HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrd2008-006Sponsored by: Planning and Zoning
Introduction Date: April 14, 2008
Public Hearing Date: Apri128, 2008
Enactment Date: Apri128, 2008
CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA
ORDINANCE 2008-006
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD,
ALASKA, AMENDING SEWARD CITY CODE TABLE 15.10.220.
DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS, TO DECREASE THE SETBACKS
IN THE INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT
WHEREAS, various Industrial Zoning District property owners and lease holders have
requested decreasing the setbacks in the Industrial Zoning District; and
WHEREAS, following newspaper publication for two weeks, written notice mailed to
affected property owners and displayed in at least three public places, the Planning and Zoning
Commission held a public hearing at its April 15, 2008 meeting and recommended City Council
approval of a proposed Zoning Code amendment; and
WHEREAS, decreasing the front setback may continue to provide for the orderly
development of the Industrial Zoning District; and
ire WHEREAS, decreasing the front setback may still allow for fire department access and
operations, utility easements, enforcement of snow-storage ordinances, parking requirements of
ordinances and safeguarding vehicular damage with bollards in life-safety circumstances; and
WHEREAS, the certified minutes and public records of the Planning and Zoning
Commission proceedings have been provided to the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF SEWARD
ORDAINS that:
Section 1. The Seward City Code is hereby amended to provide that the 20 feet
setback is reduced to 10 feet in that portion of the Industrial Zoning District known as Leirer
Industrial Subdivision, filed of record in the Seward Recording District as Plat No. 2002-19, and
Alaska Skill Center, Tract C-1, filed of record in the Seward Recording District as Plat No. 75-1,
Recorded 3-27-1975 and that Table 15.10.220 is revised accordingly.
Table 15.10.220 Development Requirements is hereby amended as follows
(Strikethroughs =deletions and are bold, Underline =additions and are bold):
CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA
ORDINANCE 2008-006
RR Rl R2 R3 UR OR AC HC CB I RM INS P
Minimum Front Yard 20 20 20 20 20 20 10 None None 20 20 20 20
Setback (ft.) (See Note
7, next page) except
Leirer and Tract C-1
below
Minimum Front
Yard Setback (ft.) 20 20 20 20 20 20 l0 None None IQ 20 20 20
for Leirer Industrial
Subdivision and
Alaska Skill Center
Tract C-1 only. (See
Note 7 next a e
Minimum Side Yard
Setback (ft.) (See 10 5 or 5 5 or 5 10 5 5 5 5 None 10 10 10 20
Notes 4 and 7, next min.wi min.wi
page) th 15 th 15
total* total*
Minimum Side Yard 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 None None 20 10 10 20
Setback Adjacent to
Street (ft.) (See Note
7, next page)
Minimum Rear Yard
Setback (ft.) (See 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 None, None 10 10 15 20
Notes 5 and 7, next 5 and
Page) 10*
Section 2. The above recitals are incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect ten (10) days following enactment.
ENACTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA, this 28th
day of April, 2008.
THE CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA
Clark Corbridge, Mayor
CITY OF SEWARD, ALASKA
ORDINANCE 2008-006
AYES: Valdatta, Dunham, Bardarson, Amberg, Kellar, Corbridge
NOES: None
ABSENT: Smith
ABSTAIN: None
ATTEST:
~ ~ ~ ~~
i
] n Levvis, C~I~I
C ty Clerk ~
~~!~ QF ~F~?d'~4i
~~. ..
• ~ ~ s
~. _.. ,._
a
,. ~,y~, e~ J 4y ~ ~,~,"y~a°' ®,'(,,,~ity Seal}
`~~~~ QF P~`~:o`~
Council Agenda Statement
Meeting Date: April 14, 2008
To: Phillip Oates, City Manager ~j
From: Bob Hicks, Community Development Director
Agenda Item: An Ordinance Amending SCC Table 15.10.220 to Reduce the Front Setback
Requirement for Structures in the Industrial Zoning District From 20 feet to
10 feet
BACKGROUND:
SCC §15.10.140 defines a "setback" as
The required minimum distance from right of way of lot line that establishes the
area within which only fencing, landscaping, driveways, parking and similaz uses
are permitted. Any structure including, but not limited to, decks, stairways,
porches or other attachments to a building are specifically prohibited in the
setback. Building eaves aze permitted to extend into the setback a maximum of
two feet.
