Frequently Asked Questions

Alternatives

1.A. Prioritize the addition of all 1,800 units to Town (closest to status quo).

1.B. Add less than 1,800 units in order to balance housing goals with other desired goals.

1.C. Add none of the 1,800 units to Town.

Solution

Direction: The Council does not have a predetermined number of additional units in mind at this time. Most agreed generally with Alternative 1.B but some noted that they leaned toward either the ‘low’ or high’ end of the 0 to 1,800 unit spectrum. Instead of choosing a number of units, the Council provided its preliminary direction on where additional units would be appropriate in Town, as well as what types of housing are desired. Once staff provides an estimate on how many additional units the Council’s direction would likely generate, the Council will then reconsider and finalize its direction on how many of the 1,800 units should be located in Town.

Alternatives

This question will not follow the multiple choice format of the other 7 policy questions. A “visual preference” exercise is provided that asks the public to identify which types of residential development they would prefer to see constructed in Districts 3 through 6 to provide the additional 1,800 units (or whatever number of additional units they support).

Solution

See the Policy Direction Subarea Map (JPG) and Policy Directions by Subarea documents. Review all Subarea Final Policy Directions (PDF).

Alternatives

3.A Calculate build-out by zoning potential (status quo for general build-out)

3.B Calculate build-out on an ‘as built’ basis (status quo for workforce housing bonus)

Solution

Direction: Alternatives 3.A and 3.B: The Council supports using zoning potential to estimate build-out for base zoning (3.A) but also use the “as built” method for any residential units constructed using a development incentive (3.B). This is the same dual system that the Town currently uses.

Alternatives

4.A. Require the same deed restriction rate for 1,800 units as currently required by the Land Development Regulations (LDRs) for new housing (status quo).

4.B. Require workforce deed restriction for all additional units.

4.C. The number of deed-restricted units should be based on meeting a specific community goal, such as the 65% local workforce housing goal.

Solution

Direction: Alternative 4.C: The purpose of adding the units is to provide workforce housing. Deed restrictions are an important tool and often preferred but are not reasonable or necessary in all cases. Market-based tools, such as those mentioned by the Planning Commission (e.g., limits on unit sizes, requiring a percentage to be rentals, requiring a mix of unit types, etc.), should also be considered.

Alternatives

5.A. We should keep commercial development potential at current levels (status quo). 5.B. We should try to reduce commercial development potential through incentives, but not require reductions. 5.C. We should allow the transfer of commercial development potential from one property to another.

Solution

Direction: Alternatives 5.B and 5.C: In mixed-use areas use incentives to encourage workforce housing to reduce commercial development where feasible. The transfer of commercial development rights from one property to another should be explored as well.

Alternatives

6.A. Apply Design Review only to commercial and multi-family buildings (three or more attached units) in Districts 3 through 6.

6.B. Apply Design Review to only commercial development in Districts 3 through 6 (closest to status quo).

6.C. Apply Design Review to commercial development and larger multi-family projects (e.g., 10 units or more) in Districts 3 through 6.

Solution

Direction: Alternative 6.A: Apply Design Review to commercial development and multi-family buildings of three or more units.

Alternatives

7.A. Sidewalks should be required primarily to connect commercial services with surrounding residential areas.

7.B. Sidewalks should be required for areas covered in Alternative 7.A and also between major residential neighborhoods.

7.C Additional sidewalks should not be required of private landowners but may be expanded by the Town using public funds where necessary.

Solution

Direction: Alternative 7.B: Sidewalks should be provided to connect commercial areas to surrounding residential areas, as well as between major residential neighborhoods.

Alternatives

8.A. We should incentivize connections as part of certain redevelopment and new projects (status quo).

8.B. We should require connections as part of certain redevelopment and new projects, likely as part of the subdivision process and/or development approval process.

8.C. The street network in Town is essentially set and adding new connections would not provide significant benefit.

Solution

Direction: Alternative 8.B: Town should require connections as part of certain redevelopment and new projects. Requirements would likely be part of the subdivision process and/or development review process.