City of Thibodaux Zoning Review - South Central Planning ...

2010 Thibodaux Zoning ReviewAnother finding that we had was many of the issues that were brought up were things that wouldbe routine if you had a planner on staff, they could do the routine research such as maximum lotcoverage or the visibility at intersections, they can do a zoning study on a regular basis, they couldlook up the non-conforming uses or go out and actually do the land use study, they could look atthe parking issue and actually see, it could be looked at, it could be determined what those issuesare. They can educate the public so the confusion about what is modular, what is mobile, youknow what is manufactured, a planner on staff could easily address those issues and add that tothe zoning ordinance. So if the budget permits that would be a recommendation to at least get aprofessional planner who can assist the Planning Commission and the Council in addressing someof these issues.Non-conforming uses, as I stated before this was a big issue here in the City and what was told tous was that the Chamber sent the Mayor a letter basically expressing their concern about thegrandfathering provision and the non-conforming ordinance. They felt like it had the potential ofcausing some economic problems as we kind of heard a little earlier where businesses may loosetheir grandfathering status and left, just abandoned in the neighborhood so the Chamberapparently formed a committee and did an official zoning study. Well they found about 100instances of non-conforming uses, again as I mentioned before just through a cursory review withthe map, just looking at maps and not actually going out and doing that study because that is notwhat the zoning review was about, it was enough to give credence to the fact that there are, orseem to be plenty non-conforming uses, enough so to warrant a study. Within the ordinance itselfthe language seems to be a little confusing about non-conforming uses, there is two prescriptivetimes for loosing the grandfathering status, Section 403 stipulates that the uses of land, or landwith minor structures looses it grandfathering status after being vacant for 18 months and Section405, structures or structures on premises can loose its grandfather status after being vacant for 6consecutive months, however on an inconsistent basis if it is vacant for 18 months over a 3 yearperiod it can loose it non-conformity as well. That seems a little challenging for staff, probably you,Errol, to keep up with, you know has it been 18 months, has it been 3 months, 6 months. Section203 discusses a 6 month loss of grandfathering status for signs and the Thibodaux ZoningOrdinance Section 22, the grandfathering provision for signs we felt probably should be removed toeliminate confusion. So our recommendation again we want to say that the non-conforming, thegrandfathering clause, the changing in the terminology, the percentages, the length of time is reallydependent on what the City would like to do and we didn’t know that. So what we offered in all ofthese recommendations are options and what we will need to get back is the feedback as to thedirection that the City would like to go in but a short term recommendation, what we found in theCity of Hammond was that they had a 3 month vacancy time limitation, after 3 months, if thestructure had been vacant for 3 months, you loose your grandfathering status. They did provide,on a case by case basis, conditional use status and they would review that on a case by casebasis. Their percentage of damage that was allowed was up to 75%, if the City is interest in takinga more strict approach perhaps that is one that they would like to use. Or you could increase thepercentage of damages and the length of time such as the cities of Pineville and Ruston. If the citywants to take a more lenient approach to non-conforming use, perhaps that is the model that youcan use. For our long term recommendation I do want to caution that without doing a zoning studyto understand the dynamics in these neighborhoods, these could be neighborhoods in transition,considering that your zoning ordinance hasn’t been updated in 31 years, these neighborhoodscould have been single family residential areas and now they may be something else in the year2010, so if you take a more strict approach you could actually be creating even more problems bycreating even more vacant property. If you take a more lenient approach without doing a studythen you take away the tool from the community to actually get rid of an egregious, offense use if itis located in the neighborhood, so the recommendation would be to actually do a land use study inthe identified neighborhoods, the neighborhoods that clearly they have some non-conformingissues to do a study in those areas to understand that the zoning need to actually be changed.Then once the zoning is updated to match the uses in that neighborhood then you can look at, okwe want to take a stricter approach now or we want to do a more lenient approach, whatever is theCouncil’s choice. Another option could be if the neighborhoods were, they’ve been in existencenow, they’ve been operating and these non-conformities for years, many people may becomfortable with that, they may like having the convenience of having whatever this is in theirneighborhood, so another option could be creating a mixed use zone where ok maybe this nonconformity,if it is not detrimental, if it is a community use, a neighborhood use that theneighborhood likes, it the lot size is not quite right, it doesn’t quite meet conformity but theneighborhood enjoys the convenience perhaps then you might consider a mixed use zone for thatarea. It is just an option and again without studying what is actually in those neighborhoods; it isdifficult to make a strong recommendation one way or the other.As I mentioned before there was an issue with manufactured, mobile and modular homes, therewas some confusion surrounding the term, Resolution 1550 called for a moratorium and it used thewords manufactured and mobile interchangeably but in an interview participants clearly stated thatthe moratorium was on modular homes and those are three different things. So our short termrecommendation is to clarify in the ordinance what is mobile, modular and manufactured. What wefound, this is HUD definition is that manufactured homes are built to HUD standards and they metthose HUD specifications, mobile homes were built either prior to the 1976 HUD code or they arebuilt to industry standards and not HUD standards, modular homes have to meet the same building683