SCC Table 15.10.220 presently provides that the "Minimum Front Yard Setback" in the
Industrial Zoning District is 20 feet.
The administration has initiated this request for an ordinance change at the request of a lessee in
the Industrial Zoning District, after the Director of Community Development denied a request by
that lessee to place a temporary membrane greenhouse/gardening structure within the 20-foot
front setback for the summer season. That denial was founded in the above ordinance
provisions.
The present setback requirements were enacted on May 9, 1994 (Ordinance No. 94-10
Substitute). At that time, there were many pre-existing "structures" closer to the front right of
way than 20 feet. They were grandfathered asnon-conforming uses.
In 2003-04, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City Council that the
setback should be reduced from 20 feet to 10 feet. Ordinance 2004-01 failed by a vote of 4-3 by
the City Council. The proposal and vote occurred during the litigation pertaining to the canopy
overhang at Ace Hardware.
SCC §15.01.035(c) requires a public hearing and written recommendation process before the
Planning and Zoning Commission for any amendment of zoning and land use regulations. The
earliest that process could occur is April 15. In order to attempt to accommodate the requested
use by the Sewazd citizen by the summer of 2008, the administration has initiated the first
reading of this ordinance before the City Council to occur simultaneously with that public
hearing/recommendation process before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Hence, before
the second reading of the ordinance, it will be necessary for the Administration to submit a
13
supplemental Agenda Statement reporting the outcome of the Commission proceedings and
possibly some additional input from the public
JUSTIFICATION:
There is a 20-foot front setback required in SCC Table 15.10.220 for all zoning districts labeled
"principally residential." There is a 20-foot front setback required in SCC Table 15.10.220 for
all zoning districts labeled "principally public."
Among those zoning districts labeled "principally commercial," only "Office Residential" and
"Industrial" zones must have that same 20-foot front setback. SCC Table 15.10.220 requires
only a 10-foot front setback in anAuto-Commercial Zoning District. SCC Table 15.10.220 does
not require any setback whatsoever in either the Central Business Zoning District or the Harbor-
Commercial Zoning District.
Proponents of this ordinance-change reducing the front setback in the Industrial Zoning District
contend that 20 feet is excessive. An "Industrial" district is different from the various zoning
districts labeled "principally residential" and labeled "principally public" in SCC Table
15.10.220. An "Industrial" district is more like the other zoning districts labeled "principally
commercial" in that Table.
The only other zoning district with a 20-foot front setback among those labeled "principally
commercial" is Office Residential. There, the 20-foot front setback is more justifiable, because
the use is partially residential. That however is not the case for an Industrial use area.
One citizen has submitted a written statement in opposition to the ordinance, raising the following
points for consideration:
• A 20-foot front setback is reasonable size to allow for on-site parking, where some pickup
trucks may be 18.5 feet long. Reducing the setback would put parking into the right of way,
or into harm's way for snow removal and road maintenance.
• With further limitations on space for snow storage, owners will have an additional incentive
to simply push snow into the right of way or onto adjacent vacant lots. Allowing "structures"
such as buildings, decks, stairways, proches, sheds and other attachments ten-feet closer
reduces the space for snow disposal, parking, landscaping and emergency access.
• Already today, there is a 30,000 gallon propane tank on Leirer Road without any protective
bollards (only a chainlink fence easily penetrated by a vehicle out of control). Such a
potentially dangerous explosive "structure" should not be allowed within 10 feet of the
public right of way.
• Even with the 20-foot setback, none of these lots has landscaping or green space. That
possibility is worse if the setback is reduced to 10-feet.
The Electric Department of the City expressed concern "with easements for utilities [and] placement
of equipment impacting a utility's ability to work within an easement." The Electric Department
notes that "industrial use may require large transformer installation which may require up to 20-feet
typically in one comer of the lot."
~~
i~
The Public Works Department was "adamantly opposed to a reduction in setbacks..." noting "The
Public Works folks need the buffer -snow plowing, drainage structures (maintenance of such)
fences, gazbage cans etc."
CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST:
The 2020 Comprehensive Plan defines the Industrial District as
Established as a district in which the principal use of land is business, manufacturing,
processing, fabricating, repair, assembly, storage, wholesaling and distribution
operations; which may create some nuisance and are [sic] neither properly associated
nor compatible with residential land uses. Vol II at 26.
Where applicable, this ordinance is consistent with the Seward City Code, Charter, Comprehensive
Plans, Land Use Plans, Strategic Plan, and City Council Rules of Procedures.
FISCAL NOTE:
This change has no fiscal impact for the City of Sewazd.
Approved by Finance Department:
RECOMMENDATION:
The Administration recommends approval of this ordinance for the following reasons.
• No similar setback is required on the opposite side of Port Avenue, which is zoned
Hazbor Commercial, and which evidences faz more traffic and pedestrian activity than
most of the Industrial Zoning District.
• For the most part, a 20-foot setbacks apply in residentially related districts only, and
commercially related districts have 10-foot setbacks (or no setback requirement) in
Sewazd. The Industrial District Zone is an anomaly as enacted today..
Totally independent of the question of whether the front setback for structures is 10 feet
or 20 feet, no owner can ever obtain a building permit from the City of Seward without
first ensuring (1) adequate utility easements, (2) adequate parking spaces, (3) an adequate
snow-storage plan, (4) life-safety requirements for explosive storage tanks, and (5)
adequate fire access - all as required by the Seward City Code, building codes and fire
codes. Stated conversely, a setback of 10 feet rather than 20 feet in an Industrial Zone
does not mean, immediately and automatically, that an owner can build a structure to that
limit of the property setback. All of the safeguazds expressed as concerns by opponents
are adequately addressed and preserved in other Seward ordinance and code
requirements. (For example, SCC § 13.01.025 prohibits placing snow on private property
of others, or on a public right of way.)
In short, existing utility-easement requirements, pazking requirements, snow-storage
requirements, and fire-code compliance requirements continue to ensure adequate open space in
the Industrial Zoning District, even after the front setback might be reduced from 20 feet to 10
feet.
~p r
1J
Council Supplemental Agenda Statement
Meeting Date: April 28, 2008
To: Phillip Oates, City Manager ~~
From: Bob Hicks, Community Development Director
Agenda Item: An Ordinance Amending SCC Table 15.10.220 to Reduce the Front Setback
Requirement for Structures in the Industrial Zoning District From 20 feet to
10 feet
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND:
(1) On April 15, after the date of the original Council Agenda Statement in this matter, the
Planning and Zoning Commission held its public hearing and offered its recommendations, as
required by SCC § 15.01.035(c).
A copy of the draft (unapproved) minutes is attached here. Some commissioners were wary of
dealing with this issue with an ordinance change, and other commissioners clearly supported it.
One commissioner noted that his support was lazgely founded in the fact that this ordinance
would bring a number ofnon-conforming structures into compliance with front set-back
requirements in the Industrial Zoning District.
As P & Z Resolution No. 2008-08 indicates, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends
that the ordinance change for front setbacks should not apply to the entire Industrial Zoning
District, but only to an area from Leirer Road east to the Railroad right of way at the Coal
Loading facility, and from Port Avenue north to the road to the Coal Loading facility. This
includes all of Leirer Subdivision, and the small AVTEC subdivision contiguous to the northern
tip of Leirer Subdivision.
(2) In the earlier Agenda Statement, we reported that the Public Works Department opposed this
ordinance change. After further discussions of alternative methods to achieve adequate snow
storage, etc., the director of the Department of Public Works has authorized us to report that,
while he understands that the City has the ability to enforce easements, snow-storage, drainage,
etc. through other ordinances, the blanket requirement of a 20-foot setback provides a convenient
administrative tool for accomplishing these other requirements in one simple
statement/requirement.
(3) In the Council Agenda Statement of Apri114, 2008, we reported summarily,
In 2003-04, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City
Council that the setback should be reduced from 20 feet to 10 feet. Ordinance
2004-01 failed by a vote of 4-3 by the City Council. The proposal and vote
occurred during the litigation pertaining to the canopy overhang at Ace Hazdwaze.
Further research requires some elaboration of that statement.
