In their regular meeting on January 25, the Buena Vista Board of Trustees had a lengthy debate and discussion of Ordinance No. 1, Series 2022, which would amend certain sections of Titles 7, 8, and 16 of the Buena Vista Municipal Code concerning single room occupancy, multifamily dwellings in the Highway Commercial District, creation of the Small Lot Single-Family Residential District (R-1.5) zone district and exempting certain small multifamily dwellings from site plan requirements.
Town of Buena Vista Principal Planner, Mark Doering described the proposed ordinance as part of their effort to try to identify ways to help housing in the community, which leads to work on the code audit that Planning Director Teipel has been working on to bring back items that the town can control to deal with making housing affordable.
“I can’t change the price of lumber or concrete or the availability of labor,” he said. “But we can control things like our zoning.”
Buena Vista Town Hall. Photo by Henry DeKam
The four major proposed adjustments are as follows:
- Single Room Occupancy (SRO) as a new residential use
- Multifamily allowed in the Highway Commercial Zone district
- New Small Lot Residential (R 1.5) Zone district
- Small Multifamily (4 units or less) allowed with a building permit if all infrastructure is in place
One of the main concerns brought up by the trustees was about short-term rentals (STR) in SRO structures, as the current code allows for proportional STRs based on the number of leasable areas.
The proposed limits on short-term rentals within Single Room Occupancy buildings. Photo courtesy of the Board of Trustees.
“I’m a fan of having places like this,” said Trustee Gina Lucrezi. “But it’s weird to me…Half is long-term renters, half is STRs…Is the room next to me just people coming and going all the time?”
Doering said they would have to clarify changes for long-term versus short-term rentals. Trustee Cindy Swisher agreed and said that short-term renters and shift work don’t mix well. Trustee Devin Rowe said he saw it as a way for landlords to potentially charge occupants more. Teipel reiterated that it was not an affordable housing solution, but a housing diversity option. Lucrezi said she would be on board with the SRO designation without STRs; her concerns revolving around tenant comfort and safety.
With multifamily structures in the Highway Commercial (HC) zone district, there was some concern about the potential for four-story buildings. There would also be a limit on how many of the units or apartments can be made into condominiums.
“There are two different [density bonus] options available,” explained Doering. “You can go taller, and you can reduce the amount of parking.” The density bonuses are intended to incentivize the use of the HC district for those large multifamily dwellings.
Trustee Libby Fay said she was in favor of making changes to allow builders to come in to build, who have previously been limited by zoning codes in the town. Trustee Norm Nyberg said a four-story structure might look out of place, and Doering reiterated that they may not build up but instead opt for reduced parking. Other trustees saw it as a clear option for increased housing.
“We’re talking about height restrictions on hypothetical buildings,” said Trustee Devin Rowe. “People will have to rezone if they…want to build a four-story building…I see this a no-brainer for a way to bring housing here, especially affordable housing.”
The New Small Lot Residential Zone (R-1.5) would not rezone anything but would instead propose a new zone for people to pursue with proposals. It would be intended for small lots with single-family detached dwellings to increase affordability with higher residential densities where other multifamily uses may not be desired. It also intends to provide affordable long-term ownership opportunities by dedicating a portion of the lots to Town.
Trustees Lucrezi and Norman Nyberg both had concerns about water needs. Lucrezi was concerned that the current water plan couldn’t handle that many more dwellings and Teipel and Mayor Duff Lacy said that it would be about who came and claimed the water first.
“Joseph [Teipel] said we don’t have enough water to satisfy everything that’s out there anyway,” said Lacy. “It’s first come, first served…What’s being proposed is to allow for more density on the infrastructure we have.”
Nyberg asked how much water the Carbonate Street Development (which will include a minimum of 65 new housing units, as well as childcare and commercial spaces) would need, and Teipel said it would probably need about 50-55 single-family equivalents.
After a nearly unanimous desire for more information, the board moved to hear more information on the R-1.5 district and the small multifamily dwellings on Feb. 8 and to hear more about single room occupancies and large multi-family dwellings in the HC zone district on Feb. 22. The motion carried unanimously.
Municipal Code on Building Numbering
The board moved on to Ordinance No. 2, Series 2022, amending Section 11-42 of the Buena Vista Municipal Code concerning the numbering of buildings. Teipel explained that as in-fill development, Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) numbers, and multi-family buildings continue on the rise in town, there have been some issues with addresses are assigned. Doering added that half-addresses are difficult for shipping, and that clearly identified ADUs will make emergency response clearer. Rowe moved to approve the ordinance, and Swisher seconded. The Motion carried unanimously.
Some of the changes include giving unique addresses to any kind of occupancy, including ADUs, specifying that the numbering between units on commercial buildings shall be spaced at least ten numbers apart and that all multi-story buildings shall have unit numbers starting with 1 (i.e. first-floor unit number 100, second-floor unit number 200, etc).
The board then discussed a resolution approving the airport’s agreement with Dibble Engineering for the 2022 apron rehabilitation design phase.
“We are in the queue to get FAA funding,” said Jack Wiles, adding that they are trying to avoid shutting down the airport two years in a row for improvements. A portion of the FAA funding will go to the design, and they will set the project up for 2023. The Design Phase costs come to $143,972, plus a surplus of $5,000 for administration fees, and they will be working with Dibble Engineering. Lucrezi moved to approve the agreement with Dibble Engineering, and Volpe seconded. The motion carried unanimously.
Recent Comments