The URL can be used to link to this page

Unified Development Code Update Copyrighted August 27, 2025 City of Dubuque WORK SESSION # City Council ITEM TITLE: Unified Development Code Update SUMMARY: Planning staff and representatives from Camiros will present the findings of the Unified Development Code (UDC) Technical Review conducted by Camiros and set the stage for the next phase of the UDC update. SUGGUESTED DISPOSITION: ATTACHMENTS: 1. MVM Memo 2. Staff Memo Unified Development Code Update 3. DBQ Tech Report PPT 4. DBQ Technical Review Report 5. Community Survey 6. Technical Group Survey Page 16 of 421 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager SUBJECT: Work Session on Unified Development Code Update: Technical Review Report Presentation DATE: August 25, 2025 Planning Services Director Wally Wernimont is sharing information for the 6:30 p.m., August 27, 2025, Work Session on the Unified Development Code (UDC) Technical Review. The purpose of the work session is to present the findings of the technical review conducted by Camiros (UDC consultant) and to set the stage for the next phase of the UDC update. Planning staff and representatives from Camiros will provide the presentation. A public presentation on the report will be held on August 26, 2025, at 6:30 p.m. at the Jule Operations Training Center. This presentation is open to the public, who are encouraged to attend, ask questions, and provide comments on the report. _____________________________________ Michael C. Van Milligen MCVM:sv Attachment cc: Crenna Brumwell, City Attorney Cori Burbach, Assistant City Manager Wally Wernimont, Planning Services Director Shena Moon, Associate Planner Chris Happ Olson, Assistant Planner Travis Schrobilgen, Assistant Planner Jason Duba, Assistant Planner Page 17 of 421 1 TO: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager FROM: Wally Wernimont, Planning Services Director SUBJECT: Work Session on Unified Development Code Update: Technical Review Report Presentation DATE: August 25, 2025 INTRODUCTION This memo transmits information for the upcoming August 27, 2025, City Council Work Session on the Unified Development Code (UDC) Technical Review. The purpose of the work session is to present the findings of the technical review conducted by Camiros (UDC consultant) and to set the stage for the next phase of the UDC update. Planning staff and representatives from Camiros will provide the presentation. DISSCUSSION The Unified Development Code (UDC) serves as the City’s primary tool for regulating land use, zoning, and development. As a central component of the City’s land use strategy, the UDC must remain current, effective, and aligned with the City’s broader planning goals, including those established in the Imagine Dubuque Comprehensive Plan. To support a comprehensive update of the UDC, the City engaged Camiros to conduct a technical review. The purpose of this review is three-fold. First, the review provides a more in-depth understanding of the current zoning regulations as we move toward drafting an updated code. Second, it allows for discussion of additional issues during meetings and interviews with City staff and stakeholders as well as online surveys. Third, it introduces concepts and regulatory approaches that set direction for substantive updates to be included in the new Unified Development Code. This report is not a draft of the revised code, but instead a roadmap that outlines the most significant areas where changes may be needed. While some revisions will be minor and intended to improve readability and usability, others will involve more comprehensive restructuring and policy direction. To continue fostering dialogue and ongoing collaboration with the community, the Technical Review Report and the results of the Community and Technical Surveys have been posted on the city’s project website at www.cityofdubuque.org/udcupdate. A media Page 18 of 421 2 release was issued on August 5th announcing the publication of the Unified Development Code Technical Report for public review. A public presentation on the report will be held on August 26, 2025, at 6:30 p.m. at the Jule Operations Training Center. This presentation is open to the public, who are encouraged to attend, ask questions, and provide comments on the report. REQUESTED ACTION This information is being provided for review and discussion during the August 27, 2025 Work Session. No formal action is required at this time. Enclosures: Dubuque UDC Technical Review Report cc: Shena Moon, Associate Planner Chris Happ Olson, Assistant Planner Travis Schrobilgen, Assistant Planner Jason Duba, Assistant Planner F:\Users\Planning Sec\City Council\00 Work Sessions\UDC Code Update\Staff Memo Unified Development Code Update.doc Page 19 of 421 Technical Review Report Dubuque UDC August 2025 Page 20 of 421 2 Dubuque Code Update - Objectives What are the objectives of the Code update? •Implement adopted policies such as Imagine Dubuque •Organize code as user-friendly, predictable, consistent •Create new opportunities for diverse housing •Promote sustainable + resilient development •Integrate objective design standards into the districts •Reduce dependence on special approvals •Increase transparency of development approvals Page 21 of 421 3 Step 1: Technical Review Report •What goes into the Report? •An in-depth review of current regulations •Evaluation of stakeholder comments •Survey results •Discussions with staff who work with the Code •What is in the Report? •Identify current issues, best practices, common special approvals •Present concepts + regulatory approaches that set direction for Code drafting •What is the purpose of these meetings? •Gather additional feedback to inform Code drafting Please note: The Report will not be revised; it is intended to spur discussion, get additional feedback Page 22 of 421 4 Organization Page 23 of 421 5 Code Organization Graphic orientation Define all terms Measurement methodologies Consistent voice Compartmentalize Page 24 of 421 6 Compartmentalization Page 25 of 421 7 Uses Page 26 of 421 8 Use Structure Create a global use matrix •Access the matrix two ways •Inconsistencies in terminology eliminated •Adding or modifying uses becomes simpler List all principal, accessory + temporary uses Use definitions + standards Identify uses: 1.By district 2.By use type Page 27 of 421 9 Use Structure Address emerging principal uses •“Corner Stores” •Maker/creator spaces •Artisan industrial •Specialty food service •Food truck parks •Commercial kitchens Address temporary uses •Food trucks •Fireworks stands •Temporary outdoor events •Real estate/construction uses Address accessory uses •Drive throughs •Home occupations •Accessory dwelling units (State Law) •Outdoor sales/storage Page 28 of 421 10 Districts Page 29 of 421 11 Residential Districts Key recommendations - Residential district structure •R-1 District Largest residential district – generally in line with current standards •R-2 District Reducing lot size to 5,000sf for both single-family + two-family creates significant conformance •R-2A District Generally in line with current standards •R-3 + R-4 Districts Very similar in intent + controls, should be combined •Allow moderate height increase (50’) •Unit count determined by lot area instead of fixed limit •R-5 District New district for higher density townhouse + multi -family Page 30 of 421 12 Residential Districts Page 31 of 421 13 Residential Districts Key recommendations - Residential district regulations •Clarify impervious surface control within landscape requirements •Reverse from 20% green space to 80% impervious maximum •Front setback averaging for single-family and two- family areas •Create specific controls that allow for the split of large single-family dwellings into multiple units •Need to determine where appropriate •Set specific thresholds for when + where this could happen with standards for how it can happen •Allow for cottage court development Page 32 of 421 14 Commercial Districts Establish a set of commercial districts with a logical increase in scale + function Proposed District Current District Intent C-N Neighborhood Commercial OC Office Commercial C-1 Neighborhood Commercial Small-scale commercial compatible with residential C-MU Mixed-Use C-2 Neighborhood Shopping Center C-2A Mixed-Use Neighborhood Combine existing districts to create a true mixed-use district C-G General Commercial C-3 General Commercial Auto-oriented commercial areas Heavy commercial (current district) CBD Central Business District C-4 Downtown Commercial C-5 Central Business Create a subdistrict structure for Code, Outer Core, Edge + Wholesale C-S Commercial Service Wholesale CS Commercial Service + Page 33 of 421 15 Commercial + Mixed-Use Districts • Include design standards for commercial districts establish a streetwall (C-N, C-MU, CBD) • Create build-to zones in certain commercial districts to commercial areas • CR District Eliminate as these areas can fit into other be viable; absorb into other commercial areas • OS District Eliminate as strictly office districts may not to create true adaptive reuse tool • OR District Revise as Residential Professional District Additional changes to the commercial districts… Page 34 of 421 16 Industrial District Industrial district structure •Maintain current LI Light + HI Heavy Industrial Districts •Consolidate the current MHI Modified Heavy Industrial District into the HI District •Create a new IMU Industrial Mixed-Use District •Address reuse of industrial areas in creative ways •Allow for mixing of uses, such as craft/artisan industrial + warehousing with commercial uses •Allow select residential Page 35 of 421 17 Special Purpose + Overlay Districts Overlay Districts •Maintain current overlays: •RROD Rural Residential Overlay •RHOD Restricted Height Overlay •Flood Hazard Overlay – maintained but moved to its own article •SOD Sign Overlay – Build controls into sign article •OTN Old Town Neighborhood Overlay – Incorporate controls into the commercial districts (design standards) • PUD District - alternate approach recommended eliminate as parks are allowed in all districts • POS Public Open Space District - very little zoned, • ID Institutional District (rename INST) • AG Agricultural District • Maintain current special purpose: Special Purpose Districts Page 36 of 421 18 General Development Standards Page 37 of 421 19 General Development Standards General standards – examples: •Sight triangle •Fences •Mechanical equipment •Refuse containers Exterior lighting controls Accessory structures – examples: Standards for location, size, height •Detached garages, sheds •Decks •Solar + wind Page 38 of 421 20 General Development Standards Permitted Encroachments Page 39 of 421 21 Parking Update parking standards •Design of parking lots + parking structures •Driveway controls •Permissions for electric vehicle spaces •Design of loading areas Update parking ratios •Incorporate flexibilities: •Exempt additional districts •Exempt existing structures •Exempt initial square footage for commercial •Count on-street spaces •Include parking maximums Require bike parking more specifically Storage of commercial + recreational vehicles Page 40 of 421 22 Parking Consider a Different Approach to Parking No parking minimums required Why take this approach? •Many areas have developed without off-street parking, historically not provided any – no minimums allows for easier reuse + redevelopment •Can negatively impact neighborhood character – required parking drives site design, sacrificing designs that acknowledge context •Reduce variances, which add significant cost and time •Environmentally unfriendly - excessive paving (stormwater run-off, heat island) There would still be standards for how parking is designed, including landscape, if parking is provided Page 41 of 421 23 Landscape Current Landscape Standards •Based on calculation: trees & shrubs per square footage of permeable area •Approach can be confusing •Prioritize numerical compliance over thoughtful design Recommended Approach •Organize around key site elements: parking areas •Ensures aesthetic enhancement + effective screening •Include clear, specific planting requirements Perimeter of Parking Lots Interior of Parking Lots Buffer Yards (by district + use intensity) Page 42 of 421 24 Signs Must be content neutral Can still distinguish •On-premise vs. off-premise •Commercial vs. Noncommercial Reorganize sign regulations •Purpose •General Sign Standards •Prohibited Signs •Exempt Signs: No Permit Required •Signs: Permit Required •Billboards Classic sign control Page 43 of 421 25 Signs Approach to sign control •Signs should be regulated by specific type + then by district •This allows signs to match district form + maintain a consistent visual character Signs Exempt from Permit ✓A-frame signs ✓Attention-getting devices ✓Commercial flags ✓Construction activity temporary sign ✓Cultural or historical site sign ✓Directional signs ✓Noncommercial message ✓Parking circulation point sign ✓Pedestrian sign for commercial use ✓Real estate activity temporary sign ✓Residential nameplate ✓Window sign ✓Awning ✓Banners ✓Canopy ✓Drive-through sign ✓Electronic sign Signs Requiring a Permit ✓Freestanding sign ✓Marquee ✓Projecting sign ✓Wall sign Page 44 of 421 26 Administration Page 45 of 421 27 Administration Clarify administrative processes Four articles: I.Code administrators II.Application procedures III.Zoning approvals IV.Subdivision Amendments (Text + Map) Conditional use Variance Special exception Site plan review Temporary use permit Sign permit Zoning interpretation Zoning appeals Planned unit development Subdivision Page 46 of 421 28 • Clarify criteria for denial • Clarify the process – standards integrated into the Code Site Plan Review • Update permit Temporary Use Permit • New process for formal interpretation of the text Zoning Interpretation • For all other developments, a 10% or less modification to any numeric standard less of the required setback • Maintain current limited setback waiver for single-family + two-family that is 33.3% or • Create more flexibility Special Exception Administration Page 47 of 421 29 • Cottage: Replace this type of subdivision with cottage court development • Solar: Incorporate standards in the sustainable subdivision points • Conservation: Simplify + and clarify this process • Currently three types of specific subdivisions: additional criteria • Review sustainable subdivision points system for clarity + enhance with any appropriate improvements required as a condition of development approval • Codify City policy governing the payment responsibilities, timing, + procedures for off-site Subdivision • Establish criteria for when it may be required • Not explicitly stated but may be required as part of site plan review + subdivision Requirement for Traffic Study Administration Page 48 of 421 30 Planned Development Currently, City relies on PD – can create an unpredictable development environment Planned Development (PD) as a zoning tool •Intent to allow unique + innovative developments PDs have changed over time •Used beyond original intent •Commonly used to fill in gaps in outdated zoning •Can become a default zoning mechanism - serving as a workaround Issues with PD Overuse •Time-consuming + costly for developers and the City •Uncertain outcomes lead to frustration + inefficiency •PDs function as mini -zoning codes making enforcement complex Page 49 of 421 31 Planned Development Code reform can… •Establish a responsive district and use structure •Turn common conditions into standards Revise the process - Consider an alternate approach to PD •Currently the Code treats planned development as a district •Alternate approach is to treat PD as an approval procedure •Underlying district standards, including uses, apply unless modified as part of the PD approval •District remains in place - if the PD expires, that site maintains rights of the underlying district More flexible PD process •Eliminate minimum acreage for most areas •Eliminate required types of planned developments •Negotiation – required benefits and amenities Page 50 of 421 32 Nonconformities Page 51 of 421 33 Nonconformities Nonconforming use Discontinued or abandoned, changed Exception for existing residential uses Nonconforming structure Rules for structural improvements Allow for residential replacement in kind Flexibilities for existing detached garages Nonconforming site characteristic Landscape, lighting, parking, etc. Nonconforming lot Building upon the existing legal lot of record Nonconforming sign When it can be replaced following damage Potential new permission Allow SF, 2F nonconforming side + rear wall additions (vertical or horizontal) without variance Page 52 of 421 34 Technical Review Report Dubuque UDC August 2025 Page 53 of 421 Technical Review Report: Dubuque Unified Development Code July 2025 Prepared by Camiros for the City of Dubuque Page 54 of 421 Page 55 of 421 Technical Review Report Introduction 3 I. Introduction This report presents the findings of a technical review of the City of Dubuque’s Unified Development Code (UDC) performed by Camiros. The purpose of this review is three-fold. First, the review provides a more in-depth understanding of the current zoning regulations as we move toward drafting an updated code. Second, it allows for discussion of additional issues during meetings and interviews with City staff and stakeholders as well as the online surveys. Third, it introduces concepts and regulatory approaches that set direction for substantive updates to be included in the new Unified Development Code. This Report is not intended to discuss every needed change, as some will be minor changes that “clean up” the Code and create a more user-friendly document, while others are more detailed revisions to be worked out during the drafting process. Rather, the intent is to highlight key issues and revisions that represent substantive changes to current regulations and offer conceptual approaches to resolving specific issues. Page 56 of 421 Page 57 of 421 5 Technical Review Report Format + Organization II. Format + Organization The Code should follow a logical system of compartmentalization. The Code should follow a consistent, structured pattern from beginning to end. To improve the organizational structure of the Unified Development Code and – in turn – its ease of use, it should employ a system of compartmentalization. This is a technique where items of information are grouped together by regulatory category and purpose. The current UDC employs such an approach to a certain degree, but this can be further refined for ease of use, such as eliminating a general provisions chapter where a variety of controls are currently located (current Chapter 3). A proposed outline is provided below: Chapter 1:Chapter 1:Title, Purpose, and IntentTitle, Purpose, and Intent Chapter 2:Chapter 2:General Definitions and Measurement MethodologiesGeneral Definitions and Measurement Methodologies Chapter 3:Chapter 3:Zoning Districts and Zoning MapZoning Districts and Zoning Map Chapter 4:Chapter 4:Residential DistrictsResidential Districts Chapter 5:Chapter 5:Commercial DistrictsCommercial Districts Chapter 6:Chapter 6:Downtown DistrictsDowntown Districts Chapter 7:Chapter 7:Industrial DistrictsIndustrial Districts Chapter 8:Chapter 8:Special Purpose DistrictsSpecial Purpose Districts Chapter 9:Chapter 9:Overlay DistrictsOverlay Districts Chapter 10:Chapter 10:Flood Hazard Overlay DistrictFlood Hazard Overlay District Chapter 11:Chapter 11:UsesUses Chapter 12:Chapter 12:General Development StandardsGeneral Development Standards Chapter 13:Chapter 13:Accessory StructuresAccessory Structures Chapter 14:Chapter 14:Off-Street Parking and LoadingOff-Street Parking and Loading Chapter 15:Chapter 15:LandscapeLandscape Chapter 16:Chapter 16:SignsSigns Chapter 17:Chapter 17:Code AdministratorsCode Administrators Chapter 18:Chapter 18:Application ProceduresApplication Procedures Chapter 19:Chapter 19:Zoning ApprovalsZoning Approvals Chapter 20:Chapter 20:Historic PreservationHistoric Preservation Chapter 21:Chapter 21:Land Subdivision ApprovalLand Subdivision Approval Chapter 22:Chapter 22:NonconformitiesNonconformities Chapter 23:Chapter 23:EnforcementEnforcement Page 58 of 421 66 Technical Review Report Format + Organization All general terms within the Code should be defined. All definitions of general terms used in the Code should be located in one chapter. The majority of terms are found in the current Chapter 2, but certain current chapters, such as signs, have their own set of self-contained definitions. All existing definitions will be evaluated, updated for clarity, and checked for internal conflicts. Any key terms that are currently undefined will be defined and definitions no longer needed will be deleted. It is important to note that even with the consolidation of general terms into one chapter, three sections will still contain their own sets of definitions. The use chapter, as described below, will contain all use definitions. The flood hazard overlay and historic preservation chapters will also retain their own sets of definitions because of the specificity of terms used within those regulations. This will be explained within Chapter 2 of the Code. The Code should clearly explain all rules of measurement. The rules of measurement for building height, setbacks, lot width, etc. should be brought together in one section so that their application is clear and consistent. The majority of the measurement standards will be illustrated to make them understandable to the user. The Code would benefit from greater use of illustrations and matrices. The Code should illustrate a variety of definitions and regulations, which will more effectively communicate information to users. Numerous regulations would benefit from illustration including, but not limited to: • Measurement rules, such as building height, yards and setbacks, sign area, sign height, etc. • Design standards • Parking, landscape, and sign regulations Graphics are not limited to the examples cited above. It is anticipated that additional regulations, design concepts, and terms will require illustration as they are developed during the drafting process. The Code would also benefit from a greater use of matrices. In addition to a global use matrix (see discussion below), other regulations, such as permitted encroachments and parking requirements, would benefit from the table format to more clearly summarize and present information. Internal consistency in terminology and “voice” should be maintained. The integrity of land use regulation hinges on the internal consistency of various details and terms. Consistent terminology should be used throughout the Code. As a simple example, a decision should be made whether to use the term setback or yard when referring to the minimum required dimension. In addition, because different authors have written different sections of the Code over time, it has become an amalgam of different “voices” that reflect the background of its individual authors. An overall rewrite eliminates this type of inconsistency. Page 59 of 421 Page 60 of 421 88 Technical Review Report Uses III. Uses The modern generic use approach should be adopted to address uses within the districts. A revision of how uses within the zoning districts are controlled is proposed, based upon the concept of “generic uses.” A generic use approach to the listing of uses is established by combining specific uses into a broader use category. For example, barber or beauty shop, shoe repair, and laundromats would be addressed in the use “personal services establishment,” which then can allow similar uses such as household appliance repair shops and dry cleaners. Dubuque currently employs an approach that incorporates some generic uses, but still relies on listing certain specific uses, particularly within the nonresidential districts, which can make it difficult to respond to new and emerging uses. Incorporating a full generic use approach has two main benefits. First, it eliminates the need for extensive and detailed lists; the use sections of the Code become shorter and easier to use. Second, the generic use approach provides the City with greater flexibility to review and permit those uses that may be desirable, but are not specifically listed within the broader context of the use definition. With any use permission restructuring, detailed use definitions are critical. Each use must be defined, and many may include specific examples of what is and is not included in a particular use definition. Another important element of the generic use approach is continuing to recognize that certain specific uses are unique in their impacts and community concerns and need to be regulated separately, rather than as part of a generic use. Once singled out, any use listed separately cannot be considered part of any generic use definition. Finally, in terms of use definitions, we can better define ancillary uses as part of a principal use definition. For example, a light industrial use could include an ancillary showroom; in another example, a hospital may contain the ancillary uses of a cafeteria and retail (gift shop). The use of the term ancillary will be specifically defined in the Code so that it is distinct from accessory structure or accessory use definitions and controls. Uses within the UDC should continue to be organized as a global use matrix and the chapter should contain all use regulations. Rather than listing allowed uses within each individual district, a more efficient approach is to adopt a global use matrix. All uses and districts would be organized into a single matrix, each cell indicating whether a use is permitted or conditional within a particular district. This organization provides several benefits: • Users can access the matrix two ways - either they can identify their district and see what uses are allowed, or they can see districts in which a particular use is allowed to locate. • Inconsistencies in terminology are eliminated as each use is listed just once in the table, rather than repeated across different districts. • Adding or modifying use permissions becomes much simpler, as there is a single place to edit, rather than multiple locations. The organization of use permissions for the districts as a matrix is a key technique for ease of use. This use matrix should include all categories of uses allowed within a district – principal (permitted and conditional), accessory, and temporary uses. This would create more clarity as to how each use is classified. Page 61 of 421 9 Technical Review Report Uses Further, the use chapter should function as a self-contained chapter, comprised of the use matrix, use standards, and use definitions. These would be updated as follows: • The uses allowed in each district will be evaluated and updated. Uses must correspond to the purpose, form, and function of each district. The revision process will include a full evaluation and resorting of uses allowed in each district. • Use standards are used to mitigate the potential impacts of certain uses, similar to the use standards within Chapter 7 of the current Code. Additional use standards may be needed for certain uses. Standards will be reviewed and updated as needed to ensure that they are objective and can be easily interpreted and applied. Most importantly, additional standards, particularly those that are commonly applied to uses as part of approvals, should be brought into the UDC. • Use definitions can elucidate any ancillary uses that may be part of or integral to a principal use. For example, a light industrial use can be defined as potentially including an ancillary showroom. This would help to clarify what is considered a true accessory use versus a principal use with ancillary components within the current use structure. The Code should address emerging uses. Codes need to continually address uses that are either particular issues for a city or have emerged as new uses in today’s planning environment. While a comprehensive update to the use structure would create flexibilities that allow for desired new uses, certain uses would still need to be addressed. The following are uses that have been identified as either new uses that may be appropriate in Dubuque or are refinements needed for current uses. Upon revision of the use structure, there are likely more uses that may be needed as the districts and the use matrix are created. Corner Stores (Neighborhood Commercial Establishment) The Code could accommodate historic corner stores by creating a new permitted or conditional use called “neighborhood commercial establishment.” Dubuque has some older residential neighborhoods that traditionally developed with limited commercial services integrated into residential areas, typically called “corner stores.” Although these structures are part of the residential fabric, pursuant to the current Code, most are considered nonconforming, prohibiting property owners to reopen previously closed corner stores. To allow them to continue, the Code could incorporate a “neighborhood commercial establishment” as a use that would be allowed within certain districts. A series of design standards and impact controls would be included as required standards, as well as a tailored list of allowable uses within that use category to prohibit more intensive commercial uses or problematic uses, such as the retail sales of alcohol. To expand opportunities for small-scale retail and service uses that primarily serve the local neighborhood, this use can also allow for the establishment of new “corner stores” in specific circumstances. Like the standards above for reuse of existing structures, standards would be created to ensure that new neighborhood commercial establishments are small-scale developments with a tailored list of uses, compatible with surrounding residential neighborhoods. Maker/Creator Spaces To encourage new innovative and creative uses, the Code should address certain new uses. Some uses to consider for inclusion are the following: Page 62 of 421 1010 Technical Review Report Uses • Industrial Design, defined as an establishment where the design, marketing, and/or brand development of various products are researched and developed typically integrating the fields of art, business, science, and/or engineering. An industrial design establishment may create prototypes and products, but does not mass manufacture products from the premises. • Artisan Industrial where artisan-related crafts and industrial processes that are more intensive uses, such as small-scale metalworking, glassblowing, and furniture making, are allowed. • Specialty Food Service includes businesses that specializes in the sale of certain food products, such as a candy maker, bakery, catering, or coffee roaster, and may offer areas for ancillary retail sales or restaurants that serve the products processed on-site. Specialty food service includes preparation, processing, canning, or packaging of food products where all processing is completely enclosed and there are no outside impacts. • Food Truck Parks where the principal use of land is to accommodate food truck vendors offering food and/or beverages for sale to the public, which may include seating areas for customers. • Commercial Kitchen (Standalone), which is a shared commercial kitchen in which individuals or businesses prepare value-added food products and meals, usually paying a set rate by timeframe (daily, weekly, monthly, etc.) to lease a kitchen space shared by others. During the pandemic, these types of uses have become more frequent, also called “ghost kitchens” or “ghost restaurants.” These typically require specific standards because of high traffic from delivery persons. A full range of temporary uses should be addressed. The approach to temporary uses in the current Code does not appear to adequately address the full range of temporary uses, referring to them generally in Section 3-19. Specific temporary uses to include are: • Mobile Food Sales (Food Trucks) • Mobile Retail Sales • Firework Stands • Real Estate Sales Office/Model Unit • Temporary Contractor’s Office/Contractor’s Yard • Temporary Construction Staging Area • Temporary Outdoor Event (Sales and/or Entertainment) With a specific listing of temporary uses, they can be better regulated for their specific impacts and standards can be developed for each type of temporary use. Standards can control the duration of the event and general operation on site, rather than the more general standards and timeframes currently in the Code. When defined and integrated into the use matrix, permissions can be tailored by type and by district. A full range of accessory uses should be addressed. Similar to temporary uses, the use matrix should also address a comprehensive set of accessory uses. The matrix should be limited to uses, rather than including structures as well, which would be regulated separately. Common accessory uses include the following: • Drive-Through Facility • Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) • Home Occupation • Outdoor Sales and Display • Outdoor Storage • Outdoor Seating/Dining/Activity Area Page 63 of 421 Page 64 of 421 1212 Technical Review Report Districts IV. Districts Simplify the purpose statements of the districts. In numerous instances, the purpose statements (or preambles) for zoning districts are overly detailed, which can inadvertently restrict their applicability throughout the City. This issue is particularly pronounced in nonresidential districts, where highly specific language may hinder flexibility in land use and development. To ensure broader and more effective application, purpose statements should be clear, succinct, and focused on conveying the district’s overarching intent and defining characteristics. By maintaining a more general yet purposeful approach, these statements can guide zoning regulations without imposing unnecessary constraints. Regulation of bulk within the districts should be simplified. The current Code controls the size of lots, as well as the bulk and placement of structures within certain districts at a granular level, with varying standards based upon groups or categories of uses outside of dwelling types (dwelling types are typically regulated by type). A simpler, more modern approach is to provide bulk regulations for just two categories: residential dwelling types and nonresidential uses. These regulations can then be coupled with a series of use standards that address impacts or concerns related to any specific uses that would be allowed within the districts, including creating specific bulk standards for uses where it is critical. RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Allow for diverse housing options. Stakeholder interviews have highlighted the need for new development with a mix of housing types and densities. This variety is important to maintaining multi-generational neighborhoods, attracting new demographics, addressing the issue of “gentle density,” and offering choices that align with changing residential tastes and a range of income levels that ultimately strengthen the position of the City. The Code can implement these goals and address housing diversity and affordability by several means, including permissions for diverse and unique dwelling types, zoning districts that allow or require a mix of dwelling types, and allowances for innovative housing types such as cottage courts. Revisions to existing district standards could better address existing residential development patterns and open up opportunities for housing diversity. An analysis of the development patterns of the current residential districts was undertaken to see if the current districts fit meet the existing standards. The following outlines approaches to refining each of these districts. Residential district analysis maps are included in this Report. R-1 Single-Family Residential District The current R-1 District is the largest residential district in terms of geography. An analysis of the 5,000 square foot minimum lot size shows the majority of lots are in conformance. Therefore, it is recommended to maintain this general development pattern. Small pockets of nonconformance could be addressed by rezoning to another residential district if desired. R-2 Two Family Residential District An analysis of the R-2 District was conducted at both the 5,000 and 6,000 square foot lot sizes because the current requirement for two-family dwellings within a district designed to allow for two-family is out of sync with Page 65 of 421 13 Technical Review Report Districts development patterns. At the 5,000 square foot lot size, 74% of lots conform to the minimum lot size; at 6,000 square feet, that conformance decreases to 57%, creating a significant limitation for the desired two-family dwelling type. It is recommended to decrease the lot size for two-family dwellings to match the single-family – 5,000 square feet. This would allow for the district to function as intended. Further, the townhouse standard requires 3,000 square feet per (limited to two units). It is recommended to decrease the requirement to 2,500 square feet per unit. R-2A Alternate Two-Family Residential There is a significant level of conformance (89%) for this smaller lot district. It is recommended to maintain the district as it has current utility and could cover more areas into the future where a denser development pattern is desired. Page 66 of 421 14 Technical Review Report Districts 14 R-1 Residential District: 5,000 SF Minimum Lot Size Conformance W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q)JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W " " @M \:)e M Q)W l ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@ M W 'f Q W 4 @ MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4 : 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : # M " ) 4 ' Q W M") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M 9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9): M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ MWW ʄ W' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃ W ' 2 : 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9 @ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f @ @ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q2)44 4) J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@ @2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q@ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M' @ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @ W'f l Q 4M2 MQ W 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e 4 M) #M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW'f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9 W 4J ) : #Ml'@ \: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W ' @ M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M @ Q 4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW' M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M @ M ')44Q MM @ f f @@ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q''l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQWQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W )"":l e)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@ M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l ' @ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@ \M 9 @ \:Q \:)eM Q)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1\Q W): 9 \MJ'lJ M2 9 M 1@ ')44 Q ɼʀɼ 9)4 4M 2M9M) M 4 1 \ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@QQ M @ Q M@\Wʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG �� i�i�� Siz� �� Conforming (�3�� | 93%) Nonconforming (995 | 7%) City Limits Roads R-1 Residential District W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q )JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W " " @M \:)e M Q)W l ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@ M W 'f Q W 4 @ MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4 : 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : # M " ) 4 'Q WM") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M 9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9): M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ MWW ʄ W' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃ W ' 2 : 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9 @ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f @ @ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q 2)44 4)J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@ @2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q@ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M'@ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @ W'f l Q 4M2 MQ W 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e 4 M) #M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW'f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9 W 4J ) : #Ml'@ \: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W ' @ M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M @ Q 4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW'M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M @ M ')44Q MM @ f f @@ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q''l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 f Q WQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W )"":l e)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@ M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l ' @ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M 9 @ \:Q \:)eM Q)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1 \QW): 9\ MJ'lJ M2 9 M 1@ ')44 Q ɼʀɼ 9)4 4M 2M9M) M 4 1\ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@QQ M @ Q M@\Wʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG �� i�i�� Siz� �� Conforming (�3�� | 93%) Nonconforming (995 | 7%) City Limits Roads R-1 Residential District W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q)JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W "" @M \:)eMQ)Wl ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@MW'fQW 4@MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4: 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : #M " ) 4 'Q W M") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M 9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9):M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ MWW ʄW' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃW' 2: 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9 @ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f@@ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q2)44 4)J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@@2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q@ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M' @ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @ W'flQ 4M2MQW 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e4 M) #M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW' f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9 W 4J ) : #Ml'@\: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W' @ M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M@Q4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW' M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M@M')44Q MM@ f f @@ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q'' l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQWQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W)"":le)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l '@ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M9@\:Q \:)eMQ)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1\QW): 9\ MJ'lJ M2 9M1@')44Q ɼʀɼ 9)44M 2M9M) M 4 1\ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@QQ M @ Q M@\Wʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG Lot Size Increments Less than 2,500sf (153 | 1%) 2,500sf – Less then 3,000sf (60 | 0.4%) 3,000sf – Less then 3,500sf (51 | 0.3%) 3,500sf – Less than 4,000sf (93 | 0.6%) 4,000sf – Less than 4,500sf (160 | 1%) 4,500sf – Less than 5,000sf (478 | 3%) 5,000sf+ (13,226 | 93%) City Limits Roads R-1 Residential District Page 67 of 421 15 Technical Review Report Districts R-1 Residential District: Lot Size Increments W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q )JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W "" @M \:)e M Q)W l ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@ M W 'f Q W 4 @ MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4 : 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : # M " ) 4 'Q WM") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M 9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9): M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ MWW ʄ W' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃ W ' 2 : 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9 @ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f @ @ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q2)44 4) J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@ @2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q @ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M' @ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @ W'f l Q 4M2 MQ W 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e4 M) #M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW'f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9 W 4J ) : #Ml'@ \: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W' @ M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M @ Q 4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW'M@ Q 9 @ :W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M @ M ')44Q MM@ f f @ @ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q''l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQWQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W)"":l e)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀ ɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@ M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l ' @ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M 9 @ \:Q \:)eM Q)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1\Q W): 9 \MJ'lJ M2 9 M 1@ ')44 Q ɼʀɼ 9)4 4M 2M9M) M 4 1\ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@Q Q M@ Q M@\W ʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG Lot Size Increments Less than 2,500sf (153 | 1%) 2,500sf – Less then 3,000sf (60 | 0.4%) 3,000sf – Less then 3,500sf (51 | 0.3%) 3,500sf – Less than 4,000sf (93 | 0.6%) 4,000sf – Less than 4,500sf (160 | 1%) 4,500sf – Less than 5,000sf (478 | 3%) 5,000sf+ (13,226 | 93%) City Limits Roads R-1 Residential District W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q )JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W " " @M \:)e M Q)W l ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@ M W 'f Q W 4 @ MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4 : 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : # M " ) 4 'Q WM") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9): M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ M WW ʄ W' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃ W ' 2 : 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9@ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f @ @ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q2)44 4)J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@ @2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q@ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M' @ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @W'f l Q 4M2 MQ W 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e 4 M) #M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW'f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9W 4J ) : #Ml'@ \: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W ' @M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M @ Q 4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW' M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M @ M ')44Q MM@ f f @ @ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q''l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQWQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W )"":l e)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@ M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l ' @ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M 9 @ \:Q \:)e M Q)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1\Q W): 9 \ MJ'lJ M2 9 M 1@ ')44 Q ɼʀɼ 9)4 4M 2M9M ) M 4 1\ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@Q Q M@ Q M@\W ʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG Lot Size Increments Less than 2,500sf (153 | 1%) 2,500sf – Less then 3,000sf (60 | 0.4%) 3,000sf – Less then 3,500sf (51 | 0.3%) 3,500sf – Less than 4,000sf (93 | 0.6%) 4,000sf – Less than 4,500sf (160 | 1%) 4,500sf – Less than 5,000sf (478 | 3%) 5,000sf+ (13,226 | 93%) City Limits Roads R-1 Residential District W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q)JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W " " @M \:)eMQ)Wl ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@MW'fQW 4@MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4: 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : # M " ) 4 'Q WM") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9): M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ MWW ʄW' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃW' 2: 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9@ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f@@ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q2)44 4)J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@@2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q@ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M'@ 