PL PACKET 01172023 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

17 City should feel confident in requiring significant upgrades to the design and amenity package of such a PUD, given the increased density that usually accompanies this type of project. The key for the successful use of Planned Unit Development is to be able to identify the specific, tangible benefits from the use of PUD design. These benefits may include upgraded architecture (both building design and materials), significantly increased landscaping, or additional open space offsetting greater building density. In many cases, the developer may be adding specific amenities to the project, including recreational facilities, or similar elements. When these types of “upgrades” can not be easily identified, the City should reconsider the flexibility being requested by the applicant. Nonconformities A common issue that faces Planning Commissions in the application of zoning regulations is how to treat existing buildings or land uses that are no longer allowed by newer zoning requirements. Such buildings and uses are called “nonconformities”, and have specific rights under State law. Until recently, the municipality applied a “50% Rule” to all nonconformities. Under this rule, a community was permitted to require that any existing nonconformity be removed and replaced only by a fully conforming use if it was destroyed by more than 50% of its value. Thus, a property owner who lost most of a building through damage by storm, accident, or even one’s own demolition, was required from that point on to comply with the current zoning requirements. The newer rule expands the rights of the owners of nonconformities. The Statute explicitly provides that nonconformities may be replaced or improved, but not expanded, so long as the owner has applied for a building permit within 6 months, and completed the work within 12 months. After this timeframe, the 50% Rule comes back into play. This is true even for the removal of nonconformities that are removed by the owner intentionally – natural or accidental damage is no longer a factor. One aspect of this issue relates to the “legality” or illegality” of the use or building. The nonconforming rights accrue only to those uses that are “legal nonconforming”, that is, they must have been legally established at the time of their construction or occupancy, according to the rules in place at that time. If they were never legal, such as someone who built a building outside of the regulations that would have applied, then no nonconforming rights accrue to that use or building. There are specific exclusions for Floodplain nonconformities that should be checked out when applying this relatively new language.