As of this writing, April 15, the residential zoning advisory committee is entering into its sixth month of activity. Up to this point we have been concentrating at learning about what, to no one's surprise, has turned out to be a very complex issue. With the aid of support staff from the city, we have learned how many other cities have wrestled with this problem and found a very wide range of options.

In February we took a very interesting and informative bus and walking tour of eleven different residential neighborhoods throughout the city. Fortunately it was on one of those unusually warm days we had that month. The tour really brought home what a wide variety of neighborhoods and diverse range of needs there are in our community and it heightened our awareness of the challenge faced in trying to support and preserve the unique character of each neighborhood with one overall code.

We have also looked carefully at what flexibility the city would have in changing its ordinances and still be within the limits defined by the state law which authorizes cities to establish zoning codes. While I hardly have the legal expertise that several of the committee members have, I think I am safe in saying that state law allows for a lot more flexibility than we first thought. We have now entered into the process of proposing specific changes that will hopefully turn what most agree is an out-of-date code and accompanying appeals procedures into a system that will work well as we enter into a new century. I emphasize that the following suggestions are at best musings and brainstorms that have been presented only as food for thought and in no way should be seen as indicating any definite direction the committee may be headed in.

In order to more efficiently handle a large (and possibly growing) task, the committee has divided into two subcommittees, a process subcommittee which considers changes dealing with procedures, and a neighborhood character subcommittee which is looking at some of the physical and architectural implications of possible changes. This is a rather rough delineation and in truth there is much overlap in what each subcommittee does but the creation of the subcommittees has greatly increased our capacity to consider alternatives. I sit on the process subcommittee and the suggestions I present here come mainly from its activities.

1. Increased public education. It is speculated that if homeowners were better informed about the process they would have more realistic expectations of it and be less frustrated if they become involved in it.

2. Increased information required to be given to prospective buyers by sellers and agents. This is in response to many stories heard from people who say that they bought their home planning to make major improvements only to discover after the fact that the current zoning system wouldn't allow it.

3. Increased staff discretion. The zoning board is supposed to be a board of appeals but it has evolved into a body that seems to be making many of what some think are really just day to day decisions.

4. Expansion of the conditional use process.

5. Loosening of the variance standards. This refers to the standards which now are quite limiting as to the unique situation a homeowner must be in order to be granted a variance.

6. Increased say on the part of individual neighborhoods as to the granting of variances. Again to my surprise, some neighborhood associations have been quite hesitant about this idea, saying that they try to avoid being involved in any possible disputes between individual neighbors.

7. A variety of specific changes to the code itself. This is more the area for the neighborhood character subcommittee and I hope to present some of their ideas in the next newsletter.

The committee meets on the second and fourth Monday of each month at 6:00 p.m. in the Municipal Building and the first part of the meeting continues to be set aside to receive public input. One or two people have done so at each of our recent meetings. They always are well received and often have sparked the most interesting discussions of the evening.

Though when the committee was first created there was some hope that we would have recommendations ready for the common council by May, reality has set in and our current plans are to have something ready by September. We will be meeting through the summer but may change our schedule somewhat so if you would like to be there anytime June through August it may be wise to check on times with any of your Tenney-Lapham neighborhood members of the committee: GiGi Holland 251-8586; Diane Milligan 256-1474; or Bob Kinderman 251-1358. As usual we are always eager to hear your comments.

- Bob Kinderman


Back to the May/June Table of Contents