9 M # \ J ') 4 4 @W'flQ 4M2MQW 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e 4 M) #M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW'f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9W 4J ) : #Ml'@\: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W ' @M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M@Q4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW' M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M@M')44Q MM @ f f @ @ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q''l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQWQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W)"":le)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l ' @ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M9@\:Q \:)e MQ)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1\QW): 9 \ MJ'lJ M2 9M1@')44Q ɼʀɼ 9)44M 2M9M ) M 4 1\ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@Q Q M@ Q M@\Wʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG Lot Size Increments Less than 2,500sf (153 | 1%) 2,500sf – Less then 3,000sf (60 | 0.4%) 3,000sf – Less then 3,500sf (51 | 0.3%) 3,500sf – Less than 4,000sf (93 | 0.6%) 4,000sf – Less than 4,500sf (160 | 1%) 4,500sf – Less than 5,000sf (478 | 3%) 5,000sf+ (13,226 | 93%) City Limits Roads R-1 Residential District Page 68 of 421 16 Technical Review Report Districts 16 R-2 Residential District: 5,000 SF Minimum Lot Size Conformance W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q )JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W " " @M \:)e M Q)W l ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@ M W 'f Q W 4 @ MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4 : 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : #M " ) 4 'Q WM") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M 9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9): M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ MWW ʄ W' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃ W ' 2 : 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9 @ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f @ @ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q 2)44 4) J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@ @2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q @ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M' @ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @ W'f l Q 4M2 MQ W 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e4 M) # M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW' f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9W 4J ) : #Ml'@ \: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W ' @ M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M @ Q 4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW' M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M @ M ')44Q MM@ f f @ @ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q'' l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQ WQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W )"":l e)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@ M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l ' @ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M 9 @ \:Q \:)e M Q)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1 \QW): 9\ MJ'lJ M2 9 M 1@ ')44 Q ɼʀɼ 9)4 4M 2M9M ) M 4 1\ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@QQ M@ Q M@\W ʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG �� i�i�� Siz� �� Con�o�min� ��7�7 | 74%) �oncon�o�min� �6�� | 26%) City Limits Roads �� si��ti�� District W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q)JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W " " @M \:)e M Q)W l ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@ M W 'f Q W 4 @ MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4 : 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : # M " ) 4 'Q WM") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9):M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ MWW ʄ W' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃ W ' 2 : 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9 @ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f @ @ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q2)44 4)J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@ @2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q@ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M'@ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @ W'f l Q 4M 2 MQ W 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e 4 M) #M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW'f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9 W 4J ) : #Ml'@ \: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W ' @ M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M @ Q 4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW' M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M @ M ')44Q MM @ f f @@ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q''l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQWQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W )"":l e)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@ M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l ' @ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@ \M 9 @ \:Q \:)e M Q)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1\Q W): 9 \ MJ'lJ M2 9 M 1@ ')44 Q ɼʀɼ 9)4 4M 2M9M) M 4 1\ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@Q Q M@ Q M@\Wʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG �� i�i�� Siz� �� Con�o�min� ��7�7 | 74%) �oncon�o�min� �6�� | 26%) City Limits Roads �� si��ti�� District W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q)JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W "" @M \:)eMQ)Wl ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@MW'fQW 4@MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4: 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : # M " ) 4 ' Q WM") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M 9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9): M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ MWW ʄW' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃW' 2: 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9 @ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f@@ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q2)44 4)J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@@2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q@ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M' @ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @W'flQ 4M2MQW 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e4 M) #M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW'f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9 W 4J ) : #Ml'@\: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W ' @ M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M@Q4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW' M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M@M')44Q MM @ f f @@ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q''l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQWQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W)"":le)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l '@ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M9@\:Q \:)e MQ)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1\QW): 9 \MJ'lJ M2 9M1@')44Q ɼʀɼ 9)44M 2M9M) M 4 1 \ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@QQ M@ Q M@\Wʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG Lot Size Increments Less than 2,500sf (153 | 1%) 2,500sf – Less then 3,000sf (60 | 0.4%) 3,000sf – Less then 3,500sf (51 | 0.3%) 3,500sf – Less than 4,000sf (93 | 0.6%) 4,000sf – Less than 4,500sf (160 | 1%) 4,500sf – Less than 5,000sf (478 | 3%) 5,000sf+ (13,226 | 93%) City Limits Roads R-1 Residential District Page 69 of 421 17 Technical Review Report Districts R-2 Residential District: 6,000 SF Minimum Lot Size Conformance W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q )JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W " " @M \:)e M Q)W l ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@ M W 'f Q W 4 @ MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4 : 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : # M " ) 4 'Q WM") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M 9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9): M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ M WW ʄ W' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃ W ' 2 : 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9 @ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f @ @ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q 2)44 4)J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@ @2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q@ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M'@ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @ W'f l Q 4M2 MQ W 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e 4 M) #M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW'f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9 W 4J ) : #Ml'@ \: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W ' @ M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M @ Q 4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW'M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M @ M ')44Q MM @ f f @@ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q''l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQWQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W )"":l e)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@ M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l ' @ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M 9 @ \:Q \:)eM Q)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1\Q W): 9\ MJ'lJ M2 9 M 1@ ')44 Q ɼʀɼ 9)4 4M 2M9M) M 4 1\ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@QQ M @ Q M@\W ʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG �� i�i�� Siz� �� Con�o�min� ��3�� | 57%) �oncon�o�min� �� | 43%) City Limits Roads �� si��ti�� District W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q )JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W " " @M \:)e M Q)W l ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@ M W 'f Q W 4 @ MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4 : 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : # M " ) 4 'Q W M") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M 9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9): M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ M WW ʄ W' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃ W ' 2 : 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9 @ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f @ @ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q 2)44 4) J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@ @2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q@ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M' @ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @ W'f l Q 4M2 MQ W 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e 4 M) #M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW'f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9 W 4J ) : #Ml'@ \: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W ' @ M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M @ Q 4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW' M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M @ M ')44Q MM @ f f @@ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q''l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQWQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W )"":l e)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@ M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l ' @ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M 9 @ \:Q \:)eM Q)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1\Q W): 9 \MJ'lJ M2 9 M 1@ ')44 Q ɼʀɼ 9)4 4M 2M9M) M 4 1\ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@QQ M @ Q M@\Wʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG �� i�i�� Siz� �� Con�o�min� ��3�� | 57%) �oncon�o�min� �� | 43%) City Limits Roads �� si��ti�� District W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q)JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W "" @M \:)eMQ)Wl ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@MW'fQW 4@MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4: 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : # M " ) 4 'Q WM") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9): M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ MWW ʄW' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃW' 2: 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9@ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f@@ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q2)44 4)J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@@2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q @ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M' @ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @W'flQ 4M2MQW 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e4 M) #M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW'f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9W 4J ) : #Ml'@\: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W ' @M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M@Q4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW' M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M@M')44Q MM@ f f @ @ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q''l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQWQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W)"":le)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l '@ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M9@\:Q \:)e MQ)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1\QW): 9 \ MJ'lJ M2 9M1@')44Q ɼʀɼ 9)44M 2M9M ) M 4 1\ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@Q Q M@ Q M@\W ʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG Lot Size Increments Less than 2,500sf (153 | 1%) 2,500sf – Less then 3,000sf (60 | 0.4%) 3,000sf – Less then 3,500sf (51 | 0.3%) 3,500sf – Less than 4,000sf (93 | 0.6%) 4,000sf – Less than 4,500sf (160 | 1%) 4,500sf – Less than 5,000sf (478 | 3%) 5,000sf+ (13,226 | 93%) City Limits Roads R-1 Residential District Page 70 of 421 18 Technical Review Report Districts 18 R-2 Residential District: Lot Size Increments W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q )JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W " " @M \:)e M Q)W l ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@ M W 'f Q W 4 @ MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4 : 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : #M " ) 4 'Q WM") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M 9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9): M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ MWW ʄ W' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃ W ' 2 : 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9 @ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f @ @ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q 2)44 4) J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@ @2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q @ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M' @ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @ W'f l Q 4M2 MQ W 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e4 M) # M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW' f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9W 4J ) : #Ml'@ \: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W ' @ M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M @ Q 4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW' M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M @ M ')44Q MM@ f f @ @ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q'' l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQ WQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W )"":l e)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@ M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l ' @ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M 9 @ \:Q \:)e M Q)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1 \QW): 9\ MJ'lJ M2 9 M 1@ ')44 Q ɼʀɼ 9)4 4M 2M9M ) M 4 1\ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@QQ M@ Q M@\W ʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG Lot Size Increments Less than 2,500sf (80 | 3%) 2,500sf – Less then 3,000sf (61 | 2.6%) 3,000sf – Less than 3,500sf (63 | 2.7%) 3,500sf – Less than 4,000sf (156 | 7%) 4,000sf – Less than 4,500sf (95 | 4%) 4,500sf – Less than 5,000sf (146 | 6.3%) 5,000sf – Less than 6,000sf (389 | 16.7%) 6,000sf+ (1,328 | 57.3%) City Limits Roads �� si��ti�� District W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q )JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W " " @M \:)e M Q)W l ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@ M W 'f Q W 4 @ MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4 : 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : #M " ) 4 'Q WM") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M 9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9): M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ M WW ʄ W' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃ W ' 2 : 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9 @ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f @ @ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q 2)44 4) J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@ @2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q@ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M' @ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @ W'f l Q 4M2 MQ W 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e4 M) # M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW' f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9W 4J ) : #Ml'@ \: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W ' @ M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M @ Q 4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW' M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M @ M ')44Q MM@ f f @ @ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q'' l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQ WQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W )"":l e)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@ M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l ' @ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M 9 @ \:Q \:)e M Q)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1 \QW): 9\ MJ'lJ M2 9 M 1@ ')44 Q ɼʀɼ 9)4 4M 2M9M ) M 4 1\ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@QQ M@ Q M@\W ʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG Lot Size Increments Less than 2,500sf (80 | 3%) 2,500sf – Less then 3,000sf (61 | 2.6%) 3,000sf – Less than 3,500sf (63 | 2.7%) 3,500sf – Less than 4,000sf (156 | 7%) 4,000sf – Less than 4,500sf (95 | 4%) 4,500sf – Less than 5,000sf (146 | 6.3%) 5,000sf – Less than 6,000sf (389 | 16.7%) 6,000sf+ (1,328 | 57.3%) City Limits Roads �� si��ti�� District W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q)JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W "" @M \:)eMQ)Wl ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@MW'fQW 4@MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4: 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : # M " ) 4 ' Q WM") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M 9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9): M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ MWW ʄW' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃW' 2: 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9 @ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f@@ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q2)44 4)J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@@2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q@ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M' @ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @W'flQ 4M2MQW 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e4 M) #M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW'f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9 W 4J ) : #Ml'@\: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W ' @ M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M@Q4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW' M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M@M')44Q MM @ f f @@ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q''l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQWQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W)"":le)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l '@ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M9@\:Q \:)e MQ)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1\QW): 9 \MJ'lJ M2 9M1@')44Q ɼʀɼ 9)44M 2M9M) M 4 1 \ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@QQ M@ Q M@\Wʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG Lot Size Increments Less than 2,500sf (153 | 1%) 2,500sf – Less then 3,000sf (60 | 0.4%) 3,000sf – Less then 3,500sf (51 | 0.3%) 3,500sf – Less than 4,000sf (93 | 0.6%) 4,000sf – Less than 4,500sf (160 | 1%) 4,500sf – Less than 5,000sf (478 | 3%) 5,000sf+ (13,226 | 93%) City Limits Roads R-1 Residential District Page 71 of 421 19 Technical Review Report Districts R-2A Residential District: 2,500 SF Minimum Lot Size Conformance W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q )JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W "" @M \:)e M Q)W l ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@ M W 'f Q W 4 @ MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4 : 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : # M " ) 4 'Q WM") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9):M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ MWW ʄ W' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃ W ' 2 : 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9@ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f @ @ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q 2)44 4)J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@ @2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q @ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M' @ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @W'f l Q 4M2 MQ W 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e4 M) #M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW'f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9W 4J ) : #Ml'@ \: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W ' @M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M @ Q 4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW' M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M @ M ')44Q MM @ f f @ @ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q''l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQWQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W )"":l e)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@ M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l '@ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M 9 @ \:Q \:)e M Q)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1 \QW): 9 \ MJ'lJ M2 9 M 1@ ')44 Q ɼʀɼ 9)4 4M 2M9M ) M 4 1\ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@Q Q M@ Q M@\Wʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG �� i�i�� Siz� �� Con�o�min� ��8 | 89%) �oncon�o�min� ��19 | 11%) City Limits Roads �� si��ti�� District W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q )JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W "" @M \:)e M Q)W l ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@ M W 'f Q W 4 @ MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4 : 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : #M " ) 4 ' Q WM") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M 9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9): M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ M WW ʄ W' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃ W ' 2 : 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9 @ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f @ @ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q 2)44 4)J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@ @2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q@ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M' @ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @ W'f l Q 4M2 MQ W 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e4 M) #M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW' f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9W 4J ) : #Ml'@ \: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W ' @ M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M @ Q 4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW' M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M @ M ')44Q MM@ f f @ @ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q'' l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQWQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W )"":l e)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@ M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l ' @ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M 9 @ \:Q \:)e M Q)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1\Q W): 9 \MJ'lJ M2 9 M 1@ ')44 Q ɼʀɼ 9)4 4M 2M9M ) M 4 1 \ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@QQ M@ Q M@\Wʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG �� i�i�� Siz� �� Con�o�min� ��8 | 89%) �oncon�o�min� ��19 | 11%) City Limits Roads �� si��ti�� District W:q:)W J::Ql4e:) Q)JJ4 42M)# )M @ M: # 4 : @ 2 \ \ M : Q W " " @M \:)eMQ)Wl ')4 4 ɾM J M \ :@MW'fQW 4@MQ ʁɼ f) : Q @ M ʁ ɼ 4): @ 4: 9)4 # M : e) f 9 Q Q l f QW @# 4 W e ) Q W e: \M: Q ' M) : #M " ) 4 ' Q W M") 4 Q \ M l #M:e) f : W M 4 4M2 #M :e )f 9 W M 9 4 2\"9:: W'@ 9 Q Q@ \ W ' M : 9): M 4 M@ 24 Q ' ) M Q 9W 4 @ MWW ʄW' ɼʁW' ɼʂW' M M @ QQ ʃW' 2: 9 :Q@: @4 ' ) # ' f l 4 @ \ Q W ɼʀW' "M9 @ : W ')44MQW f ' ) W 4@f44 4 \ " " M Q : W 4e4 : ɽɽ: Q):W :: \ M : 4)::f@@ 9 WMl 2 M J M 1 2 Q @ : \ : 2 M ' ) 4 4 M\:Q2)44 4) J Q 4@9M M@ @ Q e 4 W ʀW' @ @ W ' ɼɼW' 9 4@W fQWM@@2 : e ʂW' 1@ ' : " 2 : : l 2:@')44 2 l f l ' M M ) Q @ : J4q e 4 4l M @ fl Q@ \ W 'J@):W Q' l @ 2 Q M' @ 9 M # \ J ' ) 4 4 @ W'flQ 4M2MQW 4 ' ) M W M Q ) : W 4 ) ɾɽ: e4 M) # M ' 9 QJJ ' ) M 9WW' f 1 @ ' : 9 W e )4 M\Q' 9Mlf@ @ #M: f Q ' ) : # W @ : 9 W 4J ) : #Ml'@\: J M 2 W' 9 ) : ' f W' @ M : L \ : ɼɾW' 4 9 W 4 : W ) 4# @: ɼɿW' M@Q4 Q ) : W 1 @ ' : e 4 : W ) : QW@:e44l ɼɻW' M@ Q 9 @ : W QJM):# e 4 4 l f#@:f' 4 ) @ f M@M')44Q MM@ f f @@ JM Q @ W W 9 ) M 4Q''l ' : l e 4 @ : "@@W')44 fQWQ) M " @ M M2 f @ @ M 4 l #4 J @): W W)"":le)Q fQW9M2 ɼʀɼ @WQ Q\MlJ4q QQ ) ' M@M @4l9J) Q\ : 4 ) # ' W 244l 'e:44 J) : M MM@ f' ɽɻ ʁɼ f @ @ ) # ) W 4 : W \ M l ' @ 4 4 ) l 4 @ 2 ͍ 9 "@\M9@\:Q \:)e MQ)Wl J M2 Q\Ml 9 @ :4JW 1\QW): 9 \MJ'lJ M2 9M1@')44Q ɼʀɼ 9)44M 2M9M) M 4 1 \ 4 ) : \ \ L \ ::WW ʁɼ ɼʀɼ 4 9 f @ @ ʀ ɽM@QQ M @ Q M@\Wʁɼ Q k) W +G"+aGX aXµG Lot Size Increments Less than 2,500sf (153 | 1%) 2,500sf – Less then 3,000sf (60 | 0.4%) 3,000sf – Less then 3,500sf (51 | 0.3%) 3,500sf – Less than 4,000sf (93 | 0.6%) 4,000sf – Less than 4,500sf (160 | 1%) 4,500sf – Less than 5,000sf (478 | 3%) 5,000sf+ (13,226 | 93%) City Limits Roads R-1 Residential District Page 72 of 421 2020 Technical Review Report Districts R-3 Moderate Density Multi-Family and R-4 Multi-Family Residential Districts The R-3 and R-4 Districts share an identical purpose in their standards - to allow for a diverse range of housing options while maintaining a form consistent with “gentle density.” Given the minimal distinctions between the two, consolidating them into a single district is a practical step that enhances housing flexibility and simplifies regulations. (See table below.) • Both R-3 and R-4 permit a variety of housing forms - including single-family, two-family, townhouse, and multi-family developments - making them functionally similar in their intent. Maintaining two separate districts with almost the same purpose creates unnecessary complexity. • The primary distinction between these districts lies in the number of townhouse and multi-family units permitted and a modest ten foot height increase in R-4 for multi-family. These are not substantial differences and do not justify maintaining separate zoning districts. Given the desire for housing options, it would be more efficient to regulate development through setbacks, maximum building coverage, and site development standards rather than arbitrary unit count limitations and a small height difference. • Both districts already align with the principle of “gentle density” - offering a transition between lower-density neighborhoods and more intensive development. Combining them into a single district with updated regulations will provide consistency, promote housing diversity, and encourage responsible growth. • By allowing for a moderate height increase for the newly combined district, such as 50 feet, there is more flexibility for building design without fundamentally altering neighborhood character. This slight adjustment can lead to more efficient land use and a greater ability to meet evolving housing needs. • Instead of imposing a fixed limit on the number of townhouse or multi-family units within a development, unit count should be determined by lot area. This encourages better site design by allowing developers to distribute units efficiently while adhering to height, setback, and coverage limits. It also reflects real-world land constraints, ensuring that density is based on the actual lot size rather than an arbitrary cap that may not account for a site’s capacity. Additionally, a lot area based approach enables a mix of unit sizes, including smaller, more naturally affordable options, without penalizing developments that aim to provide more housing. Finally, eliminating rigid unit caps removes unnecessary regulatory hurdles while still allowing for context-sensitive development. It also reflects real-world land constraints, ensuring that density is based on the actual lot size rather than an arbitrary cap that may not account for a site’s capacity. Additionally, a lot area based approach enables a mix of unit sizes, including smaller, more naturally affordable options, without penalizing developments that aim to provide more housing. Finally, eliminating rigid unit caps removes unnecessary regulatory hurdles while still allowing for context-sensitive development. R-3 1,358 Lots R-4 653 lots Min. Lot Area Max. Height Max. Units Min. Lot Area Max. Height Max. Units Single-Family Detached 5,000sf 30’5,000sf 30’ Two-Family 5,000sf 30’5,000sf 30’ Townhouse 1,600sf/du 30’6 units 1,600sf/du 30’12 units Multiple-Family 2,000sf/du 30’6 units 2,000sf/du 40’12 units Page 73 of 421 21 Technical Review Report Districts Include a new district for higher density townhouse and multi-family dwellings. A new residential district specifically targeted for denser townhouse and multi-family development would provide a valuable tool for accommodating future growth while maintaining predictability. While it may not be immediately necessary to apply this district to any mapped areas, having it as a “back pocket” option ensures that the City is prepared to respond to evolving housing demands efficiently and proactively. By allowing for taller multi-family development - potentially up to 70 feet (typically, six stories) - this district could support the creation of denser housing in appropriate locations without requiring variances or planned unit developments. Importantly, with clear standards in place, the form and impact of development would be predictable, ensuring that new projects can integrate into their adjacent areas without negative impacts. This approach gives the City flexibility to enable denser development when needed while maintaining control over where and how it occurs. Summary of Proposed Residential District Structure The following district structure is proposed. In addition, we recommend renaming the residential districts to the Residential Neighborhood Districts structure in order to clearly communicate that the districts have been modified in the new Code. The table below summarizes the structure outlined above – it shows the proposed district, the current districts it would be based on, and the types of dwellings that would be allowed. Proposed District Current District Dwelling Types RN-1 Residential Neighborhood 1 R-1 District Single-family detached RN-2 Residential Neighborhood 2 R-2 District Single-family detached Two-family Townhouse (limited to 2 units) RN-3 Residential Neighborhood 3 R-2A District Single-family detached Two-family Townhouse (limited to 2 units) RN-4 Residential Neighborhood 4 R-3 and R-4 Districts Single-family detached Two-family Townhouse Multi-family RN-5 Residential Neighborhood 5 New district Townhouse Multi-family Clarify the impervious surface currently applied to residential districts within the landscape chapter. Impervious surface is a measure of intensity of land use that controls how much of a site may be occupied by structures, pavement, and other impervious surfaces that do not allow for the absorption of water into the ground. The current landscape section requires 20% of the lot area for residential to be pervious. This control would be moved to the residential district dimensional requirements and restated as an 80% maximum impervious surface control. The measurement methodology section in Chapter 2 would clarify that maximum impervious surface of a lot is calculated as the percentage of all impervious surface area against the total area of the lot; it includes the principal building, accessory structures, and all paved areas. Page 74 of 421 2222 Technical Review Report Districts To maintain clarity the current “lot coverage” control would be renamed “building coverage” in order to be clear that this control measures the footprint of principal buildings and accessory structures and does not include paved areas. Together, building coverage maximums coupled with impervious surface coverage maximums help to regulate the volume of new development on a lot, helping to create compatibility with neighboring development. Revise the required front setback control for single-family and two-family dwellings to that of an averaging requirement. A front setback averaging provision for single-family and two-family dwellings would better allow for contextual development. In the control, the average front setbacks of the adjacent lots on either side of a lot are used to establish the required front setback. Averaging is based on the two adjacent lots on either side or, in the case of a corner lot, the next two adjacent lots. In the case of a lot configuration where only one lot is available for averaging, the required front setback is that of the adjacent lot. Once this number is determined, the setback is typically allowed to vary by plus or minus 10%. This type of provision would typically read: “(Set number) feet or average of front setback of abutting structures. In no case is a setback greater than X feet required.” The current maximum permitted front setback (50 feet) would also be maintained. Of note, the current way corner lot setbacks are controlled – where each street setback is considered a front setback, and each setback along shared lot lines - will be maintained. Create specific controls that allow for the split of large single-family dwellings into multiple units. A potential opportunity for housing diversity is the conversion of older large single-family dwellings into multi-unit residences. The benefit is that it allows for owners of large homes to continue to maintain the structure because of additional income and encourages the preservation of these buildings. However, conversions do increase the density of neighborhoods initially designed as single-family. One approach is to create standards that allow for conversion in specific instances. First, it would need to be determined in which zoning districts this should be allowed. Then standards would be set based on structure gross floor area, lot size, and unit size to determine when this could happen. The intent is to limit this to only larger structures with very specific standards for conversions. A key issue with such conversions is the provision of adequate parking; standards needed to be balanced to allow for this to happen without the need for variances. It is understood that a key sensitivity with such a flexibility is that certain areas in close proximity to educational facilities can create conflicts with the neighborhoods when used for student housing. This will need to be taken into consideration when drafting such standards. Allow for cottage court development. The City may wish to consider the use and an associated set of standards for cottage courts (also called “pocket neighborhoods”) as an option for new residential development. The cottage court form allows for small lot residential development in a manner that organizes various dwelling types around a common courtyard or shared open space, designed as a cohesive whole and maintained in shared stewardship by residents. Such a development form can also incentivize the creation of smaller, potentially more affordable units through provisions that encourage smaller square footage in exchange for additional development potential. This would be allowed as a use within the proposed RN-1 through RN-4 Districts. The inclusion of such a development type would eliminate the need for a cottage subdivision type. Page 75 of 421 23 Technical Review Report Districts COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS Revise the OR Office Residential District to more specifically address its role as an adaptive reuse tool, as was its original intent. The OR District’s purpose statement describes its role as a way to permit the “adaptive reuse of existing building stock, which will normally be residential in character.” A district targeted at this type of development promotes the adaptive reuse of existing residential buildings, preserves the architectural character and historical value of older neighborhoods, and supports economic development. By allowing larger homes to be converted into office spaces, low-intensity commercial uses, or multi-unit dwellings, this district encourages sustainable development practices, reduces the need for new construction, and revitalizes underutilized properties. It also provides a flexible zoning approach that accommodates changing community needs, fosters small business growth, and creates a dynamic mix of residential and professional uses within the same area. It also functions as a district that can help facilitate a smooth transition between commercial areas and low density residential neighborhoods The OR District could be restructured as the Residential Professional District with standards that address both conversions and new construction that blends in with the existing development form. Eliminate the OS Office Service and rezone these areas to the appropriate commercial districts. Relying solely on office use within a zoning district can make it susceptible to economic downturns or shifts in market demand. Post-pandemic, remote work opportunities have dramatically increased, leading many existing offices to downsize due to hybrid work models, or move to a solely digital business model. As a result, this has led to a significantly decreased demand for office space across markets. Therefore, with office space trending less desirable or oversupplied, the risk of vacancies and blight within areas reserved solely for office has increased. Zoning areas exclusively for office use can also lead to a lack of diversity in the types of activities and amenities available within an area, which do not meet the needs of nearby residents and employees seeking a mix of uses, such as retail, dining, or residential options. These office-only zoning areas also often result in areas that are active during typical business hours but become deserted during evenings and weekends, diminishing the economic vibrancy of the area. Therefore, it is recommended to eliminate OS District and absorb it within the commercial and mixed-use districts. Concerns regarding the creation of nonconforming uses by eliminating the current office districts and rezoning those areas as either commercial or mixed-use would be minimal as the uses allowed within the office districts are also allowed within those districts. Refine the commercial districts to ensure they present a rational palette of options for commercial and mixed-use development at varying scales. The following table presents a potential new commercial district structure to better control the scale and form of existing and desired commercial development within the City. Page 76 of 421 2424 Technical Review Report Districts Proposed District Current District Comments C-N Neighborhood Commercial OC Office Commercial C-1 Neighborhood Commercial There are few differences between the OC and C-1 Districts in terms of use and dimensional controls: • Townhouse is allowed only in C-1 • OC allows for 40’, while C-1 allows for 30’ • C-1 limits MF to six units maximum Both are intended for limited retail. In addition, because the limitation on multi- family units is only in the C-1, it appears that areas deemed appropriate for C-1 are being zoned OC. Therefore, it is proposed to combine the districts in a new C-N District and refine standards so that true neighborhood commercial is allowed. These would include: • Eliminating the limit on multi-family units. As stated earlier, unit count is better determined by lot area. • Allow for residential units above the ground floor to facilitate mixed-use development. • Allow for townhouse development. • A height limit of 40 feet. By structuring use permissions, dimensional standards, and design elements, this district can function as a small-scale commercial district that remains compatible with nearby residential. C-MU Mixed-Use Commercial C-2 Neighborhood Shopping Center C-2A Mixed Use Neighborhood The distinctions between the C-2 and C-2A Districts are minimal, primarily focused on uses with the C-2A limiting the size of commercial uses. It is recommended to combine the districts into a true mixed-use district. This would include the following: • Eliminate any limits on the size of commercial uses. Limiting the size of commercial can be arbitrary and can make mixed-use projects less attractive or feasible. Design and siting standards can break up larger buildings so that they blend into the character of the district and surrounding areas. • Increase the height of the districts to 50 feet. This would allow for mixed- use development with at least two stories of residential above. • Allow for multi-family development. This would allow for areas to develop as horizontal mixed-use (i.e., along the block) as well as vertical (i.e., within one structure). C-G General Commercial C-3 General Commercial The current C-3 District accommodates more auto-oriented commercial areas that serve a regional consumer base, typically located, as noted in the purpose statement, along highways and arterials. The proposed C-G District would serve the same purpose. However, the current standards limit height to 40 feet. Larger retailers, even single story, often require additional height flexibilities. It is proposed that there would be no height limit unless adjacent to residential districts. Page 77 of 421 25 Technical Review Report Districts Proposed District Current District Comments C-S Commercial Service and Wholesale CS Commercial Service and Wholesale This district is oriented toward heavy commercial uses. While there is not a significant amount of area zoned CS, there is utility to specialized district such as this. It is recommended, as mentioned above, to allow for a moderate height increase to 50 feet for flexibility for larger uses. CBD Central Business District - Subdistricts C-4 Downtown Commercial C-5 Central Business Currently, the Downtown area is divided into two districts – the C-4 Downtown Commercial and C-5 Central Business Districts. The C-5 covers the core of the Downtown with Main Street as the spine. With no height limit and residential restricted to the upper floors, this sets parameters in line with other traditional downtowns. The traditional Downtown should continue to be characterized by a vertically mixed-use environment focused on creating a vibrant, pedestrian-oriented, active downtown with a continuous, consistent streetwall. The C-4 encompasses a broad area surrounding the Downtown core, generally extending from 1st to 21st Street. Given the extensive size of this district, a more nuanced approach to zoning regulations may be necessary to reflect the varying contexts within this area. Properties directly adjacent to the core should align more closely with the core’s established character, maintaining similar use permissions and dimensional standards to support a cohesive urban environment. In contrast, properties located farther from the core can benefit from greater flexibility in both permitted uses and development standards, allowing for a more gradual transition from the dense urban center to surrounding neighborhoods. This gradation would ensure that zoning appropriately responds to the differing needs and characteristics of each area within the current C-4 District. This would also allow for some areas of the C-4 to accommodate multi-family dwellings to support the core. Therefore, a proposed structure for Downtown is proposed as follows, using a subdistrict structure under the umbrella of the CBD Central Business District. • CBD Core: Current C-5 District (see above) • CBD Outer Core: Retail and service uses that are surround the core. Mixed-use development is allowed, with residential dwellings permitted above the ground floor. This could also allow multi-family. • CBD Edge: Areas of transition between the higher intensity environment of the larger Downtown and adjacent smaller-scale neighborhoods, again with residential dwellings permitted above the ground floor as well as multi-family dwellings. One of the complications to design within the entire Downtown area is the OTN Old Town Neighborhood Overlay District. The OTN Overlay contains a design and siting standards that lives outside of the Code (the overlay standards in the Code reference that document). Many of the standards within that document are key to ensuring development meets the goals of an active, walkable, mixed- use Downtown. In addition, overlays add another layer of regulation, which can discourage those looking to development because of the complexity. It is proposed, for the Downtown area, to remove the OTN Overlay and integrate its standards into the CBD Subdistricts. In the CBD, design standards that more specifically address siting and form are particularly appropriate. Page 78 of 421 2626 Technical Review Report Districts Proposed District Current District Comments C-R Recreation Commercial District Eliminated With the new proposed district structure, those areas currently zoned the CR District would be able to fit within the other districts. Therefore, it is proposed to eliminate this district. Select commercial districts should have build-to zones, rather than minimum setbacks, in order to create a streetwall and pedestrian-friendly, mixed-use environment. The current commercial districts either include a minimum front setback or do not require any setbacks. This does not necessarily bring buildings close to the street and can result in the placement of structures can be located further back from the street than desired, creating an environment that is primarily oriented to vehicles. Therefore, it is proposed to create build-to zones within some of the commercial districts. This would be especially important for the C-N, C-MU, and CBD Districts. Creation of design standards for commercial districts. Design standards can enhance the quality of future commercial development within Dubuque by addressing the design of building entries, elements of building articulation such as recesses and projections, ground floor and upper story transparency, etc. These standards should not address architectural style or aesthetics, but rather should control the basic features on a façade via measurable, objective requirements. As an example, a standard may require elements of articulation at maximum intervals along a building façade, such as recesses, projections, a change in material, texture, or color, or the incorporation of architectural features such as columns, pilasters, etc. Such a standard does not dictate how articulation is achieved, but rather presents the basic, measurable requirement. Standards would be tailored to the desired character of individual commercial districts, requiring greater articulation in areas of the City where walkability and a pedestrian orientation are desired like the CBD, and allowing for more flexibility in other commercial areas, such as general commercial areas. Standards such as these – working in combination with a set of clear dimensional requirements that address the location and size of buildings – can provide a clear framework for new development in alignment with the intent and purpose of each district. As mentioned in the CBD District discussion above, the OTN Old Town Neighborhood