Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
AGENDA
LACEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday, February 17, 2015 – 7:00 p.m.
Lacey City Hall Council Chambers, 420 College St. SE
Call to Order: 7:00 p.m.
A. Roll Call B. Approval of Agenda & Consent Agenda Items*
Approval of the February 3, 2015, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
Public Comments: 7:01 p.m. Commission Members Reports: 7:03 p.m. Director’s Report: 7:05 p.m. New Business: 7:10 p.m. Woodland District Hybrid Form Based Code Update: Ryan Andrews, Planning Manager. The Planning Commission will be briefed on the status of the Woodland District Hybrid Form Based Code Project. Old Business: 7:40 p.m. Land Use Element Visioning Discussion: Ryan Andrews, Planning Manager; Christy Osborn, Associate Planner. The Planning Commission will continue the discussion, in preparation for the joint meeting with the City Council scheduled for February 19, on community vision related to future city and UGA growth patterns and expectations. Communications and Announcements: 8:55 p.m. Next Meeting: March 3, 2015. Adjournment: 9:00 p.m.
*Items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion and one vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is desired, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and will be considered separately.
Page 1 of 1
MINUTES Lacey Planning Commission Meeting
Tuesday, February 3, 2015 – 7:00 p.m. Lacey City Hall Council Chambers, 420 College Street SE
Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Gail Madden. Planning Commission members present: Gail Madden, Carolyn Cox, Cathy Murcia, Mike Beehler, Jason Gordon, Sharon Kophs, Carolyn St. Claire, Albert de Santis and Paul Enns. Staff present: Ryan Andrews, Rick Walk, and Cindy Carmichael. Gail Madden noted a quorum present. Carolyn Cox made a motion, seconded by Sharon Kophs, to approve the agenda for tonight’s meeting. All were in favor, the motion carried. Mike Beehler made a motion, seconded by Cathy Murcia, to approve the minutes of the January 20, 2015, meeting. All were in favor, the motion carried. 1. Public Comments: None.
2. Commission Member’s Report:
• Gail Madden reported that she, Cathy Murcia, Mike Beehler, Carolyn Cox and Sharon Kophs attended the Joint meeting of North Thurston County Planning Commissions at TRPC and everyone felt it was very informative. Several comments included how communication is the key between all the entities and they are very pleased with the communication in Lacey between staff, the Planning Commission, and the City Council in this respect.
• Cathy Murcia reported that she attended the JBLM Listening Session in Lakewood and said it was great to see all of the surrounding communities there. She was surprised what the monetary impact losing troops would have on these surrounding areas.
• Cathy also attended the recent Council Meeting where recognition was given for the Shop With a Cop and Lacey Loves to Read award recipients. The meeting also included Polish exchange students from our sister city. Cathy was impressed with how the Council and others handled the police criticism that was brought up by a member of the audience.
3. Director’s Report:
• Rick Walk informed Planning Commission of the upcoming Council Retreat agenda with a work session on a 6-year financial plan for the City.
• Rick informed Planning Commission about the City’s new web page for Economic Development. There will be a survey available for businesses for what are the things they like that the City does and what the City can do better to meet their needs and also a survey for the public on businesses they would like see open in Lacey.
4. New Business: Countywide Planning Policy Update: • Rick Walk gave a brief outline on the draft of the Countywide Planning policies. The goal is to establish
consistency within the local jurisdictions in developing comprehensive plans. The update integrated goals and policies from the Regional Sustainability Plan. The Urban Growth Management Sub-committee of Thurston Regional Planning Council recommended the draft to the Board of County Commissioners for adoption.
Utilities Element: • Ryan Andrews went over the draft Utilities Element noting that the focus is on private suppliers; electrical, natural
gas, cable and phone. A discussion followed on how the draft provides clarity on the policies and goals with the format being appreciated.
• The street tree ordinance was also mentioned with the intent to discourage tree topping associated with utility line clearance.
• The Utilities Element identifies a future development regulation amendment for cell towers as a potential implementation measure including establishing appropriate aesthetic requirements.
2015 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket: • Ryan Andrews discussed the applications for Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone related to two parcels
currently zoned Open Space Institutional from South Puget Sound Community College and the Seattle Archdiocese to Light Industrial. Both of the parcels side by side combined are about 100 acres and are up for
Page 1 of 2
sale. Staff is recommending that the application be put on the 2015 work program. The docket applications will be formally considered at the joint worksession of the Planning Commission and City Council on February 19th.
5. Communications and Announcements: None. 6. Next meeting: February 17, 2015.
7. Adjournment: 8:15 p.m.
Page 2 of 2
2/10/15
CITY OF LACEY PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SCHEDULE
Planning Commission Meeting February 17, 2015 Packets due: February 12th
1. Worksession: Woodland District Hybrid Form Based Code 2. Worksession: UGA/Annexation discussion follow-up
Joint Meeting of City Council and Planning Commission February 19, 2015
1. Hill-Betti Annexation 2. 2015 Work Program Review 3. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket 4. Community Visioning Analysis
Planning Commission Meeting March 3, 2015 Packets due: February 26th
1. Worksession: Environmental Element 2. Worksession: Economic Development Market Study Update and Available
Properties
Planning Commission Meeting March 17, 2015 Packets due: March 12th
1. Worksession: Amy Tousley, Puget Sound Energy 2. Worksession: Planning Areas: Central and Hawks Prairie 3. Worksession: Planning Areas: Horizons and Lakes
2/10/15
Planning Commission Meeting April 7, 2015 Packets due: April 2nd
1. Worksession: Planning Areas: Meadows and Pleasant Glade
Planning Commission Meeting April 21, 2015 Packets due: April 16th
1. Worksession: Planning Areas: Seasons and Thompson Place 2. Worksession: 2015 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Private Applications
Planning Commission Meeting May 5, 2015 Packets due: April 30th
1. Public Hearing: 2015 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Private Applications 2. Worksession: Market Study Briefing
Pending items: Re-engage Envision Lacey (Apr-Summer)
Staff Report February 17, 2015
Page 1 of 2
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT February 17, 2015
SUBJECT: Woodland District Hybrid Form-Based Code ________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: Conduct an introductory briefing on the status of the Woodland District
Hybrid Form-Based Code project in preparation for the week-long charrette to be conducted March 23rd through March 26th.
TO: Lacey Planning Commission STAFF CONTACTS: Rick Walk, Director of Community Development
Ryan Andrews, Planning Manager ATTACHMENT(S): 1. Technical Team Roster 2. Woodland District Market Analysis Interim Draft 3. Technical Team Meeting 2 Update PRIOR COUNCIL/ COMMISSION/ COMMITTEE REVIEW: None. BACKGROUND: The Woodland District Strategic Plan, which was adopted by the Lacey City Council on July 25, 2013, set forth short and long-term strategies to enhance the District as a place to gather, interact, live, shop and play. The primary action in the “Set the Stage” portion of the action plan developed for the Woodland District was to develop a form-based code. The “Set the Stage” section is related to actions that can be taken to catalyze development and are designed to provide a foundation for investment into the District. The form-based code is unique in that it uses both graphics and a concise narrative to clearly illustrate the District’s desired form and character. Unlike standard zoning codes, the form-based code shapes both the public realm (streets and pedestrian network, public places, and on-street parking) and private realm (building forms, design and locations, on-site parking, and landscaping). The main benefit of the form-based approach is that it provides clarity of content and permitting process which is of benefit to potential developers. The code would ultimately serve as an incentive to attract new investments and produce a cohesive neighborhood characterized by great places. With the 2015 budget, the City Council authorized $100,000 for consultant services related to the development of the form-based code. The City has hired SCJ Alliance to lead the project
Staff Report February 17, 2015
Page 2 of 2
with support from Urbsworks, a Portland-based design firm and Community Attributes, a Seattle-based economics consultant. To assist the City and the design team, the City has established a technical review team made up of various stakeholders including architects, landscape architects, property owners, brokers, etc. to act as the steering committee through the process. The roster of the technical team is attached. The technical team held their first meeting January 12th. The purpose of that meeting was a kick-off to the form-based code project with a form-based code “101” introduction and a stakeholder assessment exercise to get feedback on concerns and early ideas related to development of the form-based code. The second technical team meeting was held on February 9th where they heard information related to market data and urban design modeling in preparation for an upcoming weeklong charrette. Much of the work to develop the form-based code will occur at the charrette. The charrette is scheduled for the week of March 23rd through March 26th and will be a series of hands-on workshops, open houses, drop-in discussions with the project team, and a final public presentation. The Planning Commission is encouraged to attend. For the Planning Commission briefing, staff will present some of the information presented at the second technical team meeting related to market data, urban design, and background on how a form-based code is different from a traditional code. RECOMMENDATION: This will be an introductory briefing on the Woodland District Hybrid Form-Based Code project.
Woodland District Hybrid Form-Based Code Technical Review Team Joni Baker Prime Locations [email protected] (360) 943-9922 Thera Black Senior Planner Thurston Regional Planning Council [email protected] (360) 956-7575 Dennis Bloom Planning Manager Intercity Transit [email protected] (360) 786.8585 Chris Blume Vice President Capital Development Company [email protected] (360) 491-6850 Sandy Boyce Communication Specialist City of Lacey [email protected] Doug Christenson Stormwater Engineer City of Lacey [email protected] Dan Cody Architect KMB Design Group [email protected] (360) 528-2766 Debbie Draper Coldwell Banker [email protected] (360) 352-7651
Bob Droll Landscape Architect Robert W. Droll Landscape Architect [email protected] (360) 456.3813 Wade Duffy Building Official City of Lacey [email protected] Kevin Ekar Heritage Bank [email protected] (360) 570-7370 Mark Lahaie MJR Development [email protected] (360) 402-2279 Dr. Dave Pelkey Director of Facilities and Planning South Puget Sound Community College [email protected] (360) 596-5227 George Smith Economic Development Coordinator City of Lacey [email protected] Carolyn St. Claire Lacey Planning Commission [email protected] (360) 459-5154 Interested parties: Julie McBride [email protected]
CITY OF LACEY
HYBRID FORM-BASED CODE
Urban Economics and Development Feasibility
Interim Draft 2/4/15
Elliot Weiss, Community Attributes Inc.
1. ANALYSIS
A. Prospects for Growth
B. Market Data
i. Single-Family (forthcoming)
ii. Multifamily (forthcoming)
iii. Retail
iv. Office
v. Industrial
vi. Flex
C. Stakeholder Perspectives
D. Pro Forma Modeling (forthcoming)
2. RECOMMENDATIONS (forthcoming)
A. Application to Master Planning
B. Application to Code-Writing
DRAFT – 2/4/15
1. ANALYSIS
A. Prospects for Growth
• How much growth?
• What type of growth?
• Where will growth occur?
