Park City, UtahLAND MANAGEMENT CODE CHANGES - AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Alex Joyce | Cascadia Partners
Affordable Housing Master Planned DevelopmentWhy Audit?
Middle Income, Attainable & Affordable Housing
Housing Transportation
Energy
Driven by Complete Community Values
Park City’s commitment to 800 City & private obligation units by 2026.
Inclusive & Healthy Community.
Help Achieve Critical Council Priorities
Social Equity
Project Kick-off Site Visit / Interviews Site Plans / Proforma / Sensitivity Testing
April May June - August
Recommendations & Final Report
Sept - Oct.
Where are We? Where are we Going?
Today’s Meeting
Affordable Housing Master Planned Development (AMPD) Zoning Audit
HR1 – Historic Residential
GC – General Commercial
RC – Recreational Commercial
• Test MPD vs. Draft AMPD standards• Test standards as written, assume no
exceptions except multifamily use • 3 Sites - 3 Zones - 3 Sizes• Residential development programs• Understand influence of underlying zone standards• Quantify impact to form and finance (and affordability)• Detailed pro forma and site plan evaluation
Historic (HR1): One-Half Acre Site
Prospector (GC):2-Acre Site
Resort Adjacent (RC): 1.5-Acre Site
Study Sites
The three study sites represent different development patterns in different parts of town.
Park CityHR1 Parcel Analysis
HR1 – Historic Residential
85% of HR1 zone is 4,834sf or less
Study site is 21,875sf:16 parcels of this size or larger
2,804: median sf3,867: average sf
Park CityRC Parcel Analysis
79% of RC zone is 9,831sf or less
Study site is 65,100sf:7 parcels of this size or larger (most of these under 100,000sf)
2,312: median sf9,528: average sf
RC – Recreational Commercial
Park CityGC Parcel Analysis
62% of GC zone is 17,961sf or less(of these, 86% are less than 10,000sf)
Study site is 87,000sf:18 parcels of this size or larger
5,862: median sf23,966: average sf
GC – General Commercial
Park CityContextual: Large Format vs Small-Scale
Austin, TX Bunn Creek Apartments11.62 acres- Disconnected- Driveable
Park City, UT Retreat at The Park0.5 acres- Fits into surrounding fabric
WHO• Out of town developer• REIT
WHO• Public Entity• Local CDC• Public-Private-Partnership
=/=
AMPD Basics
• AMPD Low Bonus:• 50-60% affordable units• At 150% AMI
100% UNIT BONUS (Double the amount)
• AMPD High Bonus:• 86-100% affordable units• At <59% AMI
200% UNIT BONUS (Triple the Amount)
Cascadia Partners Test
Key Findings
• Fixed dimensional standards make shrinking unit sizes only option for achieving affordability
• AMPD projects currently incentivized to go entirely micro-unit• Parking makes achieving density bonus challenging at workforce,
impossible at deeper affordability• MPD has far lower affordability requirement – AMPD density bonus does
not appear to “bridge the gap” and be enticing for private builder • In most cases, MPD is better aligned with market in terms of allowable unit
sizing – although dimensional standards still result in very expensive units
AMPDBonus & Standards
STORIES SETBACKS BUFFER OPEN SPACE LOT COVERAGE
PARKINGPER UNIT
Unable to Change Building Footprint as Unit Count Grows
Consider allowing more building footprint in AMPD
10 units844sf Single-Family Footprint1519sf Duplex Footprint
20 units844sf Duplex Footprint1519sf Fourplex Footprint
HR1 - MPD HR1 - AMPD
Density Bonus + No Change in Building Size = Unit Sizes Cut in Half- Results in Micro-unit Projects
• With max building footprint standard still applying in AMPD, the only way to fit additional affordable units is to shrink unit square footage or include fewer units.
• Shrinking units results in all micro-units suitable only for 1 person households.
AMPD - Observations
High Open Space Requirement- Land is Expensive, Raising Housing Costs
• Unit prices must absorb entire amount of site not in building footprint, sometimes upwards of 73%.
