Consider Recommendation on Ordinance #20-04 (Landscape Requirements)

As the Environmental Policy Board (EPB) knows, Staff is working on an ordinance amendment regarding landscaping requirements (initially focused on the Employment Districts, but has since expanded to create a separate Landscape Section in City Code and removing landscape standards from individual zoning districts).  Due to a couple of recent development proposals, Staff wanted to check back in with the EPB regarding one aspect of the draft ordinance, which addresses detached townhomes and villas. 

Currently, in the R-2 Residential District (Medium Density), landscaping is based on a Canopy Cover Formula, which takes into account available pervious area for plantings.  However, it is becoming more commonplace to see development proposals for detached townhomes or villas, which can not only meet the density and other bulk standard requirements of the R-2 Residential District, but also look and function more similarly to a single family residential neighborhood.

In these instances, it would seem reasonable to apply the more traditional two (2) trees per lot, or some modified version of this standard.  One difference between the lots for detached townhomes and single family homes is lot width, which could make two front yard trees more challenging.  Minimum lot width in the traditional R-1 Residential (MUSA) District is eighty (80) feet.  There is also a sub-district now that would allow lot width to be sixty-five (65) feet.  In the R-2 Residential District, minimum lot width is fifty (50) feet.  When you factor in space for a driveway and other potential obstacles (e.g. street lights, hydrants, mailboxes, etc.), trying to fit two front yard trees in becomes difficult (not at the time of initial planting, but looking ahead 10-20 years).

The draft Ordinance that was last presented to the EPB did include separate landscaping requirements for detached townhomes and villas compared to attached townhome products.  This was not necessarily highlighted as part of that last review.  Staff wanted to check in with the EPB to make sure this recommended change was not overlooked and to confirm that the Board has no objections to this aspect of the ordinance.  The language can be found in the attached draft ordinance, Section 117-364 (c) (5) and (6).

This is being handled as part of Staff's regular duties.

Based on discussion.  No formal motion is needed.  Staff is simply looking for consensus that the proposed modifications to landscape requirements for detached townhomes and villas are acceptable/supported by the EPB.