DRAFT – 2/4/15
PROSPECTS FOR GROWTH
Exhibit 1. Population and Housing Growth Forecast,
City of Lacey, 2015-2035
2015 2035 Net New
Dwelling Units
Single Family Housing Units 12,161 14,244 2,083
Multifamily Housing Units 6,644 8,235 1,592
Townhouse 0
Low-Rise 0
Mid-Rise 0
High-Rise 0
Group Quarters 991 991 0
Total New Housing Units 19,796 23,470 3,675
Employment
Resource 74 74 0
Commercial 17,760 26,125 8,365
Retail N/A N/A
Industrial 2,814 4,753 1,939
Government 5,274 6,761 1,487
DRAFT – 2/4/15
Source: TRPC, 2012
PROSPECTS FOR GROWTH
Exhibit 2. Population Growth Forecast, Cities of Lacey,
Olympia and Tumwater, 2015-2035
DRAFT – 2/4/15
POPULATION
OLYMPIA
LACEY
TUMWATER
Source: TRPC, 2012
Net Change in Population
Olympia: 18,175
Lacey: 7,712
Tumwater: 10,801
These figures exclude
population growth within each
city’s UGA.
Exhibit 3. Employment Growth Forecast, Thurston County, 2015-2035
PROSPECTS FOR GROWTH
NAICS Industry 2015 2035
Net New
Jobs
Employment
Growth (CAGR)
High Growth
54-56 Professional and Business Services 15,300 23,900 8,600 2.3%
71 Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 2,960 4,600 1,640 2.2%
81 Other Services, Except Public Administration 9,070 12,880 3,810 1.8%
23 Construction 8,380 11,810 3,430 1.7%
Low Growth
11 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Related 2,480 2,670 190 0.4%
321, 327-339 Durable Goods 1,830 1,990 160 0.4%
31-33 Manufacturing 3,200 3,540 340 0.5%
311-316, 322-326 Nondurable Goods 1,370 1,550 180 0.6%
DRAFT – 2/4/15
Source: TRPC, 2012
PROSPECTS FOR GROWTH
> High-Growth Industries Across Thurston County:
> Professional and Business Services (NAICS 54-56)
> Includes law, accounting, computer programming, architecture and engineering, marketing and
graphic design, management professionals and administrative support, among other
occupations.
> Arts, Entertainment and Recreation (NAICS 71)
> Includes actors, musicians and singers, fitness trainers, gaming supervisors and amusement
and recreation attendants, among other occupations
> Other Services, Except Public Administration (NAICS 81)
> Includes Automotive Repair, Consumer Electronics Repair, Commercial and Industrial
Machinery Repair, Home and Garden Equipment Repair, Reupholstery and Furniture Repair,
Footwear and Leather Goods Repair
> Construction (NAICS 23)
> Low-Growth Industries Across Thurston County:
> Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Related (NAICS 11)
> Manufacturing (NAICS 31-33)
> Durable and Non-Durable Goods (NAICS 32)
DRAFT – 2/4/15
PROSPECTS FOR GROWTH
Exhibit 4. Ratio of Assessed
Improvement Value to
Assessed Land Value, City of
Lacey, 2009
This map uses data from
the Thurston County
Assessor’s Office to
evaluate certain barriers
to redevelopment. Where
assessed improvement
values (the value of the
buildings on a parcel) are
high relative to assessed
land values, the existing
structures are a
disincentive to redevelop
the property (darker
yellow). Conversely, where
assessed improvement
values are low relative to
land values, the current
develop may not represent
the highest and best use
of the property, indicating
an incentive to redevelop.
Source: Thurston County
1. ANALYSIS
A. Prospects for Growth
B. Market Data
i. Single-Family (forthcoming)
ii. Multifamily (forthcoming)
iii. Retail
iv. Office
v. Industrial
vi. Flex
DRAFT – 2/4/15
MARKET DATA
MARKET DATA
1. ANALYSIS
A. Prospects for Growth
B. Market Data
i. Single-Family (forthcoming)
ii. Multifamily (forthcoming)
iii. Retail
iv. Office
v. Industrial
C. Stakeholder Perspectives
DRAFT – 2/4/15
The following section summarizes key findings from five interviews CAI conducted with real estate professionals
familiar with Lacey and the Woodland District. The findings are grouped into major categories for legibility. Some
findings may appear to be internally contradictory if stakeholders disagreed with each other or related
contrasting opinions.
The consultant team will use the findings from the interviews to better inform assumptions about development
feasibility.
STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES
DRAFT – 2/4/15
GENERAL COMMENTS
> The Woodland District represents the best opportunity in Lacey for large-scale mixed-use development;
there is a significant opportunity to draw on existing assets (e.g. ample tree canopy, accessibility from the
interstate, existing retail concentration, nearby student population) to create a “day and night” destination
for residents and visitors.
> The Woodland District is suitable for many development types, but single- and mixed-use multifamily
residential and office rehabilitation projects appear to be the most feasible based on current market
interest.
> Low land and building prices over the last several years have allowed investors to purchase property at a
price that allows significant investment in rehabilitation and upgrading, which are necessary for many of the
properties in the Woodland District to compete.
> Incremental approaches to planning and development in the Woodland District will be most successful in
creating a place that embodies the city’s vision.
RETAIL
> Increasing the day-time employment base is a critical component of attracting new retailers.
> Many of the existing retail centers need to be rejuvenated. Additional retail and restaurants may be feasible
on a smaller scale.
STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES
DRAFT – 2/4/15
OFFICE
> There will likely continue to be a mix of public and private sector tenants in the office buildings in the
Woodland District, but each has a different set of needs relating to space and tenant improvement
packages.
RESIDENTIAL
> Vertical mixed-use residential development may not be the best fit; single-use multifamily could
complement existing commercial uses in the District. Product types need to be a good fit for families.
> Students from St. Martin’s and SPSCC are an excellent target market for rental housing in the District.
PARKING
> Surface parking is the most feasible way to meet parking requirements at this time. While one development
in the Woodland District currently has a mix of surface and underground parking, current rent levels appear
to be too low to justify the cost of structured parking. Furthermore, land cost is currently low enough that it
may be economically advantageous to purchase enough land to accommodate the breadth of a surface lot
rather than to incur the cost of building multiple levels of parking.
> There is substantial street parking available in the Woodland District, such that some development projects
may be able to accommodate some of the required parking on-street.
> There is an opportunity for developing at lower parking ratios (possibly below one space per dwelling unit)
with shared daytime parking
STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES
DRAFT – 2/4/15
DEVELOPMENT CLIMATE
> Lacey has a development-friendly perception regionally that will help create momentum for the Woodland
District. The continued perception (reality?) of lower fees is important.
CHALLENGES
> The district still suffers from “funky” access and a lack of direct visibility to Interstate 5. Hawk’s Prairie
appears to be outcompeting the Woodland District, in part due to better freeway access.
> Tall trees along the freeway block view corridors, limiting visibility for District tenants.
> Some stakeholders are skeptical that the large-format (i.e. “big box”) retailers in the Woodland District will
ever transition to more urban models with structured parking and multistory stores.
> Code revisions that limit parking, restrict lanes of travel and widen sidewalks could be perceived as
challenges to the commercial vitality of the District.
STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES
DRAFT – 2/4/15
Technical Team Meeting 2 Update
Joseph Readdy, AIA, LEED AP, Urbsworks, Inc. Marcy McInelly, AIA, Urbsworks, Inc.
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Outline
3D Modeling Exercise
Preliminary FBC Framework
Charrette Schedule and Roles
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
3D Modeling Exercise
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
56 Lacey Woodland District Strategic Plan | July 25, 2013
3DFLŷF�$YH�SE
6OHDWHU�.LQQH\�5G�6(
,���)UHHZD\�,QWHUFKDQJH
*ROI�&
OXE�5G�6(
&ROOHJH�6W�S
E
�WK�$YH�6(
�UG�$YH�6(
Regional Destination
Retail/Entertainment
Destination
Retail/Mixed-Use
Retail
Mixed-Use
Transit/
Mixed-Use
Urban
Neighborhood
Edge
Retail
Edge
Retail
SPSCC
Huntamer
Park
Figure 13. Future Place Types
Trail
Greenbelt/Park
SPS Community College
Transit/Mixed Use
Retail/Mixed Use
Regional Destination Retail/Entertainment
Destination Retail/Mixed Use
Edge Retail
Urban Neighborhood
0 200 400
Feet
Woodland District Boundary
Future Trail
Recommendations
3D Modeling Exercise
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Urbsworks, Inc | Portland Oregon 97239 USA | 503 827 4155 | www.urbsworks.com!
Date 15_0209 | Subject Lacey Hybrid FBC | To FILE | From Marcy McInelly
Character Area
(from 2013 Strategic Plan)
No. Site characteristics Development program (with input from CAI)
Area Context
SF Acres Primary Frontage
Other Frontage
Allowable Height
Destination Retail / Mixed-Use
1 87,075 s.f. 1.99 acres Arterial Main Street 150 feet TBD
Regional Destination Retail/Entertainment
2 145,280 s.f.
3.33 acres Arterial Local Street 120 feet TBD
3 148,585 s.f.
3.41 acres Arterial Local Street 120 feet TBD
Urban Neighborhood 4 93,140 s.f. 2.14 acres Main Street Local Street 150 feet Mixed-use Residential
5 20,445 s.f. 0.47 acres Arterial Local Street 150 feet TBD
6 52,375 s.f. 1.20 acres Arterial Local Street 150 feet TBD
Edge Retail 7 52,335 s.f. 1.20 acres Arterial Local Street Multi-use Path
120 feet TBD
Retail Mixed-Use 8 55,560 s.f. 1.27 acres Arterial Main Street 150 feet TBD
!
3D Modeling Exercise
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Preliminary FBC Framework
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Regulating Plan
Development (Design) Standards Table
Street Types
Frontage Types
Permitted land uses
Other regulations
Fundamental FBC components
26 SACRAMENTO AREA COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS FORM-BASED CODE HANDBOOK 21 AUGUST 2008
ILLUSTRATION OF A NEW COMMUNITY PLANForm-based code elementsConsistent with the notion that one size does not fi t all, the application of form-based code techniques will also vary from one situation to another. However, they will typically include a regulating plan, requirements and guidelines, and supporting provisions.
Regulating planPublic involvement and creation of a clear vision provides the foundation for a form-based code. The regulating plan translates this vision into a plan and map of the regulated area designating the locations, which are to embody specifi c physical characteristics. This plan is often very detailed and considers specifi c design treatments for small subareas or individual blocks. A regulating plan map will show where different design standards apply, providing the link between the community vision and the form-based code elements that will help implement it.
Form-based code in practiceREGULATING PLAN
THE REGULATING PLAN TRANSLATES THE COMMUNITY’S DESIGN VISION INTO A GRAPHIC PLAN. THIS EXAMPLE, TAKEN FROM THE SMART CODE (V. 6.5) ILLUSTRATES WHERE DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT TYPES AND INTENSITIES SHOULD OCCUR WITHIN A GIVEN PLANNING AREA.
WHAT IS A FORM-BASED CODE?
DUA
NY
PLAT
ER-Z
YBER
K AN
D C
OMPA
NY
27SACRAMENTO AREA COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS FORM-BASED CODE HANDBOOK21 AUGUST 2008
WHAT IS A FORM-BASED CODE?
LOT OCCUPATIONa. Lot Area not applicable not applicable 5,000 s.f. min. 1,400 s.f. - 20,000 s.f. 1,200 s.f. - 40,000 s.f. 5,000 sf. min
40,000 s.f. max.5,000 sf. min.40,000 s.f. max.
