Projects: Zoning and Variances
| Introduction | ||
|
Over-development is perceived by area residents to be among the foremost threats to the character of the community. These threats include:
Summary of Goals:
Issues & Actions: Issue #1: Requests for variances often accompany renovation and development projects in residential areas. Variances from regulations understandably cause strife in neighborhoods. These variances can be granted by the Zoning Commissioner or the Department of Environmental Protection and Resource Management (DEPRM) if they are not opposed. The granting of variances sets precedents for further variances, weakening neighborhoods’ standards and defenses. Action 1.1 [RRLRAIA] Insure that the executive director monitors planning, zoning and development issues in order to inform the neighborhoods of requests for variances and proposed developments in their areas. Action 1.2 [ZDC] Assist the neighborhood in organizing effective testimony before the Zoning Commissioner — every effort must be made to be successful at this level. Action 1.3 3 [ZDC] Seek out DEPRM inspectors before environmental variances are granted, since there is no official avenue for community input (whereas developers’ engineers talk to DEPRM all the time). Issue #2: Zoning and building code violations are divisive for neighbors. Action 2.1 [RRLRAIA] Report suspected zoning and building code violations to the Department of Permits and Development Management. Action 2.2 [RRLRAIA] Support neighborhood’s legal action if it becomes necessary to take a violator to court. Issue #3: Large tracts of land are targets for subdivision, resulting in increased density, increased traffic and loss of open space. Action 3.1 [ZDC] Work with the Land Preservation Committee (LPC) to address those large parcels of land in the community whose development would be detrimental to the neighborhoods. Advise owners of conservation easements through the Land Preservation Trust (LPT) or of down-zoning. Action 3.2 [TC] [RRLRAIA] Maintain a list of LPT properties and their restrictions, as well as a list of large tracts where LPT easements would be desirable. Issue #4: There are three official opportunities for zoning change by developers. The quadrennial Comprehensive Zoning Map Process engages the developers, the public, planning staff, the planning board and the county council in a tiered series of hearings over 14.5 months. In the years between, the Cycle Zoning process is managed by various county agencies responsible for monitoring development, with more constrained public input, and with the board of appeals rather than the county council making the final decisions. A third process exists for out-of-cycle applications. Action 4.1 [ZDC] Educate the RRLRAIA board and its neighborhoods about the importance of talking to developers and county staff and testifying at all public hearings. County decision-making about zoning designations is responsive to community input. Action 4.2 Encourage developers to attend RRLRAIA board meetings to present their plans. Dialogue improves every development. Issue #5: Expertly drafted restrictive covenants offered by developers to safeguard communities can be effective, but they are not easily enforced as compliance requires monitoring and costly legal action. Action 5.1 [ZDC] Seek the most appropriate zoning designation for a tract or a commercial enterprise because this is the neighborhoods’ best protection. Action 5.2 [ZDC] Encourage neighborhoods to enter into covenants restricting developers to certain uses — only when the zoning designation is unavoidably permissive and only after expert legal review. Action 5.3 [RRLRAIA] Enter into covenants as rarely as possible and only when there is no other party to do so. Issue #6: Many schools, medical institutions, religious institutions and retirement communities are in or border this community. They are permitted in residential zones by “special exception.” Their expansion and development plans should have positive impacts Action 6.1 [RRLRAIA] Invite all “special exception” institutions planning expansion to its board meetings to share their plans. Action 6.2 [ZDC] Work with the County Office of Planning staff, the County Council, and in concert with other community groups to improve compatibility standards for institutional uses in residentially zoned areas. Issue #7: County law and ordinances control development process. Improvements would empower communities to:
Action 7.1 - 6 [RRLRAIA] Craft legislation which:
Issue #8: Positive development can benefit the community. Action 8.1 [RRLRAIA] Encourage redevelopment projects that improve the appearance and compatibility of existing business uses. Action 8.2 [RRLRAIA] Encourage restoration and preservation of all of RRLRA’s at-risk historic structures as residences or for adaptive reuse as these buildings weave our architectural “story”. Action 8.3 [RRLRAIA] Support the admirable goals of Maryland’s “Smart Growth” Initiative, such as the refurbishing of run-down neighborhoods in the metropolitan area. As an example, the Historic Scott Settlement of Bare Hills is a proud survivor of the pre-Civil War era. It is in need of repairs and restoration sensitive to the architectural achievements of its founder, the Rev. Aquilla Scott (also founder of the St. Johns AME Church on Bellona Avenue in Ruxton). Scott community leaders have begun to work with the County’s Office of Community Conservation to preserve and improve the historic dwellings. Issue #9: It is the view of community associations that the development process is weighted too heavily in favor of developers. It is difficult, costly and time-consuming for citizens to prevail when threatened with incompatible development. Action 9.1 [RRLRAIA] ] Express support for the office, budget and salary of the People’s Counsel whose job it is to challenge, on behalf of the citizens, the County’s legally questionable zoning decisions. Action 9.2 [RRLRAIA] Recruit lawyers, architects, and community-friendly developers to the RRLRAIA board as their expertise would be invaluable. Action 9.3 [RRLRAIA] Share expertise and influence with bordering community associations, the Community Conservation Action Group, the Greater Towson Council of Community Associations, and others. |
||