MARCH 4, 2010 ISSUE
Boone Planning Subgroup Proposes New Density Regs
Proposals Aimed at Greater Density, Mixed Uses, Increased Walkability
A Boone Planning Commission subcommittee has recommended changes to the town’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) to achieve greater density in the downtown, general business, neighborhood business, office and institutional, light industrial and multi-family residential zoning districts.
The subcommittee, chaired by Planning Commissioner Eric Woolridge, proposes the use of a maximum building footprint instead of maximum square footage to calculate density. It also recommends a minimum two-story building requirement for downtown and neighborhood business districts, reduced setbacks in business districts and elimination of the open space and minimum recreation space requirements.
“These represent the most substantive changes that we’ve ever recommended to council,” Woolridge said, presenting the proposals to the Boone Town Council and planning staff at a planning retreat February 26.
“
We might end up with a couple small, incremental changes. That to me is a great barometer of the disfunctionality of the UDO.
”—Greg Simmons, Planning Commission member
In 2007, the Town of Boone conducted a Smart Growth Audit of the town. In general, a smart growth approach seeks to avoid urban sprawl by concentrating growth and redevelopment within a city instead of building outward. The town recently adopted a Boone 2030 Land Use Master Plan that employs smart growth principles, but many of its goals and recommendations conflict with the current UDO, a regulatory document.
Density, or intensity, is a measure of the extent to which a land parcel is developed in conformity with zoning ordinances. In November 2008, the Town Council asked the Planning Commission to evaluate the current density requirements to see if any could be combined or eliminated.
The Smart Growth Audit recommended that the town update its density and height requirements. “When combined with the relatively large minimum lot sizes, these regulations result in a land use pattern that is inefficient and not at all compact,” the audit stated. “The density and height requirements could be simplified…the town should consider maximum heights and maximum pervious areas.”
Woolridge said the maximum floor area ratio, which calculates the total square footage of a building, inhibits developers from building upward. Referencing the current UDO, town staff and smart growth policies across the country, the subcommittee devised a proposed intensity table. According to the table, the maximum building footprint would be 100 percent of the lot size in the B-1 central business (downtown) district; 50 percent of the lot size in the B-2 neighborhood business, B-3 general business, R-3 multi-family residential and O/I office and institutional districts; and 35 percent in the light industrial district.
In addition to maximum building footprints, however, development would still be subject to minimum lot widths, height limits, livability space requirements, street setbacks and interior setbacks.
The subcommittee also recommended that two-story development be required in the B-1 and B-2 districts. Council Member Jamie Leigh asked if property owners who were rebuilding a one-story structure would have to meet the new two-story requirement. The UDO currently requires that major repairs or renovations to more than 50 percent of a structure require that the development come into compliance with current zoning codes, town attorney Sam Furgiuele stated.
Leigh said she feared that the two-story requirement would be cost-prohibitive and discourage redevelopment. Planning Commissioner Kimberly Marland said the council could draft language stating the requirement would only be for new construction. Planning Commission Chair Bunk Spann suggested that the council could find incentives for developers to build to two stories instead of making it a requirement.
The Smart Growth Audit and land use master plan recommend that buildings be located closer to the street, with parking on the side and rear instead of the front. The subcommittee proposed a zero-foot maximum setback for B-1 and B-2 districts while accounting for existing sidewalks and street features. In the B-3 district, which generally is the business district located along the main highways, the subcommittee suggests reducing the setback from 20 feet to 10 feet.
Finally, the subcommittee proposed tossing out the requirements for open space and recreation space. Instead of requiring a developer to build an insignificant recreation feature, Woolridge said, the town could collect an in-lieu recreation fee to use for town recreational facilities.
The subcommittee members stated they would have liked to have made more significant changes but that working within the existing UDO prevented them from doing so. Their proposal indicated support for the town writing a completely new UDO that complies with the land use master plan rather than making changes to the current UDO.
Planning Commissioner Greg Simmons noted that the subcommittee has worked hard on the density proposals for the past six months, but “at the end of this…we might wind up with a couple small, incremental changes.
“That to me is a great barometer of the disfunctionality of the UDO,” Simmons added. “Is that, over the next 20 years, how we want to do this?”
The council agreed to schedule a special meeting for additional consideration of the density proposals.
Community Interest
News & Notes
Events
Arts & Entertainment
