justin Hurley and second by Pat Beck to authorize staff to finalize the Urbanization Element and schedule the matter for a public hearing. ROLL CALL: Oliver, yes; Hurley, yes; Beck, yes; Schmeusser, yes; and Wangle; yes. Motion passed. Commissioners took a short break from 6:50 p.m. to 6:55 p.m. C. File No. 9017. Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan Community Development Director Tom Humphrey complimented Don Burt and staff on their efforts and work done during his absence in Kuwait. Mr. Humphrey stated that as a result, the City is in an excellent position to move forward with the Regional Plan once it has been adopted. Mr. Humphrey brought commissioners up-to-date on the current status of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan, noting that Jackson County will be considering the "Plan" at its December, 2009 meeting. Subsequent to that, it is anticipated that each of the participating cities will schedule open houses and a public hearing to take public comment on the Plan. Staff s analysis of the Regional Plan is presented in Attachment "B" of the packet starting on page 62 and provides a summary of eight basic elements of the Plan including the purpose, planning horizon, goals and policies, implementation, Urban Reserve areas, performance indicators and monitoring, incentives and disincentives, and amendments. Commissioner Justin Hurley requested that language be added to Central Point's urban reserves (p. 5-12 of the RVCOG's Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Project -Planning Report) with regard to "sustainable natural environments". Planning Commission Minutes October 6, 2009 Page 4 In addition, Mr. Hurley inquired about the presence of wetlands in proposed urban reserve area CP-2B. Mr. Humphrey responded that the Rogue Valley Council of Governments recognized the presence of these wetlands as part of a recent master plan for this area, and we have some flexibility to possibly move them. Mr. Hurley suggested incorporating them as a feature of development in lieu of just fencing them off. Mr. Humphrey asked commissioners to read through the Regional Plan summary (attachment "B") and provide input. Once the county process begins, Central Point will need to schedule a public hearing within thirty (30) days. Mike Oliver offered that it would be easier to evaluate the document utilizing the maps contained in Attachment B as opposed to the maps in the RVCOG's draft as they clarify boundaries and tax lots. Mr. Humphrey said he'd discuss this with the RPS Contract Oversight Committee (COC). A motion was made by Mike Oliver and seconded by Justin Hurley to move the process forward, scheduling a public hearing on the Regional Plan no sooner than 30 days after the Jackson County Planning Commission has accepted the Plan. ROLL CALL: Oliver, yes; Hurley, yes; Beck, yes; Schmeusser, yes; and Wangle; yes. Motion passed. VII. DISCUSSION VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS IX. MISCELLANEOUS Tom Humphrey advised commissioners that he was working with code enforcement towards a successful resolution of an eyesore located at the corner of Taylor Road and Haskell Road. Mr. Humphrey announced further that Central Point staff will have an appointment with the Jackson County Board of Commissioners to pursue the railroad crossing located in the Twin Creeks Development area. An intergovernmental agreement has been agreed to in concept, and the City now needs to work out the logistics for closing another railroad crossing. There will be a discussion about the Economic Element and the C-4/C-5 zoning districts at a Council study session on October 19`h and commission members are welcome to attend. X. ADJOURNMENT Mike Oliver made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Keith Wangle seconded the motion. Meeting was adjourned at 7:40 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes October 6, 2009 Page 5 The foregoing minutes of the October 6, 2009 Planning Commission meeting were approved by the Planning Commission at its meeting on the day of 2009. Planning Commission Chair AMERICA'S BEST KIDS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Community Development STAFF REPORT Tom Humphrey, AICP Community Development Director STAFF REPORT December 1, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: File No. 10002 Consideration of an application for a Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a martial arts/gymnastics studio located within the Mountain View Plaza. Applicant: America's Best Kids, Inc. STAFF SO~RCE\ ,,,r-_..._ Dave Jacob Com nits Planner BACKGROUND: The applicant leased the subject property with the intention of operating a martial arts/gymnastics studio within Mountain View Plaza. The property is zoned C-4, Tourist and Office Professional, and the address is 1350 Plaza Blvd., Suite C. The martial arts/gymnastics studio is classified as a "physical fitness/conditioning center; martial arts school" as described in Central Point Municipal Code (CPMC) 17.44.030(A)(10) and is a conditional use within the C-4 district. Central Point Yoga, Curves, a physical therapy office, and a chiropractic office have had conditional use permits approved and have demonstrated to be a compatible use within Mountain View Plaza. These uses have not had an adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood. The applicant has stated in his findings that all requirements as outlined under CPMC 17.76.040 shall be met (Attachment "A"). Outside agencies and other City Departments have been given the opportunity to comment and the application has been duly noticed in accordance with ORS 197.763. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Building permits required if any interior or exterior remodeling work is planned. FINDINGS: Refer to Attachment "C". ISSUES: None. EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS: Attachment "A" -Applicant's Findings Attachment "B" -Building Department Comments Attachment "C" -Planning Department Findings of Fact Attachment "D" -Proposed Resolution ACTION: Consideration of Resolution No. _, approving the proposed Conditional Use Permit. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Resolution No. _, granting a Conditional Use Permit. Findings and Conditions A. The site proposed would provide sufficient space for America's Best Kids, Inc. to conductsafe and effective activities in martial arts, pre-school gymnastics or dance. Student classeswould be approximately 5-15 participants. B. America's Best Kids, Inc. should have no more traffic impact on the surrounding complex/community then the complex/community was designed to accommodate and will be most similar in operation to a "physical fitness/conditioning center; martial arts school, as described and permitted under 17.44.030, conditional uses. C. America's Best Kids, Inc. will comply with all regulations that are stipulated in the lease in regards to signs, structures, etc, thus complying with the same regulations as the other businesses in the complex. In regard to vehicular issues, America's Best Kids, Inc. will have no adverse effect on abutting property. D. America's Best Kids, Inc. will exist for the betterment of their clientele and the surrounding community and will comply with all applicable local, state and federal health and safety regulations. E. Does not appear applicable. c~ ATTACHMENT" ~ '° City of Central P®ifntr ~i~gon lA0 So.Third SR,Cengaf Polnt,Or:97502 54i.6W.~921 Fax 541654.6384 www.d:crntral-pointarus Ptat~ning department Tom Humphtey AICP, Community Develgpmant plrector/ AasistanYCity Admtninrafor Date: October 26,.2009 Return to: 1?ave)acob, Count unitX Planner ~\\y~ ~~`Q~~ E-mail: dave~jat;obC«?ce}~tralpointoregon.QOv ~. IF ~~'E1~~1c~~~~~ONT~GWI ~. ~. W~C.~ ~' X Air ort X ackson Coun Roads & Parks X Avtsta Utilities X Public Works De artment X Bi~ildin ;pe neit ,, X west Communications X Central Poink School District X Ro a River Valle Irri afion Pist. X Charter Commpnication X Ro a Valle Sewer Services X Pacific Power X Ro a Valle Trans ortation Dist. X Police De artment X Jackson Coun Surve or X Fire District No. 3 X U.S. Post Office X State Hi hwa Division X Flood Plain S ecialist -Central Pt. X So. Ore on Re 'oral Comm. - 911 Other: X Ro a Dis osal & Rec clin APPLICATIONS :. File Number/Project Name A lication e/Deecri tion 10002 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a martial arts studio to be located within the Mtn. View Plaza Shopping Center -1350 Plaza Boulevard, Ste. C, Central Point, OR 97502; A licant is America's Best Kids, Inc. Attached is a Planning action application. Please review and submit comments and/or a written report setting forth any necessary conditions as required by your department/agency to the Planning Department within ten (10) working days. df no comments are received within the ten day review period, it will be assumed that there are no comments. A Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, December 1, 3009 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall. 140 South Third Street ~ Central Point, OR 97502 ~ 541.664.3321 ~ 541.664.63134 ATTACHMENT "C" FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW File No: 10002 INTRODUCTION In the matter of a conditional use permit for the proposed operation of a martial arts/gymnastic studio within the Mountain View Plaza. The proposed center is located in the C-4, Tourist and Office Professional zoning district and identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37S 2W 02D, Tax Lot 1204. The proposed space is located at 1350 Plaza Boulevard, Suite C, Central Point, OR 97502 (Applicant: America's Best Kids, Inc.) 17.76.020 Information required. An application for a conditional use permit shall include the following information: A. Name and address of the applicant; B. Statement that the applicant is the owner of the property or is the authorized agent of the owner; C. Address and legal description or the assessor's parcel number of the property; D. An accurate scale drawing of the site and improvements proposed. The drawing must be adequate to enable the planning commission to determine the compliance of the proposal with the requirements of this title; E, A statement indicating the precise manner of compliance with each of the applicable provisions of this title together with any other data pertinent to the findings prerequisite to the granting of a use permit. Finding: The applicant has submitted all of the necessary information to proceed with the review of this application. Conclusion: The applicant has met this criterion. 