5,000 sf. min.100,000 s.f.max
5,000 sf. min. 5,000 sf. min. 5,000 s.f. min. 5,000 s.f. min. as per abutting zone as per abutting zone
b. Lot Width not applicable not applicable 50 ft. min. 16 ft. min / 50 ft. min. 15 ft. min / 50 ft. min. 50 ft. min. 50 ft. min. 50 ft. min. 100 ft. min. 100 ft. min. 50 ft. min. 50 ft. min. as per abutting zone as per abutting zonec. Lot Coverage not applicable not applicable 50% max 60% max 80% max 80% max 80% max 80% max 80% max 80% max 80% max 90% max as per abutting zone as per abutting zoned. Floor Lot Ratio (FLR) not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable 5 8 6 a.12 or b.22 30 not applicable not applicable as per abutting zone as per abutting zonee. Frontage at front setback not applicable not applicable not applicable 50% min. 60% min. 70% min. 70% min. 70% min. 70% min. 70% min. 0% min. None as per abutting zone as per abutting zonef. Open Space Requirements not applicable not applicable 25% lot area min. 15% lot area min. 10% lot area min. 10% lot area min. 10% lot area min. 10% lot area min. 10% lot area min. 10% lot area min. 5% lot area min. 5% lot area min. as per abutting zone as per abutting zoneg. Density not applicable not applicable 18 du/acre max. 36 du/acre max. 65 du/acre max. 150 du /acre * 150 du /acre * 150 du /acre * 150 du /acre * 150 du /acre * 9 du/acre max. None as per abutting zone as per abutting zone
BUILDING SETBACK a. Principal Front not applicable not applicable 20 ft. min. 10 ft.min. 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. As per abutting zone As per abutting zoneb. Secondary Front not applicable not applicable 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. 5 ft. min. as per abutting zone as per abutting zonec. Side not applicable not applicable 5 ft. min. 0 ft. min. / 5 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. as per abutting zone as per abutting zoned. Rear not applicable not applicable 20 ft. min. 20 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. as per abutting zone as per abutting zone
OUTBUILDING SETBACK a. Principal Front not applicable not applicable 20 ft. min. (T3 L, O) 30 ft. min. not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable as per abutting zone as per abutting zoneb. Secondary Front not applicable not applicable 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable as per abutting zone as per abutting zonec. Side not applicable not applicable 5 ft. min. 0 ft. min. / 5 ft. min. not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable as per abutting zone as per abutting zoned. Rear not applicable not applicable 5 ft. min. 5 ft. min. not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable as per abutting zone as per abutting zone
PRIVATE FRONTAGESa. Common Lawn not applicable not applicable permitted permitted prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited as per abutting zone as per abutting zoneb. Porch & Fence not applicable not applicable permitted permitted prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited as per abutting zone as per abutting zonec. Terrace or L.C. not applicable not applicable prohibited permitted prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited permitted permitted as per abutting zone as per abutting zoned. Forecourt not applicable not applicable prohibited permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted as per abutting zone as per abutting zonee. Stoop not applicable not applicable prohibited permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted as per abutting zone as per abutting zonef. Shopfront & Awning not applicable not applicable prohibited permitted (T4 L, O) permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted as per abutting zone as per abutting zoneg. Gallery not applicable not applicable prohibited prohibited permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted as per abutting zone as per abutting zoneh. Arcade not applicable not applicable prohibited prohibited permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted as per abutting zone as per abutting zone
BUILDING HEIGHT (stories)a. Principal Building not applicable not applicable 2 max. 3 max. 2 min.
5 max.2 min.8 max.
2 min.12 max.
2 min.24 max.
2 min.36 max.
2 min. 48 max.
none8 max.
none 8 max.
as per abutting zone as per abutting zone
b. Outbuilding not applicable not applicable 2 max. 2 max. not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable as per abutting zone as per abutting zonec. Benefit Height Abutting T6, T5 & T4 only
not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable 4 max. 8 max. 24 max. 24 max. unlimited 2 max. non applicable as per abutting zone as per abutting zone
PUBLIC FRONTAGESa. HW & RR permitted permitted permitted prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited as per abutting zone as per abutting zoneb. BV prohibited prohibited permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted as per abutting zone as per abutting zonec. SR prohibited prohibited permitted permitted prohibited permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted as per abutting zone as per abutting zoned. RS prohibited prohibited permitted permitted prohibited permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted as per abutting zone as per abutting zonee. SS & AV prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted as per abutting zone as per abutting zonef. CS & AV prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted as per abutting zone as per abutting zoneg. Rear Lane permitted permitted permitted permitted prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited as per abutting zone as per abutting zoneh. Rear Alley prohibited permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted as per abutting zone as per abutting zonei. Path permitted permitted permitted permitted prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited as per abutting zone as per abutting zonej. Passage prohibited permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted as per abutting zone as per abutting zonek. Bicycle Trail permitted permitted permitted prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited as per abutting zone as per abutting zonel. Bicycle Lane permitted permitted permitted permitted prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited as per abutting zone as per abutting zonel. Bicycle Route permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted as per abutting zone as per abutting zone
R U R A L l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l U R B A N
NATURAL ZONE RURAL ZONE SUB-URBAN ZONE GENERAL URBAN ZONE URBAN CENTER ZONE URBAN CORE ZONES WORK PLACE INDUSTRIAL CIVIC INSTITUTIONAL CIVIC SPACE
T6-8 D1 D2T6-12 T6-24 T6-36 T6-48 CI CST2 T3 T4 T5T1
development standards are “keyed” into the regulating plan
Requirements and guidelines Support for the regulating plan is provided by requirements and guidelines that articulate the details of the planning concepts in the regulating plan. Although the organization will vary somewhat from plan to plan, requirements and guidelines typically fall into the following fi ve categories:
10 ft. min. 10 n. 10 ft. min. 10 ft. min. 10 ft
ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. m0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. min. 0 ft. m
. min. not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not appmin. not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not appliin. / 5 ft. min. not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicn. not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applicable not applica
d prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibitedprohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibitedprohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibited prohibitedpermitted permitted permitted permitted permittedpermitted permitted permitted permitted
4 L, O) permitted permitted permipermitted
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLE
SPECIFIC DESIGN STANDARDS ARE “KEYED”
INTO THE REGULATING PLAN (SHOWN
BENEATH THE PLAN AND SECTION VIEWS OF
THAT ZONE). MIAMI 21 DRAFT FORM-BASED
CODE.
PLAN VIEW
SECTION VIEW
CITY
OF
MIA
MI,
FL/D
UAN
Y PL
ATER
-ZYB
ERK
AND
COM
PAN
Y
✓ Regulating Plan (similar to a zoning code)
✓ Development Standards, usually in a table
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Building off of Woodland District Strategic Plan
✓ Place types
✓ Street types
56 Lacey Woodland District Strategic Plan | July 25, 2013
3DFLŷF�$YH�SE
6OHDWHU�.LQQH\�5G�6(
,���)UHHZD\�,QWHUFKDQJH
*ROI�&
OXE�5G�6(
&ROOHJH�6W�S
E
�WK�$YH�6(
�UG�$YH�6(
Regional Destination
Retail/Entertainment
Destination
Retail/Mixed-Use
Retail
Mixed-Use
Transit/
Mixed-Use
Urban
Neighborhood
Edge
Retail
Edge
Retail
SPSCC
Huntamer
Park
Figure 13. Future Place Types
Trail
Greenbelt/Park
SPS Community College
Transit/Mixed Use
Retail/Mixed Use
Regional Destination Retail/Entertainment
Destination Retail/Mixed Use
Edge Retail
Urban Neighborhood
0 200 400
Feet
Woodland District Boundary
Future Trail
Recommendations
HeadingEl is et quas as quasitas estis vella nes dignient por alit, quid quis quo eicturio omnist quae re consequi que pore ma non restiuntios alit qui cus molorep udaecus nus explab imagnat emporem re sequid maior sam hillamet aut fuga. Ut apercid explibea cus, solum utecabor mod minveniat volor re con core, unte praes ende volectatibus sequae volut enitasperum ex estionsedit.
SubheadingTo conecepero omnimus ciuntur sus atias ressum aut quiatus di odit et qui que ne voluptur aut autestis cum que pratur sed ut eaquo to dolorep repuda ea expe prorpossed moluptatus autat parum aut velique plabori ut raturis atendam nus sitaturibus erum fugit ex escius esti ulluptatem fugitat usanis vel eum qui doles aut aut lam fuga. Hit, tem aut lam volorem aborestias dolor aspiduntet abo.
Subheading
Occae conectotatum faceribus autem ipsandus eossed est, experor eptatus, imin nonsequam, volorerest harum iliam quam, qui optatec uptatquibus ea audandi tatinullabor se nessed quia ist, aceptas in con porro dunti suscid moles velique sequo ipidunt aut laut occupic ipsanderum re everehe nescipic tem doluptate volorem eniminv endipsa nturio blatibearum elitio mil ini dolum es et odi volupta tempora temporeri quo ipsanis excerio. Itat esequiat etur restius est, si alit et voleniae alibus endusti conet dolorrundent laut velent, soluptatet porem vel ea ad quia con nos sitatquas archilitas es magnat.
49July 25, 2013 | Lacey Woodland District Strategic Plan
T
3DFLðF�$YH�SE 6OHDWHU�.LQQH\�5G�6(
,���)UHHZD\�,QWHUFKDQJH
*ROI�&OXE�5G�6(
&ROOHJH�6W�SE
�WK�$YH�6(
�UG�$YH�6(
South
Sound
Center
Revised
Fred
Meyer
Huntamer
Park
St. Martin’s
University
City
Hall
Figure 11. Future Street Types
0 200 400
Feet
Woodland District Boundary
PRIVATE STREETS
Private Entry, Sidewalk on Two Sides
Private, On-Street Parking
Private Retail Access, Sidewalk on One Side
Private Access
Loading/Freight
Primary Bicycle Streets
Pedestrian Corridor �2O\PSLD�WR�0DLQ�6W�
PUBLIC STREETS
Sleater-Kinney Rd SE
Main St
3DFL¿F�$YHQXH�6(
Collector
College Street SE
Neighborhood St
Transit St
Walkway/ Alleyway
Greenbelt/Park
TTransit Center
Future Public Gathering Space
Trail Future Trail
OTHER
Recommendations
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Public Realm Standards
P R E A M B L E
design the public realm
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
Kic
koff
Mee
ting
12 Ja
nuar
y 20
15 |
City
of L
acey
WA
SCJ A
llian
ce |
Urb
swor
ks In
c |
Com
mun
ity A
ttrib
utes
Inc
| B
ainb
ridge
Street Types
Land Use Bylaw & Form Based Code
)LJXUH����������/LQHDU�%XLOGLQJ�)URQWDJH
65
S C A P E F RO N TAG E T Y P E S
9.11 | FRANKLIN AVENUE RE-URBANIZATION DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
llowing
the building must ., 0 ft maximum streets, the
oth street
easure a
to top of parapet
minimum of 40’ the ground Áoor.
be provided for tage and must
of 5’ and a
m of 8’ and a the sidewalk.
either be covered g recessed ssed entry
ont facade a
nated “Required n map, the atings for
must be provided street-facing
must face the if housing a iness hours.