~ tU
First, during that 2003-04 process of consideration, the proposal was to reduce all (front, side and
rear) setbacks, not just the front setback. The City Planner wrote a P & Z Agenda Statement
setting forth seven bulleted "benefits of decreasing the setbacks," and 12 bulleted "benefits of
maintaining the current setbacks." The planner staff then recommended "that the Commission
maintain the current setbacks in the Industrial Zoning District ...." A copy of that February 3,
2004 P&Z Agenda Statement is attached here for your information and review.
Secondly, the Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting that evening indicate
that the city planner "noted that the City attorney had reviewed the Agenda Statement and the
Resolution and had noted that the City had pending litigation on the subject and that change to
the setbacks at the current time could give the appearance of preferential treatment."
The motion to adopt Resolution 2004-06 passed by a vote of five to two, "recommending that the
City Council amend the Seward City Code Table 15.10.220 ... to decrease setbacks in the
Industrial Zoning District."
The City Planner then wrote a Council Agenda Statement setting forth six (one less than P&Z
received) bulleted "benefits of decreasing the setbacks," and 14 (two more than P&Z received)
bulleted "benefits of maintaining the current setbacks." The planner staff then recommended
"that the Council maintain the current setbacks in the Industrial Zoning District ...." A copy of
that July 26, 2004 Council Agenda Statement is attached here for your information and review.
When the proposed Ordinance 2004-01 was introduced that evening, the city attorney said that
the "preferential treatment" language was not an opinion from the city attorney. The ordinance
would apply throughout the entire industrial zoning district.
By a 4-3 vote on August 9, 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2004-0 l decreasing all
setbacks throughout the Industrial Zoning District.
The new ordinance came up for reconsideration at the Council meeting of August 23, 2004, at
the request of Council Member Margaret Anderson. It failed by a 4-3 vote.
JUSTIFICATION:
We adopt here the same "Justification" that was a part of the April 4, 2008 Council Agenda
Statement.
CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST:
Where applicable, this resolution is consistent with the Seward City Code, Charter, Comprehensive
Plans, Land Use Plans, Strategic Plan and City Council Rules of Procedures. We adopt here the
same "Consistency Checklist" that was a part of the Apri14, 2008 Council Agenda Statement.
Other:
FISCAL NOTE: ~~v~ °~~i~~i
This change has no fiscal impact for the City of Seward.
RECOMMENDATION:
(1) The Administration recommends approval of this ordinance for the following reasons.
i "1
• No similar setback is required on the opposite side of Port Avenue, which is zoned
Hazbor Commercial, and which evidences far more traffic and pedestrian activity than
most of the Industrial Zoning District.
• For the most part, a 20-foot setbacks apply in residentially related districts only, and
commercially related districts have 10-foot setbacks (or no setback requirement) in
Seward. The Industrial District Zone is an anomaly as enacted today.
• Totally independent of the question of whether the front setback for structures is 10 feet
or 20 feet, no owner can ever obtain a building permit from the City of Seward without
first ensuring (1) adequate utility easements, (2) adequate parking spaces, (3) an adequate
snow-storage plan, (4) life-safety requirements for explosive storage tanks, and (5)
adequate fire access - all as required by the Sewazd City Code, building codes and fire
codes. Stated conversely, a setback of 10 feet rather than 20 feet in an Industrial Zone
does not mean, immediately and automatically, that an owner can build a structure to that
limit of the property setback. All of the safeguards expressed as concerns by opponents
aze adequately addressed and preserved in other Seward ordinance and code
requirements. (For example, SCC § 13.01.025 prohibits placing snow on private property
of others, or on a public right of way.)
In short, existing utility-easement requirements, parking requirements, snow-storage
requirements, and fire-code compliance requirements continue to ensure adequate open space in
the Industrial Zoning District, even after the front setback might be reduced from 20 feet to 10
feet.
(2) The Administration would have no objection to limiting the application of this change in
front setbacks to the area recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission, however
dividing requirements among regions in the same zoning district is not good planning policy in
the long run. If the Council decides to limit the application of this front setback to the azea
directly north of Port Avenue, the staff will bring to the Planning and Zoning Commission
further recommendations that (a) all setbacks should be reviewed during the rewrite of Title 15,
and (b) if the azea north of Port Avenue is truly different from other areas of the Industrial
Zoning District, then Planning and Zoning possibly should consider the possibility of
recommending that the Council create two distinguishable types of industrial districting.
l~