Barberton Diagnostic 2022-12-13

1

Zoning Diagnostic Report

Barberton, Barberton, OhioOhio An evaluation of the current land development code’s support of community objectives and recommendations for future amendments

2

Ta b l e o f Co n te n t s Executive Summary ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������3 Chapter 1: Introduction ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������5 What is a Zoning Diagnostic Report? �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������5 Why is this Zoning Diagnostic Report important? ������������������������������������������������������������5 How is this Zoning Diagnostic Report Different from the Comprehensive Plan? ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������6 Chapter 2: Background Research �����������������������������������������������������������������������������8 Barberton Master Plan: Introduction ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 8 Barberton Master Plan: Demographic Trends ���������������������������������������������������������������������� 8 Barberton Master Plan: Key Objectives ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9 Barberton Master Plan: Assets and Challenges ��������������������������������������������������������������������9 Barberton Master Plan: Specific Recommendations ����������������������������������������������������10 Steering Committee: Neighborhood Character ������������������������������������������������������������������ 11 Chapter 3: Development Code Evaluation �����������������������������������������������������������14 General Zoning Comments ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������14 Downtown ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������17 Neighborhoods ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������19 Housing ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 21 Recreation ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������23 Industry ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������23 General Welfare Comments ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������24 Other Comments ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������25 Chapter 4: Recommended Updates ���������������������������������������������������������������������� 29 This Zoning Diagnostic Report was produced in 2022 by ZoneCo.

3

E xe c u t i ve S u m m a r y This Zoning Diagnostic Report evaluates the provisions of the City of Barberton development code in their promotion or interference with the community’s objectives identified in the comprehensive plan and with general planning goals. To create this report, unbiased, national zoning consultants performed a careful review of the comprehensive plan, meeting notes from steering committee workshops, the existing City of Barberton Development Code Title 2, and the online zoning map; considered connections between zoning regulations and real-world outcomes; and generated commentary linking the development code with the comprehensive plan and a list of recommended zoning amendments Overall, Barberton’s development code is more comprehensive than many peer cities’ codes. Few terms are left undefined and few scenarios are left unaddressed. Its language is well-written, precise, and nearly void of typographic errors. Tables are used throughout the code, which have the potential to simplify the delivery of information and reduce the abundance of lengthy paragraphs of text.

However, the code’s comprehensiveness may also be its biggest drawback.

Clarity outweighs simplicity and ease-of-use, and the high level of detail quickly becomes burdensome to the reader. Twenty-five base districts, plus 2 underlying districts, 4 overlay districts, and the potential for transitional overlay districts inflates all tables and every scenario. Tables become unusable as they compound, sometimes 10 tables in a row, and include long footnotes sometimes exceeding a whole page.

Furthermore, small “start-ups” esteemed by the comprehensive plan are not encouraged, as home occupations are highly limited and the use categories of light industrial uses often confusingly overlap with those of heavy industrial uses. Industrial areas, too, are mapped in an inexplicable puzzle of 3 different industrial districts, which may make expansion of one industry across multiple lots prohibited.

The recommendations are numerous. Of the most important are those that suggest simplifying regulations, adding illustrative graphics, consolidating existing districts, adding neighborhood-based districts, facilitating walkability, reducing expensive lot standards such as minimum widths that make housing more costly to develop, and eliminating parking requirements, as many peer cities are considering.

4

Introduction

Chapter

01

5

C h a p te r 1 : I n t r o d u c t i o n WHAT IS A ZONING DIAGNOSTIC REPORT? This report evaluates the Development Code of Barberton, Ohio, in its ability to achieve the community’s objectives, and, where the code is unlikely to produce such outcomes, the report recommends appropriate updates to the code.

WHY IS THIS ZONING DIAGNOSTIC REPORT IMPORTANT? Zoning regulations impact many aspects of a city, including the natural environment, housing availability, the feel of a neighborhood, access to greenspace, health and walkability, entrepreneurial opportunities, and economic stability. Therefore, an effective and efficient zoning code is paramount to achieving a community’s desired outcomes.

We believe in three general principles: Principle 1. Zoning should regulate only what needs to be regulated in order to protect health, safety, and the general welfare.

Zoning regulations should place limits on the use of land only when necessary to protect health, safety, and the general welfare.

Regulations that do not relate to such public interests may overstep the police power granted to cities and may not be legally defensible.

Principle 2. Zoning should respect both existing and desired development patterns.

Zoning regulations should relate to a community’s existing development patterns as well as its desired future scenario. When zoning regulations are out of context with existing or desired development patterns, land owners may need to apply for numerous administrative approvals and variances for common development projects, which increases the cost of investment and discourages improvements which may benefit the community. Furthermore, processing such administrative approvals and variances can unduly burden government departments.

