An update to the City of Meadville zoning ordinance has been in process for quite some time, with the original draft presented to council in January 2021 reflecting a draft date of October 2020.
The questions that initially surfaced were surrounding where this idea for form-based zoning, and all of these building typologies even came from. According to the city website, and many statements during various meetings, this is a result of the My Meadville Project. Something that was a large part of Autumn Vogel's journey to city council.
Let's go back and take a quick look at what the My Meadville Community Action Plan looks like in regard to zoning;
It's interesting that the only real mention of the Zoning Ordinance in the My Meadville Community Action Plan comes from their wanting to have community gardens and urban farms. For the record, in all areas community gardens are permitted and urban farms are considered for use by special exception. There isn't mention in the My Meadville CAP of wanting houses to look and feel the same, not even mention really of people wanting to walk everywhere downtown as Autumn claims. Regardless, they've been working on this zoning update, and have been for quite some time. There have been numerous meetings of the Planning and Zoning Commission to discuss this project, as well as when they finally brought it to council and Gary Johnson made all of his slideshow presentations. A lot of time and energy has been expended, and we still are in the major development phase of this zoning update.
A quick review of the timeframe and money involved;
When they started their presentations, there was much misunderstanding surrounding what the end goal was and why so many regulations. The goal seemed to be to encourage the redevelopment of structures already existing in the city, not necessarily for new development, as that would potentially overcrowd the city.
The result was confusion regarding what could and could not be developed and what you could and could not do when renovating a property. Now, there has been agreement that an update needed to occur, but according to Jim Roha on numerous occasions, there are inconsistencies that need to be addressed before this makes any sense.
April 6, 2022 council meeting;
What's the point? Says Jim Roha at the March 23, 2022 council meeting;
Apparently, it is offensive to Autumn when someone questions her plans;
Now we see the zoning ordinance yet again on the agenda, after city council had sent it back to the planning and zoning commission for revisions. What are the key talking points coming up?
A quick overview of these specific bullet points. First, what are building typologies?
Now, what are the form-based provisions?
Here's where it starts to get more confusing. Each district has its own design criteria, and you must know where you're at to know how to develop that property. (There is also Street Typologogy to factor in) Example;
In case you're wondering what MU-1, MU-2, and DPH stand for, we have the zoning map;
They go further and call attention to the mixed-use districts.
However, we found this slightly confusing, as part of North Street/State Street is either GB-M or MU-2, depending on the zoning map you look at;
There may be an explanation for this discrepancy. The point though, you shouldn't have to wonder which map to go by and you shouldn't have to seek clarification. Although, some may argue that this is just an error that got missed in all of the versions. Whatever the case, it calls into question the effectiveness and understandability of the document, if the infographics aren't even clear.
Briefly, Street Typology further dictates what can be done with the property, based on whichever is the higher-ranked street. You think we're kidding, we're not;
Finally, let's look at Traditional Neighborhood Development;
We're not sure how the rest of you are feeling, but after reading just these few brief sections, we feel sorry for anyone who has to try to understand any of this to develop a property. Even more troubling, is the fact that the most recent draft is 169 pages long.
But wait, there's more. Remember if you will, the clip from above; Jim states about Diamond Park and you couldn't rebuild it. Autumn starts to say, you could because it was created... and then she deflects to say what's the conversation we're supposed to have. Maybe she stopped speaking because she didn't actually know the answer, which is unlikely, as she always ums, and likes her way through whatever she tries to give us as fact.
Our theory is, she shut down and redirected because she realized Jim was right, as he usually is. Jim Roha is well-educated and experienced when it comes to ordinances and resolutions. He reads them through and ensures he understands, as well as, looks for inconsistencies and discrepancies. We know this because it is evidenced in various meetings, he will pull specific sections and questions them. But, dear reader, because we deal in the business of fact over opinion, we provide this to back up Jim's understanding that if you wanted to rebuild Diamond Park as it was, you likely couldn't;
Make sure you read the bit that says "the more restrictive requirements shall govern."
We'll have to wait and see what the results of the June 20, 2023 meeting hold for the zoning ordinance. But, could it mean a whole new draft?
Judging by this clip from the August 17, 2022 meeting, it's not out of the realm of possibilities.
As with anything on this council, we're in a hurry up and wait pattern. We hurry up, then we wait, then we pass things even when they're not 100% up to snuff. When exactly is enough going to be enough? And how many ordinances are on Larry and Autumn's quota before the end of their term?
Maybe if they cared enough to slow down, research and understand the first time around, there wouldn't be so much hostility towards what they're doing. They also might not be getting sued, but that's speculation.
Yorumlar