17.76.040 Findings and conditions. The planning commission, in granting a conditional use permit, shall find as follows: A. That the site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use and to meet all other development and lot requirements of the subject zoning district and all other provisions of this code; Finding: Per the applicant's narrative, the existing space for lease is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use. The lease space is located within Mountain View Plaza, a shopping center designed and constructed to accommodate commercial retail and service uses Conclusion: The proposed site and use meet this criterion. B. That the site has adequate access to a public street or highway and that the street or highway is adequate in size and condition to effectively accommodate the traffic that is expected to be generated by the proposed use; Page 1 of 3 Finding: Mountain View Plaza is an existing shopping center with adequate public street access needed to accommodate the traffic demands generated by Mountain View Plaza and other uses within the shopping center. Traffic access was addressed in the approval of Mountain View Plaza. Conclusion: The proposed use meets this criterion as a tenant of Mountain View Plaza. C. That the proposed use will have no significant adverse effect on abutting property or the permitted use thereof. In making this determination, the commission shall consider the proposed location of improvements on the site; vehicular ingress, egress and internal circulation; setbacks; height of buildings and structures; walls and fences; landscaping; outdoor lighting; and signs; Finding: All site improvements, vehicular ingress, egress and internal circulation; building setbacks; landscaping, outdoor lighting were addressed with the approval of Mountain View Plaza. The proposed use is housed within the existing structure of Mountain View Plaza. Conclusion: The proposed use will not adversely affect abutting properties or the use thereof. D. That the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use applied for will comply with local, state and federal health and safety regulations and therefore will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding neighborhoods and will not be detrimental or injurious to the property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the community based on the review of those factors listed in subsection C of this section; Finding: The applicant agrees to comply with all of the above requirements as stated in the applicant's narrative. Conclusion: The applicant has or intends to meet this criterion. E. That any conditions required for approval of the permit are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare and may include: 1. Adjustments to lot size or yard areas as needed to best accommodate the proposed use; provided the lots or yard areas conform to the stated minimum dimensions for the subject zoning district, unless a variance is also granted as provided for in Chapter 17.13, 2. Increasing street widths, modifications in street designs or addition of street signs or traffic signals to accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed use, 3. Adjustments to off-street parking requirements in accordance with any unique characteristics of the proposed use, 4. Regulation of points of vehicular ingress and egress, 5. Requiring landscaping, irrigation systems, lighting and a property maintenance program, 6. Regulation of signs and their locations, 7. Requiring fences, berms, walls, landscaping or other devices of organic or artificial composition to eliminate or reduce the effects of noise, vibrations, odors, visual incompatibility or other undesirable effects on surrounding properties, Page 2 of 3 8. Regulation of time of operations for certain types of uses if their operations may adversely affect privacy or sleep of persons residing nearby or otherwise conflict with other community or neighborhood functions, 9. Establish a time period within which the subject land use must be developed, 10. Requirement of a bond or other adequate assurance within a specified period of time, 11. Such other conditions that are found to be necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. Finding: All of the above conditions were previously addressed with the approval for Mountain View Plaza. The proposed use is similar to other permitted uses within the C-4 district and does not require any additional site improvements. Conclusion: The proposed use complies with the above requirements. Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENT "D" PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE OPERATION OF A MARTIAL ARTS /GYMNASTICS STUDIO LOCATED WITHIN MOUNTAIN VIEW PLAZA Applicant: America's Best Kids, Inc. (37S 2W 02D, Tax Lot 1204 1350 Plaza Blvd., Suite C) File No. 10002 WHEREAS, the applicant submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a Martial Arts/ Gymnastics Studio located within Mountain View Plaza. The subject property is located in the C-4, Tourist and Office Professional zoning district and is identified on the Jackson County Assessor's map as 37S 2W 02D, Tax Lot 1204. WHEREAS, on December 1, 2009, the Central Point Planning Commission conducted aduly-noticed public hearing on the application, at which time it reviewed the City staff report and heard testimony and comments on the application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission's consideration of the application is based on the standards and criteria applicable to the C-4, Tourist and Office Professional zoning district section 17.44, and Conditional Use Permit section 17.76 of the Central Point Municipal code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, as part of the Conditional Use Permit application, has considered and finds per the Staff Report dated December I, 2009, that adequate findings have been made demonstrating that issuance of the conditional use permit is consistent with the intent of the C-4, Tourist and Office Professional zoning district; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Central Point Planning Commission, by this Resolution No. does hereby approve the application based on the findings and conclusions of approval as set forth on Exhibit "A", the Staff Report dated December 1, 2009, which includes attachments, attached hereto by reference and incorporated herein. PASSED by the Planning Commission and signed by me in authentication of its passage this ls` day of December, 2009 Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: City Representative Approved by me this 131 day of December, 2009 Planning Commission Chair Planning Commission Resolution No. (120109) City of Central Point, Oregon 140 So.Third St:,Central Point, OY97502. 541.6fi4.3321 Fax 541.664c6384 www,c i:ce ntral-ppi nt.or.u 5 Planning. Department Tom Nurtipltrey; AICP, Community DeuelopmentDirector/ Assistant City Administrator To: Planning Commission and Citizens Advisory Cornmittee From: Don Burt, Planning Manager Subject: Urbanization Element, Residential Density Date: December 1, 2009 KEY POINTS • Average City Density (gross acres) 0 1980: • 100 acres per 1,000 population; • 3.45 dwelling units per acre. 0 2007: • 99 acres per 1,000 population; • 3.77 dwelling units per acre 0 2060: • 67 acres per 1,000 population; • 6.00 dwelling units per acre. • During the next planning period (2030) the Cites population is projected to increase adding 3,290 new households. By 2060 it is projected that an additional 5,870 households will be created, for a total increase in households of 9,160. • Buildable Residential Acreage within the UGB and the proposed URA is approximately 1,100 acres. • The average residential density for new development will be 8.3 units per gross acre. Page 1 of 5 INTRODUCTION This memo serves as a basic introduction to the residential density considerations that will come before the City as a result of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan (Regional Plan). Over the course of the next 20 and 50 year planning periods the population allocation, average household size, and inventory of buildable residential lands will be defined by the Regional Plan. With adoption of the Regional Plan these elements (population, household size, and buildable residential land) will serve the primary determinants of average density. It will then be the Cites responsibility to craft land use policies (Urbanization and Housing Elements) that assure attainment of the average density. In the context of the Regional Plan, and subsequent policy development, it is important that the proposed residential density implications are discussed and acknowledged prior to adoption of the Regional Plan. AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY In the Urbanization Element, Technical Memorandum No.1 the demand for various land use types was presented in terms of gross acres per 1,000 population (Land Use Ratios). This is a common methodology for determining the amount of land needed for each land use type, and when divided by average household size will provide the average residential density. In Table 1 the historic and projected Residential Land Use Ratios are presented along with the related average density. In reading Table 1 it is important to recognize that these figures represent city wide averages based on gross acres (inclusive of public right-of-way, environmentally constrained lands, etc.). TABLE 1. Residential Ratio and Density Year Residential Ratio Average HH Size No. Average Residential (Ac./I,000 Po .) Households Densih 1980 100 2.90 5,517 3.45 2007 99 2.67 6,376 3.77 2060 67 2.50 16,220 6.00 As illustrated in Table 1 between 2007 and 2060 the Cit~s average planned density will increase by approximately 60%, which clearly represents a more efficient use of land than that which has occurred in the past. However, a 60% increase in residential density will significantly change the physical character of the City. The above discussion focused on the average city