Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee amends industrial redevelopment rules, lowers landscape threshold to 60% and requires improvements at completion
Summary
After debate between industry representatives, planning staff and council members, the committee amended an industrial redevelopment bill to set a 60% renovation trigger for landscape requirements and require landscaping be in place at project completion; the amended bill passed 5-0.
The Transportation, Energy and Utilities Committee on Aug. 5 amended and approved a bill that changes when industrial properties must meet the city’s landscape requirements.
Bill Delaney of the Mayor’s Office described the bill as broadly positive but said two items needed attention: the threshold for triggering landscape requirements and the compliance time frame. “We think that 50% makes a lot more sense in terms of blight and encouraging development,” Delaney said, summarizing planning staff preferences, and noted industry had preferred a higher threshold.
Nina Sickler of Public Works told the committee the department prefers work to be completed at the time of final inspection rather than tracked two years after project approval because staff do not currently have a system to re-inspect projects years later. Planning staff and the planning commission supported a lower threshold consistent with current code language. Industry representatives, represented by Mr. Hagen, said a 60% threshold would be an acceptable compromise.
After discussion and a motion to amend, the committee adopted an amendment reducing the threshold to 60% and requiring required landscape improvements be in place upon completion of the project. Planning staff also discussed changing the valuation trigger to current market value rather than a three-year lookback; planning commission suggested allowing property owners to submit a certified appraisal in disputed cases, but staff warned that the appraisal process and responsibility for evaluating it had not been worked out.
The bill as amended passed the committee 5-0. Committee members said additional technical refinements (including how appraisals would be handled) could be addressed in Land Use and Zoning (LUZ) or future committee meetings.
