| Flagstaff Community:
The city is hosting a Community Conversation about the Code Analysis Project (CAP). This will be an in-depth conversation and an opportunity to provide input to city staff and discuss concerns related to how the community will address our housing and climate needs. The city is looking for the community’s input and concerns as they consider how to move forward with the CAP and the revision of development codes in a manner that reflects our community’s values.
What: Framing Our Future Together: Community Conversation with the City
When: June 13th, 9:00 am-5:00 pm (Lunch Provided)
Where: Lowell Observatory, Great Planetary Hall
Please plan to attend the whole day or as much of the day as you can.
How the Community Conversation will be Organized
The focus of the meeting will be on providing background to the public and having a robust discussion of seven “Decision Points.” Input on these seven Decision Points will guide how the city approaches future zoning code modifications for development. The city is gathering thoughts at this point in time and no direction has been provided to staff by Council regarding these decision points.
The implementation of these development modifications will result in changes to Flagstaff in multiple ways including what type of new housing units are built (size, cost, identified income, etc.) where they are built, and if those units will be built in a way to assist the city in reducing our greenhouse gas emissions as outlined in the Carbon Neutrality Plan.
(Click here to download a PDF containing additional details of the seven Decision Point Questions and the City’s explanations, compiled by F3.)
What F3 Thinks About Each of the Seven Questions
#1) Three “Scenarios” are proposed. Which Scenario is preferred to address both housing and climate concerns together?
The city has developed scenarios that represent and test the full implementation of a given approach to reach housing and sustainability/climate goals. These scenarios are not meant to be considered as outlined, but to illustrate different approaches and concepts. Take a look at what good things are being accomplished in each scenario. The approaches that meet our community’s values and goals can be combined into one scenario and studied further in detail by the city over the next few months.
- Scenario 1 focuses only on providing incentives to developers for sustainable design and affordable housing.
- Scenario 2 focuses on inclusion of required sustainability measures in all zoning areas by adjusting code requirements.
- Scenario 3 focuses only on maximizing housing production in all zoning areas by adjusting code requirements.
(Click here to download a PDF with additional details and summarized information aboutthese scenarios.)
F3 believes the approach outlined in Scenario 2 would best address both the housing and climate goals of Flagstaff. In this scenario, both sustainability/climate requirements and housing development requirements would be applied to projects in all zoning areas. These changes would benefit sustainability/climate and increase housing production. The other two scenarios do not adequately address sustainability/climate goals. The city must address climate goals along with housing goals.
While Proposition 207 claims are still possible if we change requirements in the zoning code, the city believes that allowing additional housing density on properties will result in increased monetary value of those properties, thereby negating claims of lost value. While allowing for increased housing unit densities will address the ability for more housing units to be built across all price ranges, F3 is concerned that this may result in more expensive housing if the land values were to increase. We encourage the city to consider ways to mitigate this in the Phase III analysis of the CAP.
We also must remember that proposed changes being discussed as part of Flagstaff’s CAP will not negate the state’s restrictions that prevent cities from requiring developments to contain some housing units for low income families. This issue remains, as does the pattern of large developers building single family homes and high-end and expensive condominium units in Flagstaff.
#2) Where and how should Flagstaff increase density (of housing units)?
F3 believes that increasing the density of housing units can have significant benefits particularly for the environment in terms of reductions of energy and water use through building smaller dwellings. More density means that basic daily needs will be located closer to our homes, facilitating a robust transit system with increased ridership, and fewer vehicle miles traveled. All of these will assist the city in reaching its climate goals.
That said, F3 does have concerns about increasing housing unit density. We believe it’s critically important to consider how and wherethis density will be. Density in the center of town as opposed to sprawl and low density housing at the edges of the city is preferred. Density increases need to be enacted carefully to prevent displacement of existing residents (also known as gentrification). Allowing smaller homes to be built, along with small multi-family housing (duplex, triplex, town homes, incremental infill in existing neighborhoods, and Accessory Dwelling Units), is expected to result in less expensive housing.
F3 believes density must also be provided in greenfields (undeveloped land) instead of only focused in existing neighborhoods. This means convincing developers and landowners to build at densities beyond those allowed by-right in rural residential- and rural estate-zoned areas within the city. Additional detached, single family homes on one-acre lots with a nearby golf course doesn’t meet the current needs of those who reside and work in Flagstaff, nor our climate goals.
F3 believes providing housing for low- and middle-income households at prices that are attainable is of primary importance. This type of housing is not being provided by large developers in Flagstaff at the price point or numbers needed. We continue to believe and urge the City of Flagstaff to purchase developable land and build the low and middle income housing the city desperately needs. Waiting on the market to fill this need will not work.
#3) Do you support managing the intensity of residential land uses with Floor Area Ratios (FAR) caps? Read about FAR here: https://www.planetizen.com/definition/floor-area-ratio and on our website here.