R-O-WPRIVATE LOT
BU
ILD–TO
LINE
PRO
PERTY LIN
E
h
a
b
d
f
c
g
e
Minimum building height
Awning / canopy clearance
Awning / canopy depth
Awning / canopy projection over sidewalk
Ground Áoor minimum height Entry recess
Primary entry Ground Áoor depth
a
e f
b
ff
cd
g
REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WOOD BUFFALO CITY CENTRE FORM BASED CODE | 6 FEBRUARY 201266 DRAFT
C. Forecourt Building FrontageForecourts shall conform to the following standards:
1. Courtyard Setback: The courtyard portion of a Forecourt shall be set back from the Primary Street Frontage (and Secondary Street Frontage) property line/primary building facade a minimum of 10’ and a maximum of 30’. The courtyard portion of a Forecourt shall not be covered. Courtyards shall be landscaped and/or hardscaped.
���Courtyard Length: The courtyard portion of a Forecourt shall span a minimum of 20’ along the Primary Street Frontage facade and shall comprise no more than 50% of the Primary Street building frontage. Courtyards may also span a minimum of 20’ along the Secondary Street Frontage facade and shall comprise no more than 50% of the overall Secondary Street building frontage.
���Forecourt Frontage: The Forecourt frontage shall incorporate the Linear Frontage type for building faces on the Primary and Secondary Street Frontages that are not part of the courtyard.
���Ground Áoor height: The ground Áoor must measure a minimum of 15 feet, Áoor-to-ceiling. If constructed in areas designated “Required Retail Opportunity Zone” on the Frontage Types Regulating Plan, construction of the ground Áoor shall meet Àre ratings for commercial uses.
���Minimum building height: 20 feet (measured to top of parapet or roof).
���Windows: Transparent windows must be provided along at least 50% of the courtyard-facing ground Áoor facade area. See “Linear Frontage” for window requirements for the remainder of the facade.
���Primary Entry Doors: Primary building entries must face the street and/or the courtyard, be a minimum 40 % transparent, and, if housing a business, remain unlocked during regular business hours.
�� Fences: Fences and walls with pedestrian openings are permitted within the courtyard setback but may be no greater than 36” in height and must be a minimum of 20% transparent. Fences used to screen parking areas shall follow the Surface Parking Screening Options standards.
����Parking: Parking is not allowed in the courtyard portion of a Forecourt; nor is parking allowed between the building and the street.
9 .11. 5 B U I L D I N G A N D L A N D S C A P E F RO N TAG E T Y P E S
R-O-WPRIVATE LOT
UILD
–TO LIN
E
OPER
TY LINE
e
a
bc
d
)LJXUH����������)RUHFRXUW�%XLOGLQJ�)URQWDJH
Text not updated
Minimum building height
Ground Áoor minimum height
Forecourt setback
Forecourt length
Primary entry
a
e
bcd
)LJXUH����������3RUFK�6WRRS�7HUUDFH�)URQWDJH
67DRAFT
9 .11. 5 B U I L D I N G A N D L A N D S C A P E F RO N TAG E T Y P E S
9.11 | FRANKLIN AVENUE RE-URBANIZATION DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Porch/Stoop/Terrace FrontagePorch/Stoop/Terrace Frontages shall conform to the following standards:
���Street-Facing Setback: The building shall be set back a minimum of 1.5 metres and a maximum of 4.5 metres from the Build To Line. The entry Threshold, including a roof over the Threshold, and steps to the Threshold may extend up to the Build To Line.
���Threshold Dimensions: The entry Threshold (such as a porch, stoop, terrace, patio, or light court) shall conform with the following minimum standards (note: dimensions may vary from the standards below to accommodate wheelchair ramps if necessary):
� D���Minimum of 1.5 metre depth (clear) from building facade to front of Threshold.
� E��Minimum 1.8 metre width (clear) along the building façade.
� F���The Threshold height shall be a no more than 1.8 metres above grade. An additional Threshold may be provided to access a lower level and shall be no more than 1.5 metres below grade.
� G���The Threshold shall cover an area of no more than 14 square metres per building entry.
� H���The entry Threshold may be covered by a roof no larger than the Threshold itself.
���Minimum building height: 20 feet (measured to top of parapet or roof).
���Primary Entry Doors: In order to provide adequate “eyes” on the street, ground Áoor residential uses shall provide individual building entries to individual residential units. Building entries shall face the street and be a minimum 10% transparent.
���Windows: Transparent windows shall be provided along at least 20% of the street-facing facade area. Windows shall be vertically oriented. Vertical windows may be grouped together to create square or horizontally-oriented rectangular windows.
�� Fences: Fences are permitted within the Primary Frontage Setback and Secondary Frontage Setback but shall be no greater than 9 metres in height and shall be a minimum of 50% transparent.
�� Landscaping: Landscaping shallt be provided in the Primary Frontage Setback and Secondary Frontage Setback. Hardscaping is permitted only to provide access to the Threshold; all other areas shall be planted.
���Parking: Parking shall not be permitted in between the building and the street.
property line/ easement line
private lotpublic r-o-w or Internal
Circulation Street easement
Street
b
c
c
e
f
d
i
h
h
h
Stre
et
bc
a
R-O-WPRIVATE LOT STREET
BU
ILD–TO
LINE
PRO
PERTY LIN
E
Minimum building height
Setback from Build To Line
Threshold depth
Threshold height above grade
Additional threshold depth below grade
Threshold width
Threshold area
Primary entry
a
e
b
fff
c
h
d
g
Text not updated
REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WOOD BUFFALO CITY CENTRE FORM BASED CODE | 6 FEBRUARY 201270 DRAFTDOWNTOWN REGULATING PLAN AREA
Landscape Building FrontageLandscape Building Frontages shall conform to the following standards:
���Street Frontage Setback: The front facade of the building must be set back from the street-facing property line a minimum of 3 metres and a maximum of 4.5 metres.
���Ground Áoor height: The ground Áoor shall measure a minimum of 4.5 metres, Áoor-to-ceiling. If constructed in areas designated “Required Retail Opportunity Zone,” construction of the ground Áoor shall meet Àre ratings for commercial uses.
���Minimum building height: 6 metres (measured to top of parapet or roof).
���Minimum building depth: Buildings must be a minimum of 32 metres deep in order to accommodate retail uses on the ground Áoor.
���Building Entrances: Building entrances must either be covered by an awning or canopy or be covered by being recessed behind the front building facade. If an awning or canopy is provided, it must provide a minimum vertical clearance of 2.5 metres and a maximum clearance of 4.5 metres. If only a recessed entry is provided, it must be recessed behind the front facade a minimum of 1 metre and a maximum of 1.8 metres.
���Ground Áoor construction type: In areas designated “Required Retail Opportunity Area” on the Regulating Plan map, the ground Áoor construction type shall meet Àre ratings for commercial buildings.
���Windows: Transparent ground Áoor windows must be provided along a minimum of 60% of the ground Áoor, street-facing facade area.
���Primary Entry Doors: All buildings must provide at least one building entrance that faces the street and is directly connected to the public sidewalk via a sidewalk measuring a minimum of 1.8 metres wide. Building entrances must be a minimum 40% transparent, and must remain unlocked during regular business hours.
���Service and Utility Equipment: Building service and utility equipment and outdoor storage of garbage and/or recycling is not permitted along the street-facing building facade or within the required setback area.
9 .11. 5 B U I L D I N G A N D L A N D S C A P E F RO N TAG E T Y P E S
R-O-W
BU
ILD–TO
LINE
PRO
PERTY LIN
E
PRIVATE LOT
d
c
a b
)LJXUH����������/DQGVFDSH�%XLOGLQJ�)URQWDJH
Text not updated
Maximum building height
Ground Áoor minimum height
Setback from Build To Line
Primary entry
abcd
43DRAFT 9.10 | DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
9 .10 . 5 B U I L D I N G A N D L A N D S C A P E F RO N TAG E T Y P E S
R-O-WPRIVATE LOT
BU
ILD–TO
LINE
PRO
PERTY LIN
E
Maximum podium height
Awning / canopy height
Awning / canopy clearance
Awning / canopy projection over sidewalk
Ground Áoor height
Entry recess
Primary entry
a
e
b
fff
cd
g
)LJXUH����������3RGLXP�)RUHFRXUW
45DRAFT
R-O-WPRIVATE LOT
BU
ILD–TO
LINE
PRO
PERTY LIN
E
9.10 | DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
9 .10 . 5 B U I L D I N G A N D L A N D S C A P E F RO N TAG E T Y P E S
Maximum podium height
Setback from Build To Line
Threshold depth
Threshold height above grade
Additional threshold depth below grade
Threshold width
Threshold area
Primary entry
a
e
b
fff
c
h
d
g
)LJXUH����������3RGLXP�3RUFK�6WRRS�7HUUDFH�)URQWDJH
47DRAFT 9.10 | DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
9 .10 . 5 B U I L D I N G A N D L A N D S C A P E F RO N TAG E T Y P E S
R-O-WPRIVATE LOT
BU
ILD–TO
LINE
PRO
PERTY LIN
E
h
a
b
e
d
c
g
e
Maximum podium height
Awning / canopy clearance
Awning / canopy depth
Awning / canopy projection over sidewalk
Ground Áoor minimum height
Entry recess
Ground Áoor minimum depth
a
e
b
fff
cd
g
f
)LJXUH����������3RGLXP�3RUFK�6WRRS�7HUUDFH�)URQWDJH
73DRAFT
9 .11. 5 B U I L D I N G A N D L A N D S C A P E F RO N TAG E T Y P E S
9.11 | FRANKLIN AVENUE RE-URBANIZATION DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Setback Landscape Frontage
Landscape Setback Frontages shall conform to the following standards:
���Along all public or private street-facing frontages, surface parking shall be set back a minimum of 3 metres behind the property line/easement line.
���The parking area shall be screened with a continuous row of hedges or shrubs immediately adjacent to the parking area, except where there is a driveway. The shrubs shall be a minimum of 0.9 metres high and must be mostly opaque year round.
���In addition to the required shrubs, one large tree is required along all public or private street-facing frontages. The shrubs/hedge shall be interrupted with a gap of up to 0.6 metres wide in order to accommodate trees.
���Grass or ground cover plants must fully cover the remainder of the landscaped area between the parking area and the sidewalk.
���A 0.9 metre high masonry wall may be substituted for the shrubs but the trees and groundcover plants are still required.
���Openings in the Setback screening are allowed for pedestrian pathways, sidewalks, plazas, and driveways.
