Staff proposes new rules to let neighborhood businesses in residential zones adapt, with public hearings for larger changes

City community-development staff presented detailed options to the Englewood Historic Preservation Commission for loosening restrictions on long‑standing commercial uses located in residential zoning districts, emphasizing smaller, by‑right changes with public hearings required for larger expansions.

Brian Isom, community development staff, told the commission that nonconforming uses are businesses that were legal when established but became disallowed by later rezoning. "In short, it's a use that was at one point legal that through some form of zoning action is now considered illegal," Isom said. He said the city identified a cluster of such sites concentrated in southern Englewood, and that the status can discourage investment because owners expect commercial market value even though reuse as housing or institutional uses would be required if a site becomes vacant for six months.

Isom said staff began with 14 registered nonconforming uses; one became conforming after a recent planned‑unit development rezoning that took effect Sept. 5, and another owner intends to convert to residential, leaving 12 sites under consideration. Examples he cited included Quincy Barbershop and the business operating under the name God Save the Cream, which he said currently holds a grocery‑store nonconforming designation that limits how it may sell some products.

Why it matters: staff and the commission framed the proposal as a way to help neighborhood commercial pockets remain viable, spur reinvestment in older buildings (some dating to the early 1900s), and support local services such as barbershops, small grocery or food and beverage uses.

Options presented: staff laid out three broad approaches and suboptions. Option 1 would keep the current rules unchanged. Option 2 would allow conversion to uses already allowed in the least‑intensive mixed‑use district (MUR‑3A). Option 3 would create a targeted short list of allowable uses tailored to neighborhood needs (examples raised in outreach included medical office, personal services such as barbershops, retail grocery, restaurants and dependent care).

On expansions and site updates, staff offered choices ranging from no change to allowing expansions up to MUR‑3A building and lot standards (staff showed MUR‑3A lot coverage at about 70% versus 40–50% in single‑family residential districts) or case‑by‑case review. Isom said planning and zoning commission members preferred a flexible, by‑right standard for modest changes with an option to seek a special exception through a hearing process for larger modifications.

Public outreach and feedback: staff described neighborhood engagement that included three neighborhood nights and the Inglewood block party. According to Isom, property and business owners generally sought maximum flexibility and preferred by‑right allowances; nearby residents supported limited expansions and asked for caps so a small corner store would not become a multistory development. On accessory improvements such as outdoor seating, landscaping and parking updates, the public was supportive with limits, staff said.

Implementation pathways and costs: staff proposed layered decision processes. Minor, by‑right changes would be administrative; a development director decision (an administrative adjustment) would require a 15‑day on‑site notice and a $250 application fee; a planning and zoning commission decision (special exception or conditional use‑style process) would include a public hearing and a $600 fee; and a city council decision would require neighborhood meetings, two public hearings (planning and zoning commission and council) and two council readings with an estimated minimum fee of $1,050. Isom framed these options as a tradeoff between speed/cost for small businesses and greater public input for larger changes.

Outstanding issues and constraints: commissioners pressed staff on the six‑month vacancy rule that strips nonconforming status after prolonged vacancy and on how the city would verify continued operation. Isom said enforcing the vacancy clock can be difficult when businesses do not cancel licenses and utility bills continue. Commissioners also asked whether converting nonconforming commercial sites to include residential units would be allowed; Isom said public sentiment was mixed and the commission did not favor that option at this time. Several commissioners recommended checking whether any of the identified properties are historically significant before permitting renovations.

Next steps: staff said the item returned to the planning and zoning commission in July and that staff expects to present more complete draft code language at a council study session in October, with code amendments likely delayed until after the upcoming election because of public notice and hearing timelines. Isom said the team reviewed comparable work in Spokane, Washington, which created an administrative pathway plus hearings for larger exceptions.

Ending: Commissioners thanked staff and offered follow‑up topics for the next draft, including clearer definitions of allowed uses, tighter limits on expansions, and a process to review historic significance for individual parcels before permitting substantial alterations.