Planning Commission recommends zoning rewrite but wants ban on parking in yards removed

May 23—The proposed rewrite of the city's zoning ordinance took another step toward approval Tuesday, but the Planning Commission says residents want the most controversial provision — a parking-in-yards ban — removed.

The commission debated whether to delay consideration of the ordinance to make changes that Chairman Kent Lawrence and the Planning Department said the public has suggested or vote to recommend approval of the new rewrite and ask the City Council to make the suggested changes later.

City Director of Development Dane Shaw said taking time to make the changes to the proposed ordinance, including eliminating the parking-in-yards ban, would create at least a 21-day delay. After the Planning Department makes the changes, he said the city has to advertise the proposed rewrite for seven days and then get the amended rewrite on another Planning Commission agenda. The City Council then wouldn't receive the proposed ordinance until July or August instead of June.

Lawrence convinced the Planning Commission to unanimously approve the proposed ordinance and ask the council to make the changes the public recently suggested before voting on whether to adopt the ordinance.

"This is a much cleaner process," Lawrence said. "We're saying, 'Here's the ordinance and the public wants these changes.'"

He said after the Planning Commission meeting that it's taken five years to complete the proposed ordinance and they need to move past dealing with it.

The COVID-19 pandemic followed by Planning Department changes delayed the completion of the ordinance meant to replace an ordinance which, while amended frequently, was written over 70 years ago.

The proposed ordinance will now go to the City Council in June. An ordinance requires two readings at separate meetings with a public hearing.

The proposed ordinance says residents aren't allowed to park in their front yards for long periods of time. At a public hearing in July 2023, some residents asked for that because regularly parking in the front yard kills the grass.

The proposed ordinance also says a home can't have a paved or gravel parking area that exceeds 30% of the yard or 500 square feet, a requirement that Lawrence said the council may want to remove.

Commission member Gary Borden said the group thoroughly discussed this issue in a previous meeting, and he wanted to know why they wanted to remove it.

Lawrence said he and the Planning Department want to remove the yard ban because there has been a lot of opposition, although he said he also received emails supporting it.

"There was just so much about it the Planning Department felt it was better not to put it in (the proposed ordinance)," Lawrence replied.

Councilman Billy Jackson said at a recent City Council meeting that he believes the parking ban would have a difficult time passing.

The main issue is the question about whether and how the city would enforce the ban, Lawrence said.

In April, Shaw said the Community Development's code enforcement officers would enforce the ban against parking in front yards in the same way that they enforce the city's building codes.

Lawrence said the proposed ordinance will still say a resident must park on concrete, gravel or other similar surfaces.

The proposed ordinance approved by the Planning Commission still places limits on how much square footage can be used for parking in a front yard, but Lawrence said this is a provision that the commission is suggesting the council remove before passing the ordinance.

He said the commission also recommended that the council remove the ban on parking boats, recreational vehicles and trailers in front driveways at a home, even though the ban is included in the document the commission approved.

However, Lawrence said the proposed ordinance still bans the parking of commercial trucks with a gross vehicle weight over 13,000 pounds — larger for example, than a Ford F-350 Super Duty — at a residence.

He said a moving van could still come to a home, but the vehicle cannot park in the same spot for more than 48 hours.

"We have some people parking small dump trucks in their front yard. They won't be able to do that anymore," Lawrence said.

Lawrence said residents also would be prohibited from parking their semi-trailer trucks at home overnight. The city has a truck-route ordinance that limits large trucks to state roads, except if the truck uses the most direct route to a delivery.

Another change suggested by City Planner Tommie Williams is related to promises made originally when the city created the business redevelopment zones, R-D and RD-2, in 2015 to try to improve the east side of Sixth Avenue.

The proposed ordinance combines the RD zones to create the Urban Corridor Mixed Use District, or UC-MX, but Lawrence said they left some current zoning's limits out of the proposed zoning changes. He said the city promised residents these limits during creation of the RD zoning.

"Everything, as it's written right now, doesn't honor what the neighbors were told," Lawrence said. "That's something we've just recently been approached about."

Lawrence said the proposed ordinance left out a requirement in RD-2. If a new business locates in the area between Sixth and Seventh avenues Southeast, from Prospect to 11th streets, it must have a 20-foot buffer zone between their property and a residential property.

The buffer must include a 3 1/2 -foot berm topped with trees or shrubs at least 6 feet in height. Lighting on the business properties cannot face Seventh Avenue and cannot be higher than 20 feet.

Hotels, billboards, payday lenders and manufacturers are also prohibited from opening in the redevelopment district, and Lawrence said neighbors expressed concern that this isn't banned in the new UC-MX zone.

Lawrence said retail has to be on the first floor and the apartments on the upper floors in most multifamily zoning districts, but this is something "we told the neighborhood in RD-2 would not be allowed."

Another change is on compatibility with building heights. The building placement on the size of a new apartment changes if it's near a residential zone. Instead of 25 feet or less from the adjacent property line, it would be 50 feet or less for a two-story building. An apartment can be three stories if it's 51 to 75 feet from the property line.

The 8-foot setback still applies, and there are exceptions in some zoning districts that allow for apartments with more than three floors, Lawrence said.

Lawrence said the ban against parking in front yards and the UC-MX changes may not be the only issues that need to be change. He suggested giving the Planning Department permission to make recommendations directly to the City Council.

Lawrence said the Planning Department needs to do "a little research to make sure we cover the things that are in the use chart now."

Commission member Eddie Pike said he's confident there will be issues that will come up on the proposed zoning rewrite that require more changes.

Shaw replied that proposed ordinance "is a living document" that they expect to change many times even after approval.

— bayne.hughes@decaturdaily.com or 256-340-2432