Overlay District covers other commercial areas outside of the Downtown. And again, layers of regulation create complexity. With the addition of design standards keyed to the form and function of the district, there may not be a need for the overlay. It is important to note that the OTN Overlay provides a solid foundation for design standards. Therefore, this approach involves incorporating and consolidating the OTN Overlay into the UDC’s base districts, rather than discarding the valuable work reflected in the existing design guidelines. To note, the design standards within Sections 13.5 (Design Standards for Big Box Retail Uses) and 13.6 (Design Standards for Retail Commercial Uses and Regional Shopping Centers) would be incorporated into the district design standards. INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS The current industrial districts – LI Light and HI Heavy – are typical to a city such as Dubuque. The use structure should be refined to reflect their roles as industrial districts, with limited allowances for retail and service which would support workers in the area. The current MHI Modified Heavy Industrial District would be consolidated with the HI Heavy Industrial District. Page 79 of 421 27 Technical Review Report Districts It is also proposed to add a new district – the I-MU Industrial Mixed-Use District. An I-MU District would allow for the mixing of light industrial uses with commercial uses, and even certain residential uses such as multi-family and live/work. The I-MU District is generally applicable to older industrial areas within the City that have seen a turnover of certain buildings into uses that are not industrial in nature. Some industrial buildings may no longer suit modern industrial needs but can accommodate a unique variety of creative uses and should be preserved, as they are character-giving structures in the City. A district like the I-MU District can also help preserve existing industrial development by providing a designated district where uses are permitted to mix, discouraging encroachment of non-industrial uses in the “real” industrial districts. SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS The current palette of special purpose districts reflects specific use categories of land uses within Dubuque. Specifically, these are: • AG Agriculture District • ID Institutional District – This district would be renamed the INST Institutional District to be more intuitive. Very little area is zoned the current POS Public Open Space District and therefore the district may not be needed. Parks and natural areas would be allowed broadly through the districts. A fourth special purpose district is the PUD Planned Unit Development District. Within the administrative section of this Report, an alternative approach to PUD has been presented. OVERLAY DISTRICTS Proposed revisions to the overlay districts are outlined in the table below. Current Overlay District Comments RROD Rural Residential Overlay District Maintain this district RHOD Restricted Height Overlay District Maintain this district SOD Sign Overlay District This district controls the location of off-premise signs (where they are prohibited allowed and where they are allowed). This can be built into the off-premise sign controls in the sign chapter. The specific geographies can still be cited but do not need to be controlled through a specific overlay. Bifurcating billboard controls in two places can be confusing. OTN Old Town Neighborhood Overlay District This overlay can potentially be eliminated. See discussion above in the commercial districts. Flood Hazard Overlay District To be moved to its own chapter As specific environmental control, no changes are proposed. To note, the definitions contained within this overlay should be kept with the regulations because they are specific to floodplain. As this is a lengthy and specific set of overlay regulations that tie back to federal regulations, it is better to make it its own chapter within the Code. Page 80 of 421 Page 81 of 421 29 Technical Review Report Development Standards: General Site Standards + Accessory Structures V. Development Standards: General Site Standards + Accessory Structures All development standards of general applicability should be summarized in one section. There are a number of standards that apply to development throughout the City. To make it easier for those improving their lots to understand what is required, these can be brought together in one section of the Code. Examples of current and new general development standards that could be consolidated in this chapter include: • Applicability of dimensional standards (Current Sections 3.1 through 3.4) • Visibility triangle provisions (Current Section 3.5) • Exterior lighting (on private property) • Fences and walls • Mechanical equipment • Refuse and recycling containers This chapter will also Include language that allows multiple principal buildings on a site if they meet all district requirements, rather than requiring a planned unit development. An important exception to this would be single-family and two-family dwellings, which would be limited to one principal building per lot (this does not include ADUs, which are considered an accessory use). The Code should include exterior lighting controls on private property. The current Code addresses lighting within Section 13.3.2 and within the OTN Overlay (by reference back to the design guidelines). Additional regulations can build on these requirements to better minimize light trespass and light pollution. Tailored lighting standards are typically required for certain districts, such as higher intensity for commercial districts versus lower intensity for residential districts, and for certain uses, such as that for recreational fields where taller pole heights and sensitivities to surrounding uses are needed, would also be specifically addressed. The standards should be crafted to minimize light spillage on adjacent properties. The standards would be drafted so that they can be easily administered and would not require technical expertise beyond the capacity of the City. The accessory structure controls of the existing Code should be consolidated and refined. Accessory structures are controlled a number of ways within the current UDC. General standards for them are located within Section 3.7. The “Accessory Use” sections of the districts then list a combination of accessory uses and accessory structures, particularly within the residential districts. Controls within many of the nonresidential districts contain a statement that accessory uses/structures are allowed that are “customarily incidental and subordinate to the principal use it serves.” Accessory structures should be consolidated within their own chapter. A set of general standards for accessory structures (height, setback, etc.) would be maintained, similar to the current Section 3.7, and then further enhanced with standards for specific accessory structures. These can include regulations for each in terms of size/dimension, height, placement, design, and other dimensional and location requirements. Currently, Section 3.9 also requires site plan review for certain accessory structures (greenhouses over 100 square feet in area, wind energy conversion systems, satellite receiving dishes, swimming pools); these should be evaluated to see if all still should require site plan review or if standards can address the issues of concern. Generally, site plan review should not be required. Page 82 of 421 3030 Technical Review Report Development Standards: General Site Standards + Accessory Structures Accessory structures that typically require specific standards include the following: • Amateur (ham) radio equipment • Coldframe structures • Decks • Garages, detached • Raised garden boxes • Gazebo • Patios • Pergolas • Personal recreational game courts • Satellite dish antennas • Sheds • Solar panels (private) • Wind turbine (private) As noted above, accessory uses are regulated within the use chapter. A permitted encroachments table would help to clarify what types of encroachments are allowed in setbacks. The current Code allows some architectural features to encroach into required setbacks per Section 3.6. A full set of architectural features that may or may not encroach into a required setback should be regulated through a comprehensive permitted encroachments table. An example of such table organization is provided below. These are not recommended standards or a comprehensive set of encroachments but merely an example of table organization. Table XX: Permitted Encroachments Into Required SetbacksY= Permitted // N= ProhibitedMax. = Maximum // Min. = Minimum Front Corner Side Interior Side Rear Accessibility Ramp and Other Accessibility-Related Structures Y Y Y Y Balcony Max. of 6’ into front, interior side, or corner side setback Max. of 8’ into rear setback Min. of 4’ from any lot line Min. vertical clearance of 8’ Y Y Y Y Bay Window Max. of 5’ into any setback Min. of 24” above ground Y Y Y Y Chimney Max. of 18” into setback Y Y Y Y Deck Max. of 5’ into front, corner side, or interior side setback Max. of 10’ into rear setback Prohibited in front yard N Y Y Y Eaves Max. of 2’ into setback Y Y Y Y In the current section on encroachments, some accessory structures are also included. These should be controlled through the accessory structure section described above. The encroachments table should target architectural features. EXAMP L E Page 83 of 421 Page 84 of 421 3232 Technical Review Report Development Standards: Off-Street Parking + Loading VI. Development Standards: Off-Street Parking + Loading Off-street vehicle parking and loading standards should be updated. It is important that parking requirements address the demand for all types of parking and loading, and the realities of existing conditions. Updated parking requirements should address the full range of off-street parking and loading facility elements. In order to be comprehensive, this section should update and/or address the following: • Parking lot design (dimensions, surfacing, curbing, marking, location, etc.) • Parking structure design (design standards, ingress/egress, etc.) • Parking space/facility location for residential and nonresidential uses • Driveway design and curb cuts • Parking flexibilities • Bike parking • Electric vehicles spaces • Location and design of off-street loading • Storage of commercial and recreational vehicles The standards for parking lots and parking structures found in Chapter 13 should be moved to the parking chapter. Further, the regulations that address design standards for parking structure facades facing a street (Section 13.3.5) should be more specific in how façade design and articulation are achieved. Also, rather than a recommendation, certain districts or development along selected streets should require active uses to line the ground floor of parking structures; such active space requirements would be appropriate particularly for select mixed-use districts and the Central Business District where parking structures are allowed. Parking ratios (parking spaces per use) should be revised. The parking schedule should be updated to match the use structure of the districts to minimize interpretation. With the incorporation of a global use matrix, this is easily aligned so that each use has a corresponding parking requirement. Flexibilities can continue to be provided for the district or development type. Current standards appear to be high and may require more parking than is needed. It is also recommended that the parking ratios be determined by objective standards such as physical space, whether gross square footage or rated capacity, rather than by number of employees, seats, etc. Special development types, such as retail centers, may be better served by specialized parking requirements that calculate the required parking based on the gross floor area of the development as a whole, rather than as a collection of individual uses. Because uses turnover frequently, parking calculations for these developments can move between conformance and nonconformance. A single calculation based on gross floor area of the retail center as a whole would better allow these developments to manage parking and maintain and attract new tenants. The City should consider elimination of parking minimums. A comment heard throughout the stakeholder interviews was that there may be significant support for the elimination of minimum parking requirements. This allows the market to decide how much parking – if any – should be provided. Elimination of minimum parking requirements does not mean parking will not be constructed, only that it is not required. And any parking constructed will need to comply with the standards of the UDC. Page 85 of 421 33 Technical Review Report Development Standards: Off-Street Parking + Loading There are numerous reasons why this approach is being considered by cities. First, minimum parking standards can be somewhat arbitrary, often based on calculations of parking demand at peak times rather than during normal conditions, resulting in large, underutilized, paved parking areas. This has the secondary effects of being environmentally unfriendly (excessive paving increases stormwater run-off and intensifies the heat island effect) and negatively impacting neighborhood character. Minimum parking requirements tend to be the primary driver of site-design considerations, with contextually-appropriate designs often being sacrificed to accommodate required parking. Additionally, minimum parking standards can have a dampening effect on the economic development climate. When required parking amounts cannot be accommodated on-site, variances are required, adding both significant cost and significant time to the development process. Incorporating additional parking flexibilities may reduce the need for variances. Currently the Code has few parking flexibilities. The C-5 and C-4 Districts, Jackson Park Historic District, Cathedral Historic District, Millwork District Historic Districts, are exempt from parking minimums and there are permissions for shared parking reductions. Additional options for by-right flexibilities can include: • Based upon how the zoning districts are structured, it may be appropriate to exempt additional districts from minimum parking requirements. • Structures existing at the time the Code comes into effect that do not have parking on-site (and no lot area available for such) could be exempted from parking requirements. This encourages reuse of structures as it eliminates the need for variances. • Certain districts may be able to exempt an initial square footage from providing parking, based on the size of a business – for example, exempting the first 2,500 square feet from parking calculations – in order to provide relief for new developments on small lots. This would require only larger structures to provide parking. • Allow for on-street spaces adjacent to a nonresidential use to count toward required parking. This can also be expanded to include adjustments when located within a certain distance of a public parking structure as well. Parking maximums should be considered. It is also recommended to incorporate parking maximums into the parking regulations. By setting an upper limit on the number of parking spaces allowed, this helps prevent the development of excessive parking areas, which can lead to a range of environmental and planning issues. Excessive parking often results in over-paved surfaces, contributing to the urban heat island effect. This not only affects local microclimates but also raises energy consumption for cooling in buildings nearby. Additionally, over-paving leads to increased stormwater runoff, which can overwhelm local drainage systems, contribute to flooding, and carry pollutants into waterways, negatively impacting water quality. The implementation of parking maximums is particularly important for larger developments, such as big-box retailers, shopping centers, and office complexes, which traditionally use vast amounts of land for surface parking lots. Ultimately, parking maximums can contribute to more efficient land use, reduce environmental impacts, and promote healthier, more vibrant communities. Electric vehicle (EV) charging stations should be allowed withing parking lots and structures. Permissions for electric vehicle (EV) charging stations in parking facilities should clearly stated. Bicycle parking requirements could be updated to facilitate creation of a more cohesive bicycle network. The current Code requires bicycle parking only within parking facilities of 50 or more spaces. In order to create a more cohesive network, bicycle parking could be required for smaller lots, remaining sensitive to the development realities of the districts. Updated requirements could specify how many short-term and long-term bicycle spaces are needed, the design and siting standards for those, and the flexibilities in location. Page 86 of 421 3434 Technical Review Report Development Standards: Off-Street Parking + Loading Siting standards for on-site loading standards should be included. The Code should contain siting standards for on-site loading areas such as permitted locations on the site, permitted yards where loading berths may locate, surfacing requirements, and required screening from adjacent non-industrial uses. The Code should be comprehensive on storage of vehicles in residential areas. Vehicles stored on-site in residential areas should be clearly described including typical passenger vehicles and storage of recreational vehicles. Recreation vehicles including, but not limited to, motorhomes, campers, boats, all-terrain vehicles (ATV), utility task vehicles (UTV), and trailers, can be limited to select areas of a site, such as within the interior side yard behind the front building line or in the rear yard. Where vehicles are stored as part of nonresidential uses within residential areas, standards should also be included to control their location on-site as well. Create standards for storage of commercial vehicles. Commercial vehicles parked within a residential district should allow for standard size vehicles owned and used for commercial purposes by the occupant of a dwelling or guest including, but not limited to, vans, sports utility vehicles (SUVs), standard passenger size livery vehicles, and pick-up trucks, provided that the vehicle is stored or parked in a permitted parking area. Commercial vehicles for nonresidential should be limited to commercial vehicles that are being operated and stored in the normal course of business. They should be required to be stored on the lot in areas related to their use as vehicles, provided that the primary purpose of such vehicles is not the display of signs. Page 87 of 421 Page 88 of 421 3636 Technical Review Report Development Standards: Landscape VII. Development Standards: Landscape Revise the landscape standards for clarity and consistency. The contribution of landscape to the visual quality of the built environment cannot be overemphasized. In addition to its aesthetic benefits, green space provides environmental benefits. Landscape requirements should address all aspects of site development to properly beautify, screen, and buffer. Section 13.4 of the Unified Development Code outlines the current landscape standards. These requirements are partially based on a calculation of the number of trees and shrubs per square footage of required permeable area. However, this approach can be confusing and may result in site designs that prioritize numerical compliance over thoughtful landscaping. To promote intentional landscape design, the requirements should be structured around key site elements - such as parking, transitions, and screening - to ensure both aesthetic enhancement and effective screening are achieved. The landscape requirements should be moved to their own chapter and organized around specific landscape requirements. These are as follows: • Perimeter of Parking Lots. Where a parking lot abuts the street, requirements should effectively screen cars from the right-of-way. This could mean an ornamental fence and shrubs that can be substituted with a pedestrian-scale wall or natural plantings that meet a three foot screening requirement. Currently a landscape yard is required but there is no clear direction on the number of plantings required (“…shall consist of shade trees, low shrubs, perennial flowers, and/or other plant materials approved by the City Planner”); the required plantings should be specified in the Code. The Code also specifies that a landscape yard is required along all non-street-facing edges of the lot. While this requirement’s intent aims to enhance overall site aesthetics, it is less common in codes and may result in an overabundance of plantings that do not provide significant functional or visual benefits. • Interior of Parking Lots. There should be specific interior parking lot requirements, including a minimum number of landscape parking lot islands. Current standards are not clear as to how many islands would be required and what plantings are required. Typically, a code will state that one island is required between every 10 or 15 spaces with the required plantings delineated. Flexibilities are built in so that they can be spaced differently, but that the total number remains the same. In addition, standards should require that rows terminate in islands. • Buffer Yards. Buffer yard requirements ensure proper screening between incompatible uses and are part of the current landscape requirements (13.4.8 - Screening Requirements). These current standards should be refined and tailored to the form of the districts and the intensity of uses that would need to mitigate their impacts. The current standard of six feet may be appropriate in urban commercial areas but larger buffer yards would be more appropriate for users with more impacts, such as industrial. The buffer yard standards should be a menu of options based upon the relationship between users. These more detailed requirements would be tailored to districts and/or uses to avoid onerous requirements or the creation of nonconformities. Certain areas may need exemptions built into the Code because of site constraints, while others may need more landscape. Page 89 of 421 Page 90 of 421 3838 Technical Review Report Development Standards: Signs VIII. Development Standards: Signs Sign regulations must be content neutral. A major issue that all sign regulations must contend with is that signs cannot be regulated based on content distinctions. In Reed v. Town of Gilbert, Arizona (2015), the U.S. Supreme Court found that categorization of signs based upon their content or message is subject to review under the standards of strict scrutiny – the most stringent standard of judicial review, which demands that a regulation must further a “compelling governmental interest” and must be narrowly tailored to achieve that interest. As such, in the wake of Reed, nearly any regulation based upon a content distinction may be deemed unconstitutional. This clearly has impacts that must be remedied within Dubuque’s sign regulations; the current code has a number of content-based distinctions and controls. Off-Premise and On-Premise Distinctions. Distinguishing between signs that are considered off-premise (directing attention to a business, commodity, or service sold or offered elsewhere than the lot upon which a sign is displayed) and on-premise (directing attention to a business, commodity, or service sold or offered on the same lot where such sign is displayed) has traditionally allowed municipalities a means by which to regulate a few key sign types, most notably billboards, as off-premise signs. As a supplement to the Reed decision, the 2022 City of Austin v. Reagan National Advertising of Austin, LLC U.S. Supreme Court decision upheld off-premise/on-premise distinctions. ** Off-premise signs, also known as billboards, are currently under a moratorium. Therefore, this Report does not offer specific recommendations on billboards, though standards will be part of the final Code. It is understood that separation requirements from other billboards and from land uses such as parks, places of worship, and educational facilities are being evaluated. Commercial and Noncommercial Messages. The ability to distinguish between commercial speech and noncommercial speech is also an important tool for municipalities in the regulation of signs following Reed. The Reed decision did not overrule prior decisions related to this distinction, and lower courts have upheld it in the intervening years, indicating that this is still a valid tool, allowing communities to distinguish between commercial messages and noncommercial messages (political, ideological, opinion, etc.). This is useful, as many communities may wish to place some reasonable regulations around commercial messages, while remaining neutral regarding noncommercial messages in the community. The organization of sign controls should be simplified for clarity. The current organization of sign controls is not necessarily intuitive. The following structure is recommended: • Purpose • General sign standards o Location restrictions o Limitations on audio components o Construction standards o Maintenance o Illumination (Note: in the historic districts, consider a permission for illumination if the Commission reviews the plan and approves.) • Prohibited signs • Exempt signs • On-premise signs: permit required • Off-premise signs (billboards) Page 91 of 421 39 Technical Review Report Development Standards: Signs In this organization, there are no longer separate sections for temporary and permanent signs; rather these would be addressed as either exempt or requiring a permit. Definitions and measurement of sign dimensions would be found in the proposed Chapter 2 (definitions and rules of measurement). Other provisions currently found in Chapter 15 would also be moved to the appropriate sections (sign permit to administration and nonconforming signs to nonconformities) and a cross-reference included. Additional prohibited sign types should be considered. The current Code does include a prohibited sign section. Additional signs that should be prohibited include: • Inflatable signs • Feather flags/sails • Spotlights/strobe lights • Flashing signs and moving signs, whether mechanical or wind-actuated • Off-premise temporary signs Signs considered exempt should be updated. Signs exempt from a sign permit is an area of many sign regulations where content-neutrality poses an issue. Because of the Reed decision, signs can no longer be identified or defined as “Real Estate Signs” or “Construction Signs.” Instead, a temporary sign would be allowed on a lot where such activity is taking place; for example, there would be a temporary sign allowed on a lot where real estate activity is taking place. In each case, standards for the signs (size, location, illumination permissions, etc.) would be included. Permanent and temporary signs that would be allowed without a permit may include: • A-frame signs • Attention getting devices (pennants, temporary freestanding signs) • Commercial flags (for example, “Open” flags) • Construction activity temporary sign • Cultural or historical site sign • Directional signs (building ingress/egress) • Parking lot/structure circulation point sign • Pedestrian signs for businesses (for example, small cases mounted on the wall that contain a menu near a restaurant front entry) • Real estate activity temporary sign • Residential nameplate sign • Window sign (to note, this is typically a 30% window coverage limit including both permanent and temporary window signs) There would also be standards in this chapter that cite the types of signs that are entirely exempt from sign controls (government signs, signs not visible from the public right-of-way, etc.). The regulations for signs requiring a permit should be tailored to the form and scale of each district. Permanent sign regulations should address all aspects of the sign’s character and location - maximum height and sign area, minimum setback, vertical clearance, maximum projection, etc. In addition, how signs are allocated to corner buildings and multi-tenant centers must also be evaluated. An important element will be to determine where the different sign types will be allowed. Establishing permissions by specific districts, as is similar to the structure now, allows the Code to prohibit them in some districts while allowing them within others. Also, the maximum size of signs – whether height and/or area – can then be tailored to the different districts. Page 92 of 421 4040 Technical Review Report Development Standards: Signs It is anticipated that the following types of signs would be allowed by permit and regulated as follows. This would build on signs currently requiring a permit within the code and their standards. • Banners o Limitations on number, display period, size, permitted mounting locations • Awnings and Canopies o Projection and vertical clearance maximums, percentage of printing allowed on sign face, permitted materials, design o Standards tailored to both types - nonstructural (typically made of vinyl and printed upon) and structural (made of permanent building material with solid lettering) o Standards for signs mounted above a structural awning or canopy o Standards for under awning or canopy signs o Insurance requirements to indemnify the City when located over the right-of-way • Drive-Through Signs o Height, sign area, setback o Number of signs permitted and allowed locations • Electronic Message Signs o Requirements for integration into a larger sign structure (freestanding, marquee, etc.) to maintain a cohesive appearance of signs across the city o Limitations on the overall size, typically a percentage of the overall sign area allowed in the larger sign structure o Limits on the frequency of message turnover o Limits on the length of animation (currently, two seconds of animation, followed by two seconds of static time) o The current annual fee to verify that such signs are meeting the turnover, animation standards • Freestanding Signs o Height, sign area, setback o Allow one per frontage with a minimum street frontage for an additional sign o Type allowed (pole vs. monument) • Marquees o Construction requirements, projection and vertical clearance standards o Sign area controls versus the changeable message area • Projecting Signs o Sign area, maximum projection, and vertical clearance maximums o Number of signs permitted o Potential allowance for vertically oriented signs on taller structures in select district o Insurance requirements to indemnify the City when located over the right-of-way • Wall Signs o Sign area, projection maximum, number of signs permitted o Wall signs should be controlled by a proportional control, such as one square foot per linear foot of façade o Potential allowance for skyline signs located at the top of taller structures o Potential allowance for mounting on wall signs on the lower slope of a mansard roof Page 93 of 421 41 Technical Review Report Development Standards: Signs Within the appropriate sign type as well as in the sign dimension measurement methodologies, permissions and controls on architectural signs will be included. (An example of architectural sign would be a three-dimensional ice cream cone sign for an ice cream shop.) A classic sign provision can be created to address the unique signs within the City. With Dubuque’s history, the City may want to create a classic sign designation within the Code. This type of provision preserves specific historic and/or unique signs within the City and protects those signs from nonconformity status. This would allow them to continue and be repaired, maintained, and even moved. Page 94 of 421 Page 95 of 421 43 Technical Review Report Zoning Administration IX. Zoning Administration The administrative sections of the Code should be reorganized to make the processes easier for applicants to follow. In order to make the various applications and approvals, as well as their respective processes and requirements simpler and easier for applicants to understand, we propose the following reorganization. Code Administrators This Chapter would list the powers and duties of all boards and officials involved in administration. By listing all boards and officials for all applications, the process is clarified (i.e., the user can easily reference who recommends and who approves). The following boards and officials will be included: • City Council • Zoning Advisory Commission • Zoning Board of Adjustment • Historic Preservation Commission • Zoning Administrator (This would be a new role to consolidate all code administration in one role; language would stipulate this includes their designee.) Application Procedures This Chapter would contain the rules for processing the various zoning applications. These administrative procedures will be consistent with Iowa law and grouped into the following two sections: • Application process • Notice requirements It is recommended that a specific completeness requirement be added to the Code for all applications in order to avoid the submittal and processing of incomplete applications. An example of such a requirement is as follows: The Zoning Administrator will determine whether a submitted application is complete. The Zoning Administrator will notify the applicant as to whether or not the application is complete, and will not process the application until any deficiencies are remedied. Once the Zoning Administrator determines that the application is complete, the application will be scheduled for consideration. This would eliminate postponements on the basis of incomplete submittals. It should be noted that payment of fees should be considered part of completeness review. Zoning Approvals All applications and approvals would be found in this Chapter. We anticipate that the following applications would be included: • Amendments (Text and Map) • Conditional use • Variance • Special exception • Site plan review • Temporary use permit Page 96 of 421 4444 Technical Review Report Zoning Administration • Sign permit • Zoning interpretation • Zoning appeals • Planned unit development To the degree possible, the following structure would be used for each application: • Purpose • Applicability • Authority • Procedure • Approval Standards • Expiration Revise the current special exception procedure to be more flexible. Currently, minor modifications to residential district standards are handled in two ways: • Section 16-3-18, Limited Setback Waiver, allows for single-family and two-family dwellings to obtain a setback waiver that is 33.3% or less of the required setback, which is approved by the City Planner. (There are also conditions regarding this waiver when requested for an accessory structure.) It requires notice to abutting property owners, including property owners directly across the street, who must state that they have no objection to the request. • Section 16-8-7, Special Exceptions, allows for the Zoning Board of Adjustment to approve a modification to the residential district standards with review against a more tailored set of review criteria than the established hardship standard of a variance. One way the Code can create more flexibility is to combine these current flexibilities into a revised special exception process that is applied more broadly. The special exception process would become tiered – allowing for an administrative approval unless there is an objection from the notified property owners, at which point it would be sent to the Zoning Board of Adjustment. The proposed thresholds of approval would be as follows: • The current limited setback waiver (Section 16-3-18) for single-family and two-family dwellings for a setback waiver that is 33.3% or less of the required setback. • For all other types of developments, a 10% or less modification to any numeric standard (for example, commercial district dimensional standards, sign dimension standards, etc.) in this Code. Notice to abutting property owners, including property owners directly across the street, would still be required. If there is no objection, the Zoning Administrator can approve the request. If there is an objection, residential requests would move to approval by the Zoning Board of Adjustment as a special exception and all others (nonresidential) would require a variance. Further, even if the request is within the thresholds of Zoning Administrator approval, they are able to move the application to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for approval if the nature of the request requires additional review. A zoning text interpretation process should be added for formal zoning interpretations. Every City has an informal process for zoning text interpretations, but the Code should include a formal process for documenting text interpretations. No code can adequately or clearly address every possible aspect of regulation, so this process allows the Zoning Administrator to render a written interpretation upon request (such request must be in pursuit of Page 97 of 421 45 Technical Review Report Zoning Administration a zoning action). This results in a record of interpretation requests, which leads to the predictable and consistent application of the regulations and shows where further clarification of code language may be needed. A temporary use permit should be created to regulate temporary uses. The current Code regulates temporary uses under Section 3.19, requiring site plan approval by the City Planner. It is recommended to introduce a temporary use permit for a designated set of temporary uses (see use discussion above on temporary uses). Since not all temporary uses necessitate a full site plan review to assess their impacts, only specific temporary uses should be subject to that requirement. By establishing a general temporary use permit process and incorporating detailed standards within each specific temporary use, the regulation becomes more efficient and better tailored to address varying impacts. Revise and modernize the Planned Unit Development District into a process, rather than a district. The current Code may rely too much on planned unit development, creating an unpredictable development environment. PUD, as a zoning tool, was created to allow for unique and innovative development that requires more careful consideration in its use permissions, siting, and design to allow for modifications to the underlying zoning regulations. However, over time its role can expand beyond this original intent. Planned unit development is used for a range of purposes such as to manage more controversial uses and to avoid variances. Additionally, if the current zoning districts do not adequately address modern development types/uses, planned unit development is then used to fill in the gaps. Thus, as planned unit development is used more and more, staff and Council find a good portion of their time is used managing and reviewing these approvals and applications. Simply put, PUD has deviated from its initial purpose of facilitating innovative development and has become a quick fix for the shortcomings of the current Code. This dilutes its effectiveness; it becomes a workaround rather than a tool to accommodate genuine innovation. This results in a number of issues: • The PUD process demands substantial time and resources, making it cumbersome and costly for both developers and the City. • There is a lack of certainty or predictability regarding outcomes, which can lead to frustration and inefficiency. • An overabundance of PUDs can lead to inconsistencies in development standards and a lack of cohesive planning. • Planned unit developments effectively function as miniature zoning codes, which can complicate enforcement efforts. Unlike established district standards that uniformly apply citywide, PUDs require code enforcement officials to discern and enforce specific standards tailored to each PUD. This necessitates the identification and verification of compliance with the individualized regulations governing the development, which can strain the resources of the enforcement department. While it is understood that PUD will remain a part of the Code and is a key tool that the City can use to accommodate new innovative development, there are zoning tools that are more targeted toward the concerns PUDs have been used to address. These potential tools include the following: • Establish a responsive district structure. By creating a district structure that reflects the places of Dubuque, the zoning districts will be able to better address the desired use, scale, design, and orientation of development and avoid workarounds that PUDs have been used for. Page 98 of 421 4646 Technical Review Report Zoning Administration • Turn conditions into standards. Another strategy is to include conditions that are frequently added to PUDs into the district, use, and general development standards of the Code, as applicable. This lends itself to easier administration and enforcement in the long term as these standards would apply across the board rather than having to be identified as applicable on a site-by-site basis. • Consider administrative flexibilities. Creating more administrative flexibilities would allow for minor issues in site development to be handled at a staff level. An administrative modification process can be included (discussed earlier in this report). The City should consider an alternate approach to planned unit development (PUD). Currently the Code treats planned unit development as a district. A different approach is to treat the PUD as an approval process, rather than a district. In this approach, the underlying district standards, including uses, apply unless modified as part of the PUD approval. This allows for flexibility in the application of zoning requirements based upon detailed review of individual proposals for significant developments in exchange for additional benefits to the City and the public. This approach creates more predictability. First the new PUD is based upon the underlying district - the approval “lays” on top of that district. As the district remains in place, this means if the PUD is never acted upon and expires, that site has the rights to develop of that underlying district. Further, the PUD approval works off a “base” which makes the negotiations clearer for the applicant, the administrators, and the public. The approval process would be similar to the current process – recommendation by the Zoning Advisory Commission and approval by the City Council, including a pre-application conference with staff. Even with this revised approach to PUD approvals, the City Council will retain its current level of authority over the zoning regulations and development standards for all new PUDs. Remove minimum acreage requirements for a PUD and eliminate required planned unit developments. Currently, PUD requires a minimum area of two acres. While this threshold ensures a certain scale of development, it may be seen as arbitrary if PUD is realigned with its original intent - to serve as a flexible tool for fostering innovative and creative development solutions. Removing the minimum size requirement could encourage a wider range of innovative projects. However, it is important to acknowledge the concerns of existing residential communities, particularly in established single-family neighborhoods, where introducing smaller-scale PUDs could lead to conflicts over density, design compatibility, and infrastructure impacts. Given these sensitivities, maintaining a reasonable minimum size requirement may be necessary to balance innovation with neighborhood stability in the residential districts. Also, the current Code has required PUDs for certain types of development. These are: • All retail commercial uses open to the public or members which have over 60,000 square feet of area • Regional shopping centers • Manufactured home parks • Biofuels production facilities • Commercial wind energy conversion systems • All new industrial parks and all new office parks • Any structure existing at the time of adoption of this Code which is expanded for retail commercial use to over 60,000 square feet of area and which expansion constitutes an increase of 25% or more to the area Page 99 of 421 47 Technical Review Report Zoning Administration These uses that required planned unit development would have standards built into the Code to address areas of concern. It is not recommended to require any development or use to be a PUD. Requiring certain developments to be PUDs can be problematic because it adds unnecessary costs, limits flexibility, and extends approval timelines. Additionally, the more complex planning and negotiation process can slow down development, discourage smaller builders, and reducing housing diversity by requiring larger mixed-use development to be a PUD. Mandating them for specific developments can lead to overregulation, inefficiencies, and barriers to creating more accessible and varied housing options. PUD should function as an effective mechanism for leveraging high quality development. PUD is a negotiation between a developer and the City, therefore the City should receive a benefit in return. While it is recommended to leave use, dimensional, and design modifications open ended, the Code should more explicitly incorporate a benefits and amenities requirement. The PUD process should provide guidance on the types of amenities or elements desired in exchange for flexibility and bonuses offered through the PUD process. It is important to remember that, because of its inherent flexibility, the PUD process can become a surrogate for the variance process. When a property owner does not want to meet existing district requirements, they may request a PUD where they do not have to demonstrate a hardship or practical difficulty, as would be required under a variance. Therefore, it is key to require public benefits and amenities to qualify for such exceptions so that petitioners cannot circumvent basic zoning district requirements without providing measured benefits to the City. Examples of some of the amenities and benefits that can be considered in determining whether an exception should be granted include: • Use of sustainable design and architecture, such as energy efficient design concepts and new building technologies. • Community amenities including plazas, outdoor seating, public art, and pedestrian and transit facilities. • Additional open space and recreational amenities such as open space/playgrounds, recreational facilities, dog parks, and conservation areas. • Additional public infrastructure improvements, such as new or repaved streets, provision of bicycle paths, and traffic control devices to improve traffic flow. • Senior housing or affordable housing set-asides. • Enhanced mobility options (pedestrian, bicycle, transit). This is not a definitive list but rather a list of potential amenities and benefits. In some cases, the actual development may be a benefit. For example, in areas where there is a demand for affordable housing, an affordable housing PUD can be considered a benefit. Clarify the site plan review process. Within the administrative section, site plan review would be limited to the process. As is evident by this report, many of the specific standards, such as landscape, would be moved to their own section of the Code. This section would also clarify what types of development require site plan review and include criteria to deny a site plan. (Generally, the criteria for denial of a site plan are based upon noncompliance with zoning regulations and any conditions of special approval, such as those applied to a special use or variance, as well as other actions required by the results of certain submittal items, such as a traffic study.) Page 100 of 421 4848 Technical Review Report Zoning Administration Continue to review Historic Preservation Commission regulations. The regulations of the Historic Preservation Commission, including its applications and procedures (currently in Chapter 10), will continue to be evaluated as part of the overall UDC update. This review will assess opportunities to better align these provisions with the new Zoning Code and clarify, as needed, the preservation review process. The requirement for a traffic study should be made clear. While not explicitly required in all cases, the UDC suggests that the City may require a traffic study during site plan review (Chapter 12) when traffic impacts are deemed a concern. Similarly, a traffic study may be required during subdivision review (Chapter 11) to demonstrate that projected traffic volumes will not exceed the capacity of the existing or planned street network. Currently, these requirements are referenced indirectly through application submittal checklists rather than clearly established within the UDC itself. As part of the update, the criteria for requiring a traffic study - potentially including thresholds based on development type - should be clearly defined within the Code. Page 101 of 421 Page 102 of 421 5050 Technical Review Report Nonconformities X. Nonconformities Nonconformity regulations should be updated to specifically address the variety of potential nonconforming situations. In any code update, the intent is to eliminate as many nonconformities as possible. Many are eliminated when new or revised districts are tailored to existing conditions or remapping of