• Non-building area land cost = >$5 million
Plan View
30-40%
30-40%
30-40%
30-40%
MPD - Observations
40%
*Unless using Conditional Use Permit
More Parking Area than Housing Area- Limits Units, Raises Land and Unit Costs
• In some scenarios there was more parking area than building footprint
• 23% parking and circulation• 19% building footprint
• Cost of parking is bundled into sales/rent prices
• Unbundled parking can be more flexible and respond to varied household needs
Image via Tony Jordan: Portlanders for Parking Reform
MPD - Observations
*9’x18’ is Park City standard parking stall dimensions
MPD - ObservationsMax Building Footprint Standards Favor Small Lot Subdivision- More Building Area, but Still Restrictive for Multifamily
• Max building footprint favors small lots and incents subdividing large lots
• Max building footprint on small lots is restrictive
• Favors single family & duplex unit types• Different unit types allowed with conditional use
but no additional footprint
1 Big Lot 5 Small LotsMax Footprint Allowed: 7,764 sf
Max Footprint Allowed: 3,200 sf
*Unless using Conditional Use Permit
MPD Base Case Allowance: 10 units, 10 parking spaces
9’x18’(162 sf)
Fixed Size of Standard Parking Space
MPD10 Homes
AMPD - Observations
AMPD Doubles Allowable Units
9’x18’(162 sf)
Fixed Size of Standard Parking Space
AMPD20 Homes
AMPD - Observations
But Double the Units = Double the Parking Spaces
9’x18’(162 sf)
Fixed Size of Standard Parking Space
AMPD20 Homes
AMPD - Observations
*Assuming Unit Sizes under 1,000sf
Parking Grows as Unit Count Grows
May consider change to parking requirements
78 units78 parking spaces18,000sf of parking
120 micro-units110 parking spaces21,600sf of parking
GC - MPD GC - AMPD
Can’t fit all our bonus units because parking keeps growing
Sensitivity TestingStandards to Evaluate
• Height • Setbacks• Buffer• Open Space Requirement• Lot Coverage (footprint calculation)• Reduced Parking
Turn Dials&
Measure Effects
Sensitivity TestingProposed AMPD Code
STORIES SETBACKS BUFFER OPEN SPACE LOT COVERAGE
ADDITIONALHOMES
FUNDING GAP(% of project cost)
0
100%
200%
5
10
PARKINGPER UNIT
0%0
50%
100% 1:1
1.5:1
0:1
0.5:1
-50%
-100%
0%0
50%
100%
Sensitivity TestingRecommended AMPD
ADDITIONALHOMES
0%
100%
200%
STORIES SETBACKS BUFFER OPEN SPACE LOT COVERAGE
0
5
10
PARKINGPER UNIT
0
50%
100% 1:1
1.5:1
0:1
0.5:1
0’
10’
25’
-50%
-100%
0%0
50%
100%
FUNDING GAP(% of project cost)
Preliminary RecommendationsAMPD Standards
• Height• Consider allowing additional height for bonus
units where appropriate
• Setbacks• Keep consistent within zone• Use consistent setbacks within master planned
area
• Buffer / Increased Setbacks• Eliminate any buffers for MPD or AMPD in all
zones.• Focus on transitions instead
• Open Space Requirement• Reduce to 15% for AMPD projects• Desire for well-defined useable open space
• Lot Coverage (building footprint calculation)
• Allow increased lot coverage for AMPD (50%)• Remove 3500sf footprint limitation in RC zone
• Parking• Continue10 space reduction in AMPD + 0.5
spaces per unit for bonus units.• Allow adjacent on-street to count to allow for
flexibility in conjunction with residential permit parking program.
SummaryAMPD Standards
• Large financial gap with proposed AMPD Standards
• Adjusting the standards made it better
• Still have some way to go, particularly for scenarios with higher numbers and deeper levels of affordability.