×

Warning message

The installed version of the browser you are using is outdated and no longer supported by Konveio. Please upgrade your browser to the latest release.

Full UDO Assessment

Please review & comment
File name:

-

File size:

-

Title:

-

Author:

-

Subject:

-

Keywords:

-

Creation Date:

-

Modification Date:

-

Creator:

-

PDF Producer:

-

PDF Version:

-

Page Count:

-

Page Size:

-

Fast Web View:

-
Choose an option Alt text (alternative text) helps when people can’t see the image or when it doesn’t load.
Aim for 1-2 sentences that describe the subject, setting, or actions.
This is used for ornamental images, like borders or watermarks.
Preparing document for printing…
0%
Document is loading Loading Glossary…
Powered by Konveio

Comments

View all Cancel

Commenting is closed for this document.

in reply to kimberly Phillips's comment

LeslieO Nov 7 2025 at 12:35PM on page 8

Answer
Yes. Added this to our list of revisions for the document.
in reply to JoeNapolitano's comment

LeslieO Nov 7 2025 at 12:06PM on page 20

Suggestion
Ha! I get that!
The S was intended to reflect that they are storefronts.
The X that it is a mixed-use zone, allowing us to refer to all of those zones with an X.
Substituting MX instead. We can discuss further.
in reply to JoeNapolitano's comment

LeslieO Nov 7 2025 at 12:01PM on page 16

Resolution
Okay! I added this paragraph to clearly state that:
The proposal is to translate the intents of the overlays into regulations within appropriate zoning districts and a clear set of building and site design standards. Those districts, reflecting the desired character of each location, would then be applied and visible on the zoning map.
in reply to kimberly Phillips's comment

LeslieO Nov 7 2025 at 11:48AM on page 13

Answer
Yes, it originally read that those uses should be locating "behind" major corridors. I clarified this!
in reply to JoeNapolitano's comment

SiteAdmin Nov 7 2025 at 11:46AM on page 48

Discuss
Noted for future discussion during the drafting of Installment 2: Development Standards.
in reply to kimberly Phillips's comment

LeslieO Nov 7 2025 at 11:43AM on page 12

Answer
Yes, I added an explanation here and stated that many examples exist in the older neighborhoods.
in reply to kimberly Phillips's comment

SiteAdmin Nov 7 2025 at 11:38AM on page 53

Answer
Noted for future discussion when drafting Installment 3: Administration & Procedures
in reply to kimberly Phillips's comment

SiteAdmin Nov 7 2025 at 11:37AM on page 53

Answer
Noted for future discussion when drafting Installment 3: Administration & Procedures
in reply to kimberly Phillips's comment

SiteAdmin Nov 7 2025 at 11:37AM on page 53

Answer
Noted for future discussion when drafting Installment 3: Administration & Procedures

SiteAdmin Nov 5 2025 at 11:05AM on page 28

Suggestion
Same comment re: pink text

SiteAdmin Nov 5 2025 at 11:04AM on page 27

Suggestion
Pink text needs to be addressed/deleted.

JoeNapolitano Nov 4 2025 at 10:51AM on page 48

Discuss
Yes, let's discuss the best approach.

JoeNapolitano Nov 4 2025 at 10:49AM on page 47

Suggestion
Give consideration to advances in automation and how that impacts number of employees in a space.

JoeNapolitano Nov 4 2025 at 10:33AM on page 40

Question
Are we eliminating PUD's in favor of MPD's?

JoeNapolitano Nov 4 2025 at 10:31AM on page 43

Suggestion
Yes, i like this idea.

JoeNapolitano Nov 3 2025 at 5:53PM on page 34

Suggestion
Pictures, illustrations and tables will greatly assist persons in understanding the code provisions.

JoeNapolitano Nov 3 2025 at 5:46PM on page 20

Suggestion
Yeah, the X is throwing me off. Sex district!!?? I like the D for downtown, C for corridor, etc. it's just the X...

JoeNapolitano Nov 3 2025 at 5:36PM on page 16

Suggestion
The overlay districts should be deleted. They have never been reflected on the zoning map making it difficult for a user to even know they exist. And in the case of the East US Route 14 Overlay District, it appears the drafters of the current UDO forgot to include any standards for this area! I think design standards are a better tool to use and can address many of the items required in these overlay districts.

JoeNapolitano Nov 3 2025 at 5:19PM on page 15

Discuss
The current trend seems to be for apartments near employment and shopping areas, as we have had a few proposals over the last several years, although none were approved.