Maximum setback from Build To Line
Minimum shrub/hedge height
Minimum tree spacing
abc
BU
ILD–TO
LINE
PRO
PERTY LIN
E
R-O-WPRIVATE LOT
c
b
a
)LJXUH����������6HWEDFN�/DQGVFDSH�)URQWDJH
Text not updated
41DRAFT 9.10 | DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
9 .10 . 5 B U I L D I N G A N D L A N D S C A P E F RO N TAG E T Y P E S
R-O-WPRIVATE LOT
BU
ILD–TO
LINE
PRO
PERTY LIN
E
g
a
b
d
f
ce
Maximum podium height
Awning / canopy height
Awning / canopy clearance
Awning / canopy projection over sidewalk
Ground Áoor height
Entry recess
Primary entry
a
e
b
fff
cd
g
)LJXUH����������3RGLXP�/LQHDU�)URQWDJH
Frontage Types
Land Use Bylaw & Form Based Code
Street and Frontage Types: examples
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Integrate the new FBC with the current code
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
Kic
koff
Mee
ting
12 Ja
nuar
y 20
15 |
City
of L
acey
WA
SCJ A
llian
ce |
Urb
swor
ks In
c |
Com
mun
ity A
ttrib
utes
Inc
| B
ainb
ridge
FBC IMPLEMENTATION OPTIONS FORM-BASED CODES MAY BE MANDATORY, OPTIONAL, OR MAY BE CREATED AS “FLOATING” ZONES.
FBC implementation options
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Charrette Schedule and Roles
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Urbsworks, Inc | Portland Oregon 97239 USA | 503 827 4155 | www.urbsworks.com!
Monday March 23 Tuesday March 24 Wednesday March 25 Thursday March 26
Day One Day Two Day Three Day Four
Focus of the day’s
work
FBC 101 Woodland District Hybrid FBC
goals and objectives Proposed FBC components
Preliminary Woodland District Hybrid FBC alternatives
Integrate feedback from hands- on workshop
Develop preferred alternative Develop Hybrid FBC
components Develop FBC Integration
Strategies
Preferred alternatives Draft FBC Components
Refined FBC Integration Strategies
8 am
Site tour with stakeholders Set up Charrette studio
Document and synthesize previous evening event feedback Internal design team meetings
Meet with stakeholders (drop-in or by appointment) Test FBC options with City staff
9 am
10 am
11 am
12 am - Lunch
1 pm Internal design team meetings Meet with stakeholders (drop-in or by appointment)
Prepare for evening events Test FBC options with City staff
2 pm
3 pm
4 pm - Dinner
5 pm
5:30-7:30PM Public Kick-off Meeting
Hands-on Workshop
5:30-7:30PM Open House
5:30-7:30 Technical Meeting 3
5:30-7:00 Public Presentation 6 pm
7 pm (City Council Meeting)
Public events
✓ Hands-on Workshops
✓ Open House
✓ Drop-in discussions with the Charrette Team
✓ Final Presentation and Workshop
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
Kic
koff
Mee
ting
12 Ja
nuar
y 20
15 |
City
of L
acey
WA
SCJ A
llian
ce |
Urb
swor
ks In
c |
Com
mun
ity A
ttrib
utes
Inc
| B
ainb
ridge
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Public events
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Public events
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Technical meetings
✓ Staff
✓ Technical Team
✓ Individual property and business owners, other stakeholders
✓ Elected officials
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
Kic
koff
Mee
ting
12 Ja
nuar
y 20
15 |
City
of L
acey
WA
SCJ A
llian
ce |
Urb
swor
ks In
c |
Com
mun
ity A
ttrib
utes
Inc
| B
ainb
ridge
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Internal design sessions
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Internal design sessions
✓ Design is at the center
✓ Listen and feedback what we’ve heard
✓ Articulate the vision in words, pictures and numbers
✓ Test policy, 3D model of proposed regulations, development proposals in context
It’s about creating a place people love, and
a regulatory system that gets everyone to yes sooner
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
Kic
koff
Mee
ting
12 Ja
nuar
y 20
15 |
City
of L
acey
WA
SCJ A
llian
ce |
Urb
swor
ks In
c |
Com
mun
ity A
ttrib
utes
Inc
| B
ainb
ridge
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Questions?
Thank you
Woo
dlan
d D
istric
t Hyb
rid F
orm
-Bas
ed C
ode
| T
echn
ical
Team
2 |
9 F
ebru
ary
2015
| C
ity o
f Lac
ey W
A SC
J Alli
ance
| U
rbsw
orks
Inc
| C
omm
unity
Att
ribut
es In
c |
Bai
nbrid
ge
Staff Report February 17, 2015
Page 1 of 2
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT February 17, 2015
SUBJECT: Land Use Element—Visioning Discussion Continued ________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION: Continue the discussion started at the January 20th worksession, in
preparation for the joint meeting with the City Council on February 19th, by reviewing proposed draft goals and policies related to future city and UGA growth patterns and expectations.
TO: Lacey Planning Commission STAFF CONTACTS: Rick Walk, Director of Community Development
Ryan Andrews, Planning Manager
Christy Osborn, Associate Planner ATTACHMENT(S): 1. Urban Area Septic Analysis Map—Surface Water 2. Urban Area Septic Analysis Map—Ground Water 3. Urban Area Septic Analysis Map—Surface Water and Density PRIOR COUNCIL/ COMMISSION/ COMMITTEE REVIEW: The Planning Commission has held several work sessions throughout
the update of the land use element and the Envision Lacey process with the most recent being the January 20th Planning Commission briefing.
BACKGROUND: At a worksession on January 20th, the Planning Commission was briefed on the Regional Septic Summit by Peter Brooks. At the briefing, the Planning Commission discussed the issues associated with the proliferation of septic systems located in the unincorporated urban growth area. Several maps from Peter’s presentation have been included so that you can review them in more detail. Essentially, what the maps show is that the Lacey Urban Growth Area is one of the highest areas of concern related to potential surface and ground water pollution in Thurston County. This is largely because of the age of the septic systems, the density of the development, and the well-draining soil types in these areas. While this topic is an issue that affects growth patterns in the UGA, septic conversions are not the only issue that faces the future development of the Urban Growth Area. As discussed at the January 20th meeting, the other issues include the large amount of vested single-family residential projects, available land resources, critical areas (wetlands, streams, Oregon white
Staff Report February 17, 2015
Page 2 of 2
oak, and protection of groundwater resources), availability of utility services, few commercial areas or areas of employment, and efficiency of transit service. This discussion was a springboard into the topic of how these issues might affect future planning efforts within the city limits. Specifically, to ensure that the development within the city limits continues under the densities that are needed to accommodate growth without being pushed to the easier to develop properties in the UGA. With the upcoming joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting scheduled for February 19th, staff asked a series of key questions to help frame the issues, including:
1. In order to ensure that the development within the city limits continues under the densities that are needed to accommodate growth without being pushed to the easier to develop properties in the UGA, should the UGA become a holding area? In other words, should the UGA be put under development limitations until the city limits are adequately densified?
2. Have the patterns of development in the UGA already been determined? 3. If annexations are pursued, how would properties be brought into the city limits
from the UGA? Would the City require properties served by city sewer to annex? At the briefing on February 17th, staff will present for review draft goals and policies based on addressing these key questions. The Planning Commission will review the goals and policies to consider presenting them to the City Council at the joint meeting. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission will discuss and consider draft goals and policies related to the vision of the future development of the city and unincorporated urban growth area in preparation for this discussion topic at the joint meeting on February 19th.
SUNWOOD
GOOSE
POND
LAKE
LAKE
GOOSE
LOIS
LAKE
LAKE
LAKESETCHFIELD
BIGELOWLOUISE
LAKE
LAKE
MCA
LLIS
TER
CREEK
MCALLISTER
CR
EE
K
CREEK
KEN
WO
OD
LAND
WO
OD
LAN
D
MCALLISTER
LITTLE
SPRINGS
HEWITT
SUSAN
DITC
H
DITCH
EATON
CREEK
BLOOMDITCH
CREE
K
CREEK
DITCH
CREEK
SALMON
RAYMOND
HOPKINS
CHAMBERS
CHAM
BERS
SPURGEON
LAKESHEEHAN
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE LAKELAKE SOUTHWICKLAKE SMITH
LAKE
LAKE
TEMPOLAKE
CLEARWOOD
TRAILSEND
MUNN
TROSPERLAKE
BARNES
WARD
SUNSETBEACH
CAPITOLLAKE
LAKE
CAPITOL
HEAD
LUHRBEACH
NISQUALLY
PRIEST
SHOAL
COVE
BUTLERCOVE
BUSHOOWAH-AHLEE
FLAPJACK
GULL
ELLIS
BEACH
POINT
COVE
COVE
ELIZAN
WOODARD
COUNTRYSIDE
OLYMPIA
POINT
POINT
BEACH
SHELL
COVE
TYKLE
FRYE
BAY
HARBOR
COVE
POINT
SUNRISEBEACH
MCLANE
CREE
KSPIT
BEACH
YOUNGGREEN
MADRONA
LONG
DESCHU
TES
RIV
ER
RIV
ER
BLACK
LAKE
PATTISON
LONG
LAKELAKE
LAKE
PATTISON
HICKS
LAKE
BLAC
K
LAKE
SANDYPOINT
NISQUALLY FLATS
BAY
MU
D
BUD
DELD
INLET
INLE
T
NISQUALLY REACH
SAINT
LAKE SAINT
LAKE
CLAIR
CLAIR
BOSTO
N JOH
NS
ON
BUDD
69TH LIB
BY
70TH
ZAN
GLE
66TH KELL
OG
G
68THHARBOR
67TH 67THKLE
IN
WHITHAM
MA
RV
IN
YOU
NG
DIA
NN
67THAVE66TH64TH
RDELIZ
AN
64TH 65THRD 66TH
SANDYMU
RR
AY
RD
NE
63RDBAYPOINT62ND AVERD NEAVE61ST B
OA
RD
MA
N
SNUG
INLETHARBOR 61ST AVETELLCAMP NEYO
UNG
MIL
LER
59TH WOODARD
DR
RD
SWAY
NE
BEA
CH
VIE
W
61STCR
ES
T
NE
NE
58TH57THGRAVELLY BEACH H
ILL
56TH AVE NE54TH PUG
ET
RD
55TH 56TH AVE
RD
52NDRD51ST 53RD WAY RD
LOOP 54TH
IND
IAN
PUGET
CU
SH
MA
N
BLISS BEACH
MERCANTILE RD
RD
ISLA
ND
POIN
T
HE
IGH
TS L
N
RD
BEAC
H
NE
RD
51STBEV
ER
LY D
R
46TH AVE 47THKEATING BE
LL
48TH46THWO
OD
WAYLEM
ON
FOXT R A
IL
SHIN
CK
E
46TH AVERD46TH44TH
GRAVELLY
46TH
STE
AM
BO
AT
BEACH
43RD
RD
KIN
NE
Y
44THHARBO
R
JOH
NS
ON
41ST NE
JOH
N
HA
LL
LUH
R
POIN
T
LIB
BY
SUNSET
BIS
CAY
39TH FOX
SUNRISE RD
BEACH40TH39TH NELE
MO
N R
D N
E
HAWKS PRAIRIE
38TH RD
36TH AVE36TH BA
KE
R A
ME
S
AVE RD
BCH
BOS
TON
NW
.