districts is undertaken, however, some properties and uses will remain nonconforming. Therefore, the nonconformities section should be rewritten for clarity and include provisions for nonconforming uses, structures, site characteristics, lots, and signs. The updated provisions should clearly spell out what types of changes and/or alterations are permissible. The following are the types of nonconformities that would be addressed. • Nonconforming use. The current Code contains typical controls for nonconforming uses, such as the 12 month abandonment clause for no longer allowing the use to continue. However, the current Code does include a provision in which the destruction of the structure by 75% or more would also terminate the nonconforming uses. It is not recommended to tie a nonconforming use to a structure and therefore it is proposed to eliminate this provision. o Because of Dubuque’s history, the City has a number of residential uses located within districts that are not allowed by the district. To acknowledge this natural mixed-use environment, it is proposed to deem existing residential structures conforming in order to take them out of nonconforming status. With conforming status, this would minimize the issues created by nonconformities in terms of financing or selling these homes. If such structure is damaged or destroyed through no fault of the property owner or tenant, it would be able to be repaired or reconstructed to its original condition. However, once such structure is purposefully demolished by the owner or is converted to a dwelling type allowed in the district, this deemed conforming provision is no longer valid • Nonconforming structure. Currently nonconforming structures require compliance when over 75% of the structure is destroyed with the exception of residential structures, which can be rebuilt. This should be maintained. o One flexibility that should be included is for detached garages that are nonconforming due to their location on the lot. As of the effective date of the Code, existing detached garages should be allowed to be replaced in their existing location. Such replacement garages cannot exceed the previous garage footprint or total square footage of the previous garage. • Nonconforming site characteristic. A nonconforming characteristic of use is a useful category of nonconformity and should be maintained. It is recommended to rename it “nonconforming site characteristic” to prevent any confusion with use controls. • Nonconforming lot. For nonconforming lots, any use allowed within the district should be allowed on such lot, meeting all requirements except for the nonconforming lot width and/or area standard. • Nonconforming sign. Current standards are generally in line with those seen in other cities. The current damage percentage (75%) is slightly higher than the typical 50%; a reduction should be considered in order to more quickly bring signs into conformance. Page 103 of 421 51 Technical Review Report Nonconformities A permitted horizontal or vertical expansion for nonconforming single-family and two-family homes can be added to the Code. The Code can also allow nonconforming walls of existing single-family and two-family dwellings that are nonconforming in terms of the encroachment of the side or rear wall into a required setback to be extended. This type of provision is very useful in allowing additions to existing homes, as it encourages continued investment in existing older neighborhoods, preserves the existing housing stock, and is a way to reward property owners who continue to invest in their homes, particularly older homes. Where a dwelling is deemed nonconforming because of encroachment into the required interior side or rear setback, the structure may be enlarged or extended vertically or horizontally along the same plane as defined by its existing perimeter walls, so long as the resulting structure does not create other nonconformities or otherwise violate district standards. This provision would also allow for replacement of current additions that extend into the setback, which the owner would like to replace/reconstruct. Page 104 of 421 Page 105 of 421 53 Technical Review Report Subdivision XI. SUBDIVISION Generally, the subdivision regulations are in line with typical subdivision procedures. The following more detailed observations would help to clarify existing standards. • In the Fringe Area Development Standards there is an “Exception of Specific Subdivision Requirements.” As stated this seems to apply only to the Fringe Area but it is understood in practice that this applies to all subdivisions. This should be clearly stated. • Codify City policy governing the payment responsibilities, timing, and procedures for off-site improvements required as a condition of development approval for site plans and subdivision plats. • It appears that that the sustainable subdivision points system required for all major subdivisions is working. During drafting, this section will be reviewed for clarity and enhanced with any appropriate additional criteria. • There are currently three types of specific subdivisions. The following revisions are proposed: o Conservation: The standards for this type of subdivision seem to be in line with how these types of subdivisions are controlled. There is the ability to simplify and clarify this process. No substantive changes are proposed. o Solar: This type of subdivision has not been used. It is proposed to eliminate it as a type of subdivision and incorporate the standards in the sustainable subdivision points system. o Cottage: As discussed earlier in this Report, it is proposed to replace this type of subdivision with the “cottage court development” use that would function as a development form within neighborhoods. Page 106 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 107 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #1: What type of area do you live in? Page 108 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #2: How long have you lived in Dubuque? Page 109 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #3: What type of housing do you currently live in? Page 110 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #4: How familiar are you with the City of Dubuque’s Unified Development Code? Page 111 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #5: How satisfied are you with the current development and zoning regulations in Dubuque? Page 112 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #6: In your opinion, how important is it to maintain a balance between development and preserving the natural environment in Dubuque? Page 113 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #7: What types of new development would you like to see more of in Dubuque? Page 114 of 421 Tourism Attractions Trees! Downtown development - residential and retail Need More Tourism - Like Wisconsin Dells, Branson MO. Pigeon Forge TN. Rezoning for Middle Road Spaces for kids/teens to hang out Free civic amenities such as libraries, recreation centers, parks, arboretum, etc. Family entertainment (Q just attempted and failed horribly) Roof top bars/restaurants Recreation What types of new development would you like to see more of in Dubuque? Other Responses: Redevelop existing buildings/spaces vs expansion. Grow from within. Nice dog parks Major employers nonindustrial. Actual beautiful parks lining river instead of smelly industries. Downtown multi family apt and condo. Downtown leisure and retail More affordable housing in areas NOT in the school boundaries for the DCSC Title 1 elementary schools. Affordable spaces for business owners. Additional properties that can be purchased by small businesses. Self driving vehicle infrastructure Page 115 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #8: Do you feel that current zoning regulations in Dubuque allow for enough flexibility in terms of land use and development? Page 116 of 421 What specific aspects of the Unified Development Code would you like to see improved or updated? Other Responses: Would like zoning to look at property land areas before they put in a building. Example is starbucks by Plaza 20. way to small area and terrible to get in and out of Trees in the downtown streets green space required; good old design and good new design blend well (Dubuque is behind) I am upset that the city pays no attention to absentee landlord properties engaged in unlicensed short-term occupancy (e.g. AirB&B). They are a blight and impact availability and affordability of city housing. They also use public amenities such as city streets for "guest parking." This makes city residents subsidize private businesses and creates parking/road obstructions. I live near a rental unit that has had as many as a dozen cars parked on a private street, blocking the road and driveways. I would like to see an incentive for local contractors. We have too many out of town contractors and sub- contractors working on local projects. Allow for non-paved parking in light industrial lots. Eliminate parking meters or have 1st hr free Housing communities for homeless folks. Other states are more progressive in this area and we need to look at different programs that house the homeless. Improvement or update to the above is a matter of opinion. I can't in good faith check any of these boxes without knowing what improvement or update is defined as. We don’t need any more parking None Page 117 of 421 Suggest a UDC appendix (that is regularly updated) discussing how to improve environmental sustainability, expected costs and benefits. Suggest such an appendix is reviewed and updated annually. On commercial buildings, larger size and specific location of street number. Currently buildings along Dodge Street, Kennedy Road, NW Arterial street number not visible. What specific aspects of the Unified Development Code would you like to see improved or updated? Other Responses: Page 118 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #9: What specific aspects of the Unified Development Code would you like to see improved or updated? Page 119 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #10: Do you feel that the current UDC allows for adequate green space and environmental protection in new developments? Page 120 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #11: How do you feel about the density of new housing developments in Dubuque? Page 121 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #12: Are there any specific areas in Dubuque where you feel development regulations should be relaxed or tightened? Page 122 of 421 Downtown •Height limits should be relaxed. •Remove barriers to using infill lots and ADUs. •Needs balanced historic preservation regulations. •More mixed-use development (e.g., Three Over Ones). •Reduce parking mandates and zoning rules. •Rooftop access for patron businesses. •Encourage pedestrian-friendly, vibrant redevelopment. •Allow greater building height and density. •Improve appearance—many buildings are rundown. •Reduce regulations for vacant/eyesore properties. •Create cohesive planning (not siloed districts). •Too lenient on parking credits; causes congestion. •Incentivize redevelopment in vacant areas like near Millwork District and former Dubuque Packing Co. •Eliminate excessive sign regulations. •Reduce setbacks, lot sizes, and parking mandates. North End •Should be improved for affordable housing. •Fix rundown properties and provide affordable ranch-style housing. •Preserve smaller lots and narrow rights-of-way. •Improve economic development and infrastructure. Historic Districts •Stricter regulations needed. •Conflicting opinions: some want less strict rules to enable development, others want stronger preservation. •Clarify which structures and uses are allowed. R-1 Residential Areas •Should allow duplexes and ADUs. •Allow multi-family and corner store commercial uses. •Preserve single-family home neighborhoods from short-term rentals. •Encourage neighborhood gathering places (e.g., Milkhouse, Charlotte’s Coffee House). Solon Street Area (1940s–1950s neighborhood) •Needs sidewalks; currently discourages walking. Floodplain Areas •Floodplain building policies need revision. •Avoid development in vulnerable areas due to storm risk. Millwork District •Needs sustainable updates and green space. •Code enforcement for remodeling and construction. Are there any specific areas in Dubuque where you feel development regulations should be relaxed or tightened? Page 123 of 421 Urban Areas / Infill Development •Stronger enforcement for non-compliance. •Allow mixed-use and reduce subdivision requirements. Outlying Areas / West End •Too resistant to development; zoning should be more inclusive. •Room for green space. •West End ranch-style affordable housing for seniors. •Relax minimum parking requirements. •Reduce pushback from high-income areas against low-income housing. •Allow small businesses or multi-family on corner lots. Along the Riverfront / Schmid Island •Protect vacant land and natural resources. •Environmental studies needed before development. •Maintain for recreation, senior housing, and business. Bryant School / Grandview Area •Traffic concerns with new development. Vacant Land Across from Diamond Jo •Underused—consider for redevelopment. Southwest Arterial •Commercial development should be incentivized. Main Street •Needs increased development and revitalization. •Vision planning needed. Unused / Vacant Properties •Allow redevelopment even if rezoning is required. Environmental and Sustainability Focus •Relax regulations for solar, green infrastructure. •Tree planting regulations like in Pella, IA. •Encourage sustainable housing, public transit use. AirBnB and Short-Term Rentals •Should be regulated like hotels/motels. •Especially near schools and in residential zones. Industrial / Manufacturing near Residential •Need stricter zoning for environmental safety. Are there any specific areas in Dubuque where you feel development regulations should be relaxed or tightened? Page 124 of 421 Food Deserts •Development needed to improve access. Green Space •Increase green and shared spaces. •Rethink what “greenspace” means (beyond lawns). Community Gathering Areas •Encourage more places like Charlotte's Coffee or The Milkhouse in residential zones. Parking Requirements •Simplify for industrial and light industrial uses (e.g., allow gravel instead of paved lots). Street Parking •Limit in high-traffic areas like West 3rd, Hill, North Grandview. •Improve downtown parking without losing housing opportunities Are there any specific areas in Dubuque where you feel development regulations should be relaxed or tightened? Page 125 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #13: How do you feel about the presence of billboards in the City of Dubuque? Page 126 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #14: Currently, the Dubuque City Code requires billboards to be a certain distance from other billboards and from historic districts. Should billboards also be required to be a certain distance from other districts, structures, or uses? Select as many as you like? Page 127 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #15: What type of housing should the City of Dubuque prioritize in the UDC update? (Select all that apply) Page 128 of 421 Other - What type of housing should the City of Dubuque prioritize in the UDC update? More dense single family development. Refurbished housing buildings I would love to see a shift from incentivizing apartment building construction to incentivizing affordable home ownership opportunities such as condo development, especially in adaptive reuse projects like those underway in the Millwork district. Mixed use It should not prioritize any type of housing, but the different types of housing should be in separate locations / districts to protect property values Mixed Use Residential/Commercial expensive lifestyle options. Small cottage houses Accessible housing The City shouldn't prioritize the type of housing through the UDC, they should provide adequate availability for the development of all housing types. The Market will prioritize the types of housing. As a city I believe we need to make housing available across a wide income spectrum. We should not penalize those who are poor and price them out of the housing market, nor should we penalize the wealthy who likely will wish to have more elaborate and expensive lifestyle options. Small cottage houses Accessible housing Special needs population ADA accessible housing for rent single family and duplex Healthcare and Teacher Housing Handicapped accessible single-family homes. None Commercial real estate The City shouldn't prioritize the type of housing through the UDC, they should provide adequate availability for the development of all housing types. The Market will prioritize the types of housing. As a city I believe we need to make housing available across a wide income spectrum. We should not penalize those who are poor and price them out of the housing market, nor should we penalize the wealthy who likely will wish to have more elaborate and Special needs population ADA accessible housing for rent single family and duplex Healthcare and Teacher Housing Handicapped accessible single-family homes. None Commercial real estate Page 129 of 421 Other - What type of housing should the City of Dubuque prioritize in the UDC update? Special needs population ADA accessible housing for rent single family and duplex Healthcare and Teacher Housing Handicapped accessible single-family homes. None Commercial real estate Page 130 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #16: Do you think there is a need for more affordable housing in Dubuque? Page 131 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #17: What do you think would help to encourage the development of affordable housing in Dubuque? Better city incentives, a more robust financing environment with better banking products, advertisement of the development incentives, zoning requirements that match the development goals, diverse design standards that emphasize good aesthetic design not prioritizing historic looks when HTC are not involved, clear communication about the entire process Reduced parking requirements, less lot area required per unit. More strategic tax breaks in areas to be refurbished, more investments into attractions, city parks, quality of life, growth in college and young adults population Incentives that would allow good projects to become financially feasible, especially ones that encourage density in the downtown urban core. Easing restrictions and rules on single unit rentals when owner lives in building. Equitable treatment for small developers and homeowners – big guy gets much, little guy not even near similar percentages. Page 132 of 421 Provide more substantial incentives for affordable and market rate development in the downtown area. Why are cookie cutter subdivisions springing up Asbury, Peosta and further west while huge buildings suitable for mixed use/ residential in the heart of downtown are languishing and falling into disrepair? I think the cities current incentives are showing signs of success in terms of creating affordable rental units, but I’d like to see more opportunities for affordable home ownership in new construction such as condo developments where young professionals and others similarly situated could afford to purchase real estate to begin building equity. Better programs for first time and low-income buyers to both purchase and have incentives to maintain their properties. Smaller homes and units, denser development, better transportation options not requiring vehicle ownership Perhaps minimize the ability of individuals or groups from purchasing large number of single-family units for the purpose of “controlling the market” in that area. Incentivize development for more free market apartments. If the housing development were within 1 mile to necessary amenities (grocery stores, doc offices, banks) A better definition of Affordable. This is a tricky question, because I want the city to look nicer, which eventually would raise housing value and therefore costs. Maybe just allot a certain proportion of units to be subsidized lower income housing, but make sure they are mixed into where normal units are. Incentives for landlords/property managers to support high-need residents What do you think would help to encourage the development of affordable housing in Dubuque? Page 133 of 421 How about building ranch house with gas and electric in homes. Electric Grid cannot tolerate more electric homes, and electric prices are way too high to afford these homes. Less regulation for both the developer and the buyer Grants and money, I’m sure citizens would be concerned where they are put Life in downtown, trees in the streets, family retails, terraces Robust communications campaigns that breakdown the stigma that affordable housing and crime are synonymous or that affordable housing will bring down property values of neighboring homes. Revolving loan fund to facilitate capital investment Leniency from the City’s Housing Dept for small landlords – especially those living in their apartment building (or house)– with one to three other rental units and financial incentives for them. Unfortunately, Airbnb is winning. More tourism and activities Grant funding for affordable housing development; higher density developments; pocket neighborhoods Unsure Make it easier to and faster to get through the red tape if units are affordable. Tax breaks for builders or grants to allow existing properties to be updated It's more about economics than zoning. Builder incentives. But I also feel there is a lot of affordable housing currently being developed. Review of Zoning requirements to allow more mixed use and denser housing. New housing allows people to move out of older smaller homes What do you think would help to encourage the development of affordable housing in Dubuque? Page 134 of 421 I don’t think this can be controlled. Costs of building negate any ‘affordableness’ unless it is highly subsidized. Understanding the availability of tax incentives. Legally capping what a business can charge on rent prices When I say affordable housing, I mean for those who don’t qualify for assistance but have a hard time finding a decent place to live at an affordable price. Not sure but many people cannot afford most apartments in Dubuque Affordable housing is great, but I think simply making it easier to build any type of new housing, especially closer to downtown would bring down the cost of housing. In-fill, creating incentives for rehabbing existing buildings/housing units financial incentives for developers In my experience, I believe the city tends to presume rehabbers and developers are larger operations Programs to encourage/incentify significant rehabilitation/redevelopment of existing housing stock. Unfortunately, less regulations for landlords but that is a fine line. I am not an expert, however, I think a significant portion of develop is dependent on factors outside of the unified development code How affordable housing is defined is important, in my opinion. I think we need more rental affordable housing, but we definitely need more single family home affordable housing. There is nothing that will encourage this.… A “unified” plan will unite sectors in our community Landlord incentives to make their housing affordable Tax incentives with cap on max rental for certain time period. What do you think would help to encourage the development of affordable housing in Dubuque? Page 135 of 421 Keep prices fair. Keep prices as fair as possible and allow more landlords to accept section 8 Attractive affordable housing throughout city. Not just located downtown Developer incentives so that projects make sense to complete and own financially. More entertainment. More mixed use Less in the cost burden on developers, would be step one.… Encourage building vertical with smaller footprint to gain more housing units. Create a rent control program that assists more middle earners early in their professional progression. Incentivizing coop style housing projects. Grants for laying utilities, water, and sewer. Less red tape. Tax incentives. Tax incentives. Available sites More employers that STAY in Dubuque. Tax incentives, local business/corporate support Recognition that it needs to be provided even if it isn’t profitable If the affordable housing actually added to a neighborhood instead of took away from it.… Lowering the cost of housing isn’t the issue. Affordable housing is somewhat important; however you need to research how affordable housing affects neighborhoods, crime statistics, and schools. Dubuque has enough affordable housing. More affordable housing would negatively impact our community. Tax Incentives to builders There should be a residency requirement before accessing housing vouchers … We need to do something about the density of homes in poor condition on the north end.” What do you think would help to encourage the development of affordable housing in Dubuque? Page 136 of 421 Don’t need more affordable housing It must start with jobs Access to affordable shopping as well. Single family homes with big green lawns are not a sustainable way to move forward. Multi-family units with smaller yards and more public green-space is what we need. We need more carpenters and builders to meet the demand for all types of buildings. We have enough. I think there is significant need, but giving large incentives to a large development for affordable housing nowhere near any essential services Recruitment of “community-style” builders having access to bus, shopping, groceries and a community that is safe What do you think would help to encourage the development of affordable housing in Dubuque? Empathy and support from other Dubuque residents. More consistent, reliable public transportation and walkable/bike-friendly infrastructure. Grocery store in more affordable neighborhoods. Getting rid of parking requirements for apartments Affordable housing near bus stops Higher density and lowering minimum parking requirements. Getting away from terms like “low income” and focusing on housing being affordable for the ever growing number of people who work in the service industry Relax the rules to allow more small developers to do creative infill projects. Get rid of parking mandates New leadership at city hall Page 137 of 421 1. Zoning Reforms: … 2. Tax Incentives … 3. Streamlined Development Processes … 4. Land Use and Vacancy Programs … 5. Public-Private Partnerships Young people leaving Smarter use of our tax dollars. Actually be affordable. Affordable housing opportunities have been created in downtown Dubuque. The same tax breaks/grants given to big corporations … I’m wondering if having a list/map of residential lots/areas that are available for development or rehabilitation were more accessible or published… People could take more pride in a home they built ” I am a resident of Chicago seeking a more suitable living environment. I believe that housing should be more accessible and affordable for hardworking individuals.… Educate public about land trusts and encourage them - eliminate corporate buy-outs of housing units - can you limit the number of LLC contractors allowed to operate? - why do we have to wait for a housing ‘crisis’ before building…can’t city officials see this coming Being able to rezone buildings to convert to housing. Less restrictions in historic areas. It’s not a zoning or tax issue.… It’s up to those suburban upper class interests … Again, it’s a cultural issue, whether or not we choose to raise up the least amongst us Affordable loans and costs to build Government and involvement private organizations better jobs A way for developers to make $$ on Multiuse multi family density. Stop building single family put west More commercial business in affordable areas (access to jobs). Better quality housing. Affordable shouldn’t have to mean “cheap” looking. Looser regulations and permitting What do you think would help to encourage the development of affordable housing in Dubuque? Page 138 of 421 There have been incentives for blighted properties to be rehabbed for affordable housing. Grants and TIF Given the cost of building I think only more dense development can make Affordable housing possible. Reduce parking requirements. Financial incentives and government requirements. More jobs. Quit giving our money to businesses who leave as soon as the free ride runs out. We have housing here. Obviously we’re not growing Capping rent. Preventing monopoly-like companies … Honestly, I think the lack of affordable housing has more to do with economics than the UDC. Number of single family homes utilized as rental properties … leads to supply and demand issues… Number of homes presently rented that are in disrepair … But renters have no choice but to rent. I think there is enough affordable housing in Dubuque. It is frustrating when appraisal values … families that work hard are stuck in the homes they currently own Increase supply by lowering construction costs I think in general, building new homes is a good idea. I would like to see some of the vast parking areas be built over … The downtown also could use some infill, and that infill should be sensitive to the existing historic buildings. The historic preservation commission should do design review for infill buildings in the downtown. Density is generally good Tax credits to building owners, but I don't like that idea either. More incentives for investors to rehab vacant properties, more incentives and help for first time homebuyers to encourage homeownership over renting City incentives Finding a contractor and land developers that don't want to become millionaires.. What do you think would help to encourage the development of affordable housing in Dubuque? Page 139 of 421 I think a review/timeline of the rezoning process with developers would be beneficial so they would know what it would take to rezone for more residential housing. Stop fighting with City of Asbury on west end land grabs I think more affordable housing options are easy to access in Dubuque if we considered converting the senior apartments to apartments for all. Staying away from downtown, less greedy landlords/land owners Allowing more multifamily housing to be in areas zoned as residential I am not certain what would encourage more affordable housing, but the prices are honestly ridiculous. Funding to assist developers or individuals with their first projects Subsidies and breaks on taxes for builders to be incentivized for affordable housing projects I see a need for more affordable starter homes to encourage home ownership amongst young individuals. Affordable housing that is rented, not owned, may still encourage wealth inequality in the long term Transportation and accessibility to jobs Please define “affordable” This means different things to different people! There are infill opportunities in a variety of neighborhoods. Giving the rich people who invest in major development tax breaks to do so. Partnering with a consortium of non-profits More grants for renovating our existing historic infrastructure. Feels like a win-win Community education on benefits; modification of parking requirements What do you think would help to encourage the development of affordable housing in Dubuque? Page 140 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #18: How important is it for the UDC to include policies promoting sustainability? Page 141 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #19: Do you think that the UDC should encourage more mixed-use developments (e.g., residential above retail/commercial)? Page 142 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #20: What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Page 143 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Biking Actual usuable public transit, more buses, better routes, more frequency which support the employers and residents of the city; Road improvement. Expanded lanes for busy thoroughfares. Bump outs in the downtown to promote walkability. 1. Biking/Walking - increased infrastructure for routes, bridges, safety, lighting. Ex. Schmidt Island, South of Highway 20 bridge, college campus to downtown) 2. Public bus transit - increased advertising and marketing on established routes, free transit to promote community buy-in, more public routes, increased infrastructure to increase usage 3. Roads - maintain, increased traffic flow efficiency for large events, and better connecting districts Biking lanes and more walkable, pedestrian- friendly streetscapes that encourage less vehicular traffic in the downtown core. Dedicated bike lanes, benches and trash cans and trees. Traffic calming measures more incentives for small businesses to open downtown to fill in the holes and make the downtown an exciting attractive inviting neighborhood rather than a desolate and frightening pass thru for commuters and commercial drivers. I believe that the public transit system needs a comprehensive study and likely a complete overhaul. The current busing system feels woefully under utilized, inefficient, and clunky to use. Additionally, increasing mixed use neighborhoods with multimodal transportation planned into new developments could help to reduce motor vehicle dependence, especially for low/mod income residents. Page 144 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? I think the busses are a failure but also know that poorer residents need them to access other areas. I'm not sure with our population and the spread of the city that there is a great answer. more bike lanes and trails, safer pedestrian travel, more frequent public transit More bike infrastructure that is connected to current trails. If the goal is to increase usage of public transportation (buses), we need creative ways to encourage usage by those that primarily use personal vehicle that show advantages to utilizing public transportation. Examples could include cost savings, time management (provided the stops are reasonably close to work), any safety concerns, stigma associated with public transit, etc Evaluate the use of parking meters downtown. There is not a parking shortage requiring the use of meters and it hurts small businesses that operate downtown. Overall economic activity would increase and would promote a more vibrant downtown - especially for businesses that do not have a parking lot. More biking infrastructure downtown to keep and attract younger generations. Same with continuing to invest in public transit. Wider roads for east/west traffic. There needs to be a long-term focus on improved, non-vehicle transportation--walking, biking, wayfinding, and thoughtful connectivity to places people go to and move through. A 7th Street corridor has been long discussed. It should be a priority. Page 145 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Biking infrastructure. DONE RIGHT. Doing it cheaply (bike lanes on car dominated roads with Dubuque drivers) will NOT work. Start small and do it right. Create a nice, safe path (actually isolated from car traffic). Go from one single high density housing area to one single specific grocery store. People will ACTUALLY use it. If you spread the same amount of money around across the entire city, it will likely not be used. Eventually, you can add to the good bike lanes, extending the network slowly and methodically (and it MUST be beautiful). Prioritize high quality over quantity. How about changing all our buses to the ones that look like trolleys? It's cuter. If our city looks beautiful people will respect the land and each other, it is a psychological phenomenon. Keep pushing for a train from Chicago. It is crazy that we do not have one. We should prefer this over an interstate connection nearby. Do NOT prioritize parking. We have enough. The worst thing that could happen is people will have to walk a little bit farther to their destination. GASP! What a tragedy! That was sarcasm. Obesity is a problem. Parking lots are soulless deserts that encourages car use that encourages... more parking lots. They are ugly and inefficient. We have a perfectly-sized downtown that has a lot of potential to make things cute and walkable and bikeable. People who drive downtown would love to park slightly further away to be able to use a pedestrian-only thoroughfare that have shops and restaurants with outdoor seating etc. I think there are too many lights in the beltway around the city. As soon as I get up to 50mph I am slowing down again for the next light. More walkable areas, or connections between neighborhoods. Biking and busses, less one way roads. Biking, trees for shade and natural life, walking zones Page 146 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Less parking downtown (lots of ugly empty parking lots currently); more frequent and convenient public transit (including air and train travel outside the city); more biking infrastructure One complaint I have it instead of the pink or orange route, why not go back to the Point route, Hempstead route, People know street names and where they go, not purple orange and green,. Makes it to hard to figure out what bus to get on. Biking, walking, bus routes Trail connectivity and greenspace development. Every opportunity to expand our trail network and mobility beyond cars is much appreciated a necessary! More complete streets Safe pedestrian crossing (crosswalks, anyone?), garbage cans on street corners, more streetlights (including in alleys), more traffic lights on major streets, no semis downtown (these are businesses that can expense all of the costs of re- routing their drivers - the cost of doing business in Dubuque, no?), two way streets (another accident this week on one-way Central because someone turned from the wrong lane - two-way streets would make drivers more cautious) More sidewalks and protected bike lanes. I think folks would be more likely to walk or bike around town if they could do so safely. It is hard to access parts of town on foot, like going from the mall to target. You have to cross HWY 20 to do so and there is no sidewalk or pedestrian infrastructure. More buses and a better schedule might also decrease the number of cars on the road, especially during winter storms. Page 147 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Better connectivity between sections of town, more arterial roads with higher speeds to connect the small development areas so you can live on one side of town but be able to quickly get to different areas via the arterial corridors Improved and connected bike trails. There are trails that just end without connections. Dedicated biking infrastructure. Sidewalks/paths in all high traffic areas. Improve roads such as Cedar Cross road so that it has curb/gutter and sidewalks More bike paths that connect to each other. Bus routes that go further through the city. Ask business to do up keep on their buildings and signage.“ Traffic flow on the west side Replace as many lights as possible with roudabouts. Think ahead and don't let the DOT or any other entity make idiotic decisions such as extending the left turn lane from HWY 20 to the NW arterial, instead of adding a second left turn lane to push more cars through at each light rotation. Anyone involved in designing and approving that should be banned from design and decision making for transportation for a minimum of 10 years. More innercity bike/walking paths would be great. Sky bridges between building downtown, where feasible would also be nice in winter, but I acknowledge we may be too small for that. Incorporate ebike rentals and continue to invest if walking paths (for example - on Cedar Cross road - there are no sidewalks for MOST of the road) Building bike paths on the streets downtown has to be one of the dumbest ideas I've seen from this city. Page 148 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Get rid of the green alley project. When temporary repairs are needed on roads, workers need to do it properly - sick of city workers who don't give a damn and make half assed repairs. If you repair streets in older neighborhoods, fix the curb structure as well and don't assess the resident. We pay enough taxes already. and listen to the citizens and NOT just the people who have a "name" in this town. Biking Infrastructure. A dream would be bringing back the main street street car system and encouraging parking in the ramps and lots downtown as opposed to the street. Stop with the biking lanes. They are unsafe. They took up parking from the downtown area and I don't think I've seen them used. The ability to walk safely across the train tracks from the Millwork district to the river front. High speed rail to larger cities, busses that run all hours of the day Bus infrastructure and route planning that makes more sense. Downtown-only routes. Bike infrastructure that prioritizes rider safety (protected lanes). Idaho laws for stop signs and traffic lights. End-of-trip facility requirements. Wider shoulders wherever possible to making biking safer. Bike lanes where practical along heavily used routes like Grandview and Asbury. Bike lane connections through parks or open space from busy routes to quieter residential streets. Aka find the flatest most connected residential streets for a Biking network. Bike lanes and public transit are great, but I would love to see more ubiquitous sidewalk construction. Connections- connection for walking/bike transportation- and connections to bus Page 149 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Dubuque's walking/biking trail system is an embarrassment compared to cities across the state. While it is gradually getting better, we don't have a safe, connected trail system that links people to destinations. With the increasing popularity of e-bikes, I think people are going to be more interested in commuter bike trails and Dubuque has essentially nothing to offer. More biking infrastructure. Creation of additional arterials, although this will be very difficult without acquisition/demolition, which could impact affordable housing stock. This would have to be very strategic. Begin doing street reconstruction again, stop diverting the money to thing it wasn’t intended for. Roads, public transit, inter state public transportations, pedestrian and biking infrastructure More biking infrastructure downtown. Expansion of the Jule to encompass more, encourage more folks to ride. Travel culture in Dubuque is that everyone has a car, and everyone drives alone. That's a tough nut to crack, so I don't know how you get more buy in from residents to take public transit. I personally think too much emphasis is placed on the transportation system in "fixing" so many concerns. I believe we need a solid transportation system to help people with living all across the city and to make it easier to get work, etc. But Dubuque is not going to have a transportation system like Madison, WI or other larger urban areas without massive resources that I don't feel are feasible. Less parking options to force use of public transit, including park-and-ride lots throughout the city. Page 150 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Public transit is subsidized (I think?) to the tune of maybe 1/2 million a year from rider fares. Get rid of this and make the bus system free to all riders. Add $500K to our annual budget and perhaps even save the cost(s) associated with fare collection. If that increases ridership beyond current bus capacity ... Fantastic! That is the goal. Make this a city cost for greater sustainability. Fewer cars and greater resident access to job locations, services, shopping, and civic amenities, is a public good. Budget for free ridership for a 3-5 year period and evaluate the cost/benefit during and in conclusion. Let city residents decide if they wish to continue fare-free or return to fare collection. Salary increases for public transit workers Biking infrastructure. More robust public transit options/routes/timing. More robust public transit options/routes/timing. Keep improving all of the roads and more longer hours for the bus system Keep improving all of the rodes to make them as smooth as possible and also with the city bus sysdumb increase the hours especially at night and on weekends for people that do not have any transportation Consolidated transportation policy to accommodate all riders.,-also safe bike paths and more accessible in town walking routes It would be great to have a city-wide network of bike trails (ideally wherever possible the kind that run along the road (like on the arterial) but don't share the road. Can we get bike trails all the way down to key west along the SW arterial too? Can we ever finish that traffic circle where Asbury Rd & University come together by where Butt's Florist used to be? Page 151 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Public transit and biking infrastructure that allows for more sustainable transportation methods as well as improvement and additions of sidewalks to many areas to allow for safe walking access. 1.Amtrak/train/small light rail 2. better public transit on buses 3. more roundabouts. 4. more bike infrastructure. More public transportation covering the entire city. Need transportation 7 days a week. Biking lanes. Bike charging stations for electric bikes. Roads!! We have to many large Jule buses driving around with one or two riders. This to me is a waste. I don’t know why all Jule buses aren’t the smaller van style with capacity of 12-15. This would be way more sustainable. We will never have a good bike or trail system with our hilly geography. It would be nice, but not practical unfortunately. Spend more on our roads and underground infrastructure! Better road surface. More flexible public transit that supports workforce and commerce. that would require service earlier and later in the day. Separate bike trails. More right hand turning lanes at intersections. Four-lane highway to Chicago. More commercial air options. Walkable infrastructure, grocery store on north end of town. Biking infrastructure Public transit should be viewed as an expense line on the city's budget. Not a revenue line. Public transport that runs all shifts. More biking friendly lanes in residential areas. Page 152 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? More bike lanes, dedicated walking hours only in downtown Don’t know Busing. Bike paths. Something needs to be done with the traffic if you're adding development where there's only one or two ways in or out. That's just stupid. You're going to turn neighborhoods with a lot of walkers and bikers into dangerous areas to try to walk and bike. I'm satisfied with transportation, but providing sidewalks with wheelchair accessibility is important. Biking infrastructure, especially with the popularity of ebikes Can we just focus on making the current roads usable. So many roads around Dubuque are terrible. Also, stop bottlenecking traffic everywhere with more stop signs and lights at every single intersection, and roundabouts are not the end all be all answer. Why are bigger cities able to move more traffic efficiently and make use of yield signs. If you want to make a more sustainable future, stop making us waste all of our fuel/brakes/tires by stopping/starting every block or at roundabouts, where a perfectly good straight road used to be. Again, this isn't rocket science. Just continue to maintain our roads and bridges. Don't use public transportation so can't comment on that. Bike lanes are dangerous I think Asbury road could be made into 4 lane street with no parking from University Ave. to the Western City limits. Page 153 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Public Transportation, more airline opportunities?? We should take all the money that we wasting subsidizing Airlines and just make the Jule Free. Think about how much money we are spending on air services used by so few, that we could just apply to Jule and have free transport for those users who need it the most. That would be a real market differentiator. We all know the airline will leave after the subsidy is up. We have dumped millions of dollars into an air service and infrastructure that will not every spur the economic development that people getting transportation to work would get. Better yet, take all the money from Jule and Airport and just cover ubers for everyone. Use the Jule Buses to go to and from Ohare, would be the same amount of time as trying to connect to DBQ. Roads Mass transport increases. Dubuque used to be known for its trolley system, which provided access to what was then the city limits and even beyond. The city leadership should have invested in and maintained a better system than fuel vehicles, and we must expand its use to all citizens at a low or no cost. We put in roads, water, sewer, and electricity for people, but there is not enough money for a mass transport system to serve the city, county, state, and region (like Chicago or Amtrak). Public transportation needs to offer more routes, shorter routes, and school friendly routes. Installing a roundabout at University & Asbury is long overdue. A paved cycling trail along Catfish Creek would be a big benefit for outdoor activity. Need more biking specific areas to promote safety. Page 154 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Biking infrastructure that is not road-share. Stop wrapping the Jule windows, people should be able to see into a bus they are boarding/be seen from outside of the bus when they are riding for safety. We need a train to Chicago. It’s so hard to get in and out of Dubuque. Flights are not sustainable or affordable. More pedestrian bridges over busy intersections. I don’t have a car and getting groceries from my nearest store - Hy vee on locust - is taking my life into my hands every time to get there across the intersection of dodge and the highway. Also, we need a roundabout at 9th & Bluff - no one sees the red light when they are coming down the hill and the traffic is way too fast on bluff from 10th - 1st. We could put a beautiful public fountain in the center - it would improve the look of that main area of the downtown that looks kinda sad right now. Clearly mark bus stops & schedules. Offer free parking by modal building. The road system in Dubuque has ALWAYS been 10 to 15 years behind development. Right now the Seippel road intersection with Old Hwy 20 and Chavenelle Rd is a massive CHOKE point on the West end. TWO 4-lane Road systems connect to and one dumps directly into Seippel....and then you have a 2-lane, 4-way intersection at Seippel and Old Hwy 20....seriously? Who ever thought this could work??? Large trucks moving through all directions, commuters as well as local neighborhood traffic...what a mess!! NO PLANNING WAS DONE. AN AIRORT SUPPORTING AIRLINES TO CITIES IN THE US. People who travel all the time do not want to go to Chicago first, even though we might as well drive, to Cedar Rapids or Moline. We dont have a layover, the fare is much cheaper, and we have to pay for parking, one way or another Page 155 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Need more biking specific areas to promote safety. Smart traffic signal technology is great and it works most of the time . . . We have it so much better than almost every city around of us of similar size and bigger, but when weather (fog) & glitches impact them, it is a mess. I preach patience again . . . There is no way the bridge over the railroad, with the Canadian railroads getting a significant financial pass on the problems they cause, is more important than a roundabout at University and Asbury Road! Complete Streets Public access Public transit Public Transit Expansion • Increase service frequency: Enhance the frequency of buses, particularly during peak hours, to make public transit more reliable. • Expand routes: Add new routes connecting underserved neighborhoods, suburban areas, and regional hubs.