Final open house culminates an open process

ZCC Public Outreach

The ZCC hosted its final open house today at the Independence Visitors Center – one of the last opportunities for public review and comment on the draft code before it is sent to City Council in December. The citizen comment period closes this Friday, November 12. Attendees at the ten open houses have weighed in on key changes to the code – from how new form and design controls will impact their neighborhoods to concerns about new decision-making authority at L&I. “It’s been an open process,” said Betty Turner of Germantown Community Connection, Inc., “now it’s time for a new code.”

The open house format represents the culmination of three years of work by the Zoning Code Commission to evaluate the existing code, gather input on what the priorities for new zoning regulations should be, and draft a new code. Many of those who attended the open houses have followed zoning reform from the beginning, such as Ms. Turner. Germantown Community Connection brings all of Germantown’s community groups together to discuss common concerns and speak with a collective voice on issues that impact their neighborhoods. For Ms. Turner, the new code is an opportunity for zoning to match reality. “The current code is outdated,” she said.

While specific comments varied from district to district, the main themes were consistent. Most residents want new development to be in context with the rest of the neighborhood and they want to be involved in development decisions that impact their communities. In the 2nd Councilmanic District, for example, the focus was on dimensional standards. They want building setbacks and height limits to be related to existing buildings on adjacent properties so the character of a block is maintained. “It would be better if minor dimensional exceptions allowed are contextual (within 10% e.g.) rather than a specific number of feet,” one attendee suggested. Residents in the 4th District expressed concern that the triggers for Civic Design Review (CDR) might be set too high. “One size does not fit all,” the comment said. “Places smaller than Center City should have triggers that are scaled accordingly.” In all districts, response to the registry for community organizations and improved public notice requirements was mostly positive. Some comments from all of the open houses are featured below.

Enhancing city and neighborhoods. The new code is intended to clarify the rules and establish objective criteria so that fewer cases will be sent to the ZBA. New requirements aim to improve the quality of development and encourage the reuse of vacant properties. Reaction to the proposed changes in the code was generally positive, but the following suggestions and concerns were noted.

• Vacant industrial land should be rezoned to promote more neighborhood-compatible reuse.
• Zoning should protect two-story residential blocks from a character change resulting from three-story infill.
• Height limits should include the maximum number of stories, not just feet.
• Allow full range of FAR bonus categories in other areas, not just Center City.
• Overbuilding has led to sewage/drainage problems and water main breaks. More weight should be placed on what infrastructure can support.
• Does the new code provide for quality standards for modular housing as well as traditional brick and mortar homes?
• Some of the language is vague, such as “if new use is similar or has fewer impacts.” Less specific zoning language will result in less community notification and input.
• How much can neighbors weigh in on new uses for vacant properties that are rezoned? Does reuse of abandoned buildings no longer trigger review and public comment?

Preserving and enriching the environment. New requirements to make the city greener, protect sensitive natural resources, and improve access to local food and alternate energy sources were widely supported, although some issues related to maintenance and property rights were raised.

• Who is responsible for street tree maintenance? Tree maintenance may be a burden for some property-owners.
• Heritage trees should be preserved at all costs.
• Gardening on vacant property should be encouraged through zoning.
• Expand the protected steep slopes restrictions to include first order streams in the Schuylkill River Watershed.
• Open space is good where there is low demand for other uses. Some areas need development.
• Does the code provide for a property-owner’s rights to sun and wind? For example, does the code address a situation where new or expanded building blocks sunlight to a neighbor’s solar panel or wind to a turbine?
• Will landscaping be too cost-prohibitive for lot owners?

Improving connections. Most participants agreed that promoting public transit, making development more pedestrian-friendly, implementing parking management strategies, and providing for the care of young and old residents are good, progressive strategies, but offered the following comments. Reaction to new accessory dwelling unit and day care regulations varied significantly from district to district.

• A balance between TOD and SEPTA service capability is needed.
• Require sheltered enclosures for transit improvements.
• Dedicated parking areas should be available for motorcycles, mopeds, scooters, and perhaps ultra compact cars.
• Dedicated parking for hybrids will only benefit the affluent and will not encourage purchase of efficient cars significantly.
• Make sure dedicated parking spaces don’t take precedence over people with other needs.
• Parking maximums may create spillover demand in neighborhoods.
• Accessory dwelling units should be limited to three unrelated individuals on a single property.
• Accessory dwelling units should be allowed by variance or special exception only.
• Perhaps neighborhoods could choose to opt in or out of accessory dwelling unit requirements.
• Rather than permitting accessory dwelling units based on dwelling type, base it on total gross floor area.
• Expand accessory dwelling unit provisions to permit them in existing rowhomes in southwest Philadelphia.
• Would like to see accessory dwelling units allowed in rowhomes where rear garages could accommodate a unit above.
• Enforcement of ADU will be hard. Are they inspected by L&I?
• All day care uses require safe vehicular drop-off/pick-up areas so there is no interruption to neighborhood residential traffic. The same should apply to churches, libraries.
• Day care should be located in places such as shopping malls and shopping centers where parking is available.
• Day care should be permitted in more locations, so that children are in a “home” environment.
• Limit the number of daycare facilities that can be in any one neighborhood or geographic area.
• Giving opportunities for adult day care is a positive change.

Engaging the public. The process for registering community organizations, improved public notice and meeting requirements, and the proposed Civic Design Review (CDR) have been generally well-received. Suggestions and concerns include:

• The first public notice must provide enough information to adequately inform community organizations prior to the required neighborhood meeting. Maybe include plan.
• More than one community meeting is necessary in some cases to ensure an informed decision is made.
• Make sure notice is early and distribute notices more widely in newspapers.
• Require all ZBA and L&I use permits, special exceptions, and variances to be posted online and searchable by address.
• Will any group be allowed to register even if it is comprised of just a few people without regular meetings?
• What if the Registered Community Organizations (RCO) do not follow through as required?
• What do you do when RCO boundaries overlap?
• Including only RCOs is too limiting; everyone should be able to participate.
• How is the legitimacy of RCOs determined? Criteria needed for neighborhood groups to prevent ghost organizations from acting for political fronts.
• Can the RCO register primary and secondary areas, if interested in projects outside of primary area?
• Could an RCO claim the whole city as its area, such as SCRUB, so it is notified about every development?
• The CDR should include all civic organizations that abut the development, as well as the committee person in some areas. What about development at boundaries of city?
• Triggers for CDR are too high. In today’s economy more small developments are proposed and public input should be provided.
• One size does not fit all. Triggers for CDR should be based on the scale of the project as located in the community. Places smaller than CC should have triggers that are scaled accordingly.
• Does CDR apply to public developments?
• Cannot leave rotating seat disputes on CDR to political appointments. Can we depend on councilperson to make rational decisions?

Administration. Many comments were related to how the new code will be administered and enforced and making it easy to use and understand.

• New code language requires more judgment by L&I staff at counter. Need proper training. Applies to whole code.
• A summary of the zoning code is needed that explains how it works.
• Put glossary in code.
• Where will administrative manual be accessed?
• Is code integrated with streets department regulations that govern some aspects of development?
• Should have evening ZBA meetings. Currently not fair to general public.
• A lot of changes will require more enforcement by L&I. This is a problem.