Principle 3. Zoning should be the implementation of a plan, not a barrier.

Zoning should be a tool to implement a community’s vision as expressed in its comprehensive plan. In many instances, a community invests time, funds, and energy into the development of a comprehensive plan, but

6

zoning regulations are overlooked or revised over time in a disjointed manner. This scenario leads to outdated, inconsistent, and disorganized zoning regulations that are cumbersome, intimidating, and costly for property owners and administrators, alike, and impede planning goals and economic development. On the other hand, a comprehensive update to the development code within the long-term planning process allows for clear, usable, defensible, and consistent regulations that operate efficiently to protect the public’s interests and encourage desired outcomes.

HOW IS THIS ZONING DIAGNOSTIC REPORT DIFFERENT FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? A comprehensive plan is the output of a lenghty, long-range planning process involving community engagement, visioning, and goal setting. Some community goals produced in this process may be general in nature, such as “Maintain the city’s small-town charm,” while others may be very specific, such as “Allow buildings of up to 42 feet in height.”

A comprehensive plan is adopted by a local legislative body, but its vision is just that: a high-level roadmap to guide future decision-making. A zoning code, on the other hand, is codified and sets forth regulations that, if not followed, constitutes a

violation of law.

This report serves as a link between the long-range vision of the comprehensive plan and the onthe-ground regulations of the development code.

This report was produced by a team of non-local, unbiased professionals. Professionals working on this report did not employ local public engagement but instead used the comprehensive plan document, insights from meetings with community stakeholders, professional expertise in the zoning field, experience working with peer cities, and familiarity with national best practices to evaluate the development code and generate recommended updates.

7

Background Research Chapter

02

8

C h a p te r 2 : B a c kg r o u n d R e s ea rc h A zoning diagnostic report evaluates the likelihood of a zoning or development code in achieving the community’s objectives. But what, exactly, are Barberton’s objectives? To answer that question, this report explored the comprehensive plan, titled the Barberton Master Plan (2006), and consulted with a group of Barberton citizens, known as the steerting committee. Findings from such explorations are summarized in the sections below.

BARBERTON MASTER PLAN: INTRODUCTION The Barberton Master Plan was produced by MSI Design and adopted by the Barberton City Council on June 12, 2006.

Consistent with comprehensive

plans of peer cities, the Barberton Master Plan provides a history of the city, describes demographic trends, identifies key objectives, assets, and challenges, and recommends actions to address such challenges.

BARBERTON MASTER PLAN: DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS The Barberton Master Plan describes the population as “largely stable” but aging (page viii). In 2000, the Census estimated Barberton’s population at 27,889 (page 8). However, since the comprehensive plan was published in 2006, additional Census Bureau data has been made available. The Census reported decreases from 2000, with only 26,550 residents in 2010, and only 25,191 residents in 2020 (US Census Bureau,

Census data between 1990 and 2000 shows a shift in the age groups to older population brackets. This is typical for a number of established communities as the “babyboom” generation begins to age. (Barberton Master Plan, page 10)

9

QuickFacts), illustrating a continued slow decline in population.

BARBERTON MASTER PLAN: KEY OBJECTIVES The Barberton Master Plan identifies some key objectives for the city (page 4): •

Downtown: Build off of the architectural assets of the downtown core to repair broken blocks, attract tenants, and emphasize this neighborhood as a local and regional destination.

•

Neighborhoods: Enhance interconnectivity and walkability, and maintain appropriate scale and design.

•

Housing: Increase the diversity of housing types with a variety of options for various incomes; add new single-unit housing for families to “move up” into; expand senior housing options, particularly around downtown.

•

Recreation: Develop a system of parks, trails, and other recreational opportunities.

•

Industry: Allow for small-scale light industry “start-ups”, which, if successful, may expand employment within Barberton (pages 18-20).

Some of the objectives may be majorly addressed by zoning regulations, while others rely on a combination of zoning regulations,

transportation policy, and public and private investments. For example, a zoning or development code may require that buildings sit close to the sidewalk and prohibit front yard parking lots, and such standards may improve the pedestrian experience, but walkability may also rely on significant public investments in sidewalk and crosswalk infrastructure.

