Zoning Ordinance Revision Project Rochester, New York
		Margaret A. Wuerstle, AICP
		Session: April 17, 2000 10:15AM - 11:30AM	Author Info

ABSTRACT

Just about everyone has their own definition of smart growth: anti-sprawl, livable communities, regionalism. Rochester too, has given the definition of smart growth some special conditions and meanings. Certainly, the City of Rochester is not facing the same issues as the Charlotte-Mecklenburg region or other areas that are experiencing booming growth. The City is losing industry and population. Our population is now at 231,000 which is down 10,000 from 1980 and 100,000 since 1950. Yet the greater Rochester area is experiencing the worst case scenario: sprawl without population growth.

So what is Rochester doing to address smart growth issues? Our Mayor, William A. Johnson, Jr. is a leading spokesperson in New York State for smart growth initiatives. Last year the City Council adopted our first comprehensive plan since 1964. This is our Renaissance 2010 Plan. This 5 year process engaged thousands of residents, neighborhood groups, business associations, agencies, and various interest groups in developing neighborhood plans, goals, and strategies. To complete the process, we are now updating our zoning ordinance in order to help implement some of the goals outlined in the Renaissance 2010 Plan.

Since this is the first comprehensive update of the zoning code in 25 years, we started by educating the community on zoning issuesand specifically what zoning can and cannot do. We concurrently held public scoping sessions to identify the issues to be addressed in the environmental impact statement and the zoning rewrite. We have just recently moved into the next educational phase as the draft ordinance, environmental impact statement and map are being prepared. While the Mayor is speaking to local, regional, state, and national audiences, the zoning staff is out in the community teaching various interest groups about livable communities, smart growth principles and how we might incorporate these concepts into the zoning code.

Our smart growth road show includes an 11 minute slide show which I will present to you now. Afterwards, I will explain how we intend to incorporate some of these principles into our new zoning ordinance.

..................   SMART GROWTH PRESENTATION  (Link to Rochester City Hall Website).....................

Rochester is using the term "smart growth" to describe our efforts to shape growth within the City boundaries in a way that uses land resources as efficiently as possible while preserving the quality of life and lowering regulatory barriers to housing and other economically productive development.

The Zoning Ordinance Revision Project is in the draft stages. Our consultants and staff are still developing concepts and drafting regulations. With that in mind, several of the major issues that we are looking to address in the new ordinance that deal with smart growth principles include the following:

1. Identifying areas for higher density, mixed-use development. Our planning department is identifying potential urban village areas and developing standards to accommodate higher density, mixed-use development in these areas. The issue of higher densities may be a hard sell to neighborhoods but the urban village concept has many groups intrigued enough to request this designation. Once again, everyone has their own image of what an urban village is and should be. When our final standards are developed and released we may face opposition but right now the concept is working for us. We are also using the concept of higher density, mixed-uses to develop standards for our Center City area as well.

 
2. On the other hand, another issue that we are seriously struggling with is preserving older neighborhoods and enhancing neighborhood ambiance. In certain neighborhoods, large older homes have been chopped up into apartments which has lead to a multitude of problems with noise, traffic congestion, and parking. Some neighborhoods have thrived despite the conversions. In other areas, the conversions have caused the neighborhood to rapidly decline. We hope to develop deconversion incentives and some disincentives in select neighborhoods to not only prevent the conversion of large single family homes into multiples but to encourage property owners to restore these structure to single family homes. Most of the incentives will be in the form of grants through the Housing Bureau. Our zoning project is considering stricter regulations on conversions in the form of yearly Certificate of Occupancy inspections, stricter off-street parking regulations, green space standards and prohibiting certain variances. Also at the present time our ordinance does not provide for a pure R-1 single family zoning district. Our current R-1 zone permits day care centers, nursery schools, community garages and parking lots, ancillary garages and parking lots, convents and rectories, bed and breakfasts, group homes and private community centers. For obvious reasons we need to restore R-1 zoning to some of our older stable neighborhoods in order to preserve their character. It will require a balancing of urban villages, higher density neighborhoods and low density single family neighborhoods in order to create a community that is convenient, attractive and accessible for a mix of age groups.

 
3. We also intend to address housing alternatives by providing new regulations to accommodate live/work spaces along with improved standards for adaptive reuses that will include broader categories of reuses.Standards for infill development with urban features like garages tucked in the rear yards are also under consideration.

 
4. Pedestrian friendly development that will discourage dependence on the automobile is stressed to the zoning staff by neighborhood groups. The City has close to 300 neighborhood groups that are amazingly organized due to the community organizing efforts during the preparation of the Renaissance 2010 Plan. To achieve this goal we will provide the necessary standards that will require developments to locate at the sidewalk edge and provide for walkable mixed use development. We are considering minimum required height regulations as well as standards for joint and shared parking. In select areas we are deliberating the merits of reducing or eliminating parking requirements as we now do in the Center City area.

 
5. Coupled with pedestrian friendly development, our various interest groups want to develop a greater sense of community through design guidelines that are developed with assistance from neighborhood groups. Currently, 5 new requests for overlay districts with design guidelines that have been submitted by neighborhood umbrella groups. We will encourage design quality and will insist on development that is compatible and scaled to the surrounding uses. Minimum required density, minimum height standards and defensible space standards are other regulations that are being considered in addition to the usual guidelines that deal with themes and materials.

 
6. Cooperation and collaboration between the City and the 5 surrounding municipalities has been slow. Recently, there has been positive movement amongst some of the municipalities in dealing with growth and development along a major access route. Just in case this is a sign of possible future cooperation, we are reviewing the ordinances of the surrounding municipalities with whom we share a common border to determine where we are compatible and where our ordinances are incompatible. We will determine appropriate changeswithin the City boundary and/or if negotiations are appropriate outside of the City limits.

 
7. While neighborhood groups demand stricter controls, pedestrian friendly development and good urban design guidelines, business and industrial interest groups call for us to lower regulatory barriers and to make the development process more rational and less expensive. They want more flexibility and the ability to fast track projects through the permitting process especially those projects that require multiple reviews and approvals by different boards and commissions. My current zoning code is 4 inches thick and references numerous other City codes. In the 25 years since the last zoning ordinance was adopted there have been numerous interpretations that are not referenced anywhere. We rely on the memory of the staff. Therefore, if the only thing we do to our zoning ordinance is to make it more user friendly just by reformatting, adding graphics and simply saying what we mean in plain English, we will have addressed a huge barrier. However, our intention is to streamline the development process with more administrative approvals, pre-application conferences and a fast tracking systemwith concurrent rather than sequential reviews. We are looking to provide greater flexibility with incentives and bonuses such as increased densities and heights or possibly a waiver of development fees in exchange for amenities, buffers, public art, or neighborhood improvements that make the community more desirable. Our goal is greater consistency and less subjectivity.

 
8. Enforcement was the number 1 issue raised not only by neighborhood groups but also by the business community. Our enforcement system needs to be streamlined and easy to understand. Currently, inspectors have a great deal of discretion in enforcing violations. We need a process that is fair to all yet provides enforceable assurances that we will deal with impacts and violations quickly and consistently.

 
9. Other general issues that our Zoning Revision Project will address are live entertainment, sexually oriented businesses sign age, buffering mixed and incompatible uses and front yard parking.

Author and Copyright Information

Copyright 2000 By Author

Margaret A. Wuerstle, AICP
Director of Zoning
Rochester, New York