• Introduce microtransit: Implement on-demand transit services in low-density areas where fixed-route buses are less viable. Example: Madison, WI, expanded its bus rapid transit (BRT) system to increase connectivity and reduce travel times. 2. Sustainable Transportation Options • Bike lanes and trails: Expand the network of bike lanes and multi-use trails to encourage cycling as a primary mode of transportation. • Electric vehicle (EV) infrastructure: Increase EV charging stations across the city to support the transition to electric cars. • Green transit initiatives: Transition city buses to electric or hybrid models to reduce carbon emissions. Example: Minneapolis has a Page 156 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? robust system of protected bike lanes and bike- sharing programs, fostering eco-friendly transit.3. Pedestrian-Friendly Design • Improve walkability: Upgrade sidewalks, add crosswalks, and improve lighting to create safer pedestrian environments. • Mixed-use developments: Promote developments that combine residential, commercial, and recreational spaces to reduce the need for driving. Example: Portland, OR, prioritizes walkable neighborhoods through zoning and pedestrian infrastructure investments.4. Regional Connectivity • Intercity transportation: Develop or enhance rail and bus services connecting Dubuque to other regional economic centers like Madison, Chicago, and Des Moines. • Airport improvements: Expand Dubuque Regional Airport services to accommodate more flights and destinations. Example: Cities like Omaha, NE, have worked to improve regional transit connections to support business and tourism." I believe Dubuque has become a very noisy place. The trains are blowing their horns day and night. The eighteen wheelers barrel through with their loud brakes. The transportation system should include bike paths along the river for sure but the peace and quiet could sure help. Biking infrastructure, public transit, and more green spaces/trees in downtown areas - make it more inviting to walk to businesses Smaller buses. Except for school buses most of the public transportation vehicles have few riders in them. It would require a larger city size mass transit system. The buses we currently have are only sustainable in a smaller city size. Since we do not have other mass transit options the bus system would have to be significantly upgraded. Page 157 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? I think we have a good start on our public transit system. Maybe having an additional transfer point closer to the North End, 32nd Street, Windsor area with smaller busses running shorter 30- minute routes instead of 60-minute routes would get more riders. Possibly even having a route similar to the Express going to the Kennedy Transfer that has a few stops on that North End Hill area of town. Similar to what the Green and Pink lines run now but use smaller busses covering more area west of Central Avenue if possible. Check into what addresses DuRide frequents in the unserved areas and expand service there. A thought for the future. The public transport is decent for Dubuques size. I'd like to see a train the would travel to Grant station in Chicago. More public transit. Traffic congestion on Hwy 20 entering Dbq from the west is ridiculous- utilize suggested bicycle- paths on city streets- support hybrid and all electric vehicles, tax gas-guzzling trucks and SUV’s at higher rate“ Keep road maintenance up on existing roads and add turning lanes wherever possible. When adding a turning lane make sure it is enough to actually take care of the issue at problem times (morning/evening commute, school open/close, etc). We need to have more reliable public transportation in key areas. Quality over quantity in my opinion. There are a lot of areas where public transportation is less important, but as we scale, having quality simple transportation downtown to and from key areas will drive a lot of value. Page 158 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Rail service from and to larger cities. Restrict and even constrict car access. Just say no to fire departments claiming their vehicles can't fit. Biking lanes cannot be mere lines on the road, but need curbs and poles to protect bicyclists. A genuinely ruthless campaign that actively exploits the hundreds of car deaths in Dubuque every year to promote the use of public transit and actively ditching cars for every day use. Public transit service to parks and other middle/upper class amenities (Mines of Spain, Eagle Point, Bergfeld Pond). Public transportation to future grocery stores that will be necessary to resolve the food desert situation in, around, and because of Eagles' Country Market exploitative pricing schemes. Regular bus hours on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays! And extend bus hours into at least 8 pm. none atm Walkable billable streets and paths to riverfront. Embarrassing that it’s not pleasant to bike to or along river. Connect riverfront and downtown with pedestrian and bike friendly ways "Jule brand could use a makeover. Tired and outdated.Continue bike trail connectivity. Work with property owners to access empty parking ramps. " expeditious public transit on main corridors. more bike lanes. Sadly too late for trains. Better scheduling to serve those who work odd hours. Large corridors like the arterials to move more traffic more quickly Biking Roundabouts on Asbury and Loras, Asbury and university and university and Pennsylvania. And some kind of traffic flow improvement in front of Washington Junior High More housing density. Automobile transportation infrastructure should not be prioritized over pedestrian, bicycling and public transit. More car, bicycle and scooter sharing services. Explore point-to-point transit (taxi/Uber/DuRide) services to replace bus system Not sure Another easy way to get from downtown to west side besides Dodge Biking and walking infrastructure and more public transit Viking infrastructure and walking paths public transit and walking/biking infrastructure No opinion Transportation should be provided to all industrial parks and even out to other towns such as Peosta. There are many job opportunities in warehouses and factories that won't be filled because of a lack of accessibility despite living in Dubuque. Self driving vehicle infrastructure Transportation could be improved as demand increases - frequency of busses would be the next logical step, though doing so now would likely leave empty busses. It would be nice to see a general removal of surface parking lots in the downtown and more encouragement of public transportation, cycling, and walking. People could get used to these ideas if we weren't constantly bending over backward to demolish historic buildings for parking areas - this is a very dated concept (70 year old urban planning theory) that somehow still has a hold among the community here and does not play to Dubuque's strengths. Local public transportation increased, careful, multi family housing with adequate parking and local road access that prevents traffic congestion in multi family housing areas. I need to know more about what issues people are having. Safe Biking/walking infrastructure to green spaces. Transportation to support youth programming through out the city. Keeping our roads safe and pot hole free. Sidewalks that are maintained especially those around parks and public spaces. More smart stoplights that respond to traffic being in the intersections. Increased public transportation, especially to the industrial parks and other areas where a lot of people work. Complete Streets Train service biking infrastructure! move EV buses Add roundabouts wherever warranted, Public parking, Signal timing studies (can these be improved?), Roads focus on walkability, especially in the historic downtown. expanded public transit walk/bike-friendly trails to the whole city so that people on the west end can safely access the core of Dubuque. More busing to all areas of the city. improvements to east/west and north/south thoroughfares (non highways) for commuter traffic/peak times; more recreational trails/paths. Biking infrastructure is not a need for me. I believe adding biking lanes to downtown would be catastrophic to parking, traffic control, and safety. In regards to roads I think we should find a way to divert oversized loads or non local truck traffic. I have noticed that semis are frequently driving over concrete barriers and causing damages. "Oh boy here we go. I'm going to just copy/paste what I wrote before.... my god does the city need to adjust the length of yellow lights, especially on Dodge. The time it takes to go from yellow to red is ridiculously short. In other nearby cities like Waterloo the yellow lights last at least 2-3 seconds longer. For as much semi traffic as Dodge gets (dont even get me started on the failed SW Arterial project that was supposed to reduce trucker traffic but clearly isnt doing a dang thing), and for how hilly Dodge is (think slick roads in winter), it is a legitimate safety concern to have yellow lights be that short. This survey for sure is not the right place to go to about this issue I know, but hopefully someone who reads this survey will know who to bring this issue up to. Otherwise the biggest transportation issue in Dubuque I would say is the amount of semi traffic on Dodge that just go straight through town without any stops. I dont have a clue on how you would enforce this but because SW Arterial exists, semis should not be allowed on Dodge if they are just trying to go through town. They should only be allowed on Dodge if they need to make a delivery that requires them to take Dodge. There is already too much traffic for what Dodge can handle and semis make it exponentially worse. " Dubuque does have a really great transportation system. Obviously, things could always be better. Running on Sundays would be extremely beneficial. Make Dubuque walkable. None of the plazas are accessible by foot or bike really. They're barely safe to walk in if you park somewhere in there. We don’t want to walk or bike in this town. It’s very old fashioned. I would look at other communities like Madison Wi as they have a very bike friendly community. Not sure there is a magic trick for that. More pickup locations in residential areas. How many traffic signals are there on Highway 20 between Locust and NW Arterial? I think improvements have been made with round a bouts, the Jule is all around town, and I see the new bike lanes, I'm sure there needs to be a bit more to the bike lanes, but I think there are a few areas like University and Loras that would benefit from a round a bout. Obviously there are issues with creating those and taking land, etc, but I've found them helpful in relieving congestion on my commute. Additional accessible public transportation with more flexibility Biking Infrastructure --Taxi Service - More Exit/entrance ramps on Hwy 20 to lessen congestion through town. More biking infrastructure would always be nice. Love the bike racks and bike repair stations in the Millwork District. Overpasses, bike lanes, added sidewalks, additional stops on the bus routes, Not sure. We need to cater to more large truck traffic. River trade is what founded our great city. large trucks are part of river trade. More compact development with separated paths for bikes and pedestrians, especially in high speed, high traffic areas. Roadways need to be better cared for. We need to recognize that our bus system is under used. Add biking lanes and create spaces within neighborhoods so folks can easily access them without motorized transportation. Public transit and bike/walking infrastructure. There are too many areas that are inaccessible. For instance, it's difficult and dangerous to bike/walk from down town to the locust Hy-Vee. Shared transit (cars, bikes, buses) Public transit, biking infrastructure "Biking infrastructure.Public transportation routes with improved travel time and frequency." Improved biking infrastructure, more usable bus schedules. Dubuque has too many surface parking lots and not enough buses. More biking infrastructure "Public transit to Chicago would be an absolute game changerFree buses from downtown to school and grocery areas " Greater biking infrastructure, especially to get up the Bluff. The Jule bus system is inefficient and hard to use for those who don’t have smart phones. The buses often do not run on schedule and close down so early in the day and are less accessible on weekends. Better public transit (if you can get people to use it) and biking/hiking infrastructure including ensuring that we have well maintained public sidewalks throughout the city. Need more sidewalks everywhere and bike lanes and bike paths. A more walkable city will allow for better transit service. The arterial roads and Dodge Street should be better streamlined for truck traffic, remove traffic lights, install access roads and interchanges. New leadership at city hall-streets are horrible,parks are the same ,schools aren’t much better ,crime ,illegal aliens,property taxes and fees are all serious issues with this regime. You parade yourself around like your doing good but you really aren’t doing anything for the majority of citizens, shame on us for not voting Walkable billable streets and paths to riverfront. Embarrassing that it’s not pleasant to bike to or along river. Connect riverfront and downtown with pedestrian and bike friendly ways Jule brand could use a makeover. Tired and outdated. Continue bike trail connectivity. Work with property owners to access empty parking ramps. “ Expeditious public transit on main corridors. more bike lanes. Sadly too late for trains. Better scheduling to serve those who work odd hours. Large corridors like the arterials to move more traffic more quickly Biking Roundabouts on Asbury and Loras, Asbury and university and university and Pennsylvania. And some kind of traffic flow improvement in front of Washington Junior High More housing density. Automobile transportation infrastructure should not be prioritized over pedestrian, bicycling and public transit. More car, bicycle and scooter sharing services. Explore point-to-point transit (taxi/Uber/DuRide) services to replace bus system Not sure Another easy way to get from downtown to west side besides Dodge Biking and walking infrastructure and more public transit Viking infrastructure and walking paths public transit and walking/biking infrastructure No opinion Transportation should be provided to all industrial parks and even out to other towns such as Peosta. There are many job opportunities in warehouses and factories that won't be filled because of a lack of accessibility despite living in Dubuque. Self driving vehicle infrastructure Transportation could be improved as demand increases - frequency of busses would be the next logical step, though doing so now would likely leave empty busses. It would be nice to see a general removal of surface parking lots in the downtown and more encouragement of public transportation, cycling, and walking. People could get used to these ideas if we weren't constantly bending over backward to demolish historic buildings for parking areas - this is a very dated concept (70 year old urban planning theory) that somehow still has a hold among the community here and does not play to Dubuque's strengths. Local public transportation increased, careful, multi family housing with adequate parking and local road access that prevents traffic congestion in multi family housing areas. I need to know more about what issues people are having. Safe Biking/walking infrastructure to green spaces. Transportation to support youth programming through out the city. Keeping our roads safe and pot hole free. Sidewalks that are maintained especially those around parks and public spaces. More smart stoplights that respond to traffic being in the intersections. Increased public transportation, especially to the industrial parks and other areas where a lot of people work. Complete Streets Train service biking infrastructure! move EV buses Add roundabouts wherever warranted, Public parking, Signal timing studies (can these be improved?), Roads focus on walkability, especially in the historic downtown. expanded public transit walk/bike-friendly trails to the whole city so that people on the west end can safely access the core of Dubuque. More busing to all areas of the city. improvements to east/west and north/south thoroughfares (non highways) for commuter traffic/peak times; more recreational trails/paths. Biking infrastructure is not a need for me. I believe adding biking lanes to downtown would be catastrophic to parking, traffic control, and safety. In regards to roads I think we should find a way to divert oversized loads or non local truck traffic. I have noticed that semis are frequently driving over concrete barriers and causing damages. "Oh boy here we go. I'm going to just copy/paste what I wrote before.... my god does the city need to adjust the length of yellow lights, especially on Dodge. The time it takes to go from yellow to red is ridiculously short. In other nearby cities like Waterloo the yellow lights last at least 2-3 seconds longer. For as much semi traffic as Dodge gets (dont even get me started on the failed SW Arterial project that was supposed to reduce trucker traffic but clearly isnt doing a dang thing), and for how hilly Dodge is (think slick roads in winter), it is a legitimate safety concern to have yellow lights be that short. This survey for sure is not the right place to go to about this issue I know, but hopefully someone who reads this survey will know who to bring this issue up to. Otherwise the biggest transportation issue in Dubuque I would say is the amount of semi traffic on Dodge that just go straight through town without any stops. I dont have a clue on how you would enforce this but because SW Arterial exists, semis should not be allowed on Dodge if they are just trying to go through town. They should only be allowed on Dodge if they need to make a delivery that requires them to take Dodge. There is already too much traffic for what Dodge can handle and semis make it exponentially worse. " Dubuque does have a really great transportation system. Obviously, things could always be better. Running on Sundays would be extremely beneficial. Make Dubuque walkable. None of the plazas are accessible by foot or bike really. They're barely safe to walk in if you park somewhere in there. We don’t want to walk or bike in this town. It’s very old fashioned. I would look at other communities like Madison Wi as they have a very bike friendly community. Not sure there is a magic trick for that. More pickup locations in residential areas. How many traffic signals are there on Highway 20 between Locust and NW Arterial? I think improvements have been made with round a bouts, the Jule is all around town, and I see the new bike lanes, I'm sure there needs to be a bit more to the bike lanes, but I think there are a few areas like University and Loras that would benefit from a round a bout. Obviously there are issues with creating those and taking land, etc, but I've found them helpful in relieving congestion on my commute. Additional accessible public transportation with more flexibility Biking Infrastructure --Taxi Service - More Exit/entrance ramps on Hwy 20 to lessen congestion through town. More biking infrastructure would always be nice. Love the bike racks and bike repair stations in the Millwork District. Overpasses, bike lanes, added sidewalks, additional stops on the bus routes, Not sure. We need to cater to more large truck traffic. River trade is what founded our great city. large trucks are part of river trade. More compact development with separated paths for bikes and pedestrians, especially in high speed, high traffic areas. Roadways need to be better cared for. We need to recognize that our bus system is under used. Add biking lanes and create spaces within neighborhoods so folks can easily access them without motorized transportation. Public transit and bike/walking infrastructure. There are too many areas that are inaccessible. For instance, it's difficult and dangerous to bike/walk from down town to the locust Hy-Vee. Shared transit (cars, bikes, buses) Public transit, biking infrastructure "Biking infrastructure.Public transportation routes with improved travel time and frequency." Improved biking infrastructure, more usable bus schedules. Dubuque has too many surface parking lots and not enough buses. More biking infrastructure "Public transit to Chicago would be an absolute game changerFree buses from downtown to school and grocery areas " Greater biking infrastructure, especially to get up the Bluff. The Jule bus system is inefficient and hard to use for those who don’t have smart phones. The buses often do not run on schedule and close down so early in the day and are less accessible on weekends. Better public transit (if you can get people to use it) and biking/hiking infrastructure including ensuring that we have well maintained public sidewalks throughout the city. Need more sidewalks everywhere and bike lanes and bike paths. A more walkable city will allow for better transit service. The arterial roads and Dodge Street should be better streamlined for truck traffic, remove traffic lights, install access roads and interchanges. New leadership at city hall-streets are horrible,parks are the same ,schools aren’t much better ,crime ,illegal aliens,property taxes and fees are all serious issues with this regime. You parade yourself around like your doing good but you really aren’t doing anything for the majority of citizens, shame on us for not voting Page 159 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Roundabouts on Asbury and Loras, Asbury and University and University and Pennsylvania. And some kind of traffic flow improvement in front of Washington Junior High More housing density. Automobile transportation infrastructure should not be prioritized over pedestrian, bicycling and public transit. More car, bicycle and scooter sharing services. Explore point-to-point transit (taxi/Uber/DuRide) services to replace bus system Not sure Another easy way to get from downtown to west side besides Dodge Biking and walking infrastructure and more public transit Viking infrastructure and walking paths Public transit and walking/biking infrastructure No opinion Transportation should be provided to all industrial parks and even out to other towns such as Peosta. There are many job opportunities in warehouses and factories that won't be filled because of a lack of accessibility despite living in Dubuque. Self driving vehicle infrastructure Transportation could be improved as demand increases - frequency of busses would be the next logical step, though doing so now would likely leave empty busses. It would be nice to see a general removal of surface parking lots in the downtown and more encouragement of public transportation, cycling, and walking. People could get used to these ideas if we weren't constantly bending over backward to demolish historic buildings for parking areas - this is a very dated concept (70 year old urban planning theory) that somehow still has a hold among the community here and does not play to Dubuque's strengths. Page 160 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Local public transportation increased, careful, multi family housing with adequate parking and local road access that prevents traffic congestion in multi family housing areas. I need to know more about what issues people are having. Safe Biking/walking infrastructure to green spaces. Transportation to support youth programming through out the city. Keeping our roads safe and pothole free. Sidewalks that are maintained especially those around parks and public spaces. More smart stoplights that respond to traffic being in the intersections. Increased public transportation, especially to the industrial parks and other areas where a lot of people work. Complete Streets Train service Biking infrastructure! move EV buses Add roundabouts wherever warranted, Public parking, Signal timing studies (can these be improved?) Focus on walkability, especially in the historic downtown. expanded public transit Walk/bike-friendly trails to the whole city so that people on the west end can safely access the core of Dubuque. More busing to all areas of the city. Dubuque does have a really great transportation system. Obviously, things could always be better. Running on Sundays would be extremely beneficial. Make Dubuque walkable. None of the plazas are accessible by foot or bike really. They're barely safe to walk in if you park somewhere in there. Page 161 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Improvements to east/west and north/south thoroughfares (non highways) for commuter traffic/peak times; more recreational trails/paths. Biking infrastructure is not a need for me. I believe adding biking lanes to downtown would be catastrophic to parking, traffic control, and safety. In regards to roads I think we should find a way to divert oversized loads or non local truck traffic. I have noticed that semis are frequently driving over concrete barriers and causing damages. Oh boy here we go. I'm going to just copy/paste what I wrote before.... my god does the city need to adjust the length of yellow lights, especially on Dodge. The time it takes to go from yellow to red is ridiculously short. In other nearby cities like Waterloo the yellow lights last at least 2-3 seconds longer. For as much semi traffic as Dodge gets (dont even get me started on the failed SW Arterial project that was supposed to reduce trucker traffic but clearly isnt doing a dang thing), and for how hilly Dodge is (think slick roads in winter), it is a legitimate safety concern to have yellow lights be that short. This survey for sure is not the right place to go to about this issue I know, but hopefully someone who reads this survey will know who to bring this issue up to. Otherwise the biggest transportation issue in Dubuque I would say is the amount of semi traffic on Dodge that just go straight through town without any stops. I dont have a clue on how you would enforce this but because SW Arterial exists, semis should not be allowed on Dodge if they are just trying to go through town. They should only be allowed on Dodge if they need to make a delivery that requires them to take Dodge. There is already too much traffic for what Dodge can handle and semis make it exponentially worse. Page 162 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Dubuque does have a really great transportation system. Obviously, things could always be better. Running on Sundays would be extremely beneficial. Make Dubuque walkable. None of the plazas are accessible by foot or bike really. They're barely safe to walk in if you park somewhere in there. We don’t want to walk or bike in this town. It’s very old fashioned. I would look at other communities like Madison Wi as they have a very bike friendly community. Not sure there is a magic trick for that. More pickup locations in residential areas. How many traffic signals are there on Highway 20 between Locust and NW Arterial? Additional accessible public transportation with more flexibility I think improvements have been made with round a bouts, the Jule is all around town, and I see the new bike lanes, I'm sure there needs to be a bit more to the bike lanes, but I think there are a few areas like University and Loras that would benefit from a round a bout. Obviously there are issues with creating those and taking land, etc, but I've found them helpful in relieving congestion on my commute. Biking Infrastructure --Taxi Service - More Exit/entrance ramps on Hwy 20 to lessen congestion through town. More biking infrastructure would always be nice. Love the bike racks and bike repair stations in the Millwork District. Overpasses, bike lanes, added sidewalks, additional stops on the bus routes, Not sure. Page 163 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? We need to cater to more large truck traffic. River trade is what founded our great city. large trucks are part of river trade. More compact development with separated paths for bikes and pedestrians, especially in high speed, high traffic areas. Roadways need to be better cared for. We need to recognize that our bus system is under used. Add biking lanes and create spaces within neighborhoods so folks can easily access them without motorized transportation. Public transit and bike/walking infrastructure. There are too many areas that are inaccessible. For instance, it's difficult and dangerous to bike/walk from downtown to the locust Hy-Vee. Shared transit (cars, bikes, buses) Public transit, biking infrastructure Biking infrastructure. Public transportation routes with improved travel time and frequency. Improved biking infrastructure, more usable bus schedules. Dubuque has too many surface parking lots and not enough buses. More biking infrastructure Public transit to Chicago would be an absolute game changer. Free buses from downtown to school and grocery areas Greater biking infrastructure, especially to get up the Bluff. The Jule bus system is inefficient and hard to use for those who don’t have smart phones. The buses often do not run on schedule and close down so early in the day and are less accessible on weekends. Page 164 of 421 What improvements do you believe are needed in Dubuque’s transportation system (e.g. roads, public transit, biking infrastructure) to support future growth? Better public transit (if you can get people to use it) and biking/hiking infrastructure including ensuring that we have well maintained public sidewalks throughout the city. Need more sidewalks everywhere and bike lanes and bike paths. A more walkable city will allow for better transit service. The arterial roads and Dodge Street should be better streamlined for truck traffic, remove traffic lights, install access roads and interchanges. New leadership at city hall-streets are horrible, parks are the same ,schools aren’t much better, crime, illegal aliens, property taxes and fees are all serious issues with this regime. You parade yourself around like your doing good but you really aren’t doing anything for the majority of citizens, shame on us for not voting Page 165 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #21: What do you value most about the City of Dubuque? (Provide up to three factors) Page 166 of 421 What do you value most about the City of Dubuque? (Provide up to three factors) Low cost of living Long standing businesses that anchor our community. Historic preservation. The river, bluffs, and historic resources. 1. Family Friendly Attractions 2. Enviromental & Refurbished Historic Beauty 3. Amenities (Retail, Restaurants, Health & Wellness)“ It's recreation, landscape, and proximity to the river. Historic town in Iowa Downtown Small businesses and their owners downtown. Urban lifestyle The diversity of the people. The vibrant arts scene. The feeling that anyone can get engaged and truly make a difference working towards to future The natural landscape including the river. The relatively low cost of living. The creative placemaking, which gives Dubuque its unique feel and attracts visitors. Nice people, entertainment options are increasing. family friendly city Keeping river shoreline access and views open to the public and not sold for private use/ownership. Affordability, which is mostly no longer the case, natural and historic beauty, cultural heritage. Natural beauty - Driftless Area, Mississippi River. Many city amenities without big city challenges like traffic congestion. Relatively affordable" Natural landscape; affordable cost of living; historic architecture Overall safe city. Good education by the schools. Topography (hills, river, bluffs, scenery) 1. Community 2. Safety 3. Quality of Life Its attention to its citizens Page 167 of 421 What do you value most about the City of Dubuque? (Provide up to three factors) The people. The can-do attitude. The willingness to identify improvements and move behind the initiatives as a community Perfect size for easy-access urbanism with a quick escape to ruralism. Natural beauty, walkable downtown, great community (people) The people Communication new affordable housing more higher page wage jobs, not 15-17 an hour, way to low to afford prices in Dubuque. Dubuque is the most expensive place to live. Especially the outrageous rent prices. They are way to high. The strength in numbers of people who care about what happens in Dubuque and are willing to do work to make it a better place to live and work. Businesses, housing costs, community feel Safety, low traffic, public access to infrastructure Its proximity to the Mississippi Dubuque's ability to partner and move big projects forward utilizing a plethora of private and public resources that originate outside of our community. The amount of outside investment that the Dubuque Community is able to leverage is inspiring. I value the people who live here and the feeling of community as well as the nature amenities at our fingertips! I love Dubuque! Safety, cost of living, good schools Downtown is great despite the fact that it is under- appreciated, under-supported and actively maligned Community gathering spaces that are not drinking establishments, the library, and locally owned businesses Page 168 of 421 What do you value most about the City of Dubuque? (Provide up to three factors) The unique topography which splits the town into different zones, the beautiful river and bluffs and the old industrial revitalization areas, I appreciate the rebuilding of the old buildings in the mill work district. You will never be able to build new buildings with the character and charm of the old industrial buildings. I think this could be good start towards a special niche for tourism. Historical architecture; cost of living; natural environment Bike paths. Historical buildings. Great sized town Visionary council. Police protection. Fire protection General affordability. low violent crime, lots of entertainment options Size of city allowing for personal relationships between citizens in different socioeconomic groups. This is a beautiful city. the leaders of this city do not do enough to include the "ordinary" citizen in the direction of our future. People are tired of a handful of individuals making decisions. 1. Incredible base to build on 2. Historic buildings 3. Variety in topography Landscape. Historic Buildings. People Walkable neighborhoods. Historic districts and the river front. it's progressive -it's inclusive Downtown with character, natural beauty, small size The history, culture Small town feel and close connection to unspoiled nature... it's not very sprawling which is nice. Page 169 of 421 What do you value most about the City of Dubuque? (Provide up to three factors) Progressive city government, Natural Beauty The natural landscape, river and community events I value living near downtown, where most of my needs can be met within 1-2 mile trips, often accomplished on foot or bike. I also value the forward thinking of the local government. Historic character, natural resources, Mississippi River livability, charm/beauty, city and community services The unique geography of the city, with its tree canopy and topography Relatively safe, Driftless location, Small city atmosphere Its history and landmarks Size. Safety/crime rate. Dining and entertainment options. Dubuque has a rich history. Dubuque has a small town feel, while still offering quite a lot of opportunity. To ensure that rich history, I think it's important to preserve historic buildings and site, but then also create ways to educate residents on historic buildings and sites. Perhaps an online directory of some historical/background information on buildings that are being preserved. Access to city government. Access to services. The commitment to growth and doing so with citizen input State and county parks with hiking/kayaking available. Variety of restaurants and shopping. Community the river front The people, the landmarks and our leaders The leaders The culture and the people Page 170 of 421 What do you value most about the City of Dubuque? (Provide up to three factors) Conducive to comfortable living, Schools, Historic preservation The historic mixed-use spaces in the Millwork, along bluff street and the Main Street shops/housing. I like the parks and the trail system. Keeping the current section of Heritage Trail unpaved is important for runners, walkers, outdoor people -and keep motorized vehicles off of it. I like support for independent (non-Chain) local businesses- especially good restaurants. Its rich history, culture, and beautiful landscape and greenspaces. Safety The people. Preservation of historical buildings and landmarks. Willingness to explore innovative ideas. It’s unique geography and the river. Small town feel Cost of living and community character The community and engagement of local leaders. The family friendly environment. The safety that Dubuque has. The beauty. I love that the city invests in green space. The riverwalk is a great attraction. Dubuque is very philanthropic. For the most part beautiful. A decent place to live and raise a family. Many different activity and entertainment options.“ It is a medium size community offers a variety of recreational opportunities great municipal services Ease of access to areas. Quality education Murals, nightlife, safety Slow pace and general safety. It's demographics and size Page 171 of 421 What do you value most about the City of Dubuque? (Provide up to three factors) The city is pretty affordable for it's size. There are great recreation areas around the area. It has a lot to offer without feeling like it's too big city. It used to be, and for the most part still is pretty safe. 1. Safety 2. Wheelchair Accessibility 3. Swiss Valley Park Size of the city, amenities and it's affordability Safe town, police and sheriff do a great job, keep the funding coming. City staff do a great job on the streets in the winter. It still has a small-town feel. Good mix of People and feel safe and secure for the most part. Topography and Nature, Small Size, Affordability, The people, the Economy here An old joke goes like this, "What is the best thing about Dubuque?" The answer is "the people." Next question, "What is the worst thing about Dubuque?" The answer is "the people." I was born here, left at three because our family traveled the world, and then returned at 25 to raise my children in our great community. The problem is my return happened in the 80s when the city was on its way to shutting down. The forward-thinking, public and private coordination and its people made and saved our city, turning it into one of the best overall (culture, livability, medical, education, etc.) for a city of its size and location in America. Sense of community. millwork district. public school system Low crime rate, Being able to purchase most basic items without leaving town. Naturally a beautiful place- Beautiful historic architecture - Decently walkable downtown Page 172 of 421 What do you value most about the City of Dubuque? (Provide up to three factors) Commercial & Industrial development is usually ahead of the curve I value the river and the hills. I value our quality of life.I value the mid-size of our town. Not to big, not to small. Calm environment with neighborhood character Diversity Access to the Arts Community events. The Mississippi River, The older Architecture on our buildings, A bridge going into Both Wisconsin and Illinois. Architecture/history/friendliness of shop owners. Just the right size with growing arts opportunities Short Commute via personal vehicle. The City of Dubuque has several standout qualities that make it a vibrant and appealing community. Here are three key aspects: 1. Historical and Cultural Richness Dubuque is one of the oldest cities in Iowa, with a rich history reflected in its architecture, landmarks, and museums. The preservation of historic districts, such as the Millwork District, and attractions like the National Mississippi River River Museum & Aquarium highlight its deep cultural heritage. 2. Scenic Beauty and Natural Resources Nestled along the Mississippi River, Dubuque offers stunning natural landscapes, including riverfront parks, bluffs, and trails. The city’s commitment to outdoor recreation, such as the Mines of Spain Recreation Area and the Bee Branch Creek Greenway, provides residents and visitors with ample opportunities to enjoy nature. 3. Commitment to Sustainability and Innovation Dubuque has a strong focus on sustainability and smart city initiatives. Programs like the Sustainable Dubuque initiative showcase the city’s dedication to environmental stewardship, community engagement, and long-term planning for growth. This forward-thinking mindset positions Dubuque as a leader among small to mid-sized cities. These qualities make Dubuque a unique and thriving community with a balance of historical charm, natural beauty, and progressive development.“ Traffic (relative to large cities)Healthcare Entertainment options Page 173 of 421 What do you value most about the City of Dubuque? (Provide up to three factors) Melting pot, tourist attractions, the people are wonderful The river. The people. The activities. Sustainability, Environmentally friendly, Accessible 1. The beauty of the area.2. Safety and family friendly activities that are offered.3. Progressive planning." It's small city vibe but big city options. I live near Finley Hospital so I can get anywhere in Dubuque in a matter of minutes. Sometimes there are so many activities in Dubuque it's hard to choose what I want to do. Of those activities many are free! The Multicultural Family Center has become a magnet for cultural events including adult, teen and children's activities. Old charm. The bike paths. The job market. Low crime The hills and trees. Eagle Point Park. Heritage Trail It's a larger city yet a small town mentality in many aspects of life. Hometown and proud values are still present in most areas. The revitalizing of downtown historical buildings and locations. Bringing a fresh perspective with new business and restaurants making Dubuque feel like a novel balance between new and exciting and affordability. Its proximity to and pretenses (however feeble) to emulate Chicago. The Mines of Spain, Eagle Point Park, and the accessibility and relative "cleanliness" of the riverfront. Green space and Parks. Historic areas in Dubuque Safety, Level of noise Investment opportunities, schools systems, clean parks Beauty of buildings and new uses of history Page 174 of 421 What do you value most about the City of Dubuque? (Provide up to three factors) Community aspect, nature, visible progress Affordability, Diverse experiential opportunities, Small city feeling The entire arts scene. Reasonable cost of living. Local officials actually listen to citizens. Community is open and safe Dubuque is a beautiful City with many opportunities. The local colleges provide programs for many ages . We must not take this for granted but support protecting or architectural treasures and the many life style programs for all ages. Educational opportunities, Pro active to needs, Good city council I appreciate that our city is constantly striving to improve and provide assets to the public that far outweigh the size of the community Historic architecture, natural outdoor recreation, arts accessibility Natural and historic beauty, support of sustainability, and programs that support historically underserved communities. Our people. The parks. The river Green areas. The River Walk/Access to enjoy the river. Downtown development that is happening to beautify, preserve and utilize old buildings. The city of Dubuque is very walkable and I love the historic buildings that are being preserved in the city. Variety of recreation, historical, natural and living spaces The vibrancy of the downtown. Our parks. The Bee Branch improvements. Page 175 of 421 What do you value most about the City of Dubuque? (Provide up to three factors) The people. We have a very large number of people in this city that are incredibly creative and hard working. Additionally, there are people that were native to Dubuque that have moved and started businesses elsewhere that would be valuable assets to our community given the opportunity. There should be focus on not just bringing business in, but paving a realistic way for them to set up shop and live local. Small town feeling with bigger city accommodations and amenities. Neighborhoods generally seem pretty integrated - you go down the street and you find nice houses; go around the corner and there are poor houses Our most important resources are our historic buildings and neighborhoods. Secondly is the river and surrounding bits of nature. Historical architecture, diverse culture, community gatherings I appreciate the size of the city, the overall well maintained streets and roads, the riverfront area, the development of the warehouse district, the park development in Dubuque. Dubuque has done much to improve itself in the twenty-five plus years I have lived here! It's a beautiful area of the United States. I do appreciate the value the City places on sustainability efforts reflected in their city departments and goals and priorities. Its people and its historic neighborhoods. Being a welcoming place for Everyone. Being a beautiful and historic city and maintaining that character. Being a sustainable city that encourages renovation and restoration of historical buildings Proximity to the tri-state area Page 176 of 421 What do you value most about the City of Dubuque? (Provide up to three factors) It’s history. The architecture. It’s natural beauty with the hills, bluffs, and the Mississippi River. I value the open-mindedness of the council we have. I value the quickness of our public works staff and emergency services. I value the districts and opportunities for multiple businesses in Dubuque, downtown or otherwise. Connection to the River. Parks History, Landscape, Parks 1. beautiful river walk 2. Historical “ 1. the resiliency of the people 2. the beauty of the community mainly the downtown/bluff area 3. access to jobs" Strong development track record last 20 years; much better downtown environment and quality of life I value the safety in the City of Dubuque the most. The Police Department does an amazing job of responding promptly and maintaining positive relations with all community members. Parks, the disc golf community around the area, walking by the river/anything to do with the river museum. I love Dubuque's public school system. I have been blessed to have really great teachers in our elementary schools. I work with adults with disabilities and can say that hearing from other communities across the state that we are blessed to have access to the public transportation system. We live on St. John Drive and I love that we are in a safe, quiet neighborhood with access to all of the amenities that Dubuque has to offer. Natural spaces, river, mines of spain, swiss valley, etc. Historic value and buildings. People, parks, ability to voice my opinion about city government Page 177 of 421 What do you value most about the City of Dubuque? (Provide up to three factors) Accessibility of local government, strong community events, safety Small-town, midwest values. Natural features. The way the city welcomes and celebrates diversity, the amount of 'things to do' in the city (I see the constant effort to bring entertainment in), the community offerings through parks and rec/ library, etc to help the everyone grow, share interests, and make connections. Mix of history and progress forward. Public and private partnerships. Overall beautiful location and access to nature related activities. Safety, Convenience -everything within 10 minutes of my house Cost of living I love the emphasis on preserving historical zones, promoting sustainability and environmental conservation, and helping small businesses thrive. Safety, affordability, access to parks, community involvement Amenities, Arts & Culture, Parks, Educational system, Outdoor choices, Public Safety Our river is our biggest asset. Natural beauty, unimpeded views (where available) The people. The park system Historic character and beautiful landscape. Small town, relatively inexpensive housing Potential for parks and recreation growth, between the preservation of natural landscape, enhanced with park infrastructure this city has the opportunity to create accessible recreation for residents and visitors - Opportunity to be truly engaged in the community- Historic neighborhoods and district and charm. This is a real asset that is unique to Dubuque Page 178 of 421 What do you value most about the City of Dubuque? (Provide up to three factors) The architecture, the environment, the cultural centers The history and community Beautiful scenery with the historical downtown, river, and bluffs More diverse than surrounding small towns Several colleges in town/ education opportunities My family is here Historic buildings, Engagement with the river and nature, Ease of movement Historic character and friendly neighborhoods, beautiful river setting The river but I can’t stick my toes in it. Our parks but they’re run down. Car rides but it’s to bumpy. Page 179 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #22: What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Page 180 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Cohesive development that successfully supports mixed use structures like the Millwork district in 10 other locations Connectivity to the west end, more walkable downtown. 