BARBERTON MASTER PLAN: ASSETS AND CHALLENGES The Barberton Master Plan lists some community assets and challenges, many of which are considered by this Zoning Diagnostic Report when making recommendations for zoning amendments. Assets include exceptional educational facilities, such as Barberton High School; the Lake Anna Park and historic downtown residential and business districts, including the historic Art Deco era Lake Theatre; the historic barns at Anna Dean Farm; and the former Ohio & Erie Canal towpath, which is now used as a recreational trail. Along with such assets, however, are some challenges, including the lack of environmentally safe, vacant land and the unlikelihood of annexation; an aging and decreasing population; the downsizing of industry and employment; and physical barriers that segment the community, such as waterways,

10

hills, and railroad tracks (pages 4-5).

BARBERTON MASTER PLAN: SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS The Barberton Master Plan makes many specific recommendations to help achieve the community objectives. Below, this report summarizes some of those recommendations that relate to zoning policy.

Industrial Areas Small-scale light industrial uses should be encouraged to locate on 1-3-acre lots between Wooster Road North and Coventry Road and along Van Buren Avenue (pages 18-19).

Tree lawns, landscaping, sidewalks, and architectural design standards shall be required (page 19).

Downtown South Buildings along Tuscarawas Avenue should preserve existing character, with no side setbacks, no front setbacks, buildings built more than two floors, and parking in the rear.

Ground floors should be occupied by storefronts with commercial uses above. Street trees, dining areas, pocket parks, seating plazas, and other pedestrian amenities should be encouraged. Along Wooster Road, to the south of Lake Anna, side setbacks may be more than zero feet to allow for side parking. (Pages 28-33) Downtown East On the east side of Wooster Road, allow for small-scale “big-box” stores, as well as residential of 4 stories. Surface parking should be screened from the street, and street trees should be required. Block faces should be either residential or commercial, but not “broken” (page 43).

Downtown North North of downtown, allow for pedestrian-oriented commercial uses near the intersection of Barber Road and Norton Avenue. Allow other areas north of Norton Avenue, surrounding Wolf Creek, to return to

Barberton does possess some strong attributes...the historic downtown centered around the fantastic Lake Anna provides great opportunity. In addition, the history of the Anna Dean Farm barns and the successful completion of the new High School are benchmarks to build upon. (Barberton Master Plan, page viii)

11

naturalized floodplain. (Page 44) Lake Anna Residential Allow multi-unit residential and non-residential uses, but only when the historical architecture is preserved. All new construction should respect height, massing, and form of historical single-unit homes.

Light commercial uses, such as offices, and live-work units should be permitted only in the structures immediately surrounding Lake Anna. Parking shall be permitted in the rear only. Extend the jurisdiction of the Architectural Review Board as far north as Barberton High School, as far south as the Diamond Match facility, as far west as the BCF Sports Complex, and as far east as Magic City Plaza.

Allow infill development for mixedincome housing. (Pages 48, 57) Quarry Lake Encourage single-unit homes to be constructed to the northeast of the quarry, with a connected street grid and pedestrian connections to the recreational areas surrounding the quarry. Allow for light industrial uses south and west of the quarry.

(Page 50) Robinson Avenue Allow for commercial uses along the south side of Robinson Avenue, supporting the residential neighborhoods on the east side of Barberton with necessary services such as grocery, dining,

medical, and financial. Allow for the development of unused parking areas, emphasizing commercial office and limiting retail. Limit curb cuts along Robinson Avenue, restrict parking to the rear of properties, and provide pedestrian and bicycle access to commercial buildings. New development should preserve views of and emulate the architecture of the Anna Dean Farm barns. (Pages 5254) Other Recommendations Implement design guidelines, such as site design, materials, architecture, and screening, along commercial thoroughfares, including Wooster, State, Norton, Barber, and Van Buren Streets, and Fifth Street NE. Bury overhead powerlines. Allow for a large institutional use on the land occupied by Block 7 parking, such as a community college. (Pages 5860) STEERING COMMITTEE: NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER Meetings of the steering committee took place in early 2022, during which discussions concerned maintaining or transforming neighborhood character.

Maintaining Neighborhood Character Six members of the steering committee identified 20 neighborhoods in Barberton

12

and ranked each as needing to maintain neighborhood character, needing incremental change in neighborhood character, and needing transformational change in neighborhood character.

Five neighborhoods, all located along the perimeter of the city, were listed as needing to maintain their existing character. These included Glenbreigh, North Barberton, Rose Acres, Austin Estates, and New Haven.

Incremental Change in Neighborhood Character Nine neighborhoods were listed as needing incremental, but not transformational, change. Those include the Employment District, Johnsons Corners, Columbia Heights, West Barberton, Columbia Lake, Boulevard Heights, Grandview, Van Hyning, and East Barberton.

There was some opinion that the Employment District, West Barberton, and East Barberton may need transformational change.