36TH AVE. NE
MA
RV
IN
35TH
ME
RID
IAN
SUNSET DR
COUN
TRY
CLUB
RD
GR
OV
E
HA
RB
OR
33RD AVEMADRONA
OV
ER
HU
LSE
FRENCH
RD
TOLMIEFLORA
RD
CO
OP
ER
DRIFTWOODSIMM
ON
S
BAY
RD NW VISTA SLE
ATE
R
31STDR
31ST29TH 32ND LNNWLE
WIS
32ND AVEAMES31ST AVE
MARVIN
28TH28TH AVE 30THPKWY BA
Y
ASPINWALL
RD GLADE
GU
LL
FRIE
ND
LY
LILL
Y R
D
26TH
BAY
SOUTH
27THJORG
ENSO
N
26TH AVE26TH AVE C
AR
PE
NTE
R
RDPLEASANTEXITWILLA M ETTE
HO
GU
M
24TH 24TH 114NELSON STRD
CT
GR
OV
E
20TH BETH
EL
LIS
TER
EVER
GR
EEN
EXITBRENNER OV
ER
HU
LSE
EAS
T
20TH
111MILLER OFF
18TH 18TH ABE
RN
ATH
Y
17TH E CLARA HACKMAN5 M
ETT
4THPOIN
T
KAIS
ER
INTERSTATE
CU
T
HOUSTON
RD
14TH LINDELL CO
NIN
E
AVE 15TH JUD
D
MIX
RD
15TH WAYWO
OD
LAN
D C
RE
EK
11TH WE
ST
KUHLMAN
HARTMAN
AVE11TH 12TH
CO
OP
ER
10THBAY
3RD55TH RD
MARTIN
NIS
QU
ALL
Y
DU
TER
RO
W
6TH AVE6TH
LILL
Y
7THWIL
SO
N
NE
.
8TH2ND DIV
ISIO
N
DR
.
INTERSTA
TE
CA
RP
EN
TER
EMC
KENZIE
WAY2ND RDST.
BAY RD RD
.
MUD W HARRISON STATE MARTINSTATE
EN
SIG
N
DURGINDE
VO
E
EXIT101SU MA
RV
IN
MC
PH
EE
EXIT 109PATT
ISO
N
7TH STEILACOOM
BLVD.
RD
VALL
EY
APP
LE
107EXIT PA
CIFI
C
RD PL
UM
108 6TH
RD
UNION
KIN
WO
OD
DAVID
LK.
KIN
NE
Y
PACIFICCO
LLE
GE
SW WAY
BLACK
15THDELPHI
PACIFICDAYTON
5 RD
.
INTERSTATE
PACIFICEXIT 14TH
OLD
RD 105B FONES MILLSRD FO
NE
S R
D
14THU HWYS CA
PIT
OL
CLU
B
RESER
VATION
RD
.
101 ST.
22NDEXIT SLE
ATE
R
BLVD
GO
LF
THOMSEN105MOTTMAN 20TH SEALLE
N
22NDHO
FFM
AN
MAYES
BLV
D
CA
IN
LAKE
25TH
RD
RD
EXIT32ND R
D
104 CA
RP
EN
TER
JOH
NSO
N
NORTH MORSEMU
SS
ER
MERRIMANEXIT
BLAC
K
103RW
WIG
GIN
S
RD
37TH40TH RDST CLAIRG
OLD
SB
Y
SAPPST40THBO
ULE
VAR
D
SOUTH ST. IAN
BUSH
IDMTN
45TH43RD MER
BLVD
INDIAN SUMMER
45TH SEDENT
THO
RN
TON
49TH RU
RA
L
SHIR
E
YELMMULLEN
LAKE
SW 52ND CO
LLE
GE
YORK
46TH
MA
RV
IN
54TH MULLEN56TH HWY RDEXIT 53RDBLV
D
102
BLAC
K
RU
MA
C
RD
.
GLORY59TH AVE. 58TH KA
GY
YELM HWY60TH SE58TH AVER
D
TR
OON
LN
62ND RIC
H
RU
DD
ELL
BLA
CK
LK
BE
LMO
RE
KIRSOPRD FAIR
TODTK
ARLE
HE
ND
ER
SO
N
NE
LS
66TH 62ND OAKS5 65TH RD
YELM CLA
IR D
R
DELPHI
62ND64TH CATE FARM DRISRAELIN
TERS
TATE
KINNEY
REH
KLAU
69TH HWY66TH AVE SE
70TH AVE RICH
67THRD ST LK S
T
BRITFAIR
VIE
W
71ST PRESTWIC K LN
BLV
D
LN YELM
PRINE
TU MWATER BLVD SW 73RDBUR
G
SUMMERHILL
THO
RN
-
74THCT RD
AVE SE
EXIT78TH AVE RIX
IE
HENDERSON
DR DURELL
ST.
76TH
101 JOHNSON
OLD
RD 77TH79TH AVE RAINIER
78THOSBORNE
81ST RD ME
RID
IAN
79TH AVE. 79THCE
NTE
R
STONE NO
RM
AN
DY
80THPAT KENNEDY WY RD
SE
HWY
80TH81ST VON
AVE83RD R
DDIAGONAL
RD
AYE
R S
T
ST CR
EEK
83RD 83RD 81ST EVERRH
ON
DO
85TH 84TH
GREENSKI V
IE L
N
HIL
L D
R
83RD AVE CH
ES
TNU
T
85TH FIRAVE ME
RID
IAN
LN TREE
DR
.
LITTLE
ROCK
88TH AVE
RDARM
STR
ON
G
BUR
NS
88TH 87THAVE
DE
FIA
NC
E
TROWBRIDGE99 GR EEN
CA
BO
T
MA
RIE
RD
90TH LN KIM
MIE
RD
SW
89TH SE89TH AVE91ST AVE
ST VALL
EY
93RD AVE SW93RD AVE SE
EQU
OS
LN
RIC
H
SPUR
GEO
N
SHE
LDO
N
LATI
GO
TUC
KE
R R
D
EXIT93RD
99 SRD
SW
CR
ETE
HA
RT
IND
DR
LATH
RO
P
STEDMAN RDBENTSWBLO
MB
ER
G
ARROW POOLE
NU
NN
ST
NU
NN
101ST AVE100TH
101STJON
ES
RD
RD
104TH AVE
RD
103RDCUMBERLAND
107TH AVE
LAK
E
CARNEYRD
TILL
EY
SHE
LDO
N
SWCREEKWOOD
RAINIER
CASE
STED
MAN
113TH AVE McCORKLE
113TH M
OR
RIS
ON
RID
GE
CE
DA
R
SE
HWY
Thurs ton County makes every effort to ensure that this map is a true and accurate representation of the work of County government. However, the County and all related personnel make no warranty, expressed or implied, regarding the accuracy, completeness or convenience of any information disc losed on this map. Nor does the County accept liability for any damage or injury caused by the use of this map. To the fullest extent permissible pursuant to applicable law, Thurston County disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including, but not limited to, implied warrant ies of merchant ability, data f itness for a part icular purpose, and non -infringements of proprietary rights. Under no circumstances, including, but not limited to, negligence, shall Thurston County be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special or consequential damages that result from the use of, or the inability to use, Thurston County materials .
0 0.5 10.25
Miles N
Map Created by kah on 4/4/2014
Urban Area Septic System AnalysisSurface Water Risk Categories - NeighborhoodsSurface Water & Density Overall Score
No Septic Parcels Reported
1 - Low Density
2 - Low + 1 Risk Category OR Medium
3 - Low + 2 Risk Categories OR Medium + 1 Risk Category OR High
4 - Medium + 2 Risk Categories OR High + 1 Risk Category OR Very High
5 - High + 2 Risk Categories OR Very High + 1 Risk Category
6 - Very High + 2 Risk CategoriesSurface Water Criteria Proximity to Water defined as - Within 100 feet of lake, stream, wetland, or mapped stormwater drainage feature connected to surface water Soils Criteria - Soil hydrologic groups C and D (Impermeable soils) Soil hydrologic groups A&B with water table less than 6 feet below surface
City Boundary
Neighborhood Density Calculation Method 1. Identified parcel served by septic systems based on city and county data and inventories. 2. Assigned number of residential units or equivalent residential units (ERUs) to each septic parcel based on land use codes (single family, commercial, multi-family) and county permit records. For non-residential parcels, an ERU is defined as 450 gallons per day of sewage. 3. Grouped individual parcels into neighborhoods based on subdivision plats and phases of subdivisions, or lots in an area with similarcharacteristics 4. Used total number of ERUs within a neighborhood divided by total acres within the neighborhood to calculate density , as ERUs/acre. 5. Assigned each neighborhood a density score of 1 through 4, based on the calculated ERUs per acre.
SUNWOOD
GOOSE
POND
LAKE
LAKE
GOOSE
LOIS
LAKE
LAKE
LAKESETCHFIELD
BIGELOWLOUISE
LAKE
LAKE
MCA
LLIS
TER
CREEK
MCALLISTER
CR
EE
K
CREEK
KEN
WO
OD
LAND
WO
OD
LAN
D
MCALLISTER
LITTLE
SPRINGS
HEWITT
SUSAN
DITC
H
DITCH
EATON
CREEK
BLOOMDITCH
CREE
K
CREEK
DITCH
CREEK
SALMON
RAYMOND
HOPKINS
CHAMBERS
CHAM
BERS
SPURGEON
LAKESHEEHAN
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE LAKELAKE SOUTHWICKLAKE SMITH
LAKE
LAKE
TEMPOLAKE
CLEARWOOD
TRAILSEND
MUNN
TROSPERLAKE
BARNES
WARD
SUNSETBEACH
CAPITOLLAKE
LAKE
CAPITOL
HEAD
LUHRBEACH
NISQUALLY
PRIEST
SHOAL
COVE
BUTLERCOVE
BUSHOOWAH-AHLEE
FLAPJACK
GULL
ELLIS
BEACH
POINT
COVE
COVE
ELIZAN
WOODARD
COUNTRYSIDE
OLYMPIA
POINT
POINT
BEACH
SHELL
COVE
TYKLE
FRYE
BAY
HARBOR
COVE
POINT
SUNRISEBEACH
MCLANE
CREE
K
BAYSPIT
BEACH
YOUNGGREEN
MADRONA
LONG
DESCHU
TES
RIV
ER
RIV
ER
BLACK
LAKE
PATTISON
LONG
LAKELAKE
LAKE
PATTISON
HICKS
LAKE
BLAC
K
LAKE
SANDYPOINT
NISQUALLY FLATS
BAY
MU
D
BUD
DELD
INLET
INLE
T
NISQUALLY REACH
SAINT
LAKE SAINT
LAKE
CLAIR
CLAIR
BOSTO
N JOH
NS
ON
BUDD
69TH LIB
BY
70TH
ZAN
GLE
66TH KELL
OG
G
68THHARBOR
67TH 67THKLE
IN
WHITHAM
MA
RV
IN
YOU
NG
DIA
NN
67THAVE66TH64TH
RDELIZ
AN
64TH 65THRD 66TH
SANDYMU
RR
AY
RD
NE
63RDBAYPOINT62ND AVERD NEAVE61ST B
OA
RD
MA
N
SNUG
INLETHARBOR 61ST AVETELLCAMP NEYO
UNG
MIL
LER
59TH WOODARD
DR
RD
SWAY
NE
BEA
CH
VIE
W
61STCR
ES
T
NE
NE
58TH57THGRAVELLY BEACH H
ILL
56TH AVE NE54TH PUG
ET
RD
55TH 56TH AVE
RD
52NDRD51ST 53RD WAY RD
LOOP 54TH
IND
IAN
PUGET
CU
SH
MA
N
BLISS BEACH
MERCANTILE RD
RD
ISLA
ND
POIN
T
HE
IGH
TS L
N
RD
BEAC
H
NE
RD
51STBEV
ER
LY D
R
46TH AVE 47THKEATING BE
LL
48TH46THWO
OD
WAYLEM
ON
FOXT R A
IL
SHIN
CK
E
46TH AVERD46TH44TH
GRAVELLY
46TH
STE
AM
BO
AT
BEACH
43RD
RD
KIN
NE
Y
44THHARBO
R
JOH
NS
ON
41ST NE
JOH
N
HA
LL
LUH
R
POIN
T
LIB
BY
SUNSET
BIS
CAY
39TH FOX
SUNRISE RD
BEACH40TH39TH NELE
MO
N R
D N
E
HAWKS PRAIRIE
38TH RD
36TH AVE36TH BA
KE
R A
ME
S
AVE RD
BCH
BOS
TON
NW
.
