►
Description
A modified presentation, based on the one given to City Council on August 22, 2017, by Vaidila Satvika, Urban Planner II/GIS Specialist in the City's Department of Planning and Urban Design.
This presentation summarizes the adopted changes that City Council passed on August 22nd.
A
My
name
is
Videla
ithaca
with
the
Department
of
Planning
and
urban
design.
This
is
a
modified
presentation
based
upon
one
that
was
given
to
City
Council
on
August
22nd
titled
wording,
amendments
for
small-scale
residential
infill.
This
presentation
summarizes
the
adopted
changes
that
City
Council
passed
on
August
22nd.
A
A
We
provide
a
lot
of
single-family
homes
like
you
see
on
the
left
of
this
image
or
larger
mid-rise
apartments
on
the
right,
but
we
haven't
for
about
the
last
50
to
70
years,
been
building
a
lot
of
the
what
they're
calling
the
missing
middle
types
of
housing
units
that
are
duplexes,
triplexes,
townhomes,
bungalow
courts
and
smaller
apartment
buildings
due
to
changes
in
zoning
in
the
last
50
years.
Nevertheless,
this
was
a
part
of
Asheville's
history
and
an
important
part
of
the
zoning
recommendations.
A
Some
key
points
to
keep
in
mind
as
you
listen
to
this
presentation
is
that
Asheville
has
a
significantly
constrained
housing
market
with
a
very
low
vacancy
rate.
In
addition,
we
found
that
the
residential
districts
are
currently
not
providing
the
permitted
number
of
housing
units
and
that,
within
those
districts,
the
housing
stock
is
primarily
single-family,
so
we're
really
missing
a
lot
of
variety
in
our
housing
units
and
we're
experiencing
a
shortage
of
them.
This
image
shows
the
timeline
of
the
small-scale
residential
infill
project.
A
This
really
began
in
February
2016,
with
a
presentation
to
the
City
Council
and
for
the
last
year
and
a
half
the
Planning
Department
has
been
working
on
public
input.
We've
been
collecting
recommendations
from
the
public.
We
had
a
couple
of
public
workshops.
We
made
many
presentations
to
different
community
groups
and
we
did
some
online
surveys,
which
are
highlighted
here
in
summary
form
on
the
bottom
of
the
sheet.
That
shows
that
primarily,
there
has
been
significant
public
support
for
these
recommendations.
A
So,
let's
go
into
the
proposals.
The
first
one
is
to
reduce
the
minimum
lot
width
by
20%.
The
idea
here
is
that
the
land
in
Asheville
is
constrained
and
the
largest
constraint
is
the
current
standards
for
the
minimum
lot
width.
So
by
reducing
bought
with
standards
by
20%,
we
can
open
up
the
potential
for
properties
that
are
large
to
potentially
subdivide.
So
you
see
here
in
the
chart,
it
shows
the
different
zoning
districts
and
the
current
versus
the
proposed
are
now
in
effect.
A
Minimum
lot
width
in
those
different
districts
note
that
the
reductionist
slot,
with
for
any
property
that
is
affected
by
the
steep
slope
ordinance,
would
still
be
affected
by
that
ordinance.
So
for
any
property
located
above
2200
feet
in
elevation
with
more
than
15%
grade,
it
is
still
restricted
and
governed
by
those
regulations.
The
next
proposal
that
we
gave
to
City
Council
was
a
recommendation
to
incentivize
duplexes.
This
change
would
allow
duplexes
on
all
parcels
in
multi-family
districts
under
certain
conditions.
A
So
if
you
look
at
the
visual
on
the
left-hand
side,
you
see
the
current
land
requirements
for
a
duplex
versus
the
land
requirements
for
a
typical
home
and
accessory
dwelling
unit.
Duplexes
are
required
to
have
twice
as
much
land
as
homes
and
ad
use.
Even
though
a
home
and
an
Adu
is
considered
really
two
different
units,
as
is
a
duplex,
so
we
are
proposing
that
we
should
hold
duplexes
to
the
same
standard
to
allow
them
on
the
same
size
lot
as
homes
and
ad
use.
