Good afternoon.

It is just after 1 30 on July 13th.

We have three items on today's planning housing and parks committee, starting with zoning text amendment 2608.

I am the lead sponsor of the zoning text amendment.

It was introduced on April 28th.

It allows for the reinstatement of a nonconforming use under certain specific conditions.

There was a public hearing on June 16th.

After multiple discussions with council staff and with planning department staff, I realize that in certain contexts, reinstating a lapsed non-conforming use could be reasonable and even seen as a community benefit specifically to the neighboring community.

Doing so can create new neighborhood businesses or amenities and help address buildings that have sat vacant for a period of time.

And we know we have quite a bit of vacancy challenges, something that this council and this committee specifically has tried to address in multiple avenues.

Ms.

Nadu, thank you for all of your help with this zoning text amendment.

Really appreciate it.

And if there's no comments from colleagues, let me turn it over to you to walk us through the packet, please.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, committee.

So as noted, uh ZTA 2608 will allow the reinstatement of a nonconforming use under a pretty thorough process.

To start with, we had a public hearing June 16th.

Um all testimony was in support, um, notice noting that issue with vacant buildings, um, and also that businesses sometimes have to close for personal or other economic um reasons.

I believe COVID was listed as an example during the public hearing.

Um so backing up slightly with what a non-conforming use is.

Um, so a nonconforming use, um, very common in zoning across the country.

It's a use that was lawful when it was established, but for some reason no longer conforms to the requirements of the zone.

This can happen for a few reasons.

Um, either the use is no longer allowed in that zone due to a zoning rewrite or a master plan.

Um it can also be non-conforming because other um requirements have changed, such as setbacks or other use requirements.

Um a nonconforming use under the current zoning ordinance is considered abandoned if it ceases operations for at least six consecutive months.

Um and under the current zoning law, that use cannot be re-established again.

Um the intent here is to phase out uses that are considered no longer appropriate for the zone.

So, as noted by the sponsor, what this CTA would do is allow reinstatement if it's been abandoned for less than five years, and that five years would start at the date of submission of the application.

Um if you look at the ZTA itself, um, there's a bit of a process for this, and those application requirements are basically the same requirements as a conditional use.

Um the reason is that these would go to the Office of Zoning and Administrative Hearings, um, and there would also be notice provided uh via our usual application notice as well as posting the sign at the property.

Um but one thing that will be unique about this process is unlike the traditional conditional use process, a hearing will not automatically be required.

So part of the notice is notice that goes to municipalities, property owners, um, HOAs, civic associations, everyone in that regular vicinity, we use, I believe it's half a mile.

Um if someone who received notice objects to the non-conforming use, um then they can submit that uh to OSA and specifically request a hearing.

Um that has to be filed within 30 days of receiving notice, so the neighbors would have quite a bit of time to think about that use, meet with the property owner.

Um if granted, that hearing must be scheduled within 60 days of the date the application was requested.

Um, two other pieces to this to help the hearing examiner make a decision.

Um, first, DPS must submit written comments to OSA within 30 days as well.

Um, the intent of these comments is to describe the prior use and layout of the property, because presumably there was a U and O before.

Um, and also any complaints that were received related to the use.

So the reasoning there is there might have been a use, let's say, well, I won't call out specific uses, but if there was a use there that it had issues, um OZA would know that before allowing the reinstatement.

Um second, planning will also provide a written recommendation, and that recommendation will note if there's a master plan that specifically calls out that use is not being allowed.

So, for example, we've had recent master plans where we're saying we're phasing out auto uses.

So it might be that those are not the ones you want to reinstate because the council through that master plan had already said that's not the use we want in this area.

Similarly, planning's comments could include information about any effects from reinstatement of the use.

This is adverse effects, including traffic circulations and other things that have changed.

The hope is that that's going to be unlikely since five years is a pretty short window.

But that's all the evidence that hearing the hearing examiner will have.

Something else to note, if the hearing examiner finds that she needs more information to make a decision, she can also on her own decide to hold a hearing without getting that request from the community.

So the decision will be a written decision within 60 days of the application if no hearing is held, or within 45 days of the close of hearing if one is held.

There's two standards that the hearing examiner will need to find.

One, that the non-conforming use reinstatement would not change the nature, character, or intensity of the prior use to an extent that substantial adverse effects could be expected.

And then, second, that it does not conflict with that most recent master plan for wherever the application is allowed.

Something else in the ZTA is the hearing examiner will be allowed to make minimal changes.

That's to size, layout, vehicle circulation, compatibility, landscaping, lighting, the type of factors that OSA looks at often.

The reasoning here is it might be when this use was there five years ago, there might be some actually beneficial changes you would want to make for it to reopen.

So there's a little bit of wiggle room to do that.

After approval, the applicant must submit an annual report to DPS by July 30th of every year, just confirming that they're still in operation and that they're still consistent.

If not, if that report's not received and DPS does an inspection and it is closed, that use will be considered abandoned, and no re more reinstatement will be allowed.