36TH AVE. NE
MA
RV
IN
35TH
ME
RID
IAN
SUNSET DR
COUN
TRY
CLUB
RD
GR
OV
E
HA
RB
OR
33RD AVEMADRONA
OV
ER
HU
LSE
FRENCH
RD
TOLMIEFLORA
RD
CO
OP
ER
DRIFTWOODSIMM
ON
S
BAY
RD NW VISTA SLE
ATE
R
31STDR
31ST29TH 32ND LNNWLE
WIS
32ND AVEAMES31ST AVE
MARVIN
28TH28TH AVE 30THPKWY BA
Y
ASPINWALL
RD GLADE
GU
LL
FRIE
ND
LY
LILL
Y R
D
26TH
BAY
SOUTH
27THJORG
ENSO
N
26TH AVE26TH AVE C
AR
PE
NTE
R
RDPLEASANTEXITWILLA M ETTE
HO
GU
M
24TH 24TH 114NELSON STRD
CT
GR
OV
E
20TH BETH
EL
LIS
TER
EVER
GR
EEN
EXITBRENNER OV
ER
HU
LSE
EAS
T
20TH
111MILLER OFF
18TH 18TH ABE
RN
ATH
Y
17TH E CLARA HACKMAN5 M
ETT
4THPOIN
T
KAIS
ER
INTERSTATE
CU
T
HOUSTON
RD
14TH LINDELL CO
NIN
E
AVE 15TH JUD
D
MIX
RD
15TH WAYWO
OD
LAN
D C
RE
EK
11TH WE
ST
KUHLMAN
HARTMAN
AVE11TH 12TH
CO
OP
ER
10THBAY
3RD55TH RD
MARTIN
NIS
QU
ALL
Y
DU
TER
RO
W
6TH AVE6TH
LILL
Y
7THWIL
SO
N
NE
.
8TH2ND DIV
ISIO
N
DR
.
INTERSTA
TE
CA
RP
EN
TER
EMC
KENZIE
WAY2ND RDST.
BAY RD RD
.
MUD W HARRISON STATE MARTINSTATE
EN
SIG
N
DURGINDE
VO
E
EXIT101SU MA
RV
IN
MC
PH
EE
EXIT 109PATT
ISO
N
7TH STEILACOOM
BLVD.
RD
VALL
EY
APP
LE
107EXIT PA
CIFI
C
RD PL
UM
108 6TH
RD
UNION
KIN
WO
OD
DAVID
LK.
KIN
NE
Y
PACIFICCO
LLE
GE
SW WAY
BLACK
15THDELPHI
PACIFICDAYTON
5 RD
.
INTERSTATE
PACIFICEXIT 14TH
OLD
RD 105B FONES MILLSRD FO
NE
S R
D
14THU HWYS CA
PIT
OL
CLU
B
RESER
VATION
RD
.
101 ST.
22NDEXIT SLE
ATE
R
BLVD
GO
LF
THOMSEN105MOTTMAN 20TH SEALLE
N
22NDHO
FFM
AN
MAYES
BLV
D
CA
IN
LAKE
25TH
RD
RD
EXIT32ND R
D
104 CA
RP
EN
TER
JOH
NSO
N
NORTH MORSEMU
SS
ER
MERRIMANEXIT
BLAC
K
103RW
WIG
GIN
S
RD
37TH40TH RDST CLAIRG
OLD
SB
Y
SAPPST40THBO
ULE
VAR
D
SOUTH ST. IAN
BUSH
IDMTN
45TH43RD MER
BLVD
INDIAN SUMMER
45TH SEDENT
THO
RN
TON
49TH RU
RA
L
SHIR
E
YELMMULLEN
LAKE
SW 52ND CO
LLE
GE
YORK
46TH
MA
RV
IN
54TH MULLEN56TH HWY RDEXIT 53RDBLV
D
102
BLAC
K
RU
MA
C
RD
.
GLORY59TH AVE. 58TH KA
GY
YELM HWY60TH SE58TH AVER
D
TR
OON
LN
62ND RIC
H
RU
DD
ELL
BLA
CK
LK
BE
LMO
RE
KIRSOPRD FAIR
TODTK
ARLE
HE
ND
ER
SO
N
NE
LS
66TH 62ND OAKS5 65TH RD
YELM CLA
IR D
R
DELPHI
62ND64TH CATE FARM DRISRAELIN
TERS
TATE
KINNEY
REH
KLAU
69TH HWY66TH AVE SE
70TH AVE RICH
67THRD ST LK S
T
BRITFAIR
VIE
W
71ST PRESTWIC K LN
BLV
D
LN YELM
PRINE
TU MWATER BLVD SW 73RDBUR
G
SUMMERHILL
THO
RN
-
74THCT RD
AVE SE
EXIT78TH AVE RIX
IE
HENDERSON
DR DURELL
ST.
76TH
101 JOHNSON
OLD
RD 77TH79TH AVE RAINIER
78THOSBORNE
81ST RD ME
RID
IAN
79TH AVE. 79THCE
NTE
R
STONE NO
RM
AN
DY
80THPAT KENNEDY WY RD
SE
HWY
80TH81ST VON
AVE83RD R
DDIAGONAL
RD
AYE
R S
T
ST CR
EEK
83RD 83RD 81ST EVERRH
ON
DO
85TH 84TH
GREENSKI V
IE L
N
HIL
L D
R
83RD AVE CH
ES
TNU
T
85TH FIRAVE ME
RID
IAN
LN TREE
DR
.
LITTLE
ROCK
88TH AVE
RDARM
STR
ON
G
BUR
NS
88TH 87THAVE
DE
FIA
NC
E
TROWBRIDGE99 GR EEN
CA
BO
T
MA
RIE
RD
90TH LN KIM
MIE
RD
SW
89TH SE89TH AVE91ST AVE
ST VALL
EY
93RD AVE SW93RD AVE SE
EQU
OS
LN
RIC
H
SPUR
GEO
N
SHE
LDO
N
LATI
GO
TUC
KE
R R
D
EXIT93RD
99 SRD
SW
CR
ETE
HA
RT
IND
DR
LATH
RO
P
STEDMAN RDBENTSWBLO
MB
ER
G
ARROW POOLE
NU
NN
ST
NU
NN
101ST AVE100TH
101STJON
ES
RD
RD
104TH AVE
RD
103RDCUMBERLAND
107TH AVE
LAK
E
CARNEYRD
TILL
EY
SHE
LDO
N
SWCREEKWOOD
RAINIER
CASE
STED
MAN
113TH AVE McCORKLE
113TH M
OR
RIS
ON
RID
GE
CE
DA
R
AVE
SE
HWY
Thurs ton County makes every effort to ensure that this map is a true and accurate representation of the work of County government. However, the County and all related personnel make no warranty, expressed or implied, regarding the accuracy, completeness or convenience of any information disc losed on this map. Nor does the County accept liability for any damage or injury caused by the use of this map. To the fullest extent permissible pursuant to applicable law, Thurston County disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including, but not limited to, implied warrant ies of merchant ability, data f itness for a part icular purpose, and non -infringements of proprietary rights. Under no circumstances, including, but not limited to, negligence, shall Thurston County be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special or consequential damages that result from the use of, or the inability to use, Thurston County materials .
0 0.5 10.25
Miles N
Map Created by kah on 4/1/2014
Urban Area Septic System AnalysisGroundwater Risk Categories - NeighborhoodsGroundwater & Density Overall Score
No Septic Parcels Reported
1 - Low Density
2 - Low + 1 Risk Category OR Medium
3 - Low + 2 Risk Categories OR Medium + 1 Risk Category OR High
4 - Medium + 2 Risk Categories OR High + 1 Risk Category OR Very High
5 - High + 2 Risk Categories OR Very High + 1 Risk Category
6 - Very High + 2 Risk CategoriesGroundwater Criteria Wellhead Protection Area - For Group A and B public water systems (data source WDOH) or public water system wells with100 foot buffer wellhead (data source Thurston County) representations.Soils Criteria - Soil hydrologic group A (Porous soils) Soil hydrologic group B with water table deeper than 6 feet
Urban Growth Area City Boundary
Neighborhood Density Calculation Method 1. Identified parcel served by septic systems based on city and county data and inventories. 2. Assigned number of residential units or equivalent residential units (ERUs) to each septic parcel based on land use codes (single family, commercial, multi-family) and county permit records. For non-residential parcels, an ERU is defined as 450 gallons per day of sewage. 3. Grouped individual parcels into neighborhoods based on subdivision plats and phases of subdivisions, or lots in an area with similarcharacteristics 4. Used total number of ERUs within a neighborhood divided by total acres within the neighborhood to calculate density , as ERUs/acre. 5. Assigned each neighborhood a density score of 1 through 4, based on the calculated ERUs per acre.
