Gainesville City Commission passes minimum lot size ordinance with compromise on maximum primary residence size

BY JENNIFER CABRERA

GAINESVILLE, Fla. – At today’s Gainesville City Commission meeting, Commissioners passed a pair of minimum lot size ordinances on second reading, with three major changes from the version they adopted on first reading: the largest primary residence that can be built on a small lot would be 1,500 square feet, only one accessory dwelling unit would be permitted on those lots, and implementation of “cottage neighborhoods” was postponed.

What do the ordinances do?

The Commission voted 4-3 in July to approve the ordinances on first reading.

The ordinances consolidate all single-family zoning districts into one single-family district, with a minimum lot size of 3,000 square feet and a minimum width of 35 feet; the proposal does not require lots to be that size but allows for flexibility. The current single-family zones, RSF-1 through RSF-4, permit 3.5 to 8 units per acre; the new zoning permits 12 units per acre. Houses would have a minimum 10-foot setback in the front, 20 feet in the rear, five feet for a rear accessory structure, five feet on the interior side, and five feet on the street side of a corner lot. The ordinances passed on first reading also allowed for homes to be built around a centrally-located green space, known as a cottage neighborhood. 

At the first reading, Commissioner Cynthia Chestnut favored a pilot project and was one of the three Commissioners who voted against the ordinances; the others were Commissioners Desmon Duncan-Walker and Ed Book. Duncan-Walker said she would prefer a “scalpel” approach, and Book also did not support converting all single-family lots to the same zoning. 

Land Development Code Amendment

The Commission first took up the Land Development Code Amendment that implemented the minimum lot size and setback requirements. 

In “a spirit of trying to figure out a way that we could come together and move forward on this,” Commissioner Bryan Eastman proposed some changes to the ordinance that was passed on first reading:

• Revise the dimensional standards of the new “Single Family” zoning category to add a subsection with the following: “Lots below 5,445 square feet shall have a maximum square footage of the principal unit of no more than 1,600 square feet of gross floor area and a maximum of one accessory dwelling unit.”
• Eliminate the section about cottage neighborhoods and ask staff to revise that section based on a more traditional cottage neighborhoods ordinance such as Alachua County’s, as well as any other changes to minor subdivisions that get to a similar outcome.
• Ask staff to review City ordinances for any other required/recommended changes and impacts to other ordinances that will need to be changed to reflect the new criteria and bring back recommended changes.

Eastman said that Gainesville Neighborhood Voices (GNV) had requested a minimum house size of 1,400 square feet, but he thought that was “a bit small.” The current code allows for two accessory dwelling units (ADUs), one attached and one detached, but only one would be allowed on a lot below 5,445 sq ft.

Eastman said GNV had also asked that the cottage neighborhood section be rewritten to be more like the County’s ordinance, and he didn’t think the Commissioners should write that language from the dais. He said he thought the changes would get the Commission to “not just a majority vote, but close to a unanimous vote… It puts in some of those protections” that citizens asked for. 

In response to a question from Mayor Harvey Ward, Eastman said, “1,400 seems very small… I would hate to limit families from having the square footage that they need to get that first starter home because we kind of just picked a number out of a hat.”

Chestnut asked whether Eastman would consider 1,500 sq ft and said staff could monitor whether this results in new houses, so “if we get a number coming in, saying that this is not workable,… we’d have to look at coming back to look at this.”

Commissioner Reina Saco objected strongly to reducing the number of ADUs to one because “we’ve had maybe a couple dozen across the city in the several years since we passed it, and the city’s still standing and it hasn’t burnt down for having a couple ADUs in place. So why reduce it?”

Eastman said he was trying to offer a compromise that would attract at least four votes, and “I’m very comfortable with what I had originally written,… [but] I just don’t think that’s where we are at the moment.”

Saco said she would vote against the ordinance if it reduced the number of ADUs. Eastman said it seemed “unlikely that you would have two accessory dwelling units on a .125-acre lot,” and Saco responded, “So why regulate it?”

Book said he appreciated Eastman’s efforts, not just to get to four votes, but to find “something that’s more palatable to the residents who live in most of the neighborhoods across the city.” He said he was still concerned about a rezoning that affects all single-family lots in the city and raised concerns about a lack of parking requirements.

Ward said, “Regarding parking specifically, people aren’t going to build something they don’t feel like they can sell… We’re not telling people they can’t build parking; we’re not requiring the parking. So I think the market comes into play at that point.” He said he was comfortable with 1,500 sq ft and agreed that they should have further discussions about cottage neighborhoods. 

Public comment

Between early public comment and comments on the agenda item:

• one person completely opposed the ordinance;
• one person was concerned about implementing the zoning city-wide but was otherwise fine with the ordinance;
• three people supported the ordinance with the changes proposed by Eastman;
• two people supported the ordinance but wanted even more changes, similar to earlier versions of the ordinance;
• one person preferred allowing two ADUs.

After public comment, Saco said that opposing two ADUs was “fear-mongering to an extreme… To purposefully cripple an element of our housing program and tools on the shadow of a specter of a possibility is ridiculous to me because we have two years showing it didn’t happen… That’s the part of this that I find the most offensive. I can count to four. I know I’m outnumbered… I just ask that you take out the part of accessory dwelling units.”

Ward pointed out that the reduction in ADUs only affects lots under one-eighth of an acre. 

Motion

Eastman made a motion to approve the ordinance on second reading with the changes listed above except for a maximum size of 1,500 sq ft instead of 1,600 sq ft. Chestnut seconded the motion. At the request of staff, Eastman amended it to say “conditional on approval of the Comp Plan change” that was next on the agenda. 

The motion passed 5-1, with Saco in dissent and Commissioner Casey Willits absent.

Comprehensive Plan Amendment

The Commission next took up the corresponding Comprehensive Plan change that amended the density allowed in the new Single Family zoning that was created in the previous ordinance. 

Eastman made a motion to approve the ordinance and, at the request of Book, added a request to staff to collect data on the impacts of the changes, specifically accessory dwelling units, property values, how many people take advantage of building on small lots, and collateral issues like flooding and parking. Chestnut seconded the motion.

The motion passed 6-0, with Willits absent.