Bowling Green council hears wide-ranging zoning-code amendments focused on online permits, signs and setback clarifications

Planning Director Heather Sailor presented Ordinance No. 9354 at a public hearing, telling the Bowling Green City Council the package primarily updates the city's zoning code to reflect a new online permitting portal and correct a series of inconsistencies.

"We have made changes or proposed changes to the zoning code based a lot on our change to having an online portal now," Sailor said, describing edits that remove the requirement that certain submissions be "written" and that eliminate paper-drawing and multiple-print requirements.

The ordinance would make multiple targeted edits: remove the word "written" from several application and notice requirements so submissions and notifications may be digital; restore the zoning-certificate validity period to one year from date of approval (rather than from date of application); and delete outdated paper-drawing and multiple-print requirements now that the city accepts digital files.

Sailor also outlined several substance changes. She proposed clarifying vision-clearance measurements to specify measurements be taken from where rights-of-way intersect rather than from ambiguous points such as property lines or the edge of the roadway, and to harmonize fence language so objects taller than 2 feet remain excluded from vision triangles. "We wanted to make it clearer by saying we like to measure from where the right of ways intersect," she said.

On signage and lighting, staff recommended rewording the outdoor-lighting section to limit intensity and explicitly apply the lighting rules to illuminated or electronic signage so digital message signs must conform to the same light-pollution limits. Sailor said staff had received business-community requests to reconsider the city’s ban on moving temporary signs and proposed allowing feather or horizontal-banner signs under permit with limits on the number of display days.

The proposed accessory-use edits drew the most sustained council attention. Under the draft text, certain detached accessory structures would be required to meet the same front-yard setback rules as principal buildings, which could make some front-yard sheds and detached decks impermissible in zones with deeper minimum setbacks. Sailor explained that, under the proposed language, many detached accessory uses would no longer be allowed within the front-yard setback.

"We were just proposing that under the table that they be the same as what's applicable to principal structures for the front yard setback," Sailor said, noting that in some zoning districts the minimum front-yard setback could be 20 feet rather than 10.

A council member who identified themselves during discussion praised the online-application updates but warned the accessory-use change risked removing features that contribute to neighborhood character. "I am very wary of prohibiting people from having, for example, patios or decks or playsets in their front yard," the council member said, and said they had shared a proposed amendment to preserve some front-yard features.

Council member Joel said he supported most of the package but suggested a compromise on sheds: allow sheds in F2D unless they exceed 100 square feet. "I think I don't know that we have a real interest in restricting somebody's use of a shed," Joel said.

Staff clarified related definitions: gardens are listed as accessory uses and generally do not have to comply with minimum setbacks; by contrast, the code defines a rain garden as a stormwater-infiltration feature that is also an accessory use and currently not required to meet minimum setbacks. Sailor warned distinguishing a rain garden from ordinary landscaping could be difficult and suggested the council consider a separate piece of legislation to clarify that definition if desired.

Staff also explained the difference between decks that are functionally attached to a house (considered part of the principal structure) and detached accessory decks; under current practice detached decks smaller than 100 square feet are permitted in front yards, but the proposed text would not allow detached accessory structures in front-yard setbacks.

There was no applicant testimony and no correspondence filed for the hearing. The chair closed the public hearing at the conclusion of council discussion; no vote on the ordinance was taken at this meeting.

Next steps: the ordinance remains before council for further consideration, including potential amendments on accessory uses and temporary-sign provisions.