Special Planning Committee

Summary

Meeting Overview

The Urban County Council met on March 23, 2010, at 9:00 a.m., with Chair CM Gorton presiding. During this session, the Council addressed seven agenda items focused on residential zoning and housing definitions. All seven items were approved, including matters related to residential zone issues, residential additions, items referred to committee, and definitions of family, functional family, fraternity or sorority house, and congregate living facility. The Council took one motion and vote during the meeting and heard seven public comments from members of the community.

Attendance

The following individuals were present at the meeting on March 23, 2010:

• Gorton
• Blues
• Gray
• Ellinger
• James
• Lawless
• Beard
• Feigel
• Stinnett
• McChord

No absences or late arrivals were recorded.

Votes and Decisions

The Council voted to move all recommended text amendments forward to the full Council for work session. 1:55:06

Motion Details: Vice Mayor Gray moved, and Council Member Lawless seconded, a motion to advance the following recommended text amendments: - Changes to the definition of family - Changes to the definition of boarding/lodging house - Changes to the definition of congregate living facility - Changes to the definition of fraternity/sorority house

Vote Result: The motion passed by voice vote with no dissenting votes. All ten Council members present voted in favor: Gorton, Blues, Gray, Ellinger, James, Lawless, Beard, Feigel, Stinnett, and McChord.

Conditions: The amendments include modifications to the single-family dwelling definition to clarify that expansion limits are based on square footage as of January 1, 2010.

Public Comment

Seven speakers addressed the council during the public comment period, raising concerns about enforcement, permanence, and the practical implications of the proposed zoning changes.

Enforcement and Permitting

Todd Johnson 1:11:46 expressed concerns about unintended consequences for remodelers and requested clarification on enforcement, permitting processes, and documentation requirements for property expansions under the new zoning rules.

Dewey Crow 1:16:02 responded by explaining that enforcement would be complaint-driven and that building inspection would rely on lease records and property history to determine compliance with the new definitions.

Permanence and Certainty

Richard Murphy 1:38:31 stated that the group sought certainty and permanence in the new zoning rules to avoid recurring disputes and future legislative battles over the same issues.

Craig Harden 1:40:04 emphasized the need for permanence in the new zoning rules and highlighted additional policy changes, such as the university's off-campus housing office, as tools to improve community outcomes.

Implementation and Guidelines

Chris King 1:44:58 advocated for the creation of interpretive guidelines to document the intent behind the new definitions to aid staff in enforcement and reduce ambiguity.

Broader Impact

Council Member Blues 1:27:30 requested a summary of how the new definitions would affect city-wide density, emphasizing the need for context on the long-term impact of the changes.

Ted Cowan 1:35:53 reiterated that the goal was to slow down unsustainable conversions and high-density encroachment into single-family neighborhoods, not to eliminate all group living.

Contested Items

Three significant points of contention emerged during the March 23, 2010 meeting:

Definition of Congregate Living Facility

Council Member James raised concerns about removing the definition of congregate living facility, arguing that this approach would leave non-university congregate living arrangements unaddressed. James advocated for broader city-wide coverage beyond the university area, contending that the definition should remain to ensure comprehensive regulation across all residential zones.

Expansion Limits on Residential Additions

A split vote occurred regarding expansion limits for residential properties. The disagreement centered on whether a 25% expansion limit should be applied as an absolute restriction or calculated based on the date of permit application. The committee ultimately clarified that the expansion limit applies to square footage as measured on January 1, 2010, establishing a fixed baseline for determining permissible expansion.

Use of the Term 'Student' in Definitions

Council Member Lawless urged the committee to avoid using the term "student" in zoning definitions. Lawless emphasized that using student-specific language would limit the scope of the zoning changes to university areas, when the regulations should apply city-wide. This discussion reflected broader concerns about ensuring the zoning amendments addressed residential density and use issues throughout the entire city rather than focusing narrowly on university-adjacent neighborhoods.

Residential Zone Issues

8:56

The meeting included a discussion of proposed changes to the definition of boarding or lodging houses in residential zones. Logan Askew and Rochelle Boland led this agenda item.

The proposed changes involved two key modifications:

• Removal of the phrase "rooms for hire" from the existing definition
• Clarification that the definition applies to situations where five or more unrelated adults share living and kitchen facilities in R3 and R4 zones

The outcome of this discussion was approval of the proposed changes to the residential zone definition.

Residential Additions

The board reviewed proposed changes to the definitions of single-family and two-family dwellings 25:36. Key speakers on this item included Logan Askew, Bill Lear, and Dewey Crow.

The discussion centered on a new exception that would allow continued use of properties where five or more unrelated individuals have resided during the past five years. This exception would be subject to three conditions, though the specific conditions were not detailed in the available materials.

The item was approved by the board.

Items Referred to Committee

6:30

Chair CM Gorton presented this agenda item, which addressed the authorization of the Special Planning Committee to refer matters to the full Council.

The item confirmed that the Special Planning Committee is authorized to refer the following categories of matters to the full Council:

• Parks
• Planning
• Zoning
• Housing
• Transportation
• Grants
• Legislation
• Social services

The outcome of this item was approved.

Definition of Family

The council discussed and approved a revised definition of family during this agenda item. 20:30

Key Speakers

Logan Askew and Rochelle Boland led the discussion on this matter.

Changes Approved

The revised definition of family incorporates "housekeeping unit" as an interchangeable term within the definition. Additionally, the council added subsection E to the definition, which references single- and two-family dwelling exceptions for existing uses.

Outcome

The revised definition of family was approved.

Definition of Functional Family

47:02

Logan Askew led the discussion on the definition of functional family during this agenda item. The meeting confirmed that there would be no changes to the existing functional family definition, which remains unchanged from prior proposals.

The discussion resulted in an approved outcome, with the group accepting the continuation of the current definition without modification.

Definition of Fraternity or Sorority House

47:02

The body approved a revised definition of fraternity or sorority houses during this agenda item.

Key Speakers

Logan Askew and Chris King led the discussion on this matter.

What Was Approved

The revised definition includes the following elements:

• Recognition of fraternity and sorority houses as serving dual purposes: both living quarters and gathering spaces
• Extension of official recognition to groups actively seeking official status
• Specific criteria for recognition, including the presence of signage and hosting of events

Outcome

The revised definition was approved by the body.

Congregate Living Facility

The council discussed the definition of congregate living facility in the zoning code 16:04. Key speakers on this matter included Logan Askew and Richard Murphy.

The council decided to remove the definition of congregate living facility from the zoning code. This removal was determined to be appropriate because the definition had become redundant in light of other recent changes to the code, particularly the adoption of a new fraternity and sorority house definition.

The outcome of this discussion was approval to proceed with removing this definition from the zoning code.