One of the greatest concerns of many in our community is not density in and of itself, but the intensity of that housing density. FAR can be an important means of guiding desired intensity. There has been some criticism of using FAR in residential areas (Congress for New Urbanism) as preventing building types to artfully and responsively work in all types of neighborhoods and city centers. Low FAR numbers can result in making development of duplexes or triplexes difficult in some cases. For instance, this was the situation in Sacramento, before their revised zoning code allowed for a FAR of 1.0 on normal residential lots.
F3 supports exploring the use of appropriate Floor Area Ratios in existing residential areas where oversized housing units are not desired. However, FAR should not be used to prohibit all non-single-family development. We believe prior to revising the zoning code, the city should undertake a thorough analysis of various FAR ratios to determine the impact on Flagstaff neighborhoods while considering lot size and height limitations. FAR may not be appropriate in all existing neighborhoods.
#4) Do you support creating a “menu” of sustainable design standards for developers to choose from? See the PDF on our website here for an example of such a menu.
A menu of design standards is merely a list of specific actions that a developer could choose to implement. For example, in return for building all electric apartments, the developer may receive a density bonus for their development.
It is common that some sustainable climate actions such as installing solar panels or building to net zero would not be pursued by a developer unless an incentive was provided such as a density bonus. As an example, a developer may choose to build using multiple sustainable design standards. Given this situation, an incentive could be provided to that developer to increase sustainable standards so that the development could be built to “net zero” standards (meaning it is designed to consume zero energy from utility-scale sources and produce net-zero carbon emissions annually). This is a building that would be top-of-the-line sustainable and good for the climate. Because of the expense involved, sometimes this type of building is usually only possible if an incentive is provided.
F3 supports developing a menu of required climate/sustainability elements to encourage the inclusion of these standards in new buildings. While undergoing a separate city process unrelated to the CAP, but related to overall sustainability/climate goals for Flagstaff, we support the City adopting the full 2024 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) which sets minimum requirements for energy efficiency for residential and commercial buildings.
(More detailed information and explanations about each of the seven decision point questions is available in a PDF on our website here.)
#5) Do you support moving forward with reductions in required parking in some or all of the city?
F3 supports moving forward with exploring where in Flagstaff reductions in required parking would be beneficial. We suggest starting with specific locations, monitoring the application of the parking reductions, and then expanding into more areas over time. It is clear from nationwide examples that parking mandates are detrimental to achieving desired densities in existing neighborhoods where ADUs and infill with small multi-family housing is desired. In larger multi-family development, parking spaces are expensive to build and maintain and can result in more expensive housing units. A reduced need for parking spaces allows more land for housing units and green space.
When considering reductions in required parking, it will be important for the city to look into curb management practices, particularly in existing residential neighborhoods, and apply changes in areas where needed.More information about curb management practices can be found here.
#6) Do you support developing a strategy and a process for creating a narrower local street design option in some new type of development?
F3 strongly supports development of a strategy and process for allowing narrower local street design in new neighborhoods, especially new subdivisions. Narrower streets have been shown to slow vehicles, make the neighborhood safer, and increase walkability. Before enacting such a change, the city will need to address resulting issues including emergency services and snow removal on city-owned roads. How have these issues been addressed on private land? For instance, determination of where the snow would be moved would need to be determined early in the design process.
#7) Do you support developing a strategy and process for replacing the city’s current Winter Parking Ordinance?
F3 supports the city in developing a strategy and process for replacing our current Winter Parking Ordinance. According to the CAP analysis, Flagstaff has one of the most restrictive winter ordinances in the country. A strategy is needed that meets the city’s needs including addressing neighborhood infill and different snow removal practices.
On-street parking has always been an integral part of cities enabling more density. As Flagstaff neighborhoods see more ADUs and small multi-family housing built, on-street parking will become a critical need. Utilizing existing street space, on-street parking reduces the need for large, off-street parking lots. This can preserve land for other uses such as green space. On-street parking helps to slow traffic, particularly on wider streets and is known to slow traffic speeds. This provides safer streets for drivers as well as pedestrians and bicyclists. Parked cars can also act as a buffer between pedestrians on sidewalks and moving traffic, increasing safety and enhancing comfort.
(More detailed information and explanations about each of the seven decision point questions is available on our website here.)
Next Steps for the City
-Listen to the community at the June 13 Community Conversation event at Lowell Observatory
-Resolve any outstanding issues related to the Decision Point questions and provide that input to the city’s consulting team
-Receive and review Phase III of the Code Analysis Project: Formal Code Recommendations
-Prepare proposed code amendments, review by the public, and adopt the code amendments.
I look forward to seeing F3 members and the public at the “Framing Our Future Together” Community Conversation on June 13th.
Michele James
Executive Director
MJames@FriendsofFlagstaff.org |