A
The
third
proposal
is
to
incentivize
multi-family
housing
in
multi-family
zoning
districts.
The
idea
is
that
we
would
allow
additional
multifamily
units
for
every
thousand
square
feet
of
parcel
area
in
excess
of
the
minimum
lot
standards.
We
learned
about
this
actually
from
reviewing
Asheville's
city
code.
In
1948.
They
had
a
similar
regulation
that
permitted
multifamily
units
in
all
residential
districts.
We
are
taking
that,
but
giving
it
a
little
bit
of
a
twist
so
that
we
require
more
land
than
was
required
in
the
40s.
A
The
proposal
would
allow
for
a
duplex
on
a
standard,
multifamily
law
and
then
for
every
thousand
square
feet
of
area.
In
addition
to
that,
minimum
lot
size
you'd
be
able
to
have
an
additional
unit,
so
you
could
have
a
triplex
if
you
had
a
thousand
extra
square
feet
above
the
minimum
standard,
a
quadruplex.
If
you
had
two
thousand
square
feet
more
than
the
minimum
and
a
five
Plex,
if
you
had
an
additional
thousand
square
feet,
so
this
really
incentivizes
more
housing
on
smaller
pieces
of
land.
A
The
fourth
proposal
goes
along
with
the
third
one,
the
incentive
for
multifamily
housing
in
that
it
establishes
neighborhood
scale
design
standards
for
multifamily
projects.
So
this
would
only
be
a
standard
for
the
multi-family
districts.
Rm
6,
RM,
8,
+,
RM
16,
and
what
it
would
seek
to
do
is
provide
multifamily
that
is
compatible
with
residential
zoning
districts.
A
So
we're
hoping
that
the
new
multi-family
structures
are
perhaps
something
like
this
image
on
the
left
that
look
like
larger
apartment
houses,
but
they
reflect
the
single-family
typology
of
residential
districts
and
the
image
on
the
right
shows
that
they
could
have
shared
driveways
to
use
the
land
more
efficiently.
When
it
comes
to
parking.
This
image
highlights
the
key
standards
that
we
would
require
for
multifamily
projects.
Some
of
the
important
ones
are
that
the
maximum
footprint
size
of
the
building
would
be
4,000
square
feet.
A
It
wouldn't
have
a
gross
floor
area
in
excess
of
12,000
square
feet,
maximum
of
3
stories
and
no
more
than
12
units
per
building.
Some
other
standards
would
include
having
the
parking
to
the
side
or
the
rear
and
screen
and
by
vegetation,
and
only
having
one
primary
entrance
to
access
the
the
property.
One
related
change
that
our
department
proposed
to
the
City
Council,
was
to
increase
the
parking
requirement
for
properties
within
a
mile
of
the
central
business
district.
A
Currently,
as
you
can
see
on
the
map,
the
dark
line
shows
the
boundaries
for
the
area
that
exempts
off
street
parking
for
residential
projects.
So
this
is
to
say
that
off
street
parking
is
not
required
within
this
area.
Although
our
department
recommended
to
increase
the
parking
requirement,
City
Council
decided
to
not
make
any
changes
at
this
point.
Another
related
change
has
to
do
with
driveway
widths,
the
Department
of
planning
and
urban
design
recommended
to
reduce
driveway
standards
and
the
City
Council
adopted
to
reduce
the
minimum
driveway
width
standard
without
altering
the
maximum.
A
So
currently
for
single-family
development,
the
minimum
driveway
width
is
nine
feet
and
the
maximum
is
eighteen
feet.
In
summary,
the
small-scale
infill
recommendations
that
were
adopted
by
City
Council
include
a
20%
lot,
with
reduction
for
all
residential
districts,
incentivizing
duplexes
and
multi-family
structures
in
multi-family
districts,
new
neighborhood
scale,
multifamily
design,
standards
for
multifamily
projects
and
associated
you
do
changes
to
support
these
recommendations
for
additional
information.
Please
visit
the
city's
website
for
this
project.