HomeMy WebLinkAboutA001 - Staff Report dated January 26, 2016 0 W � c
a Z7 /A .
ITEM # 22
Staff Report
Request By United Church Of Christ to Initiate a Text Amendment to The
Downtown Service Center (DSC) District Minimum Floor Area Ratio And
Height Requirements
January 26, 2016
BACKGROUND:
The City Council received a request on December 22nd for Council to consider
initiating a Zoning Text Amendment, to allow religious institutions in the DSC
(Downtown Service Center) zoning district to operate under an exception to the
minimum floor area ratio and minimum height requirements in the DSC zoning
regulations. After reviewing the memo provided by the staff regarding this
issue, at the January 12t" meeting the City Council asked that this item be
placed on a future agenda.
The property owner, United Church of Christ located at 217 6t" Street, desires to
enclose a walkway entering into the church as part of a long term master plan
for their facility. The United Church of Christ already greatly exceeds the
maximum allowed Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and building coverage allowances of
their underlying Neighborhood Commercial zoning and cannot expand their
existing structure as desired. Therefore, the United Church of Christ desires
to rezone the property to DSC so as to not be restricted by a maximum
floor area and coverage standard. However, if rezoned to DSC, United
Church of Christ would then be non-compliant within the DSC zoning
district as they would not achieve the minimum 1.0 floor area ratio
standard and potentially the two-story minimum height requirement.
Neighborhood Commercial and Downtown Service Center zoning were created
as part of the 2000 Zoning Ordinance update. Prior to 2000, Downtown was
zoned as General Commercial and the property upon which the church sits was
Planned Commercial, two zoning districts that no longer exist. DSC standards
were crafted with the purpose of promoting Downtown as an urban district that
continued the feel and look of a traditional Main Street downtown area. Most of
the historic buildings in Downtown are two stories and have an FAR that is
greater than 1.0. These standards were written to ensure that new development
would be of similar character as existing buildings and would not be
underdeveloped with one-story buildings and substantial amounts of surface
parking.
OPTIONS:
Downtown has some challenges to allowing for incremental changes with the
FAR and Height standards, especially for properties that are not commercial
uses, properties with nonconforming uses or structures, and for surface parking
1
lots. Staff believes that City Council could find merit to the request to either
directly relieve religious institutions from meeting minimum floor area and height
requirements or to create a permitting process for exceptions to the
requirements. Staff also believes that if there are any changes to the DSC
zoning there should be corresponding changes to the Campustown
Service Center zoning due to the same situational concerns and
standards.
1. Initiate a text amendment to the DSC development standards to exempt uses
i requiring a Special Use Permit (such as religious institutions, child care,
breweries) from the minimum FAR and building height requirements.
This option would have limited applicability by generally applying to institutional
and miscellaneous uses, but not to trade, office, or entertainment uses. It
would allow for a case-by-case review by the Zoning Board of Adjustment
of how such a use would fit within its surroundings and meet the purpose
and objectives of the zoning district. Under this option, the focus of the
Special Use Permit would not be specifically on the FAR and building height.
2. Initiate a text amendment to modify the exception process to include FAR and
height.
This change would apply to all types of uses, not just religious institutions.
There is an exception process already in place for height, but the standards are
quite hard to meet. An exception process may establish more specific standards
for deviating from minimum requirements than the Special Use Permit process.
An exception would need approval from the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
3. Initiate a text amendment to clarify that a nonconforming building may be
added onto without having to meet minimum FAR or height requirements.
This is a different take on the request that deals with the issue of nonconformity
on a site rather than the standard itself. This change would apply to all types of
uses, not just religious institutions. Currently a use can be expanded by up to
125% of the current use, but a structure cannot be enlarged if it does not meet
zoning standards. This option would allow for incremental property changes
and additions without having to fully meet the floor area and height
requirements that would be expected of new developments, but it would
function within the limited options of a non-conforming use and approvals
through staff and the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
4. Initiate a text amendment that make exempts religious institutions from
minimum FAR and height standards, without approval of special use permit or
exception.
This option would directly exclude religious uses from the standards, but would
not exclude them from needing a special use permit for review of their use in
general. If Council does not believe FAR and height are relevant to non-
commercial uses and case-by-case review was not needed, it would pick this
option to streamline the review process.
2
5. Decline to initiate a text amendment and have the property owner seek a
variance from the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
STAFF COMMENTS:
If Council initiates an amendment, staff would work to incorporate a change to
both the DSC and CSC zoning to address the issue of additions at religious
institutions the same since they are the only two zoning districts with minimum
FAR and height standards. Recently, the Collegiate Methodist Church was in a
similar situation and had to seek variances to do modifications to their property.
Staff does not believe a referral for a text amendment would need to be
considered a major issue requiring prioritization by the Council, as it would not
require extensive research or outreach. Staff believes most of the options have
merit depending on one's perspective of meeting design interests and
supporting the unique needs of religious institutions. The primary issue for
Council is whether initiating a text amendment should be limited in scope
to a religious institution type of use or a broader solution that could be
available for a variety of uses.
3