wide density. In reality, the City's projected residential development will occur on the Cit~s Buildable Lands (redevelopment, infill, vacant). Within the UGB and proposed URA the Buildable Lands total approximately 1,100 acres. The Buildable Lands distribution is 18% within the UGB and 82% within the URA. By 2060 it is expected that the City wIll need to accommodate an additiona19,160 households within the available Buildable Lands inventory. The result is an average density of 8.3 units per gross acres within the Buildable Lands. Page 2 of 5 CURRENT DENSITY POLICY AND STANDARDS The Cites current residential land use program is comprised of eight (8) zoning districts within four (4) land use categoriesr. Table 2 describes the residential land use and zoning districts currently available to the City, and the minimum and maximum densities prescribed for those districts. TABLE 2 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT :CURRENT DENSITY RANGES Acres) R-L R-1-6 R-1-8 3.20 4.80 2.40. 4.00 R-2__ R-3 __ MNII2 .Source City of Central POint Comprehensive Plan 4.80 9.60 11.20 20.00 11.20 25.60 Code The above land use and zoning classification can be mixed in a variety of ratios to attain a target average density. The current mix illustrated in Figure 1 is designed to provide an average density of 3.77 units per gross acre. Figure 1. Land Use/Zoning Acreage Distribution la Farm -Residential (R-F) /a Low Density (R-1) t City of Central Point 1980 Comprehensive Plan '~ Medium Density (R-2, LMR) N High Density (R-3, MMR & HMR) Page 3 of 5 The mix can be modified to increase, or decrease the average density. This can be accomplished by: - Redistributing the acreage from one district to another; or - Increasing the minimum and maximum density range within the Land Use/Zoning districts. REGIONAL PLAN RESIDENTIAL DENSITY POLICY As the City moves into the next planning period it will be required, at a minimum, to assure that the average new residential development equals or exceeds a density of 5.5 dwelling units for lands within the current UGB, and 6.0 dwelling units per gross acre for lands within the Urban Reserve Areas. For purposes of this memo all discussion defaults to the 6.0 density. For planning purposes it is recommended that the 5.5 acre density be disregarded, and that all policies be based on attaining a minimum average of 6.0 dwelling units per gross acre. The reasons for this recommendation are: Only 18% of the Buildable Land inventory would be subject to the 5.5 density, while the majority of the Buildable lands inventory will be subject to the 6.0 density; - It would be simpler, and less confusing, to develop policies that target the 6.0 density rather than have to prepare policies that address both; and The split density accommodation can be addressed through the reallocation of Land Use/Zoning areas and individual density adjustments within each zoning district. DENSITY STRATEGIES There are two basic strategies for achieving a desired average residential density in new development. The first is to assure that implementing ordinances are designed to achieve, the minimum allowed density in each zoning district. This would also include in-fill and redevelopment implementation regulations. The second is to properly allocate buildable acreage to each of the residential land use (density) categories. Minimum Density Requirement One of the most effective means of assuring attainment of a minimum average density requirement is through the establishment of minimum density requirements for all residential districts. As a result of recent code amendments the City now requires that all residential development comply with the minimum density requirements for the underlying zoning district. Page 4 of 5 It is possible that these existing minimums and maximums can be adjusted to increase or decrease densities. The only caution is to avoid the creation of non- conforming situations relative to lot area and size. Allocation of Residential Acreage As the City proceeds with updating the Urbanization Element it will be necessary to reallocate the acreage distribution between Land Use/Zoning districts. As noted in Figure 1 the emphasis today is on Low Density (63%). IxL the future, as a percentage of the total residential land inventory, the Low Density district will have to give up some of its share to the higher density districts. Figure 2 is an example of one possible redistribution, and serves only as an illustration. Figure 2. Residential land Use/Zoning Redistribution 1% ® Very Low Density ®Low Density ~ Medium Density ®I ligh Density ^ Very Nigh Density At the December Planning Commission and Citizens Advisory Committee meeting staff will present an interactive model that will allow for What Ifs. URBAN DESIGN With the increase in densities discussed above there will be an urge to discuss urban design. Discussions regarding urban design will be addressed as a separate topic. It is recommended that the Commission/Committee discuss the numbers and general strategies to accommodate increases in density (no commitment), after which discussions on urban design can be introduced. Page 5 of 5