Altoona updating rules on buildings

On one of the streets of northern Dutch Hill, on a block of old houses standing smack-dab against the sidewalk and elbow-to-elbow with each other, there's a much newer structure set back about 20 feet in front and several feet on each side.

The building's odd placement breaks up the continuity of the block facade.

Revising the setback requirements that probably led to the anomaly is among many changes the Altoona Planning Commission has begun making in the Planning Code - the compilation of all the rules in the city for zoning and land development.

Recalibrating building setbacks to match "what exists, rather than for some ideal suburb" is the biggest change, Planning Administrator Lee Slusser said.

Instead of the current front setback of 20 feet in five of six residential zones - 25 feet in the other - the proposal calls for setbacks equal to the average of existing actual setbacks on each block face.

"Does this fit?" is the rhetorical question that underlies the change, said commission Chairman Bob Gutshall.

Traditional neighborhoods with narrow lots, houses against the street, front porches and neighborhood businesses like barber shops and corner stores tend to encourage sociability, Slusser said.

"When you live on a 25-foot lot, you can't not say 'hi,'" he said.

The revisions will make it easier to fill in the gaps in those neighborhoods caused by demolitions without damaging the fabric that makes them what they are or having to get a potentially difficult variance from the Zoning Hearing Board, Slusser said.

"The [existing neighborhood] pattern is not all bad," Slusser said. "We should stop making it illegal."

Commercial buildings

Another proposal would make it easier to reuse existing commercial and industrial buildings in residential zones, helping reintegrate businesses among those homes and helping to re-establish character in those neighborhoods.

Currently, owners must obtain a variance from the Zoning Board, a challenge given the need to prove there's difficulty with the property that makes it virtually impossible to use according to the regular rules.

The revision would enable owners to seek a "special exception," which would require them to show only that their plans would meet a prescribed set of conditions - although the board can add to those, to help ensure compatible development.

The new procedure would still require public notice, so neighbors could object to an owner's plan or encourage the board to modify its requirements - maybe by ordering a fence to block headlights from cars in a parking lot or make sure odors or noise won't be a problem, Slusser said.

Slusser realized the need for an easier way to reintegrate old buildings into the fabric of neighborhoods when planning office staffer Jean Cupp sought a variance to start a corner store.

Corner stores - which are making a comeback - restaurants, shops and offices are among the leading new uses, he said.

Windmills, livestock

The city's planning staff also proposes to allow small, home-scale windmills, which Altoona currently bans. And it proposes to restrict livestock.

There's a windmill in the city already, along McMahon Drive, Slusser said.

The proposal calls for the windmills to be nice-looking, to carry no advertisements, to be short enough so if they topple, they won't land on another property and to comply with electrical codes.

The commission may table the windmill provision for a year, based on reservations of members, including Frank Wiley, who said be doesn't want to see them all over residential areas.

The recent keeping of a rooster by an Eldorado family led to examination of the livestock rules, Slusser said.

Roosters are one of the worst kinds of animals to keep in a city, because "they make a ton of noise at exactly the wrong time," Slusser said.

The proposed rules would limit the keeping of livestock like chickens or goats to lots big enough for a 100-foot setback in all directions.

That would qualify only a few major institutional properties, he said, "so we don't have a cow on a 25-foot lot," he said.

Townhouses, fences

In addition, the staff proposes to allow more townhouses in the city's densest areas and allow residents to build solid fences up to 4-feet tall across the front of their properties.

There are too few townhouses in the city now, Slusser said.

That compressed style of development is popular with young professionals, whom the city is trying to attract, and seniors, which the city has in abundance, he said.

Planning Director Larry Carter has been trying to promote the concept.

Current rules allow solid fences to be as high as 30 inches in front of properties, if they're solid, as high as 4 feet if they're half-open.

"You can still talk over 4 feet," Slusser said.

Other stuff

The staff proposes to regulate Dumpsters for the first time, so they won't attract flies and rats or emit odors; make engineers vouch for student housing plans; strengthen traffic-study requirements on big projects; regulate the number of students in rental homes through the property maintenance code, based on oxygen-exchange rates for bedrooms; and make planning requirements more explicit, so owners planning small projects won't be surprised at what they need to do.

The oxygen-exchange rules will reduce the number of students permitted in student homes, except in old mansions, Slusser predicted.

Making planning requirements more explicit will help organizations like a social club whose leaders were surprised at the cost of a project they thought they'd raised enough money to do, Gutshall said.

History

The Planning Code hasn't been updated since 2003. Updates should be annual, Slusser said.

He hopes this package will encourage development, making the city more attractive and competitive.

"It's the right thing," said Zoning Hearing Board member Mike Halloran of the proposals. "Lee [Slusser] is trying to move the city in the right direction."

Halloran favors moving slowly, however, because well-meant changes can bring unintended consequences.

The proposal to make it easier to reuse buildings is of special concern for him.

"It can be a double-edged sword," when an owner comes to the board with a proposal to restore a business use for a property where the right to do so has lapsed after being discontinued a year or more, he said.

"But I also have faith in the Planning Department," he said. "I think they have the best interests of the city at heart."

Mirror Staff Writer William Kibler is at 949-7038.