Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ordinance Interpretation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
BZA weighs 3-acre zoning limit as it approves small expansion
Summary
Board members debated whether a 2015 ordinance that limits private indoor recreation facilities to lots under 3 acres should bar the requested expansion; staff argued the lease area could be treated as a separate lot and the board chose to approve the modification while reserving future discretion.
A central issue in the Board of Zoning Appeals’ deliberations was whether the city’s 2015 ordinance limiting private indoor recreation facilities to lots no larger than 3 acres applies to the leased portion of a property or the entire parcel. The board discussed the definition of “lot” and the legislative intent behind the 2015 change, which staff said aimed to keep industrial zones predominantly industrial.
Mark Kipa read the zoning definition of a lot and explained why the lease area might be considered a separate unit: “Definition of a lot is a piece or parcel of land occupied or intended to be occupied by a principal building and its accessory buildings to be used, developed, or built upon as a unit under single ownership,” Kipa said. Applicant representative Richard Hall said the lease area is 1.68 acres of a roughly 3.55-acre parcel and argued that the leased area would comply with the 3-acre maximum.
Board members split on the procedural framing: some said the application is a modification to a prior special exception and therefore consistent with earlier approvals; others said enlarging the special exception’s limits is closer to a new special exception and raised concerns about precedent for larger future recreational uses in industrial zones. The board ultimately approved the modification but explicitly reserved the right to treat different future applications differently to avoid creating an open-ended precedent.