1. More all-season experiences, attractions in already existing and renovated spaces 2. More and improved exercise and wellness facilities 3. More and improved transportation and city district connections Creating quality life amenities that help recruit population to the area. Connectivity and sense of place amongst key neighborhoods of the City. Developer- friendly environment. Inclusion and welcoming behavior needs to start at the top. Zoning maps that are the same as TIF districts. Walk the talk for small businesses starting at the top - citizens will follow proper modeling. More energy focused on the downtown area Affordable home ownership opportunities beyond the older, high maintenance, single family homes that are typically only available in the greater downtown areas. Rethink public transit and consider making it free to all riders. Offer simple high frequency routes so residents and visitors don’t have to study multiple route maps especially where the routes could cater to tourists and/or where the city is trying to incentivize commerce and redevelopment such as the central Avenue corridor. Lastly, the UDC should be future ready with the likely transition to semi or fully autonomous vehicles, hopefully parking demands will decrease but infrastructure needs including for electrification will change and new developments should be ready for this evolution. Less taxes for business and for the people. Page 181 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Paved trail to Dyersville. Enforce no pets in those parks where they are not allowed. East/West travel through Dubuque has greatly increased the past few years and future growth will only get worse if action is not taken to get ahead of this. We need more high paying careers (not "jobs"), affordable rent, and more housing options. More open and welcoming to people from other places and of different backgrounds. Increased downtown living, working, and vibrancy. A technology company or other employer that would be an exciting attraction to new, young residents and recent college grads Increased biking infrastructure, more amenities for families and teenagers, more ethnic restaurants. I would like to see the downtown area be open to shopping stores again. I would love to see Christmas holiday lights in the downtown area. There are areas within the city that are presumed to be less desirable that are simply a continuation of the same neighborhood (example: Lincoln Ave seems to be safer/cleaner as you are north of Bethany Home vs south. Central Ave as you get closer to 32nd street seems safer/cleaner than getting closer to 20th) Would be interested to know the percentage of home ownership vs rental. And if rental is higher in the perceived areas, what are some things we could do to improve the look and feel for those that live there so they feel good about their living conditions. Invest in infrastructure and projects centered around attracting young professionals and families. This likely means investing significant resources into attracting businesses with significant employment opportunities and high paying jobs. Also means that while we need to maintain the character of our downtown, we also need to be able to bring modern architecture and development projects to downtown - and encourage that development. Page 182 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Improved, proactive communication between all constituents. Broad proactive community engagement for publicly owned land Let's pick the 3 ugliest downtown blocks and turn them into the most beautiful Pedestrian routes. Sidewalks and bike routes that are too close to major car traffic will be underutilized More appeal to "outsiders" (most people I know who move away are people of color); more frequent and convenient public transit Better high paying jobs, real affordable housing, lower prices of rent More support for small business operators. Better bike options for travel across all aspects of the city" more walking paths, elimination of parking meters downtown More family-based activity centers, less bars and churches. Better inclusion of the Mississippi in Dubuque's life. Streets bordered with trees. No trucks anymore I would like to see 100% of Dubuque residents to live within a 10-minute walk of a park or public greens space and for these spaces to be of equal quality meeting the specific needs of the people who live within this radius. I would like for Dubuque to become a public trails mecca, connecting all neighborhoods to our cultural and natural resource treasures and for Dubuque to prioritize around every corner projects that complement our cultural and natural history while improving upon native habitats, improving water quality and managing water quantity. Dubuque can be the most connected, healthy, equitable, and outdoor recreation- oriented community of its size in the county. We have all of the resources and will to do so at the ready. Let's roll! Page 183 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) More apartments, more condos, more restaurants if something is allowed on one side of a street, it should be allowed on both sides of a street, perhaps in accordance with existing tax districts (maybe that is a TIF district?) Less parking, more greenspace, more trees Would like to see all of the areas next to the river be better utilized, there is no where to go and sit and be right next to the river to enjoy it. The are no actual beaches to go to with out owning a boat. The road on the floodwall by the dam and the river view park are the only place the river can be easily seen. The city is missing a huge benefit because we are not presenting the river as well as it could be utilized. There could be bars and restaurants shopping etc. over looking the river, I have seen many cities small and large take advantage of rivers and streams all across the united states way better then Dubuque. We have the fourth longest river in the world in our backyard and we do not acknowledge it. Infill development; maintenance/repair of existing utility infrastructure; Walkable/bikeable neighborhoods Improvement on existing building’s appearance and signage Better street repairs Disability requirements checked on all facilities One Skyscraper, more bridges over the railroad More restrictive billboard and signage code. Ban outdoor public art on buildings in historic preservation districts. Rework of the east dubuque bridge intersection (travelling east is a nightmare and almost always a bottleneck). Add a roundabout at the intersection of university and Asbury Redo Cedar Cross Road from Birch Hearth and Home to Tristate blind society - incorporating sidewalks and improving curb appeal for all housing and businesses Page 184 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) The citizens should have a say over the term of service of a city manager citizens should have a say in the ""look"" of the city, i.e. paintings on buildings or having ""woke"" or ""inclusivity"" painting on the 5 Flags Center. too many decisions are made by a select group of people in this town. work harder to include the blue- collar class Accessibility of information. I feel we have a lot of events that happen in Dubuque, but I don't usually know about them.- Property owners need to held accountable for allowing buildings to fall into disrepair. We are losing too many historic properties due to negligent property owners.- Current historic homeowners should get incentives for living in and retaining these properties. Without them, we would lose a lot of Dubuque's charm. Better tree coverage in the downtown district to encourage more walking. More Bike Lanes. More arts and museums. I would like to see programs to assist with lead water pipes for residential homeowners. Dubuque also needs more functional green spaces downtown...ie..fruit trees, pollinator flower beds, trees More retail shops in the town clock area and down Main St. getting better, but there are still many empty storefronts. Fill the largely unused parking lots downtown in with useable retail and commercial(aka units for larger stores and businesses. 19th cent. Commercial is too small to be viable for most businesses today) done in a way that respects the 19th century architecture and character of downtown. I could see partnering with architecture schools like Notre Dame since classical architects are hard to find(they have helped with redevelopment projects of similar scope in the Netherlands, Italy, and England) Page 185 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Improve some of the major arterials through the city More quality, affordable housing aka less than $1,000 I think the mixed-use areas near the Millwork district are a great example of what can be done in other downtown areas. I know it's easier typed than done, but numerous downtown areas are currently taken up with surface parking lots or empty businesses. I believe there is unmet housing demand in the downtown area. Higher quality restaurants and food options with more variety - community recreation facility - long overdue - Less reliance on personal vehicles and parking- more use of mass transportation, walking, biking, uber etc. More affordable housing, more diverse events, better diversity of restaurants and businesses Increased environmental regulations on zoning, esp. regarding flood plans. Increased environmental regulations building, esp. regarding insulation. A safe, functional mixed use trail infrastructure. Redevelopment of dilapidated properties. Design guidelines by district for the entire community, including streetscape standards based on road classification. Trail connectivity throughout the City, so one does not need to drive to a trailhead to access the system. More historic preservation, More comprehensive plan for park restoration like Eagle Point Park. Street reconstruction Take back the riverfront, it belongs to the citizens of Dubuque not individuals or commercial and industrial development. As we develop more housing units, we must pause and ask ourselves, are we developing the right type of housing? Are there enough starter homes to buy (I would say the answer is probably not). Are there enough apartment in development (I don't know the answer). In long term projects, will all apartments be occupied as more starter homes are built, or will more starter homes result in apartment vacancies. To that end, how do we balance development to make sure we're developing housing that wont' be wasteful or short sited, while still meeting immediate and urgent needs.Page 186 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) More businesses e.g. restaurants, malls Continued and expanded development in north end area. Realistic expectations of the potential of the Millwork District. (1) Continue looking at ways to ease traffic on Dodge/Hwy20. New Arterial road and re-route of Hwy 52 were good starts, but there is still too much trucking on this road. (2) Stop being so sycophant to businesses. We give more tax abatements and TIF handouts to companies that exploit our community then leave (Duluth TC, Avelo, etc.). Use this money more wisely. City residents do not see the immediacy of these sort of payments. (Probably not a zoning code upgrade, but here's the gripe, anyway!) (3) Start regulating short term rentals such as AirB&B! I recall the intense debate over that restaurant redevelopment/expansion on Grandview when the (regulated) business did not offer adequate parking for the proposed service/space expansion. This is going on *all over the city* in residential communities and is impacting the availability of single-family and apartment availability. Plus, we are losing out on tax collection for these *businesses* (not private residences!). Also, there is little oversight on how reservations are made, and if there may be violations of civil rights laws.“ More walking/biking paths Better commuter options for biking. More complete street design. Mixed-use housing more green space bike lanes Be more open to people of all backgrounds all types of backgrounds Open for everyone regardless of their background. Create more high Paying jobs at least $15 an hour at least And have a job fair to recruit more police officers and firemen. Page 187 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Better housing for all. Age in place housing options for seniors. Thoughtful practical development If you drive up to Madison and go on the side roads to the SW of the city you will find an amazing amount of new, nice looking apartment complexes for young adult professionals. Dubuque doesn't seem to have any of this. I don't even know where to recommend that young professionals who are new to town consider renting other than the Millwork lofts. The other parts of town need some nice, safe rental options for young professionals. I'd like to see the bike trail system expanded and interconnected. Gaps between trails need to be completed. A trail along side (but not sharing the road with) SW Arterial for bikers and runners would be great. It would be great to completely connect the river wall trail and make it nice from where it starts to the south of Julien Dubuque Bridge along the floodwall, through that sketchy former industrial area, up past the River Museum and along the nice part by the Grand River Center- then up past the train bridge, around the harbor and up to where the trail system picks up closer to the Q (keep it all safe trail- not shared with streets so that people are comfortable biking with their kids on it).Is there a way to solve the parking situation downtown? Can the ramps be free? Or can the city make available something that works like I-Pass does for the Chicago tollways- where you just put it in your car and if you drive up to a parking ramp you are admitted for a flat fee (maybe its $1 or $2 or something) that is paid automatically without you doing anything? This would make exits and entrance super fast without fumbling for money, phones, etc. I avoid the ramps because I hate the payment process. I would like to see additional greenspaces in the urban centers of town. Less urban sprawl, better public transportation, more mix use development on parking lots or old buildings instead of destroying nature. Page 188 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Community center to include an indoor pool and recreation. Expand the library and the amenities the library has to offer. Seek a partnership that could bring a Waterpark or amusement park to the city. Work to become a destination city year-round. Update underground infrastructure, it’s long overdue. I realize the public cannot see it but with the poor conditions in small capacities it hinders development and and is in need of constant repair. Be more flexible and open to ideas with developers, they are the ones investing and helping to grow our City. Indoor sports complex Population growth and growth in the younger demographic. encouraging rental housing targeted to college students and recent graduates is a necessity to support our local colleges and universities as well as our businesses. Growth in housing opportunities for this population will help retain graduates and grow a demographic that Dubuque lags behind other metros in. Population growth and growth in the younger demographic. encouraging rental housing targeted to college students and recent graduates is a necessity to support our local colleges and universities as well as our businesses. Growth in housing opportunities for this population will help retain graduates and grow a demographic that Dubuque lags behind other metros in. 1) More housing. 2) More flights. 3) More sports/rec facilities. Promote commercial expansion in designated areas. Commercial air service, with flight schedules that make sense. Expanded Dubuque Museum of Art continued commitment to historic preservation“ A community that supports and values our public education systems. More efficient use of tax dollars Improve quality of housing stock Enforcement of ordinances in all neighborhoods Page 189 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Less street parking. People should not be allowed to run businesses out of their homes (ie: construction) that have multiple vehicles and trailers parked on streets and in driveways. Attract more business downtown Economic development, better flight options at airport. Better streets. If affordable housing is built, build it across the entire community not just downtown. I would like to see the Point area get some kind of focus. It's filled with long term residents who have lived here for years and remain entirely forgotten. Put some reinvestment into our end of town. 1. Stop wasting so much money on these bike paths and outdoor spaces that don't mean anything and are in the least utilized areas. 2. There isn't anything to do with families that want to go somewhere and spend time together for a day that is entirely inclusive (needs, not politically). Backpocket is about the only place that is attempting to provide a one-stop, all day entertainment for families. There needs to be more of this that is affordable (competition).3. The parks that we have could easily be updated, rather than having to completely reconstruct brand new ones. Vets had a really nice make over, that is one spot, and it is busy all of the time. Why aren't the other parks getting makeovers. For what has been spent on stupid concrete overhangs and sculptures/statues/etc, parks could have been updated. 1. There is a lack of ADA single family homes. 2. More sidewalks and businesses with wheelchair accessibility. 3. Clean up or tear down dilapidated buildings, businesses and housing.“ Better hospitals so people don't have to travel to Iowa City for services. Page 190 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) See so many people creating multiple offenses and still out on the street, why? Too many drivers driving while barred and no insurance, makes average citizens pay more in insurance. More quality restaurants, not fast food. Continue to be best in safety, fire and police. More restaurants and shops, Air service to Dallas or Phoenix?? Think and act more boldy for vision. Less conflicts of interest and grudge holding by City Gov and local entities that chase people out of town like AY McDonald Less waste on things with no ROI More shopping options More cultural spending and support, even though it is good, this one area will play a more critical role in improving our city. It generates tourism, education, activities, and more. Four-lane roads to Chicago and a generous link to Amtrak rail. Two airlines serve our regional area, so the city does not need to buy seats. More accessible access for riverboats might include a higher bridge across the Mississippi River, as in the days of the "High Bridge" over the railroad bridge. This might mean adding mail support with government road, rail, river, and airline subsidies, but that is what our federal taxes should be for, even if they need to be raised. Spending money generates more money, and the cycle improves quality and quantity of life. Clean up the old, abandoned buildings more focus on public education expand on the millwork district More entertainment options for adults, families and children. More retail. Additional air and rail transportation. Lean into the natural and historic beauty to draw more tourists. - outlaw the lighted signs like on the side of the Five Flags - it’s too bright. Absolutely terrible. - move the police station out of the center of downtown- remove laws requiring lawn mowing - outlaw pesticides and chemicals for aesthetic reasons (it drives me crazy to Page 191 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) see the city spraying roundup in sidewalk cracks, walking right past litter collecting in the city lots - make it make sense). - build a sheltered event center where we could have farmers market year round - think a big semi-permanent heated tent. " Infrastructure such as road building has always been WAY behind the curve.... There needs to be better east-west routes for bicycles. Asbury Rd use to be the pathway out of town. Now, the SW arterial prevents a cyclist from leaving the city without taking the bike out west on a car first. For future expansion on the south-west direction, we need another fire station. More mixed residential and commercial with neighborhood dining and corner grocery stores More major employment. We are losing major Factories. WHY?? Remove meters. Use only historical lights downtown. Improve sidewalks & holiday decor Wish list is of more for residents to do socially- & entertainment-wise, but the trend toward conservative (right-leaning) overall resident mindset (often impact by extreme influences on both sides, instead of common sense middle ground) seems to have opportunities lost in Dubuque and surrounding area. Actually become sustainable. 1. Schmitt Island as a Regional Destination Leverage the new amphitheater and Pinseekers facility to position Schmitt Island as a premier entertainment and recreation hub. Complement these developments with additional features like a riverfront promenade, expanded trails, and eco-friendly public spaces. Incorporate public art installations along pathways and near venues to enhance the visitor experience. Page 192 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) 2. Foster a Thriving Tech Ecosystem Attract tech companies by offering incentives like tax breaks and grants for relocation or startup growth. Develop coworking and innovation hubs near Schmitt Island or downtown to encourage collaboration. Partner with universities to create research centers in clean tech and software, using Schmitt Island as a smart city pilot site for innovative technologies.3. Expand Public Art and Cultural Programming Build on the amphitheater’s potential by hosting art festivals, live performances, and interactive workshops. Integrate public art throughout the island and city, transforming underused spaces into vibrant cultural landmarks. Collaborate with schools and tech companies to blend art and technology, fostering a creative and skilled workforce. By aligning Schmitt Island’s ongoing developments with broader efforts in tech, art, and sustainability, Dubuque can create a dynamic city that attracts businesses, tourists, and residents alike.“ Clean up areas on outskirts of downtown AFFORDABLE Housing is a must- More green space downtown- Late night study spot OR Dubuque Rec Center Less NOISE along Highway 20, The arterial and Highway 61/151. I understand we have an ordinance that prohibits loud trucks and trains and wish the police would start enforcing it. More nature/green space downtown, walking/biking infrastructure downtown, more community-based gathering spaces 1. Pave the Heritage Trail for more accessible use for all citizens. Also make the the upkeep of Eagle Point Park a priority. Keep the character while expanding options for retail/restaurants/businesses. Beautify the city by adding more smaller green spaces for neighborhoods. Page 193 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Improvements in Public Transportation to include more areas and/or shorter routes in some areas. Jule App in Spanish. I'm sure other languages would also be helpful. More City information and signs with translations in Spanish along with the English wording. It's difficult for me to understand how thoughtless we can be when I see information in English that informs Spanish-speaking/reading people to check somewhere else to find the information in Spanish. We all know we need affordable housing. Downtown updated. Reduced section 8.Landlord enforcement. More bike and walking spaces I would like Dbq to be proactive protectors of our water and food. Please read “The Swine Republic, Struggles with the Truth About Agriculture and Water Quality” by Chris Jones. Iowa is number 2 state with the highest cancer rate in US…talk about quality of life! Dubuque can’t even ban plastic bag use, so I don’t have a lot of hope you will become aware of how serious our situation is. - I would like to see slum landlords held accountable and the concentration of racial and ethnic populations dispersed equally throughout the city.- encourage sensitivity training for everyone involved in city projects…publicize and support our Multicultural Center with advertisements and money. We need to welcome diversity in our population, which will lead to new ideas. When the same people control our policy decisions, nothing changes….Empower our youth. Clean up problematic areas where crime is most present. Redevelop existing old buildings so they are no longer eye sores. New business that attract newer job categories like tech. This would help drive tenants downtown in revitalized housing/commercial building. Better recreational / restaurant options for new workforce not from Dubuque. Page 194 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Access to public pianos (yeah, it's niche and selfish, I know). Schools that don't have to do fundraising campaigns to afford their budgets (charter schools are INSANE). Proper support for the poor and disadvantaged, for starters perhaps a multi-use complex on the former site of the pack and/or electricity station wherein there are mental health services, warming center, emergency housing, grocery store for all (membership program for the poor to have their groceries subsidized by private donations). More baseball and softball fields for youth and adults. One larger municipal public pool with more amenities. Try to lease up the empty buildings in Dubuque with either rental housing or retail, or restaurant, before building new structures Low-income housing Dbq has the mission for men, 2 places for women expecting children, and the wintertime place for men with children. What about something for single women? When my mother left my father due to abuse, we found no housing accepting of her. More accessible Grants for building improvements. Downtown density of people and pedestrians. A vibrant Main Street with residences and businesses. Connect waterfront and downtown for pedestrians. Analysis of whether DRA should remain nonprofit “ More restaurants, walkable, bikeable areas in the city, Northend improvements, less traffic on Central Ave. Continued infill and development of empty spaces in the city core. Less urban sprawl. Tightened signage regulations in new developments. Height and lighting. Strategic reuse of urban land. Continue renovating historic buildings. More creative approach to public transit (subsidized Uber) Better enforcement of traffic laws. EACH day I walk past Washington Jr. school, I see at least one car run a very red light. There are too many people who speed and run red lights. More places to park downtown that are NOT metered. Page 195 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Less impediments to building and business Prioritize much needed improvements to Eagle Point Park. Enhance Heritage Trail with a hard surface . It would be great to see some smaller scale housing for entry level buyers and downsizing seniors More support and involvement and modernization of civic commissions. More support for those living in poverty and moderate incomes, increased protection of the environment and historic buildings. More retail stores-that we actually want to shop at Again-Quit giving our money away. Give it to already local companies trying to expand instead of to companies who come and leave right away. Add more restaurants, activity areas, and public access to riverside areas and downtown to bring people down to enjoy them. More free parking areas for downtown. More bike and pedestrian friendly areas. I believe in mixed use development for the city, but I’d like to see the landlord’s vet their tenants so we can keep out the drug dealers. More shopping, restaurants and condos/apartments We need to increase our tree canopy. We need to increase the amount of mixed-use development. Cut down on vacant buildings. Force land lords to maintain properties. Maintain alleyways, maintained of roadways, upkeep of florals and median vegetation. Page 196 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Increased sense/communication of identity - what it means to be a part of Dubuque, or even certain neighborhoods. An increased emphasis on outdoor recreation could help us attract and retain a workforce. Maintaining our historic districts and the historic feeling of our historic districts is essential. Smart infill with more urbanist minded principals (i.e. mixed use, live-work-play areas in the downtown.) I’d like to see mixed use areas, however I don’t feel it is at all helpful to quality of life for businesses to use excessive bright lighting. The example I think of is the large BP station across from Ace Hardware at JFK and 32nd. More public funding for the arts. More help for all small businesses, not just startups. Id love to see the city embrace its rural roots and be progressive at the same time. But that is hard. Time will tell. I would like to see more natural environments that are accessible within the different zoning. Not just parks with play structures, but open areas for natural exploration and engagement, to invite the youngest in the communities to engage. I think the Bee Branch is a great example. More access to Nature spaces through out all of the city. Continue to fight small town mentality and deeply integrated racism. Better relationships between the City and Landlords and Small Business Owners. More focus on incentives for first time homebuyers, and not just ones that fall within the poverty standards Much of the city's infrastructure needs to be updated. No parking meters in downtown, especially main and Iowa where a lot of retail shops are! Lower parking fines. Making sure meters actually work Page 197 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) I would love to see more education done by the City for these updates in development and infrastructure. I could see improvement on the City with updates on the compressive plans - where are we going? I would like to see Dubuque go after more planning grants for smaller projects to get small wins for the City. The Port of Dubuque project that was proposed a few years ago needs to get pushed forward. I think that would greatly impact the City in a positive way. Traffic improvement Fixing or renovating historic buildings to minimize the appearance of "rough" part of town. Improvements to rental units so not so deplorable looking - landlords who care about buildings, not just the rent money requirements for tenants in rental units to keep apt./house in good shape - neighborhoods of rentals look so run down 1. the mindset of the citizens that it was fine when i was young. Continue to make downtown more cohesive/connected; figure out the former Pack ground for an aspirational city-changing development opportunity. Go back in time and build the ballpark for what would have been the Cubs minor league team!! 1. Housing- Currently I pay about $1200 a month to live at Radford and no utilities are included. I think it is insane that I have lived in this complex for over 2 years and rent has increased 3 times. It is not only about adding more housing to lower the prices, but the quality of life needs to be considered. It is difficult to build community when you face shut doors and no common spaces. Also, why don't the majority of apartments in this town have in unit laundry. Do people actually want to walk their dirty clothes to a community area or coin op? Page 198 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) 2. Pay Scale- Cost of living is still very low in Dubuque, but we have not increased salaries to account for the inflation we are currently facing. If I was single and moved to Dubuque I would not be able to afford my housing. I have spoken to other renters and they agree that the cost of renting is now reaching half of your paycheck and is unsustainable. 3. City Owned Properties- I am referring to properties like the Grand River Center and Grand Harbor. Both of these properties are in desperate need of renovations. It is hard to find a company to invest such capital in these locations due to the fact that they have a very short-term lease on the operations and will never own the property. I believe some of these properties could be sold and we could see additional economic development. “ Longer yellow lights, especially on Dodge. Reduce the amount of semi traffic on Dodge. SW arterial was built for a reason, use it. More higher end apartments for those who do not want to buy a house but also don't want to live in the slums The smells of the dump needs to be addressed from the access change and the view of the chain-linked fences coming into town give a bad impression. Affordable and accessible housing. Making places more walkable. Most importantly I would like to see more places hire people with disabilities. More renovation in millwork district. But, it needs to not be such an "artsy trendy" thing where everything is expensive and artisanal and just be another normal part of the city built into the old infrastructure. More mobile society- walking and biking. Affordable housing less than $1200 a month. Less restrictions on home and commercial renovations or new construction I think we need to attract new corporate businesses to the area. Many large companies are downsizing or moving out of Dubuque. Page 199 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) More family friendly activities and resources for school- aged kids ALPRs should be removed immediately. They are expensive, intrusive, and unconstitutional. In addition to the tens of thousands to purchase and install each of these ALPRs, the city also spent thousands applying for permits for each camera. Add in the ongoing cost of maintenance and the real cost is astronomical. Because the data from these cameras can be ""stitched together"", they are qualitatively different than a typical traffic camera. This stitching allows for the tracking of any vehicle, at any time, anywhere in the city. By comparison, the use of GPS trackers requires a warrant. ALPRs are an open-ended, indiscriminate, warrantless search of undefined scope and therefore are a blatant violation of the 4th Amendment. The indiscriminate collection and storage of metadata by a government entity should concern everyone. I know the state has limited public school funding, I think overall our public school system is doing an exceptional job, especially with what they're given. I'd love to see the public schools get the kind of subsidies that the private schools do as they affect so many more students. I think affordable housing is important - the wages in Dubuque don't match the rent/mortgages of houses being built. My family would have been an ideal candidate for the Switch Homes development, and they said they were affordable. My husband is a disabled veteran, had a good paying office job at ----------, and I work full time in an office as well. The houses were twice what we'd qualify for. The people in town who can afford that, already afford nicer homes, and I'm not surprised they aren't selling quickly. Whether it's higher wages or less expensive homes, the scales need to be balanced there. Wages, as discussed above would likely be the third point I'd make. It was discussed at the Legislative Kickoff by Tom Townsend, but I'm not sure how the city can incentivize this. A mandate would likely not be well received, I'm an idealist - so I'd hope that information on why businesses should increase wages and how they can remain profitable would help. Is there a business advisor, etc who could be subsidized by the city to guide businesses into these changes?Page 200 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) A greater focus on nature access for all young children and those who help care for and educate them (families, childcares, etc.). Especially as it relates to children with disabilities and various sensory needs (autism, etc.) More Bike lanes. More air service options. More recreational activities. Indoor rec center with indoor track More incentives for small business retail shops and restaurants to thrive. An emphasis on walkable neighborhoods/zones, including mixed use areas that include housing, business such as restaurants and shops, and necessities such as grocery stores. The River Walk is one of the best places I’ve seen for foot traffic in Dubuque. I believe pedestrian accessible shops and restaurants here could thrive. Playground equipment or even volleyball/basketball courts in some of the empty spaces down there (such as the empty lot on the right side of the Grand Harbor Hotel) could see lots of use as well, especially during the summer. More trees for more shade, increase in bike lanes, affordable housing for the poor, more space for Opening Doors & the Mission, additional stops on the bus route, enclosed bus stop waiting areas for to accommodate our 4 seasons. Revitalize Central Ave (14th -24th)Clean up Entrance to City from the North (Iowa Hwy 3 (Heritage pond area)Inspections of short term rentals (BnB; Air BnB) We need to stop chasing fulltime work away for part time work. (Greater dub area) That is a waist of tax dollars. Buried utilities throughout the city, not just new developments. Fewer electronic signs at businesses and churches. automatic upzoning. More infrastructure to support biking and walking as a viable mode of transport. Cohesive neighborhoods Page 201 of 421 What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Anything to protect our history and provide more public spaces. Replacing more parking lots with parks or mixed used buildings would be great. City is implementing things done elsewhere 20 years ago - should be able to learn from those rather than seeming to act like this is the first time new infrastructure is being tried Transportation - Affordable housing and mixed-use housing, opportunity to buy condos, not just rent them- More green spaces and trees amongst infrastructure Improved public transit service, fewer surface parking lots in historic downtown Reduction in on street parking, more pedestrian infrastructure, more mixed-use areas, neighborhood grocery stores More public transportation connecting downtown to the college and grocery areas- feels very divided compared to other places I have lived Mixed zoning in residential areas to make life more walkable/healthier Expanding lead water supply replacement assistance to more regions than downtown Greater walkability and bikability More resources for youth, more affordable housing, more overseeing of landlords to avoid so many slum lords More emphasis on providing a wider variety of housing in various parts of the city Better pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, more places to walk to, more density. New city manager, New city council, Eliminate woke and DEI policies Page 202 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #23: What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? (Provide up to three priorities) Page 203 of 421 What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? It should support the City’s development goals (# and types of housing, pop growth, etc) It should be comprehensive, clearly communicated and easy to find by outside developers. It should result in the City we seek not the one we see Infill, mixed-use, lessen parking requirements, reduced lot size requirements. Long-term city environmental and community sustainability, and population growth. City attractions, amenities, improved quality of life, unique to each district. Connecting the districts Encourage infill development: Prioritize reuse and redevelopment of existing urban spaces to reduce sprawl. Encourage mixed-use developments: Promote live-work-play environments to attract young professionals and support downtown revitalization. Partnerships: Collaborate with private and public entities to fund and execute transformative projects. Prioritize brick and mortar small business development. Downtown development Easier and less costly paths to variances - little guys can’t afford it. Encouraging commercial and residential development downtown that will be accessible to lower income, new arrivals, young professionals and the elderly who not only enjoy a more tight knit community but are challenged and isolated by commutes to work, shopping or socializing. Future … no harm (sustainability) Affordability Equity in new development Basically, would you like someone to dictate everything you do with your property, business, or home? Seeking public input is appreciated but the special interest group that seems to be taking shape for their personal goals is a concern. Page 204 of 421 What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? Putting people first. Not profits, not corporations, not the big "names" in the city that get enough of our resources. Density, Walkability, Affordability Attraction and retention of residents; sustainability; attainable homeownership. We certainly want to make sure its not so restrictive that those interested in investing/developing within our city don't have too many hoops to jump though. And we need to balance that with holding developers accountable to the overall livability of our community. The more pride people take in where they live, where they work, where they go to shop, get gas, be entertained, outdoor park life, etc., the more they preserve and expect others to preserve those spaces. We should ask the question "Will each change made to the UDC encourage Dubuque to be a more attractive place to live for the next generation?" If the answer is no, then we should not make the change. What is in the best long-term interest of our community? Clear communication of the long-term dream of what we all want our city to become and how we work together to get there Mixed used housing prioritized (most revenue per sq foot for cities) and people like the mix of small indy shops/restaurants/taverns with houses-Prioritize beauty over quantity. Don't make things cheaply, don't do things half-assed. Build things out of stone. Penitentiaries of the 1800's are nicer looking than the crap we build today. - Include SOME low income options for any major project (but not enough to make a ""poor neighborhood""-Lower required parking lot standards. Do some research into this, the answer is obvious. Environmental sustainability; equity Instead of city employees having meetings about this, why not get citizens involved in meeting to find out their opinion’s Page 205 of 421 What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? Less regulation, Partnership between developers and city teams Benefit of the citizens, promoting more healthy lifestyle Get the 19th century industrial and truck/car traffic out of the city. Reduce noise from bikes and trucks. Make the city appealing aesthetically Parks and greenspace access. Trails and connectivity. Public/Private Partnerships Flexibility Little guy should be treated as well as the big guy is treated (and big guys get treated pretty nicely in Dubuque) Sustainability, green infrastructure Try to make it developer friendly, it should protect critical nature areas. Most of the successful tourism locations in the united states have great infrastructure mixed in with nature and have good sustainability. Affordability; environmental integrity; resiliency Uphold existing historical codes. No more tax exemptions on building and/or building remodeling More independent input Protection for existing residential neighborhoods Treat property owners and developers fairly. Understand that if it can be done privately, it should be done privately. Be consistent in enforcement without interjecting department head's personal preferences. Let people live their lives. Be realistic about safety, understanding that dramatic expenses to potentially save people aren't smart. The Rockbowl has no fence at the top of it yet no one falls and dies there. Enhance the ease by which people can carry on tasks of daily living and communicate with each other in an aesthetic atmosphere. Page 206 of 421 What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? Examination of the current population and determination of the existing capacity of housing and travel for that population. If the low income housing segment is in need - focus there first. If large spaces about commercial areas are wasted by no residential living - focus there." Preserving our past while allowing for growth. We should not be tearing down old buildings for the sake of building new just because it's easier. There are plenty of empty lots in Dubuque but once a building is lost, we lose it forever. Denser housing and encouragement of small groceries in the areas north of the millwork. Basic safety. For example, the number of smoke detectors in a rental has become ridiculous. Safety protocols are fine, Overkill is unnecessary. Balance of green space and living space. Don't try to create a utopia using code. Public use of the community space. I'd like to see more parks and green space mixed in within the downtown commercial spaces. Environmentally friendly and progressive -equality and equity-sustainable clean energy A balance of historic preservation with what is financially reasonable. Focus on using existing space for infill, mixed use including industry and going back to some elements of a pre zoning city might bring a new dynamism and resilience to the older parts of the city. By making it easier to start and run businesses. Include provisions for diverse public and personal transportation options including cars bikes and"last mile" solutions(think more like dutch cities!). Flexibility for owners and developers Page 207 of 421 What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? 1) Ease of construction of new housing, especially on the denser side and near downtown. 