SUNWOOD
GOOSE
POND
LAKE
LAKE
GOOSE
LOIS
LAKE
LAKE
LAKESETCHFIELD
BIGELOWLOUISE
LAKE
LAKE
MCA
LLIS
TER
CREEK
MCALLISTER
CR
EE
K
CREEK
KEN
WO
OD
LAND
WO
OD
LAN
D
MCALLISTER
LITTLE
SPRINGS
HEWITT
SUSAN
DITC
H
DITCH
EATON
CREEK
BLOOMDITCH
CREE
K
CREEK
DITCH
CREEK
SALMON
RAYMOND
HOPKINS
CHAMBERS
CHAM
BERS
SPURGEON
LAKESHEEHAN
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE
LAKE LAKELAKE SOUTHWICKLAKE SMITH
LAKE
LAKE
TEMPOLAKE
CLEARWOOD
TRAILSEND
MUNN
TROSPERLAKE
BARNES
WARD
SUNSETBEACH
CAPITOLLAKE
LAKE
CAPITOL
HEAD
LUHRBEACH
NISQUALLY
PRIEST
SHOAL
COVE
BUTLERCOVE
BUSHOOWAH-AHLEE
FLAPJACK
GULL
ELLIS
BEACH
POINT
COVE
COVE
ELIZAN
WOODARD
COUNTRYSIDE
OLYMPIA
POINT
POINT
BEACH
SHELL
COVE
TYKLE
FRYE
BAY
HARBOR
COVE
POINT
SUNRISEBEACH
MCLANE
CREE
KSPIT
BEACH
YOUNGGREEN
MADRONA
LONG
DESCHU
TES
RIV
ER
RIV
ER
BLACK
LAKE
PATTISON
LONG
LAKELAKE
LAKE
PATTISON
HICKS
LAKE
BLAC
K
LAKE
SANDYPOINT
NISQUALLY FLATS
BAY
MU
D
BUD
DELD
INLET
INLE
T
NISQUALLY REACH
SAINT
LAKE SAINT
LAKE
CLAIR
CLAIR
BOSTO
N JOH
NS
ON
BUDD
69TH LIB
BY
70TH
ZAN
GLE
66TH KELL
OG
G
68THHARBOR
67TH 67THKLE
IN
WHITHAM
MA
RV
IN
YOU
NG
DIA
NN
67THAVE66TH64TH
RDELIZ
AN
64TH 65THRD 66TH
SANDYMU
RR
AY
RD
NE
63RDBAYPOINT62ND AVERD NEAVE61ST B
OA
RD
MA
N
SNUG
INLETHARBOR 61ST AVETELLCAMP NEYO
UNG
MIL
LER
59TH WOODARD
DR
RD
SWAY
NE
BEA
CH
VIE
W
61STCR
ES
T
NE
NE
58TH57THGRAVELLY BEACH H
ILL
56TH AVE NE54TH PUG
ET
RD
55TH 56TH AVE
RD
52NDRD51ST 53RD WAY RD
LOOP 54TH
IND
IAN
PUGET
CU
SH
MA
N
BLISS BEACH
MERCANTILE RD
RD
ISLA
ND
POIN
T
HE
IGH
TS L
N
RD
BEAC
H
NE
RD
51STBEV
ER
LY D
R
46TH AVE 47THKEATING BE
LL
48TH46THWO
OD
WAYLEM
ON
FOXT R A
IL
SHIN
CK
E
46TH AVERD46TH44TH
GRAVELLY
46TH
STE
AM
BO
AT
BEACH
43RD
RD
KIN
NE
Y
44THHARBO
R
JOH
NS
ON
41ST NE
JOH
N
HA
LL
LUH
R
POIN
T
LIB
BY
SUNSET
BIS
CAY
39TH FOX
SUNRISE RD
BEACH40TH39TH NELE
MO
N R
D N
E
HAWKS PRAIRIE
38TH RD
36TH AVE36TH BA
KE
R A
ME
S
AVE RD
BCH
BOS
TON
NW
.
36TH AVE. NE
MA
RV
IN
35TH
ME
RID
IAN
SUNSET DR
COUN
TRY
CLUB
RD
GR
OV
E
HA
RB
OR
33RD AVEMADRONA
OV
ER
HU
LSE
FRENCH
RD
TOLMIEFLORA
RD
CO
OP
ER
DRIFTWOODSIMM
ON
S
BAY
RD NW VISTA SLE
ATE
R
31STDR
31ST29TH 32ND LNNWLE
WIS
32ND AVEAMES31ST AVE
MARVIN
28TH28TH AVE 30THPKWY BA
Y
ASPINWALL
RD GLADE
GU
LL
FRIE
ND
LY
LILL
Y R
D
26TH
BAY
SOUTH
27THJORG
ENSO
N
26TH AVE26TH AVE C
AR
PE
NTE
R
RDPLEASANTEXITWILLA M ETTE
HO
GU
M
24TH 24TH 114NELSON STRD
CT
GR
OV
E
20TH BETH
EL
LIS
TER
EVER
GR
EEN
EXITBRENNER OV
ER
HU
LSE
EAS
T
20TH
111MILLER OFF
18TH 18TH ABE
RN
ATH
Y
17TH E CLARA HACKMAN5 M
ETT
4THPOIN
T
KAIS
ER
INTERSTATE
CU
T
HOUSTON
RD
14TH LINDELL CO
NIN
E
AVE 15TH JUD
D
MIX
RD
15TH WAYWO
OD
LAN
D C
RE
EK
11TH WE
ST
KUHLMAN
HARTMAN
AVE11TH 12TH
CO
OP
ER
10THBAY
3RD55TH RD
MARTIN
NIS
QU
ALL
Y
DU
TER
RO
W
6TH AVE6TH
LILL
Y
7THWIL
SO
N
NE
.
8TH2ND DIV
ISIO
N
DR
.
INTERSTA
TE
CA
RP
EN
TER
EMC
KENZIE
WAY2ND RDST.
BAY RD RD
.
MUD W HARRISON STATE MARTINSTATE
EN
SIG
N
DURGINDE
VO
E
EXIT101SU MA
RV
IN
MC
PH
EE
EXIT 109PATT
ISO
N
7TH STEILACOOM
BLVD.
RD
VALL
EY
APP
LE
107EXIT PA
CIFI
C
RD PL
UM
108 6TH
RD
UNION
KIN
WO
OD
DAVID
LK.
KIN
NE
Y
PACIFICCO
LLE
GE
SW WAY
BLACK
15THDELPHI
PACIFICDAYTON
5 RD
.
INTERSTATE
PACIFICEXIT 14TH
OLD
RD 105B FONES MILLSRD FO
NE
S R
D
14THU HWYS CA
PIT
OL
CLU
B
RESER
VATION
RD
.
101 ST.
22NDEXIT SLE
ATE
R
BLVD
GO
LF
THOMSEN105MOTTMAN 20TH SEALLE
N
22NDHO
FFM
AN
MAYES
BLV
D
CA
IN
LAKE
25TH
RD
RD
EXIT32ND R
D
104 CA
RP
EN
TER
JOH
NSO
N
NORTH MORSEMU
SS
ER
MERRIMANEXIT
BLAC
K
103RW
WIG
GIN
S
RD
37TH40TH RDST CLAIRG
OLD
SB
Y
SAPPST40THBO
ULE
VAR
D
SOUTH ST. IAN
BUSH
IDMTN
45TH43RD MER
BLVD
INDIAN SUMMER
45TH SEDENT
THO
RN
TON
49TH RU
RA
L
SHIR
E
YELMMULLEN
LAKE
SW 52ND CO
LLE
GE
YORK
46TH
MA
RV
IN
54TH MULLEN56TH HWY RDEXIT 53RDBLV
D
102
BLAC
K
RU
MA
C
RD
.
GLORY59TH AVE. 58TH KA
GY
YELM HWY60TH SE58TH AVER
D
TR
OON
LN
62ND RIC
H
RU
DD
ELL
BLA
CK
LK
BE
LMO
RE
KIRSOPRD FAIR
TODTK
ARLE
HE
ND
ER
SO
N
NE
LS
66TH 62ND OAKS5 65TH RD
YELM CLA
IR D
R
DELPHI
62ND64TH CATE FARM DRISRAELIN
TERS
TATE
KINNEY
REH
KLAU
69TH HWY66TH AVE SE
70TH AVE RICH
67THRD ST LK S
T
BRITFAIR
VIE
W
71ST PRESTWIC K LN
BLV
D
LN YELM
PRINE
TU MWATER BLVD SW 73RDBUR
G
SUMMERHILL
THO
RN
-
74THCT RD
AVE SE
EXIT78TH AVE RIX
IE
HENDERSON
DR DURELL
ST.
76TH
101 JOHNSON
OLD
RD 77TH79TH AVE RAINIER
78THOSBORNE
81ST RD ME
RID
IAN
79TH AVE. 79THCE
NTE
R
STONE NO
RM
AN
DY
80THPAT KENNEDY WY RD
SE
HWY
80TH81ST VON
AVE83RD R
DDIAGONAL
RD
AYE
R S
T
ST CR
EEK
83RD 83RD 81ST EVERRH
ON
DO
85TH 84TH
GREENSKI V
IE L
N
HIL
L D
R
83RD AVE CH
ES
TNU
T
85TH FIRAVE ME
RID
IAN
LN TREE
DR
.
LITTLE
ROCK
88TH AVE
RDARM
STR
ON
G
BUR
NS
88TH 87THAVE
DE
FIA
NC
E
TROWBRIDGE99 GR EEN
CA
BO
T
MA
RIE
RD
90TH LN KIM
MIE
RD
SW
89TH SE89TH AVE91ST AVE
ST VALL
EY
93RD AVE SW93RD AVE SE
EQU
OS
LN
RIC
H
SPUR
GEO
N
SHE
LDO
N
LATI
GO
TUC
KE
R R
D
EXIT93RD
99 SRD
SW
CR
ETE
HA
RT
IND
DR
LATH
RO
P
STEDMAN RDBENTSWBLO
MB
ER
G
ARROW POOLE
NU
NN
ST
NU
NN
101ST AVE100TH
101STJON
ES
RD
RD
104TH AVE
RD
103RDCUMBERLAND
107TH AVE
LAK
E
CARNEYRD
TILL
EY
SHE
LDO
N
SWCREEKWOOD
RAINIER
CASE
STED
MAN
113TH AVE McCORKLE
113TH M
OR
RIS
ON
RID
GE
CE
DA
R
AVE
SE
HWY
Thurs ton County makes every effort to ensure that this map is a true and accurate representation of the work of County government. However, the County and all related personnel make no warranty, expressed or implied, regarding the accuracy, completeness or convenience of any information disc losed on this map. Nor does the County accept liability for any damage or injury caused by the use of this map. To the fullest extent permissible pursuant to applicable law, Thurston County disclaims all warranties, express or implied, including, but not limited to, implied warrant ies of merchant ability, data f itness for a part icular purpose, and non -infringements of proprietary rights. Under no circumstances, including, but not limited to, negligence, shall Thurston County be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special or consequential damages that result from the use of, or the inability to use, Thurston County materials .
0 0.5 10.25
Miles N
Map Created by kah on 4/9/2014
Urban Area Septic System AnalysisHigh Risk Surface Water - NeighborhoodsSurface Water & Density Overall Score
5 - High + 2 Risk Categories OR Very High + 1 Risk Category
6 - Very High + 2 Risk Categories
High Risk Groundwater - NeighborhoodsGroundwater & Density Overall Score
5 - High + 2 Risk Categories OR Very High + 1 Risk Category
6 - Very High + 2 Risk Categories
Groundwater Criteria Wellhead Protection Area - For Group A and B public water systems (data source WDOH) or public water system wells with100 foot buffer wellhead (data source Thurston County) representations.Soils Criteria - Soil hydrologic group A (Porous soils) Soil hydrologic group B with water table deeper than 6 feet
Surface Water Criteria Proximity to Water defined as - Within 100 feet of lake, stream, wetland, or mapped stormwater drainage feature connected to surface water Soils Criteria - Soil hydrologic groups C and D (Impermeable soils) Soil hydrologic groups A and B with water table less than 6 feet below surface
Urban Growth Area City Boundary
Neighborhood Density Calculation Method 1. Identified parcel served by septic systems based on city and county data and inventories. 2. Assigned number of residential units or equivalent residential units (ERUs) to each septic parcel based on land use codes (single family, commercial, multi-family) and county permit records. For non-residential parcels, an ERU is defined as 450 gallons per day of sewage. 3. Grouped individual parcels into neighborhoods based on subdivision plats and phases of subdivisions, or lots in an area with similarcharacteristics 4. Used total number of ERUs within a neighborhood divided by total acres within the neighborhood to calculate density , as ERUs/acre. 5. Assigned each neighborhood a density score of 1 through 4, based on the calculated ERUs per acre.