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 5:45PM on page 51

Question
Should freestanding signs have landscaping requirements around them?

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 5:44PM on page 51

Suggestion
Could we also look at design standards for signs? discourage old fashioned box signs in certain districts or pole signs. We also need to address electronic message signs as these are getting very popular. We have had two requests for wall-electronic message boards.

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 5:41PM on page 51

Question
Could there be a standard height and setback for each district for freestanding signs.

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 5:37PM on page 20

Suggestion
Could we assign different letters to the districts? Maybe these are a little complex? Just a thought.

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 5:35PM on page 15

Suggestion
4 to 6 unit townhome buildings? or small apartment buildings?

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 5:32PM on page 4

Suggestion
We need review standards for accessory structures such as setbacks, impervious surface requirements, how big can a shed be? how big can a garage be? where can they be located on the lot? how many garages can be on a lot - hopefully not more than one. And also design standards for accessory - a detached garage should match the primary structure or have the same roof pitch. Car ports? Lean-toos?

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 5:26PM on page 59

Discuss
One of the issues that we have now, is that the code combines zoning and the subdivision regulations into a single code. sometimes it is unknown who is supposed to review certain things like lighting or sidewalks in the parkway. Could we address clearly who reviews which components. For example the planner is not the best person to review surface requirements or stormwater. But would be the right person to review architectural components on an elevation or landscape plans.

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 5:19PM on page 53

Suggestion
ideally staff's comments should be addressed prior to being assigned to an agenda

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 5:17PM on page 53

Suggestion
Perhaps certain variances could be appealed - but subdivisions and PUDs have to demonstrate that they are functional and stormwater works, that would be a request for amendment to PUD or Subdivision plat - no need for appeal.

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 5:13PM on page 53

Discuss
A preliminary subdivision should require a preliminary plan; a final subdivision should require a final plan. Could we also have a process for Preliminary/Final subdivision plat and plan in one step?

When I refer to final plans, I am referring to construction ready documents. This seems to be an issue with many projects, they receive preliminary approval and then the details like final landscaping or lighting never get worked out or accounted for.

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 5:06PM on page 45

Question
Will these standards and guidelines be part of the district-chapter or will they be a separate chapter dedicated to standards and guidelines?

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 4:56PM on page 22

Suggestion
This answers my earlier comment about transitional areas where structures could be either residential or commercial.

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 4:14PM on page 13

Suggestion
Perhaps we should discourage self-storage facilities from locating along major arterials.

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 4:11PM on page 12

Question
Would this area outside the square be in a transitional zone or have a transitional overlay, where structures could revert back and forth to residential or (community) commercial uses. Possibly having relaxed setbacks to accommodate parking, etc.

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 4:08PM on page 12

Suggestion
Accessory dwelling units have mixed support in the Planning Community. Additionally, they also create the same off street parking concerns as single family homes that have been retrofitted into smaller units - the City has a high number of these units and the problems that are associated with them. These uses should be limited-- having Supplemental or conditions of the use that would apply.

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 3:52PM on page 12

Question
To add onto Joes question, would the older housing stock fit the definition as the "middle housing?" There are a variety of densities, values, and types of housing in the older sections.

kimberly Phillips Oct 31 2025 at 3:40PM on page 8

Discuss
Retrofitting historic homes into multifamily dwellings -- this use should be connected to supplemental conditions: such as adequate parking accommodations. Off-street parking is an ongoing issue in the City, especially where most historic homes had single lane driveways and were converted into multiple units.

JoeNapolitano Oct 30 2025 at 4:58PM on page 16

Suggestion
Only single family detached dwellings and apartments above a business,

JoeNapolitano Oct 30 2025 at 4:50PM on page 14

Suggestion
I think you should recommend the district be eliminated in favor of a large-lot R zone.

JoeNapolitano Oct 30 2025 at 4:42PM on page 12

Question
Has middle housing been defined somewhere? If not, there will be questions as to what that means.

JoeNapolitano Oct 30 2025 at 4:41PM on page 12

Suggestion
calls "for"

JoeNapolitano Oct 30 2025 at 4:33PM on page 6

Suggestion
from Implementation Matrix

JoeNapolitano Oct 30 2025 at 4:10PM on page 5

Suggestion
This sentence seems to get lost in the box of goals. Would it be better to include it as the last paragraph under the heading Comprehensive Plan? Or as the first paragraph on the next page?

JoeNapolitano Oct 30 2025 at 4:07PM on page 4

Suggestion
Ordinance instead of Code
View all