2) Mixed used development.3) Sidewalks, shade, and green space. Promote movement and physical activity for residents and visitors. Access to new development that doesn't create more traffic back-ups or stop and go for traffic. Complete Streets avoid sprawl not sure Long term sustainability of environment and community health. Ease of use. Living document - meaning be open to amending as needed to keep up with changes in the development world Keeping the Taxpayers in mind when making major decisions for what is best for Dubuque Making sure the code preserves the character of our community while also allowing our community to try more of new things (new mixed-use developments, etc, etc,). Dubuque has an opportunity to really grow, so we must adapt a growth mindset. Prioritize the well-being of those who have chosen to make their homes and livelihoods in our city. It should not be to attract outsiders. A well-run and properly managed city with a thoughtful development code and long-range planning will serve to attract those looking at our community, or may be used by other city and private agencies for this same purpose. But it's a "skin in the game" issue, not "view from the sidelines. n/a Enjoyment and resources to citizens of Dubuque. Will it increase quality of life. Page 208 of 421 What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? To increase affordable housing environmental protections more landlords/eliminate the landlord monopoly Fairness, equality and sustainability DEI principles, Good balance of affordable housing, Balance of development and preservation Provide safe affordable housing in various parts of the city with encouragement for good landlords to invest and run places. Provide additional options for more expensive apartments for young professionals who may prefer more amenities and perhaps some proximity to eating spots in the complex- etc- like exists in the Millwork District. Sustainability and environmental considerations. Less urban sprawl, more mix use, and less high restrictions. Less urban sprawl, more mix use, and less high restrictions. Look to the future but remember and honor the past that makes Dubuque unique. Growth/development, equity, housing 1) More owner-occupied housing options2) Grants for rehabilitating homes with structural issues (i.e. foundations)3) Incentives for reuse/reimagining of abandoned buildings Everyone is treated equally Population focus. Take care of existing residents Make the code easier to work with not harder. Within reason. We don't want eyesore development happening. But if it's a good, positive addition to the community then it shouldn't have to jump through hoops. Page 209 of 421 What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? 1. Common Sense 2. Stop the woke nonsense 1. Do not prioritize lower income. Prioritize middle class. 2. Make Dubuque a safe place to live and work. 3. Make changes to businesses, housing and sidewalks to accommodate wheelchairs. Redevelopment of the downtown area, including maintenance of residential buildings, to make coming into the city more inviting and safe. Pro businesses, especially those that are longtime businesses and owned locally. We are so pro new business but we chase longtime family names out of town. IBM got the Red Carpet, AY got the boot. Pro quality and durable design. Look around at JFK Road and do the exact opposite of whatever that is. Be more flexible with subdivision developers Mission, goals, and standards to support a better quality and quantity of life for all citizens no matter their financial, ethnic, or educational levels. Local people. Local jobs. Local contractors Actively recruit businesses to come to Dubuque. Support the businesses that we have. Seek to grow our community faster than we do. Growth = additional opportunity for jobs, housing, revenue. Beauty, sustainability, tourism. Quality of Life. Quality of build! Good structures with very good components to make certain the homes are economical to heat and cool. We should look at unemployment factor in Dubuque, and quit giving free housing and benefits to people who can definitely work. We have worked our entire life in Dubuque, we didnt ever ask for assistance. Work is out there, but why work when you don't have to. Making downtown more inviting Page 210 of 421 What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? I am not technical enough to say anything more than common sense and good education )example: people don't like change, but the best relatively recent example of when technology has to be embraced is the pushback you folks (& public works) had to endure over the roundabouts whose benefits were exponential in time savings. The updated Unified Development Code (UDC) for Dubuque should be guided by the following principles and goals:1. Sustainable Growth and Environmental Stewardship. The UDC should prioritize eco-friendly practices, promoting green infrastructure, energy- efficient buildings, and sustainable land use. This includes preserving natural areas, reducing urban sprawl, and integrating renewable energy and stormwater management systems into new developments.2. Housing Affordability and Accessibility. The code should encourage diverse housing options to meet the needs of all residents, from affordable housing to mixed-use developments. Flexibility in zoning, such as allowing ADUs and higher-density housing, can help address ADUs and higher-density housing, can help address affordability while promoting equitable access to amenities and transportation.3. Community-Centric Design. The UDC should foster walkable, connected neighborhoods with a focus on public spaces, pedestrian and bike infrastructure, and transit-oriented development. Incorporating public art, historic preservation, and design standards that reflect the city’s character will strengthen community identity and inclusivity. These principles will help Dubuque balance growth with environmental protection, affordability, and a high quality of life for its residents." Face to face interaction with those citizens that are most familiar with working with the Code. Do this honestly and without a predetermined solution in place. Being sustainable, promote being environmentally healthy, more access to engaging art Maintain the unique beauty of our area when planning improvements. Page 211 of 421 What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? The environment should be priority because businesses will not make sustainable choices unless required to do so. I think I like mixed development most, keeping as much of nature intact as possible. I will be anxious to see how many citizens participated in this survey! I intend to spread the word and encourage people to fill out this survey. Everybody needs to be invited. Historic preservations is great but it comes at a cost. Most people are not going to buy an old "historic" building to be forced to follow expensive and non-productive building codes to make use of the space/building. Like anything, something has to cash flow to survive. You can not update a space and be upside down in it before you step foot in it. Public study on the needs and wants for people we want to attract to Dubuque. Revitalizing architecture and existing buildings. Build with great design and quality, we don't need another strip mall... Building with quality and interesting design will hold value and interest long term. Compassion for the least amongst us. Sustainability that the code can't be screwed with by greed-based interests. Undermining external non-Dubuque (including suburban Asbury and Peosta) interests seeking to sap the city of money. Compassion for the least amongst us. Please have an article in the TH explaining the Unified Development Code. Idea from contractors A downtown that people want to live work and play in. That attracts tourists and residents Sustainability, Equity, inclusion Page 212 of 421 What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? The code needs to be in place to encourage investment/reinvestment in our community. "Strategic urban land use. Aggressive and urgent maintenance historic buildings (before they're too far gone)“ Try to look 10-15 years in advance and make changes to encourage that growth. Make it possible that someone could live downtown and be able to get to where they need to be without a car. Promotion of business and commercial friendliness as it improves tax base and overall economics of Dubuque- hopefully stop/reduce exodus of businesses to more business friendly communities 1. Fairness to citizens of all ages2. Make handicapped accessible housing a in single family homes and apartment’s. Items relative to Dubuque not other areas Maintain historic architecture Sustainability, equity, caring for the needs of all "See above " Maintain the delicate balance between attracting investors to create jobs and housing while maintaining safety, preservation and affordability for local residents. I think the code should encourage more historic preservation. It makes our city very unique. Find confident developers that will keep our city historic. Walkable neighborhoods. Longevity and sustainability of the environment while offering incentives and understanding to middle class families not just low SES families in order to provide opportunities to continue to grow in a beautiful community. Page 213 of 421 What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? Building community and connection. Providing for economic growth. Maintaining aesthetic standards Livable neighborhoods that enhance quality of life for all types of residents while also allowing businesses that serve basic needs to thrive in those neighborhoods…a tall order. Inclusion and accessibility should be major focus. Equity and clarity Sustainability, Affordable Housing. Maintaining Historic Character of the City Enviromental Sustainability Help revitalize the downtown area with a more modern look, give people a reason to wander around downtown with better lighting, street decor, piped in street music. Maintain architectural structures Comprehensive plan and district plan(s)City Council goals and priorities. City Staff recommendations. People before profit. Quality of life, sustainability, historic preservation continue to make Dubuque a great city to live in Balance between various interested, with a lean towards future improvement/development n/a. I am a renter Transportation on weekends. Safe places for families. Affordable housing Historic preservation and greenspace preservation Make things EASIER for end user. Look at other communities permit rates- lower and some are nonexistent. Support first time renovations by an individual Page 214 of 421 What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? Focus on sustainability and access for individuals. Retain college students after graduation Respect for individual privacy and property. Limited financial burden on taxpayers. Economic growth Please consider accessibility as ideas and plans are developed. Focus on nature space improvements that support accessibility and climate resilience. Continue to preserve historical buildings and architecture. Our sustainability program that is already established Look at other cities....both large & small...what works for them. Better enforcement of existing code for existing buildings Simplicity-easy for residents to understand clear and consistent integration of other plans and their goals Creating neighborhoods that feel like a community within a community. Preservation of buildings and environment. Mixed use, support all citizens (especially economically less well off), functional and good looking Walkable- Accessible - More than a place to live, a home that inspires engagement with neighborhoods, parks, nature, businesses, and community The city should be focused on people not cars Design around humans not cars Connecting downtown to the suburbs Making life more walkable Safe water for all Strong towns Accessibility, affordability, equitable Clarity Reducing the number of things that require variances. Reducing the number of PUDs by incorporating the typically desired provisions into the regular zoning regulations. Page 215 of 421 What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? Sustainability, walkability, maintain character of city while allowing it to get more dense, remove arbitrary zoning rules that get in the way of property rights without improving the city. Help reduce overall tax burden by allowing more dense taxable development and reducing the sprawl into farmland. How about tweak without overhaul Page 216 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #24: Have you ever encountered a situation where zoning regulations prevented you from doing something on your property? If yes, please explain the situation. Page 217 of 421 Have you ever encountered a situation where zoning regulations prevented you from doing something on your property? If yes, please explain the situation. Own an existing single-family home in an area that is zoned C4 commercial first floor only. Was not able to add infill or ADU to property to meet my investment requirement for a federal program because of restrictive zoning regulations Roosters Not so much prevent, but real pushback on things legal and allowed while also being held to stricter standards than others. I considered building a new detached three car garage with an ADU above at a rental property (duplex) where the construction would have utilized existing infrastructure and improved parking by creating three off street garage stalls for the residents where currently no off-street parking exists, but the zoning hurdles were insurmountable. Parking a car along side of a detached garage, in a location that was very difficult to see from the street. We were requested to remove the vehicle. ADU "Historic zoning made the cost of a fence prohibitive. While I hadn't purchased a property yet, zoning restrictions for distilleries made it so they can't exist exactly where they should- by shops, restaurants and breweries, and instead have to be in industrial areas near factories." Chickens, which has since been remedied. We considered building an ADU, but did not because zoning required us to build a larger driveway to accommodate an extra parking space even though we live on a street with ample free overnight parking. A few of our neighbors do not even have driveways, so this level of zoning requirement seems onerous and makes it more difficult than it needs to be to add new housing. Parking a car along side of a detached garage, in a location that was very difficult to see from the street. We were requested to remove the vehicle. Page 218 of 421 Have you ever encountered a situation where zoning regulations prevented you from doing something on your property? If yes, please explain the situation. Dubuque County, not city - property setbacks. I cannot utilize my property to put up storage or build whatever I want because a neighbor can write in and say that they don't want me to have a variance or allow an R1 to R2 change. It's complete nonsense, again. I bought a single-family home in the middle of town from my parents. I was told by the city that I needed to replace all the windows and many screens even though the windows were new to the house in the past 5 years and the house is 100% ground level (no basement and no upstairs)- 1000 square feet and 2 exit doors on the main level. This made no sense whatsoever. Because of this burden I decided to do a more expensive upgrade to the interior and rent the place as a VRBO vs as a longer term rental. The ROI is better and the hassle is low- so that is one less long term rental unit on the market in Dubuque now. Converting residential lots to condo/townhome side by side unit lots Had a historic home and had to jump through hoops to replace a rotting window. Could not afford the custom window the committee wanted us to get. Instead got one very similar at a much more reasonable price. Needed to rebuild an original porch on a historic home.... original lot was subdivided 100yrs ago and neighboring house was built on the then new property line but due to new recent setback regulations was told the existing original 108yr old house porch is now considered a covered deck and is now too close to neighboring 102yr old house to rebuild or restore. And that any new work would need need to conform to new zoning requirements for decks (the house itself does not conform to any other modern zoning due to lot width and neighboring buildings). Had to make due with patching it together rather than properly rebuilding from the ground up. New zoning requirements should NOT be retroactively applied to existing structures but city employees are doing exactly that. Page 219 of 421 Have you ever encountered a situation where zoning regulations prevented you from doing something on your property? If yes, please explain the situation. The people who ask are told no. The people who do and never ask get to do whatever they want with no enforcement. We wanted to add gravel to our Light Industrial zoned lot for equipment storage and we were told it needed to be paved. Brick mailbox Relatively minor so not worth the detail; but the answer is yes and it was more of what a change in policy forced and allowed neighbors to do in this time of climate extremes and how it impacts my property. Historical guidelines Having a cow on my property to get milk It is difficult to gain approval for outdoor events. I do not and will never be in a financial situation where I will be able to own my own property. Therefore, there are far too many things to list. Just for a sample, I'd say it's exceptionally difficult to compost my food waste. My affordable housing building does not allow compost service from the City of Dubuque. This is despite the immaculate compost I produce in a sealed bucket and transport to my parents' backyard out west. Though I understand, given the other tenants are animals when it comes to waste management. Again, the issue isn't just a zoning issue, but a cultural issue. People do not value their environment and surroundings with a collective view. My neighbors, the poor, the developers, the external forces trying to come into Dubuque. They're all individually motivated for self gain, not for the betterment of the community. That's a cultural issue. I was not able to do my own work because I was not living in home yet Page 220 of 421 Community Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #25: Do you have any other comments or suggestions regarding the update of the Unified Development Code. Page 221 of 421 Do you have any other comments or suggestions regarding the update of the Unified Development Code. None. Get rid of urban blight billboards, especially downtown, stop grandfathering them too. So much emphasis on sign regulations, make it easier, no wonder small businesses can’t survive. Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration of an issue that could inspire a great step forward for our community Keep it simple Please think about how to make zoning and the city easier to do business in. Removing parking requirements could be a factor in allowing development to proceed Keep the Big Picture in mind Be sure the community feedback sessions are as broad and inclusive as possible. Don't rely simply on the city of Dubuque web page and the paper to get the work out on the meeting schedule. Leverage social media, the Chamber, each of the downtown associations, Travel Dubuque, GDDC, and all of their combined mailing lists. This should also be inclusive of communities near Dubuque who use our community and it's amenities. Transportation is a positive feedback loop. Adding things for cars leads to more demand for cars. This is a phenomenon called ""induced demand"". ""One More Lane"" solutions never work (they are developed by traffic engineers who see the world from a car's perspective, not a human's perspective).Do you want to live within a loud, dangerous, polluted network of large roads and parking lots, with unhealthy people scrolling through their phones while driving? Biking and walking infrastructure allows for beauty and healthy Page 222 of 421 Do you have any other comments or suggestions regarding the update of the Unified Development Code. living. Think about what kind of people you want to attract to your city. Young professionals who have specialized skills, who are starting families. Look up ""traffic calming"" measures and implement them. Let's force drivers to slow down. Roundabouts are efficient, especially given our geography and topography. " No Downtown’s Dubuque is a desert for life…Make it appealing, a place with restaurants and outdoor terraces, fountains, public places, walking and resting places, noise reduction… Thank you for that work that you all do to make Dubuque the shining city on the River. There are so many reasons I choose to live here and to raise my family here. One of those reasons is the city and county staff and leadership of the Supervisors and City Council. We are blessed to have dedicated, collaborative, driven, dynamic people working to make Dubuque the best place to work, play, and raise a family! Thank you. No. Focus on infill; discourage sprawl Zoning changes have impacted the population density of my neighborhood. When in doubt, be less restrictive. The people will rise up if there is an issue. No In the end sanity, common sense and simplicity should prevail. Not at this time Page 223 of 421 Do you have any other comments or suggestions regarding the update of the Unified Development Code. Thank you for all of the work that you are doing on this project. I'm sure it is not easy, nor is it possible to please everyone. Thanks for the chance to offer comment and feedback. No thank you Don’t let developers control the entire narrative. New developments are good as long as they are balanced with principles of good stewardship I am a fan of duplex or 4 plex units being infilled into neighborhoods that have existing housing stock that is falling down to help revitalize a neighborhood. The city has a lot of potential to be great. It's up to the city if it decides to be great. Provide more free parking in the downtown area. While I have heard a lot about the smart parking plan make sure there's a good return on investment if that plan moves forward. Not only does that program cost to replace current meters but it costs to maintain them and to pay people to monitor them. None that I already haven’t mentioned Appreciate the city's engagement with the public and development community on this update. "Disappointed in assessment process in historic neighborhoods. High assessment with difficult sale of property " No No No.Page 224 of 421 Do you have any other comments or suggestions regarding the update of the Unified Development Code. We want Dubuque to be a safe place to live and work. We also want Dubuque to be more ADA accessible. Quality design requirements. Do not let people put bandaids on as a forever solution, Make it easier to keep Dubuque Business here. There are thousands of cities the size of Dubuque around the U.S.A. We need to study them for the good and bad of taking on such an endeavor. No Please update the lighting code in accordance with the Dark Sky Initiative - remove 50% of the billboards - lighted ones first. More public fountains with sculptures in the center. Not at this time. I need to know more Probably but this took longer than I was planning :) Offer TIF style benefits (graduated property tax increase) to homeowners who apply for permits for home improvement projects to encourage more permitted build out participation. I really feel the Long-Range Development Department does a great job. Limit the amount of houses/apartments built for the sole purpose of section 8 living. Make more of affordable housing for the hardworking Dubuque citizens. Regulations exist to protect citizens, like speed limits, labeling food ingredients, parking spaces, licensing to practice…too many to name. But greed and grievance have reared their ugly heads since the 2016 election and politicians/public servants seem intimidated by unreasonable demands for deregulation and instead of moving forward, we are being pushed back. Zoning never seemed to be a problem. Until now. Page 225 of 421 Do you have any other comments or suggestions regarding the update of the Unified Development Code. Sorry for taking up your time with mostly unactionable flavor text. I'm not an engineer in these matters, so I can only put it in more human terms. "Please share with me info of housing (emergency shelters) for women with no children and are not pregnant. Thank you. " I’d be happy to be part of an ongoing committee or email group to offer feedback or ideas. Make sure that any changes to provide the public including contractors, developers Enforce existing demolition by neglect codes. Deter negligent absentee landlords. Proliferation of air- BnBs contributes to housing shortage and deters neighborhood community No No It's very important to keep rental and single family home prices affordable. Get those rotary built at Asbury and University and also, maybe one at university and Hill Street. Keep up with the historic preservation! I find the usage of the term ""affordable housing"" a bit ambiguous in this survey. HUD: ""Affordable housing is generally defined as housing on which the occupant is paying no more than 30 percent of gross income for housing costs, including utilities."" So, I assume this survey has some target gross income in mind when asking questions about affordable housing. Suggest that some guidance by added to this survey about what exactly is meant by ""affordable housing"". Nope Page 226 of 421 Do you have any other comments or suggestions regarding the update of the Unified Development Code. Housing affordability has become a crisis around the country in large part due to the increasingly unrealistic and senseless insistence on single family zoning. Rezoning away from single family zoning should be easy. Parking requirements are too onerous and should be done away entirely and not neighborhood by neighborhood. Single family zoning should not exist. Properties should be taxed based on lot sizes only - not on improvements - this encourages development and would be a boon for economic activity, sustainability and community character. Infill should still be regulated to make sure that it fits in with the neighborhood in terms of building design, massing, setbacks, etc. I think it is difficult to find a balance sometimes between what the City wants and what the Citizens want. It would be nice to have a way for there to be some leeway in the Code that allows for a Committee to hear specific cases and decide to allow exceptions when needed. No Please no more hotels!! I do not understand why we added 2 new hotels when we are only at 40-60% occupancy the months of January, February, and March. Not at this time Keep up the great work Guidelines and enforcement for existing buildings; both occupied and vacant; regarding appearance and upkeep. IE; boarded windows, pealing paint, broken sidewalk, accumulated trash, overgrown shrubs and trees. Inspections of Bed & Breakfasts and Air B n B properties" Make it more accessible to the community. People don’t often know it’s out there until they have an issue and it’s often reactive engagement Page 227 of 421 Do you have any other comments or suggestions regarding the update of the Unified Development Code. It’s crucial that safe drinking water is prioritized Look to successes of more innovative cities, look to the future, try to reverse the mistakes of the past. Why do I feel like I’m wasting time Page 228 of 421 Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 229 of 421 The following presents the results of the technical survey. This survey was designed for development professionals or individuals with a solid understanding of the UDC and land use regulations. Appendix A – Data Broken Down by Occupational Group Page 230 of 421 Question #1: What category best classifies your occupation? Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Answer Count Percentage 15 ..I I I Developer 2 4.44% Engineer 7 15.58% Surveyor 2 4.44% Architect 3 6.67% Business Owner 11 24.44% Conlraetor 2 4.44% Realtor 10 22.22% Other 6 17.76% Answered.45 Skipped:0 Page 231 of 421 Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Question #2: How long have you worked in Dubuque? Page 232 of 421 Question #3: It easy to navigate and understand the current rules for land development in Dubuque. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update 25 2D 15 ID 5 D Very Easy Somewhat Easy No Opinion Somewhat Diffi...Very Difficult Answers Count Percentage Very EHS^1 2_22% SonmrfiBt Easy 22 No Opinion 5 11.11% Someiitat Difficult IS aa.33% Very Difficult 2 4.44 % Answered:45 Skipped .0 Page 233 of 421 Question #4: It is easy to locate specific information within the current Unified Development Code. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update 2D 15 ID 5 D T Very Easy Somewhat Easy No Opinion Sonrawhat Dlffi...Very Difficult Answers Count Percentage Very Essy 4 S.69% Someirfiat EBay 12 26.67% No Opinion 7 15.56% Someiitat Difficult 19 fl2.22% Very Difficult 3 6.67% Answered.45 Skipped:0 Page 234 of 421 Question #5: Including more diagrams, flowcharts, or other visual aids would make the UDC easier to understand and apply. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update 3D 25 2D 15 ID 5 0 Strongly Agree Agreo No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disag... Answers Count Percentage Strongly Agree 6 13.33% Agree 27 60% No Opinion 11 24.44% Disagree 1 2.22% Strongly Disagree D 0% Answered.45 Skipped:0 Page 235 of 421 Question #6: The current development rules are well-aligned with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and the City Council’s Goals. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update 25 2D 15 ID 5 0 Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disag... Answers Count Percentage Strongly Agree 1 2.22% Agree 12 26.67% No Opinion 23 51.11% Disagree 4 8.69% Strongly Disagree 5 11.11% Answered.45 Skipped.0 Page 236 of 421 Question #7: The zoning districts in the current UDC adequately address the diverse development needs and design characteristics across Dubuque. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 237 of 421 Question #8: The current residential zoning districts are sufficient to provide a range of housing options at various price points throughout the City. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 238 of 421 Question #9: The UDC should allow for smaller residential lot sizes (less than 5,000 square feet) in urban areas to accommodate more housing options. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 239 of 421 Question #10: The UDC supports the inclusion of various housing types (e.g., single-family homes, duplexes, townhomes, etc.) within residential neighborhoods. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 240 of 421 Question #11: The current commercial zoning districts adequately support the variety of businesses and services needed in the City, and in the appropriate locations. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 241 of 421 Question #12: The commercial districts are currently designed to result in development that is compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 242 of 421 Question #13: The current UDC supports and encourages the growth of small and local businesses in Dubuque. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 243 of 421 Question #14: The process for reusing and renovating existing buildings in the City is clear and effective under the current Code. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 244 of 421 Question #15: The current UDC clearly addresses the regulations for accessory structures (e.g., detached garages, carports, solar panels, sheds, etc.). Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 245 of 421 Question #16: The parking requirements for new developments are adequate. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 246 of 421 Question #17: Would you support reducing the parking requirements for new developments to promote more efficient land use, particularly in urban areas? Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 247 of 421 Question #18: The City should require more bicycle parking to encourage alternative transportation options in new developments. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 248 of 421 Question #19: The current landscaping, screening, and buffering requirements (e.g., trees, shrubs, fences) between different uses are clear and effective. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 249 of 421 Question #20: The UDC would benefit from clearer, more detailed rules for landscaping, screening and buffering. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 250 of 421 Question #21: How clear are the current rules for subdividing land in Dubuque? Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 251 of 421 Question #22: The streets should be designed to accommodate all users (e.g., pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles) when construction or reconstructed. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 252 of 421 Question #23: If you have submitted a subdivision application, what are the top three challenges or barriers you have encountered with the current regulations or processes? Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪I think the design review team should have some more definition around its process. It’s good dialogue, but as a developer it feels circular sometimes. ▪There needs to be more flexible allowances for transition to larger multiple unit or accessory dwelling units. ▪The sustainability checklist and storm water quality BMPs aspects seems like it should be re-worked. ▪Understanding where to start ▪"Review timelines for Stormwater, Unclear design requirements - City follows SUDAS sometimes, but not all" Page 253 of 421 Question #24: The UDC should allow for more developments to build “by-right” (i.e., without requiring special approvals from the City). Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 254 of 421 Question #25: The approval processes for zoning applications (rezoning, special exceptions, conditional use permits, etc.) should be streamlined to improve efficiency. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Answers Count Percentage Page 255 of 421 Question #26: The current submittal requirements for zoning applications (e.g., rezoning, special exceptions, conditional use permits) are clear and easy to follow. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 256 of 421 Question #27: The timelines for reviewing and approving zoning applications (ZAC/ZBA) are clear and predictable. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 257 of 421 Question #28: Property owners receive adequate notification when zoning or development request are being considered for nearby properties. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 258 of 421 Question #29: The current submittal requirements for site plan review are clear and straightforward. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 259 of 421 Question #30: What do you value most about the City of Dubuque related to planning priorities and future considerations? (Provide up to three factors) Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪I would value consistency and clear prioritization without substantial changes. Is it TrueNorth, Schmitt Island, Millwork district, Main St, or all of them? It feels like every "project" the city starts is done in half measures and then abandoned or de-emphasized. When that feedback is provided, responses are "we've changed strategies." When, how, by whose decision? ▪Simple, less is more, stop hindering people's rights ▪Again, adaptability. Open communication. Detailed historic preservation guidebook. ▪The UDC needs to be flexible enough to allow for focused/prioritized development. This should be reflective of the Council's 5-year goals and priorities. Infill and increasing density in our urban core is critical and any new UDC needs to combat both a culture of low-density development and the fears around what density means in terms of public space and amenities. ▪They make you think little people might matter, despite the fact that big business gets treated way better and exceptions are made for them to save them money. They try to help even when they think things can’t be done even though they are allowed by codes. You can go to outside professionals for correct answers. Page 260 of 421 Question #30: What do you value most about the City of Dubuque related to planning priorities and future considerations? (Provide up to three factors) Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪Ease of being able to talk to the right people. ▪Emphasis on additional housing ▪I have not. I see a lack of priorities. ▪Efficient public approvals process, flexible pathways to meeting priorities, growth mindset ▪They do a decent job of creating awareness of grants and credits available to developers and real estate investors. Some of the dollar amounts sometimes seem like they aren’t worth going through the process. ▪Reduction in debt ▪Community growth and development. Particularly if priorities are based on input from a cross-section of the residents and not just the vocal few or well-connected. ▪Be proactive, creative, and open ▪Big Picture! ▪Clear, simple, black and white rules communicated and provided in a way that allows a developer or property owner to review and understand them with minimal interpretation needed by staff. Page 261 of 421 Question #30: What changes or improvements would you like to see in the City of Dubuque related to planning priorities and future considerations? (Provide up to three factors) Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪I would like current developments to be completed and infilled before too much development happens in a new development area. I'm mostly talking about downtown development. I know you have to plan for the future, and developments take time to occur, but it would be nice to get something completely built out before completely switching gears. For instance, the Millwork District still has plenty of areas for development, the "North Port" still has all kinds of space for development, etc. The most sustainable development is using areas that already have infrastructure, surrounding development, etc. ▪Planning priorities and rules that reflect the other plans currently underway in the community (climate action, transportation, equitable poverty reduction plan, comprehensive plan, etc.) ▪No parking requirements and bike lanes. Page 262 of 421 Question #31: What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪Clear communication and prioritization (i.e., list them in order of importance). If this already exists, see point #1 regarding improvement of communication. I have absolutely no idea if the city considers development in one area over another more important. ▪Cut current requirements in half. Focus on slum and blight. Stop letting people cover up 4 layers of siding with grant funds. ▪It would be beneficial to include a new business notification form. Free or at minimal cost. We need to know who occupies commercial buildings and how to reach them. This would also benefit recording requirements from Main Street Iowa and the National Main Street. ▪We need a new focus on how we think about our urban fabric. Right now, development and culture has dictated that everyone drives to their destination, parks as close as they can, then walks to that one place. We know from modern urban design research that small businesses and downtown retail thrive on foot traffic which only exists in small islands (literally and figuratively) across Dubuque. If we are successful, we need to look at zoning as an opportunity to fill in the gaps between these islands and inspire more people to spend more time on sidewalks than in their cars. Page 263 of 421 Question #31: What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪City department contact information should be included, i.e. who does a building owner or developer contact about upgrading signage or seeking a building permit? Is the city planner the same position as the planning services director ? Who is the building official referenced in section 1-8? ▪Be more open to and encouraging of different or new perspectives, people, approaches, and ideas. Downtown is the most important part of every city; Dubuque’s priorities must shift. ▪We just need to clearly state the city’s rules to the game when it comes to developments. I.e. put together an illustrated document that gives you the steps. ▪Sometimes difficult to discern where in the City housing is most supported. Specifically, there are census tracts that have been communicated as higher or lower priorities as it relates to existing housing or income demographics. It would be helpful to have clear guidance on where this is. Even more beneficial with fewer restrictions/preferences as it is difficult to locate development sites to begin with, let alone that meet all preferences especially when considering alternative sources of funding which also follow geographic criteria. ▪Be round-about focused. Page 264 of 421 Question #31: What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪Enforcement of the adopted master plan without deviation. ▪Listen to the residents and business owners and not pretend we are listening by providing surveys, knowing we will move forward with what was secretly agreed upon. ▪Increased density, focus on housing, connectivity between downtown districts. ▪Creating programs that incentivize homeownership of small multifamily properties. ▪There was a duplex on White Street I believe about 10 years ago that was part of the $25,000 down payment assistance program. A program in congruence with the current (started a year or so ago) conventional mortgage allowance of 5% down payment could increase transfers of properties from low-end landlords to homeowners. ▪More regular residential neighborhoods instead of more rentals and low housing. ▪Flexibility and encouragement for development of existing properties, including commercial and residential in downtown areas as well as the ability to create accessory dwelling units in existing residential neighborhoods. Page 265 of 421 Question #31: What changes or improvements would you like to see in Dubuque? (Provide up to three priorities) Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪Investment in quality of life projects that provide activities for residents. ▪Make substantial improvements to the City's Park system. ▪Encourage growth where existing infrastructure is present. So, maybe increased assistance for housing/apartments units in downtown, or shared amenities, etc. Increased assistance for renovations vs. new build. ▪Consider topographic conditions when creating rules and regulations. Consider the economics of rules and regulations. ▪Impacts to comprehensive plans. ▪Clear, easy to understand, consistent rules so people know what they can do with their property and are not impeded by staff interpretation of confusing and often conflicting rules. ▪Fewer zoning categories with each type that remains being open to more business types and uses. ▪Removal of minimum parking requirements in commercial (and possibly other) areas. Page 266 of 421 Question #32: What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪Developer ease of use and limiting of red tape - Fair rules of engagement where city intends to require obligations on a developer - Consistency of application and enforcement of the rules ▪Freedom - Preservation of Property Value - Ways to get to yes rather than "no no no“ ▪Tiny homes, smaller lots, and square feet, Alternative transportation, Sustainability and green infrastructure ▪Flexibility, clarity, and focus. Providing a base code that allows for flexibility is key. This needs to be a living document that reflects the long- term vision for the City and the short-term needs of the economy. Clarity to both the code and the process are necessary to combat past issues. If both of these elements are clear up front, it makes for a significantly smoother experience. Focus on shorter-term economic goals for development allows for focused investment from the private sector and therefore more successful and thriving urban districts. Page 267 of 421 Question #32: What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪We need to take whatever steps we can to help with the reuse of existing buildings. Exceptions need to be able to be made to allow for the best use of these buildings without undue costs to the developer. ▪Equitable treatment for small developers and small businesses. Working with the City of Dubuque and its employees on development projects should not cause PTSD in those trying to get things done that will benefit this city, PTSD that lasts long after retirement. ▪Always defer to the private sector and the citizens. Keep things easy. Be consistent. ▪Retaining Dubuque's past while making improvements and growth around that ▪Encouragement of homeownership and providing family, friendly spaces and activities ▪The UDC should focus on a forward-thinking approach and encourage the reuse/preservation of existing buildings and site elements ▪Growing Population Page 268 of 421 Question #32: What principles or goals do you believe should guide the creation of the updated Unified Development Code? Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪Promotion of investment in communities ▪Favorable to development (fewer hurdles to gain approvals), Efficient processes, reduce time required to gain approvals ▪Standardization for all parties ▪Provide flexible development regulations that endeavor to promote new development as well as redevelopment while protecting surrounding properties from negative impacts ▪Being flexible to unique situations, which I know is a challenge for Development Codes ▪Clear and predictable processes, Make unwritten policies written, Establish review timelines and stick to them ▪Goal of creating a safe, opportunistic and inviting place with the City of Dubuque ▪Clear, Consistent, Easy to navigate and understand ▪Property owner's rights to develop (within reason) Revision to the UDC process must be maintained Page 269 of 421 Question #33: What do you value most about the City of Dubuque related to administration, zoning applications, and approval processes? (Provide up to three factors) Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪City staff availability and communication. Design guide. Adaptability ▪The City staff! They are incredibly knowledgeable in helping to navigate the system, but so often we lean on their experience to "customize" a process for each individual project because of a lack of clarity or flexibility in the existing UDC. That time burden on the staff is a concern when those same staff also have to coordinate DRT meetings and input as well as put together information for all ZAC/ZBA/Council meetings. ▪You can talk to people with the city and they try to be helpful even when their hands are tied. ▪I would say the staff in Dubuque is personable and wants to work with people. I can name several surrounding communities that are not like that. ▪The Dubuque Planning & Zoning Department staff are very knowledgeable and eager to help. I appreciate all of the information they provide. ▪I do not have an opinion. ▪The rules are always explained clearly and concisely to me, but I think it seems that many zoning changes are treated as denied until proven and wholly worthy of a change. It should be easier to change. There’s often things that clearly should be done but then get hampered by red tape. I do understand that if you let things go through too easily, you’ll have people on the other side of the spectrum complaining about the change. Those people tend to hold the community back. Page 270 of 421 Question #33: What do you value most about the City of Dubuque related to administration, zoning applications, and approval processes? (Provide up to three factors) Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪Planning Staff coordinates with the applicant to guide the application through the review process. The timelines for review of applications are quicker than other city processes. Planning Staff does not make recommendations on rezoning requests ▪The Staff are great, helpful, accommodating when it comes to helping you through the processes, deliverables, etc. ▪The staff are generally very friendly, knowledgeable and responsive in my experience. While Dubuque can be somewhat particular on some aspects of the plan/documentation processes in past experience (storm water calculation review/interpretation and sometime traffic elements), they're still very good to work with. I would recommend further clarity on some nitty-gritty aspects of the storm water ordinance as it has been interpreted different ways and is not quite clear in some regards. ▪Planning Department is an excellent resource for questions that occasionally come up. DRT process is excellent except for the lack of timeliness of some reviewers. ▪The opportunity to speak with multi facets of City Staff. ▪Willingness of staff at all levels to assist in moving the project along. ▪Clear dates posted for approval meetings. Page 271 of 421 Question #34: Have you ever encountered a situation where zoning regulations prevented you from doing something on your property? If yes, please explain the situation. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update Page 272 of 421 Question #34: Have you ever encountered a situation where zoning regulations prevented you from doing something on your property? If yes, please explain the situation. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪Selling products for retail sale on my own property and placing a sandwich board on my own property ▪Unable to provide residential housing opportunities in residential neighborhoods for people in need. ▪Zoning restrictions for shared use ▪A variance was sought and approved, but an existing housing project that had been renovated in 2001 was looking to add 3 units. A historic parking requirement meant that a landlocked building would need 5 off street, on site, parking spaces when the project was directly across from a 30% full public parking garage. City staff spent an heroic amount of time trying to find a way to forgo the need for a ZBA variance, but it ended up being necessary. ▪City employee gave wrong info, professional investigated, turned out employee didn’t know how to use GIS and maps. Not worth the trouble and more PTSD going further. ▪It was neighbor driven. As a city, we let emotions of neighbors drive our decisions. Page 273 of 421 Question #34: Have you ever encountered a situation where zoning regulations prevented you from doing something on your property? If yes, please explain the situation. Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪Re-zoning property adjacent to parcel already in C-1 ▪No comment ▪I was denied rezoning from R1 to R3, based on neighbors' reluctance for change. Due to business relations, all but 2 members of the zoning board recused themselves. The remaining board members sided with emotion. ▪Sign regulations. Statement that the ZBOA didn't want buildings to look like NASCAR vehicles seemed inappropriate when we were asking for a second sign on a building. ▪We have not gone through the process but have considered the idea of building a duplex on the vacant lot next to our home. This would require rezoning. After seeing the results of others making the same attempt and being denied, we have not pursued our project. Page 274 of 421 Question #35: Do you have any other suggestions, concerns, or ideas for improving the City of Dubuque’s Unified Development Code? Technical Group Survey: City of Dubuque Unified Development Code Update ▪Reorganize the UDC and make it searchable. ▪City needs to evaluate its priorities; very anti-business and pro-slum. ▪Thank you for doing this! ▪We are very interested in hearing about other best practices from your (the consultant's) experience with similar communities and UDC work from across the country. ▪We are very open to radical and innovative solutions to problems others have faced. ▪The city routinely goes after low hanging fruit — it’s pathetic. Think bigger, but not casinos because young people don’t care about them! ▪KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid). ▪Subsidize homeownership, and the development of ADUs. ▪I hope to hear that staff recommendations were vetted and that council can understand the UDC goals. ▪My main concern is that the current code requires a translator/interpreter to understand what can be done on private property. I'm not suggesting that people be able to do anything that they want, but I am suggesting that there be a transparent, simple way for them to understand what they can and can't do. ▪Make it easier to read and more graphics ▪Spell out the process of site development more clearly. Clarify the overlay districts. Add timeframes for approve/reject a plan. Page 275 of 421 Data Broken Down by Occupational Group Type Appendix A Page 276 of 421 Power BI DesktopWhat categor y best classifies your occupation? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Business Owner Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 100%100% (11 Responses) Page 277 of 421 Power BI DesktopWhat categor y best classifies your occupation? 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Contractor Developer Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50% (2 Responses)50% (2 Responses) Page 278 of 421 Power BI DesktopWhat categor y best classifies your occupation? 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Engineer Architect Surveyor Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 58% (7 Responses) 25% (3 Responses) 17% (2 Responses) Page 279 of 421 Power BI DesktopWhat categor y best classifies your occupation? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Realtor Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 100%100% 10 Responses Page 280 of 421 Power BI DesktopWhat categor y best classifies your occupation? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% other Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 100% (8 Responses) 100% Page 281 of 421 Power BI Desktop How long have you worked in Dubuque?Occupation: Business OwnerE Masterpiece on the Mississippi (63.64%) 7 Responses 10+ years (9.09%) 1 Response Less than 1 year (27.27%) 3 Responses 6 - 10 years Page 282 of 421 Power BI Desktop How long have you worked in Dubuque?Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 10+ years 2 Responses (50%) 1 - 5 years 2 Responses (50%) Page 283 of 421 Power BI Desktop How long have you worked in Dubuque?Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi (50%) 6 Responses 10+ years (25%) 3 Responses 6 - 10 years (17%) 2 Responses 1 - 5 years (8%) 1 Response Less than 1 year Page 284 of 421 Power BI Desktop How long have you worked in Dubuque?Occupation: RealtorE Masterpiece on the Mississippi (80%) 8 Responses 10+ years (20%) 2 Responses 6 - 10 years Page 285 of 421 Power BI Desktop How long have you worked in Dubuque?Occupation: otherE Masterpiece on the Mississippi 1 - 5 years 1 (13%) 10+ years 7 (87%) Page 286 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% It is easy to navigate and understand the current rules for land development in Dubuque.Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Somewhat Difficult Very Difficult 91% (10 Responses) 9% (1 Responses) Page 287 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% It is easy to navigate and understand the current rules for land development in Dubuque.Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Very Easy Somewhat Easy 75% (3 Responses) 70% 25% (1 Response) Page 288 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% It is easy to navigate and understand the current rules for land development in Dubuque.Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Somewhat Easy No Opinion Somewhat Difficult 2 Responses 17% 1 Response 8% 70% 9 Responses 75% Page 289 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% It is easy to navigate and understand the current rules for land development in Dubuque.Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50%50% (5 Responses) 20% (2 Responses) 30% (3 Responses) Somewhat Easy No Opinion Somewhat Difficult Page 290 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% It is easy to navigate and understand the current rules for land development in Dubuque.Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 13% (1 Response) 63% (5 Responses) 13% (1 Response) Somewhat Easy No Opinion Somewhat Difficult Very Difficult 13% (1 Response) Page 291 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% It is easy to locate specific information within the current Unified Development Code.Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi No Opinion Somewhat Difficult Very Difficult 9% (1 Response) 60% 64% (7 Responses) 27% (3 Responses) Page 292 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 40% It is easy to locate specific information within the current Unified Development Code.Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Very Easy Somewhat Easy Somewhat Difficult 50% (2 Responses)50% 25% (1 Response) 30% 25% (1 Response) Page 293 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% It is easy to locate specific information within the current Unified Development Code.Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 25% (3 Responses) 58% (7 Responses) 17% (2 Responses) Very Easy Somewhat Easy No Opinion Page 294 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% It is easy to locate specific information within the current Unified Development Code.Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 70%70% (7 Responses) 30% (3 Responses) No Opinion Somewhat Difficult Page 295 of 421 Power BI Desktop 10% 20% 30% It is easy to locate specific information within the current Unified Development Code.Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50% 50% 13% (1 Response) 0%Somewhat Easy No Opinion Somewhat Difficult (4 Responses) 40%38% (3 Responses) Page 296 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Including more diagrams, flowcharts, or other visual aids would make the Unified Development Code easier to understand and apply. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree No Opinion 45% (5 Responses) 50% 54% (6 Responses) Page 297 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Including more diagrams, flowcharts, or other visual aids would make the Unified Development Code easier to understand and apply. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree No Opinion 25% (1 Response) 75% (3 Responses) 70% Page 298 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Including more diagrams, flowcharts, or other visual aids would make the Unified Development Code easier to understand and apply. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 70% 67% (8 Responses) 25% (3 Responses) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion 8% (1 Response) Page 299 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Including more diagrams, flowcharts, or other visual aids would make the Unified Development Code easier to understand and apply. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 30% (3 Responses) 50%50% (5 Responses) 20% (2 Responses) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Page 300 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Including more diagrams, flowcharts, or other visual aids would make the Unified Development Code easier to understand and apply. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Strongly Agree Agree Disagree 12% (1 Response) 63% (5 Responses) 60% 25% (2 Responses) Page 301 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% The current development rules are well-aligned with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the City Council's Goals. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree 9% (1 Response) 35% 36% (4 Responses) 27% (3 Responses)27% (3 Responses) Page 302 of 421 Power BI Desktop 20% 40% 60% 80% The current development rules are well-aligned with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the City Council's Goals. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 0%Agree 100% (4 Responses)100% Page 303 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% The current development rules are well-aligned with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the City Council's Goals. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 70% 67% (8 Responses) 25% (3 Responses) 8% (1 Response) Agree No Opinion Strongly Disagree Page 304 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% The current development rules are well-aligned with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the City Council's Goals. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 10% (1 Response) No Opinion Disagree 90% (9 Responses) Page 305 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 25.00%2 The current development rules are well-aligned with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the City Council's Goals. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Strongly Disagree 13% (1 Response)13% (1 Response) 50% 4 (Respon ses)50% Page 306 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% The zoning districts in the current Unified Development Code adequately address the diverse development needs and design characteristics throughout Dubuque. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree 18% (2 Responses) 36% (4 Responses)36% (4 Responses) 9% (1 Response) Page 307 of 421 Power BI Desktop 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The zoning districts in the current Unified Development Code adequately address the diverse development needs and design characteristics throughout Dubuque. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 0%No Opinion Disagree 50% (2 Responses)50% (2 Responses) Page 308 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 60% The zoning districts in the current Unified Development Code adequately address the diverse development needs and design characteristics throughout Dubuque. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 58% (7 Responses) 20% 17% (2 Responses) 17% (2 Responses) 30% 40% 50% 8% (1 Response) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 309 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The zoning districts in the current Unified Development Code adequately address the diverse development needs and design characteristics throughout Dubuque. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50%50% (5 Responses) 30% (3 Responses) 10 (1 Response)10% (1 Response) (Blank) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 310 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 40% The zoning districts in the current Unified Development Code adequately address the diverse development needs and design characteristics throughout Dubuque. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 30% 25% (2 Responses) 13% (1 Response) 50% (4 Responses) 50% Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree 13% (1 Response) Page 311 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The current residential zoning districts are sufficient to provide a range of housing options at various price points throughout Dubuque. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree 45% (5 Responses) 36% (4 Responses) 9% (1 Response) 9% (1 Response) Page 312 of 421 Power BI Desktop 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The current residential zoning districts are sufficient to provide a range of housing options at various price points throughout Dubuque. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 0% Agree Disagree 50% 2 (Responses)50% (2 Responses) Page 313 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% The current residential zoning districts are sufficient to provide a range of housing options at various price points throughout Dubuque. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 33% (4 Responses) 40% 42% (5 Responses) 17% (2 Responses) 8% (1 Response) Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 314 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The current residential zoning districts are sufficient to provide a range of housing options at various price points throughout Dubuque. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree 10% (1 Response)10% (1 Response) 40% (4 Responses)40% (4 Responses) Page 315 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% The current residential zoning districts are sufficient to provide a range of housing options at various price points throughout Dubuque. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 38% (3 Responses) 13% (1 Response)13% (1 Response) 38% (3 Responses) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 316 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% The Unified Development Code should allow for smaller residential lot sizes (less than 5,000 square feet) in urban areas to accommodate more housing options. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree 18% (2 Responses) 18% (2 Responses) 18% (2 Responses) 9% (1 Response) 35% 36% (4 Responses) Page 317 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% The Unified Development Code should allow for smaller residential lot sizes (less than 5,000 square feet) in urban areas to accommodate more housing options. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Strongly Agree Agree 75% (3 Responses) 70% 25% (1 Response) Page 318 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% The Unified Development Code should allow for smaller residential lot sizes (less than 5,000 square feet) in urban areas to accommodate more housing options. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 35% 33% (4 Responses) 33% (4 Responses) 25% (3 Responses) 8% (1 Response) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 319 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% The Unified Development Code should allow for smaller residential lot sizes (less than 5,000 square feet) in urban areas to accommodate more housing options. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree 20% (2 Responses) 40%40% (4 Responses) 10% (1 Response) 20% (2 Responses) 10% (1 Response) Page 320 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% (Blank)1: Strongly Agree 2: Agree 4: Disagree 25.00%2 The Unified Development Code should allow for smaller residential lot sizes (less than 5,000 square feet) in urban areas to accommodate more housing options. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 13% (1 Response) 25 (2 Responses) 38% (3 Responses) 35% Page 321 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The Unified Development Code suppor ts inclusion of various housing types (e.g., single-family homes, duplexes, townhomes) within residential neighborhoods. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree 18% (2 Responses) 45% (5 Responses) 27% (3 Responses) 9% (1 Response) Page 322 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 40% The Unified Development Code suppor ts inclusion of various housing types (e.g., single-family homes, duplexes, townhomes) within residential neighborhoods. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree No Opinion Disagree 50% (2 Responses)50% 25% (1 Response) 30% 25% (1 Response) Page 323 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 30% 40% The Unified Development Code suppor ts inclusion of various housing types (e.g., single-family homes, duplexes, townhomes) within residential neighborhoods. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 42% (5 Responses)42% (5 Responses) 20% 16% (2 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 324 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% The Unified Development Code suppor ts inclusion of various housing types (e.g., single-family homes, duplexes, townhomes) within residential neighborhoods. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree 40% 20% (2 Responses) 30% (3 Responses) 10% (1 Response) 40% (4 Responses) Page 325 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The Unified Development Code suppor ts inclusion of various housing types (e.g., single-family homes, duplexes, townhomes) within residential neighborhoods. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 60% 63% (5 Responses) 13% 1 Response)13% (1 Response) 13% (1 Response) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Strongly Disagree Page 326 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The current commercial zoning districts adequately suppor t the variety of businesses and ser vices needed in Dubuque, and in the appropriate locations. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree 18% (2 Responses) 45% (5 Responses) 36% (4 Reponses) Page 327 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 40% The current commercial zoning districts adequately suppor t the variety of businesses and ser vices needed in Dubuque, and in the appropriate locations. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree No Opinion Disagree 25% (1 Response) 30% 25% (1 Response) 50% (2 Responses)50% Page 328 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The current commercial zoning districts adequately suppor t the variety of businesses and ser vices needed in Dubuque, and in the appropriate locations. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 42% (5 Responses) 50%50% (6 Responses) 8% (1 Response) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 329 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The current commercial zoning districts adequately suppor t the variety of businesses and ser vices needed in Dubuque, and in the appropriate locations. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50%50% (5 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree 20% (2 Responses) 30% (3 Responses) Page 330 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 40% 50% 50.00%4 The current commercial zoning districts adequately suppor t the variety of businesses and ser vices needed in Dubuque, and in the appropriate locations. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 13% (1 Response)13% (1 Response) 30% 25% (2 Responses) Strongly Agree Agree Diagree Strongly Disagree Page 331 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The commercial districts are currently designed to result in development that is compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree 50% 54% (6 Responses) 18% (2 Responses) 18% (2 Responses) 9% (1 Response) Page 332 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 40% The commercial districts are currently designed to result in development that is compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree No Opinion Disagree 25% (1 Response) 50% (2 Responses)50% 30% 25% (1 Response) Page 333 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The commercial districts are currently designed to result in development that is compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 42% (5 Responses) 50%50% (6 Responses) 8% (1 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 334 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The commercial districts are currently designed to result in development that is compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree No Opinion Disagree 20% (2 Responses)20% (2 Responses) 60% (6 Responses)60% Page 335 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The commercial districts are currently designed to result in development that is compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 13% (1 Response)13% (1 Response) Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree 60% 63% (5 Responses) 13% (1 Response) Page 336 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The current Unified Development Code supports and encourages the growth of small and local businesses in Dubuque. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree 50% 54% (6 Responses) 36% (4 Responses) 9% (1 Response) Page 337 of 421 Power BI Desktop 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% The current Unified Development Code supports and encourages the growth of small and local businesses in Dubuque. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 0%Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree 25%(1 Response)25%(1 Response)25%(1 Response)25% (1 Response) Page 338 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% The current Unified Development Code supports and encourages the growth of small and local businesses in Dubuque. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 25% (3 Responses) 70% 67% (8 Responses) 8% (1 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 339 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The current Unified Development Code supports and encourages the growth of small and local businesses in Dubuque. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree No Opinion Disagree 50% (5 Responses)50% 40% (4 Responses) 10% (1 Response) Page 340 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 40% 60% The current Unified Development Code supports and encourages the growth of small and local businesses in Dubuque. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 80% 88% (7 Responses) Agree Strongly Disagree 20% 13% (1 Response) Page 341 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The process for reusing and renovating existing buildings in Dubuque is clear and effective under the current Unified Development Code. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree 60% 64% (7 Responses) 18% (2 Responses) 18% (2 Responses) Page 342 of 421 Power BI Desktop 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The process for reusing and renovating existing buildings in Dubuque is clear and effective under the current Unified Development Code. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 0%Agree Disagree 50% (2 Responses)50% (2 Responses) Page 343 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% The process for reusing and renovating existing buildings in Dubuque is clear and effective under the current Unified Development Code. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 25% (3 Responses) 30% 33% (4 Responses) 40% 42% (5 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 344 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The process for reusing and renovating existing buildings in Dubuque is clear and effective under the current Unified Development Code. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 10% (1 Response) 20% (2 Responses) 60% (6 Responses)60% 10% (1 Response) Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 345 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The process for reusing and renovating existing buildings in Dubuque is clear and effective under the current Unified Development Code. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 13% ( 1 Response)13% (1 Response)13% (1 Response) 60% 63% (5 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 346 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The current Unified Development Code clearly addresses the regulations for accessor y structures (e.g., detached garages, carports, solar panels, sheds). Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree No Opinion Disagree 60% 64% (7 Responses) 27% (3 Responses) 9% (1 Response) Page 347 of 421 Power BI Desktop 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% The current Unified Development Code clearly addresses the regulations for accessor y structures (e.g., detached garages, carports, solar panels, sheds). Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 0% Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree 25%(1 Response)25%(1 Response)25%(1 Response)25% (1 Response) Page 348 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% The current Unified Development Code clearly addresses the regulations for accessor y structures (e.g., detached garages, carports, solar panels, sheds). Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 42% (5 Responses) 58% (7 Responses) Agree No Opinion Page 349 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The current Unified Development Code clearly addresses the regulations for accessor y structures (e.g., detached garages, carports, solar panels, sheds). Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50% (5 Responses)50% 20% (2 Responses) 30% (3 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 350 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% The current Unified Development Code clearly addresses the regulations for accessor y structures (e.g., detached garages, carports, solar panels, sheds). Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 38% (3 Responses)38% (3 Responses) 25% (2 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 351 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The parking requirements for new developments are adequate.Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree 45% (5 Responses) 9% (1 Response) 27% (3 Responses) 18% (2 Responses) Page 352 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% The parking requirements for new developments are adequate.Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree Disagree 75% (3 Responses) 70% 25% (1 Response) Page 353 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% The parking requirements for new developments are adequate.Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 40% 42% (5 Responses) 25% (3 Responses) 33%(4 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 354 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The parking requirements for new developments are adequate.Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 20% (2 Responses) 50% (5 Responses)50% 20% (2 Responses) 10% (1 Response) Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 355 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 40% The parking requirements for new developments are adequate.Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 25% ( 2 Responses) 50% 50% (4 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree 30% 25% (2 Responses) Page 356 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% The City should reduce the parking requirements for new developments to promote more efficient land use, par ticularly in urban areas. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree 35% 36% (4 Responses) 18% (2 Responses) 18% (2 Responses) 27% (3 Responses) Page 357 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 40% The City should reduce the parking requirements for new developments to promote more efficient land use, par ticularly in urban areas. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Strongly Agree Agree Disagree 25% (1 Response) 30% 25% (1 Response) 50% (2 Responses)50% Page 358 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 60% The City should reduce the parking requirements for new developments to promote more efficient land use, par ticularly in urban areas. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 17% (2 Responses) 17% (2 Responses) 20% 30% 40% 50% 58% (7 Responses) 8% (1 Response) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 359 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The City should reduce the parking requirements for new developments to promote more efficient land use, par ticularly in urban areas. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50% (5 Responses)50% 30% (3 Responses) 10% (1 Response)10% (1 Response) Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 360 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% The City should reduce the parking requirements for new developments to promote more efficient land use, par ticularly in urban areas. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 38% (3 Responses)38% (3 Responses) 25% (2 Responses) Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Page 361 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The City should require more bicycle parking to encourage alternative transpor tation options in new developments. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree 45% (5 Responses) 9% (1 Response) 27% (3 Responses) 18% (2 Responses) Page 362 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 40% The City should require more bicycle parking to encourage alternative transpor tation options in new developments. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree 25% (1 Response) 50% (2 Responses)50% 30% 25% (1 Response) Page 363 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% The City should require more bicycle parking to encourage alternative transpor tation options in new developments. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 8% (1 Response) 8% (1 Response) 17% (2 Responses) 20% 25% (3 Responses) 30% 40% 42% (5 Responses) Str ongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 364 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% The City should require more bicycle parking to encourage alternative transpor tation options in new developments. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 10% (1 Response) 30% (3 Responses) 20% (2 Responses) 40% (4 Responses)40% Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 365 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% The City should require more bicycle parking to encourage alternative transpor tation options in new developments. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 13% (1 Response) 38% (3 Responses) 35% 25% (2 Responses) 13% (1 Response) 13% (1 Response) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 366 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% The Unified Development Code would benefit from clearer, more detailed rules for landscaping, screening, and buffering. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree 9% (1 Response) 9% (1 Response) 18% (2 Responses) 27% (3 Responses) 35% 36% (4 Responses) Page 367 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% The Unified Development Code would benefit from clearer, more detailed rules for landscaping, screening, and buffering. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree Disagree 75% (3 responses) 70% 25% (1 Response) Page 368 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% The Unified Development Code would benefit from clearer, more detailed rules for landscaping, screening, and buffering. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 8% (1 Response) 33% (4 Responses 33% (4 Responses)35% 25% (3 Responses) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 369 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% The Unified Development Code would benefit from clearer, more detailed rules for landscaping, screening, and buffering. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 20% (2 Responses) 30% (3 Responses )30% 20% (2 Responses)20% (2 Responses) 10% (1 Response) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 370 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The Unified Development Code would benefit from clearer, more detailed rules for landscaping, screening, and buffering. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Strongly Agree Agree Strongly Disagree 25% (2 Responses) 13% (1 Response) 63% (5 Responses) Page 371 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The current landscaping, screening, and buffering requirements (e.g., trees, shrubs, fences) between different uses are clear and effective. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree 9% (1 Response) 45% (5 Responses)45% (5 Responses) Page 372 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% The current landscaping, screening, and buffering requirements (e.g., trees, shrubs, fences) between different uses are clear and effective. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree Disagree 25% (1 Response) 75% (3 Responses) 70% Page 373 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% The current landscaping, screening, and buffering requirements (e.g., trees, shrubs, fences) between different uses are clear and effective. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 33% (4 Responses) 58% (7 Responses) Agree No Opinion Strongly Disagree 8% (1 Response) Page 374 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The current landscaping, screening, and buffering requirements (e.g., trees, shrubs, fences) between different uses are clear and effective. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 60% (6 Responses)60% 20% (2 Responses)20% (2 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 375 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The current landscaping, screening, and buffering requirements (e.g., trees, shrubs, fences) between different uses are clear and effective. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 25% (2 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree 13% (1 Response) 60% 63% (5 Responses) Page 376 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% How clear are the current rules for subdividing land in Dubuque?Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Somewhat Clear No Opinion Somewhat Unclear Very Unclear 9% (1 Response) 45% (5 Responses) 27% (3 Responses) 18% (2 Responses) Page 377 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 40% How clear are the current rules for subdividing land in Dubuque?Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Very Clear Somewhat Clear Somewhat Unclear 25% (1 Response) 50% (2 Responses)50% 30% 25% (1 Response) Page 378 of 421 Power BI Desktop 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% How clear are the current rules for subdividing land in Dubuque?Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50% (6 Responses)50% (6 Responses) Somewhat Clear No Opinion0% Page 379 of 421 Power BI Desktop 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% How clear are the current rules for subdividing land in Dubuque?Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50% (5 Responses) 0% Somewhat Clear No Opinion 50% (5 Responses) Page 380 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 40% 2: Somewhat Clear 3: No Opinion 4: Somewhat Unclear How clear are the current rules for subdividing land in Dubuque?Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 30% 25% (2 Responses) 50% 50% (4 Responses) 25% (2 Responses) Page 381 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% The streets should be designed to accommodate all users (e.g., pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles) when constructed or reconstructed. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree 36% (4 Responses) 18% (2 Responses) 9% (1 Response) 36% (4 Responses) Page 382 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 40% The streets should be designed to accommodate all users (e.g., pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles) when constructed or reconstructed. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Strongly Agree Agree Disagree 25% (1 Response) 30% 25% (1 Response) 50% (2 Responses)50% Page 383 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The streets should be designed to accommodate all users (e.g., pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles) when constructed or reconstructed. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 42% (5 Responses)42% (5 Responses) 8% (1 Response) 8% (1 Response) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 384 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% The streets should be designed to accommodate all users (e.g., pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles) when constructed or reconstructed. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 30% (3 Responses) 40% (4 Responses)40% 20% (2 Responses) 10% (1 Response) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 385 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% The streets should be designed to accommodate all users (e.g., pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles) when constructed or reconstructed. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50% 50% (4 Responses) 40% . 50% (3 Responses) 13% (1 Responses) Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Page 386 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% The Unified Development Code should allow for more developments to be built "by-right" (e.g., without requiring special approvals from the City). Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 35% 36% (4 Responses) 9% (1 Response) 9% (1 Response) 18% (2 Responses) 27% (3 Responses) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 387 of 421 Power BI Desktop 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The Unified Development Code should allow for more developments to be built "by-right" (e.g., without requiring special approvals from the City). Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50% (2 Responses) 0%Agree Disagree 50% (2 Responses) Page 388 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% The Unified Development Code should allow for more developments to be built "by-right" (e.g., without requiring special approvals from the City). Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 8% (1 Response) 17% (2 Responses) 25% (3 Responses) 17% (2 Responses) 33% (4 Responses)35% Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 389 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The Unified Development Code should allow for more developments to be built "by-right" (e.g., without requiring special approvals from the City). Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 20% (2 Responses) 10% (1 Response)10% (1 Response) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree 50% (5 Responses)50% 10% (1 Response) Page 390 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The Unified Development Code should allow for more developments to be built "by-right" (e.g., without requiring special approvals from the City). Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 60% 63% (5 Responses) 38% (3 Responses) Agree Disagree Page 391 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The approval processes for zoning applications (e.g., rezoning, special exceptions, conditional use permits) should be streamlined to improve efficiency. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi (Blank) Strongly Agree Agree 45% (5 Responses)45% (5 Responses) 9% (1 Response) Page 392 of 421 Power BI Desktop 20% 40% 60% 80% The approval processes for zoning applications (e.g., rezoning, special exceptions, conditional use permits) should be streamlined to improve efficiency. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 100% (4 Responses)100% 0% Agree Page 393 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% The approval processes for zoning applications (e.g., rezoning, special exceptions, conditional use permits) should be streamlined to improve efficiency. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 8% (1 Response) 8% (1 Response) 8% (1 Response) 17% (2 Responses) 58% (7 Responses) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 394 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The approval processes for zoning applications (e.g., rezoning, special exceptions, conditional use permits) should be streamlined to improve efficiency. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 60% (6 Responses)60% 40% (4 Responses) Strongly Agree Agree Page 395 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% The approval processes for zoning applications (e.g., rezoning, special exceptions, conditional use permits) should be streamlined to improve efficiency. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 38% (3 Responses) 13% (1 Response) 13% (1 Response) 38% (3 Responses) Strongly Agree Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 396 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The current submittal requirements for zoning applications (e.g., rezoning, special exceptions, conditional use permits) are clear and easy to follow. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50% 55% (6 Responses) 18% (2 Responses) 18% (2 Responses) 9% (1 Response) Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 397 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 40% The current submittal requirements for zoning applications (e.g., rezoning, special exceptions, conditional use permits) are clear and easy to follow. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50% (2 Responses)50% Agree No Opinion Disagree 30% 25% (1 Response)25% (1 Response) Page 398 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% The current submittal requirements for zoning applications (e.g., rezoning, special exceptions, conditional use permits) are clear and easy to follow. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 58% (7 Responses) 25% (3 Responses) 17% (2 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 399 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The current submittal requirements for zoning applications (e.g., rezoning, special exceptions, conditional use permits) are clear and easy to follow. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50% (5 Responses)50% 40% (4 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree 10% (1 Response) Page 400 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 40% The current submittal requirements for zoning applications (e.g., rezoning, special exceptions, conditional use permits) are clear and easy to follow. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 13% (1 Response) 30% 25% (2 Responses) 13% (1 Response) 50% 50% (4 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 401 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The timelines for reviewing and approving zoning applications (ZAC/ZBA) are clear and predictable.Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 18% (2 Responses) 9% (1 Response) 45% (5 Responses) 27% (3 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 402 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% The timelines for reviewing and approving zoning applications (ZAC/ZBA) are clear and predictable.Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 58% (7 Responses) 33% (4 Responses) 8% (1 Response) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 403 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% The timelines for reviewing and approving zoning applications (ZAC/ZBA) are clear and predictable.Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 75% (3 Responses) 70% 25% (1 Response) Agree Disagree Page 404 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The timelines for reviewing and approving zoning applications (ZAC/ZBA) are clear and predictable.Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 30% (3 Responses) 20% (2 Responses) 50% (5 Responses)50% Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 405 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% The timelines for reviewing and approving zoning applications (ZAC/ZBA) are clear and predictable.Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 40% 38% (3 Responses) 50% (4 Responses) 50% 13% (1 Response) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 406 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Proper ty owners receive adequate notification when zoning or development requests are being considered for nearby properties. Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Agree No Opinion Disagree 36% (4 Responses)36% (4 Responses) 27% (3 Responses) Page 407 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Proper ty owners receive adequate notification when zoning or development requests are being considered for nearby properties. Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 75% (3 Responses) 70% 25% (1 Response) Agree Disagree Page 408 of 421 Power BI Desktop 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Proper ty owners receive adequate notification when zoning or development requests are being considered for nearby properties. Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50% (6 Responses)50% (6 Responses) Agree No Opinion0% Page 409 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Proper ty owners receive adequate notification when zoning or development requests are being considered for nearby properties. Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 60% (6 Responses)60% 40% (4 Responses) Agree No Opinion Page 410 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 30% Proper ty owners receive adequate notification when zoning or development requests are being considered for nearby properties. Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 40% 38% (3 Responses) 20% 13% (1 Response) 50% 50% (4 Responses) (Blank) Agree No Opinion Page 411 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The current submittal requirements for site plan review are clear and straightfor ward.Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 9% (1 Response) 50% 55% (6 Responses) 18% (2 Responses) 18%(2 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 412 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 40% The current submittal requirements for site plan review are clear and straightfor ward.Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50% (2 Responses)50% 30% 25% (1 Response)25% (1 Response) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 413 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% The current submittal requirements for site plan review are clear and straightfor ward.Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 50%50% (6 Responses) 33% (4 Responses) 40% 17% (2 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 414 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% The current submittal requirements for site plan review are clear and straightfor ward.Occupation: Realtor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 30% (3 Responses) 50% (5 Responses)50% 20% (2 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 415 of 421 Power BI Desktop 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% The current submittal requirements for site plan review are clear and straightfor ward.Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi 38% (3 Responses) 38% 3 Responses) 25% (2 Responses) Agree No Opinion Disagree Page 416 of 421 Power BI Desktop Have you ever encountered a situation where zoning regulations prevented you from doing something on your proper ty? Occupation: Business Owner THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi (27%) 3 Responses No (63.64%) 7 Responses Yes (9%) 1 Response (Blank) Page 417 of 421 Power BI Desktop Have you ever encountered a situation where zoning regulations prevented you from doing something on your proper ty? Occupation: Contractor/Developer THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi Yes 2 Responses (50%) No 2 Responses (50%) Page 418 of 421 Power BI Desktop Have you ever encountered a situation where zoning regulations prevented you from doing something on your proper ty? Occupation: Engineer/Architect/Surveyor THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi (58%) 7 Responses No (25%) 3 Responses Yes (17%) 2 Responses (Left Blank) Page 419 of 421 Power BI Desktop Have you ever encountered a situation where zoning regulations prevented you from doing something on your proper ty? Occupation: RealtorE Masterpiece on the Mississippi No 10 Responses (100%)Page 420 of 421 Power BI Desktop Yes 2 (25%) Have you ever encountered a situation where zoning regulations prevented you from doing something on your proper ty? Occupation: other THE CITY OF E Masterpiece on the Mississippi (Blank) 1 (13%) No 5 (63%) Page 421 of 421