MOUNT VERNON — Municipal Planning Commission members have unanimously recommended that city council adopt the updated zoning code as presented.
The vote came at an MPC public hearing on June 6.
Wendy Moeller of Compass Pointe Planning reviewed the highlights she presented at the May 9 MPC meeting. The highlights include changes to zoning districts and density and a complete rewrite of the signage section.
No one spoke in support of the updated zoning code. Several opposed it.
Clyde Kahrl said many existing homes do not conform to the proposed code. He noted that duplexes and townhomes, which are certainly not eyesores, are mixed with single-family homes.
“What this zoning code does is attempt to impose the standards of New Albany on Mount Vernon, and they don’t mix,” he said.
He also voiced concerns about the 35-foot maximum height, noting many existing homes are higher than that and are not considered monstrosities.
‘No tiny homes’
Resident Robert Beck disagreed with allowing clusters of tiny homes or cottages and combining development with business. He said it was one thing to have a mix of single-family homes and apartments but another to mix in business.
“To put a business PD [planned development] in with a housing PD, that is just over the top for Mount Vernon,” he said.
Moeller’s statement that she was given a goal to create higher density in the city offended Don Carr, a Mount Vernon resident.
“There’s only reason for high density. That is to get more people here so we can have more revenue coming into the coffers,” he said. “We don’t need more traffic on Coshocton Avenue. We are over-built, in my opinion, as we are.”
Carr acknowledged the updated code eliminates some vagueness but said the city does not need larger accessory buildings. He questioned whether the increased allowable size would lead to variance requests to the BZA for an even greater increase in size.
Terry Schultz, executive director of Habitat for Humanity, said his board stands behind most of the revisions. However, the board would like to see variances in R1 and R-1A to allow for duplexes and triplexes.
Schultz said zoning is another way of redlining in communities.
“I believe that zoning is an important part, but we also have to realize the repercussions of what our zoning codes do,” he said.
He said the city cannot allow wealthy individuals to have upward mobility and crowd out those with lower income.
“Allowing construction with oversight by the Board of Zoning Appeals and municipal planning will allow for that upward mobility that is a part of the American dream,” he said.
Commission comments
City Engineer Brian Ball said the updated zoning code tightens areas where developers had too much leeway. It also provides flexibility in FEMA and EPA requirements.
“People are going to move here. The question is, do we want them in the city or agriculture?” Ball said. “Think about revitalizing Mechanic Street or putting them on Updike Road.”
Law Director Rob Broeren noted the previous code imposed many lot rules and regulations.
“This code takes the reality of many of our older neighborhoods and says they don’t have these 30-foot setback and allows you to have a setback in line with your neighbors,” he said. “So in that way the code is really, really helpful.”
Broeren said the code removes items the city cannot enforce as well as sign content and group home discrimination.
Commission member Austin Swallow said the 1990 code was significant in its age and needed updating.
“It’s not perfect, but it’s a whole lot better than it was,” he said of the updated code.
Referencing the many homes that did not conform to R1 regulations, Commission member Todd Hawkins said, “I think this update will clean up a lot of those things.”
Mayor Matt Starr referenced a $22 million investment in infill lots in 2022.
“These changes will help spur additional investment inside the city limits where the infrastructure is currently located.”
Commission member Anne Ellsworth said striking a balance between citizen rights and government management is always an issue.
“I feel this very thoughtfully does that in a way that gives clarity and puts the onus on the businesses to make sure that we are continuing to enjoy the rural landscape and taking advantage of what we have within the city limits yet responding to what we see as the growth for the city,” she said.
