Promising new zoning proposal

[pjmorgan.livejournal.com]

Saw this in the Union Square main streets newsletter:

 

Anything that reduces car trips in Somerville and makes life better for non car owners is a good idea in my book, and I'm excited about the number of proposed changes.   Please show your support to your alderman.  

http://www.somervillechamber.org/pdf_files/08tableofuseschange.pdf

Comments

[ron_newman]

One thing to keep in mind here: zoning laws apply only to future uses, not to current ones. Anything already there is 'grandfathered'.

[thetathx1138.livejournal.com]

Not according to the measure's language, though.

[ron_newman]

This is the relevant section:

Non-Conforming Uses

The proposed ordinance is intended primarily to prevent additional undesirable uses to locate in Somerville without sufficient public review and permitting. However, adoption would also make some of the existing uses non-conforming or “grandfathered”. Unlike other municipal ordinances, zoning ordinances protect established uses and structures when subsequent zoning changes render them “nonconforming” with zoning. In most communities, non-conforming uses and structures may not be expanded without variances.

However, Section 4.5 of the SZO includes generous provisions for non-conforming uses, which may be expanded or changed to other non-conforming uses so long as the Special Permit Granting Authority finds that “such change is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood” than the existing conditions, in addition to standard special permit findings. In addition, grandfathered uses are not extinguished unless the use ceases for two or more years. This is a more lengthy time period than found in other areas of the country.

A use that becomes "non-conforming" because of a later zoning law change can continue to operate, and even expand. It can even close down and reopen within two years without losing its right to operate.

[somervilleguy.livejournal.com]

The reality to this is that “the terms of use” have changed for these businesses. As an example a friend of mine owned a medium sized retail property in west Somerville with about 6-8 store fronts. He had a very few complaints over many years and was never on the bad side of the "city powers that be" until they changed the zoning for his area and made his business nonconforming. From that point on whenever a new tenant wanted to occupy a space he had to travel from out of state (having his lawyer represent him wasn't good enough) to go before the city simply because the structure was nonconforming. During one of these MANY meetings with the city he got into a testy exchange with a person on the Board of Appeals and from that point on he was denied several times for tenants simply because this person decided to mess with him and his business. He eventually sold for a good profit but it wasn’t something he wanted to do but fighting city hall got old and expensive. In other words this city can be as small minded as the smallest town.

The key line in that paragraph is the one about the “so long as the Special Permit Granting Authority finds that “such change is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood” than the existing conditions”.

That line is a very scary one if you own a business particularly one that is on the list deemed noxious. Every time you want to put in a lightbulb the city will drag you before them to kiss their ring and become “conforming”. Again, the public won’t care simply because this a narrowly focused amendment for businesses but it is a weapon to be used by the city, make no mistake about that.