| | | | | | | | | TO: | Public Safety and Neighborhood Quality of Life Committee Members |
|
| FROM:
| Alina T. Hudak, City Manager
|
|
| | DATE: | December 7, 2022
|
|
| | SUBJECT: | DISCUSSION REGARDING FUTURE PROPOSED F.A.R. BALLOT MEASURES, HOW THE ADMINISTRATION CAN BETTER CONVEY EXPLANATORY INFORMATION, WHERE PERMITTED BY LAW, ILLUSTRATING THE ACTUAL AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF FLOOR AREA ON PROPERTIES THAT WOULD BENEFIT FROM THE BALLOT MEASURE, SUCH AS BY PROVIDING EXAMPLES OF SPECIFIC PROPERTIES AND THE ASSOCIATED SQUARE FOOTAGE IN AGENDA MATERIALS OR FACTUAL INFORMATION ON THE CITY’S WEBSITE |
|
| | | | | | | | HISTORY:
| | On October 26, 2022, at the request of Commissioner Kristen Rosen Gonzalez, the City Commission referred the discussion item to the Public Safety and Neighborhood Quality of Life Committee (Item C4 O). As noted in the attached referral memo, the item sponsor would like the PSNQLC to discuss how the Administration can better convey information, where permitted by law, illustrating the actual amount of additional square footage of floor area on properties that would benefit from the ballot measure. |
| | |
| | | | | | | | ANALYSIS
| The impacts of an FAR increase can vary, depending upon the actual increase in intensity proposed. For instance, the ballot question approved in 2020 that created additional exceptions to FAR (stairs above the roof, bike parking and FPL vaults) has no impact on the intensity or massing of a building. However, the FAR increase approved in 2017 for the town center area had a much more significant impact, as the maximum FAR for a much larger, defined area, was increased to 3.5.
The City Commission can request, as needed, an intensity analysis that would show the visual impact of future FAR increases. It is important to note that smaller FAR increases may not always result in new building mass being visible from the street or sidewalk. However, for larger FAR increases, massing studies would clearly show how much additional square footage would be allowed and provide a good comparison to the existing regulations. There are digital tools available for these types of studies, and depending upon the level of detail sought, as well as the size of the study area, the overall cost for producing these diagrams would vary.
The Administration would recommend that future massing diagrams related to an FAR increase be considered on a case-by-case basis. This would give the City Commission the flexibility to decide which FAR increases may need to have such an analysis, as well as the extent and detail of the massing studies and diagrams, prior to being placed on a ballot.
Also, with State Law limiting voter guides and other methods of voter education for ballot measures, the City will need to be creative in terms of the timing of these types of analysis.
|
| | |
| | | | | | | | CONCLUSION:
The Administration recommends that the Public Safety, Neighborhoods and Quality of Life Committee discuss the item and provide an applicable recommendation to the City Commission.
| | |
| | | | | | | | | Is this a "Residents Right to Know" item, pursuant to City Code Section 2-14? | | Does this item utilize G.O. Bond Funds? | | | Yes | | No | |
| | |
|