Transformational Change in Neighborhood Character Six neighborhoods were identified as needing transformational changes in neighborhood character. Those include the Downtown District, West Wooster Corridor, North Wooster Corridor, Lake Anna, New Portage, and South Barberton.

13

Development Code Evaluation Chapter

03

14

C h a p te r 3 : D eve l o p m e n t Co d e E va l u a t i o n The City of Barberton Development Code was enacted in 1996 and has since undergone numerous amendments. This chapter evaluates the development code as it relates to the objectives set forth in the comprehensive plan and provides general comments based on zoning best practices.

GENERAL ZONING COMMENTS A development code should be clear, consistent, equitable, easy to use, and legally defensible.

Clear and Consistent The development code is more detailed and comprehensive than many development codes we have reviewed in peer cities in Ohio as well as across the country. For instance, the list of

displays exempted from the sign regulations includes highly specific, yet appropriate, examples not often seen in development codes, such as “vending machine signs...” and “monuments in cemeteries...”

(Section 1230.02(a)). Another instance occurs in Section 1210.04(d) (2) where the development code allows for a reduction in required off-street parking in the case of a captive market that draws a significant number of customers or visitors who do not arrive at the use by motor vehicle because the use is located on the same lot as, or within walking distance of, a second use or uses that generate such customer or visitor parking, such as a restaurant located in an office building; this consideration illustrates a comprehensiveness of the development code that is

The development code is more detailed and comprehensive than many zoning codes we have reviewed in peer cities in Ohio as well as those across the country.

15

rarely observed in the development codes of peer cities. This level of detail is consistent throughout the development code.

The language used in the development code is generally free of errors. For instance, few typographic mistakes were noted during the review:

40, and 50 feet for small, medium, and large trees, respectively, but, for trees, in general, the minimum spacing was listed as 25, 35, and 45 feet for small, medium, and large trees, respectively (Section 1220.05(g)(2)), which leads the reader to question whether the minimum spacing applies also to street trees.

•

“of” was used instead of “or” (Section 1350.03(c)(2));

Equitable

•

The word “maximum” was missing in “height within 50 feet of RS, RT, or RA, District:” in Table 1110D; and

•

In Table 1140A: Standards for Accessory Uses, “Any” in the Minimum Setback from Lot Line should instead read “Any other accessory use not listed above.”

Furthermore, the paragraph and indentation scheme is consistent, with only a few exceptions (see Section 1110.06(c)1.), throughout the development code (i.e., Section XXXX.XX(a)(1)A.1. format); however, there are some inconsistencies in the use of bold and/or italics in headings.

No major inconsistencies or ambiguities were observed related to permitted uses, minimum setbacks, or other standards. Some minor ambiguity was observed, however, such as in Chapter 1220 Landscaping & Screening, where the maximum spacing of street trees (1220.04(b)(1)) was listed as 30,

The development code does not greatly promote nor impede equitable outcomes. The development code includes many zoning districts, which, in theory, can lead to inequitable neighborhoods, as there could be a great range in standards applied to the many districts. However, in Barberton’s development code, many of the districts are subject to group standards, rather than individual district standards.

Grouping may lead to more even application of the law and, therefore, more equity across the city. For instance, the use table (Table 1130A) groups the RS districts, the RT districts, the RA districts, and the RM districts, meaning that the same uses are allowed in the RS-32, the RS-40, the RS-50, the RS-70, the RS-85, and the RS-100 districts, and, likewise, the same uses are allowed in the RA-16 districts as the RA-25 district. However, in other cases, each individual district is regulated differently, which may lead to unequal neighborhood quality across the city.

16

While Barberton is undergoing a slow decline in population and may, in areas, experience a housing surplus, housing access and affordability remains an important consideration in equity and is discussed later in this Chapter, under the subheading “Housing.”

Easy to Use While the development code is comprehensive and clear, it is not easy to use.

First and foremost, the development code is very lengthy.

While we have reviewed other codes that are even longer, some exceeding 500 pages, the size of this code made it difficult to navigate and review. Long codes are problematic as democratic documents; if they are too cumbersome to read, they cease to be publicly digestible and are, in essence, accessible only to those educated in legal administration or those wealthy enough to hire someone who is.

Furthermore, the development code, along with its accompanying zoning map, are encumbered with an excessive number of zoning districts. There are 25 districts, 2 underlying districts, 4 overlay districts, and the possibility of transitional overlay districting in Barberton, a city of around 25,000 residents. When overlays are applied to base districts, there could be more than 125 district permutations, or one unique

district for every 200 residents.

Each district adds to the difficulty of using the code, requiring wider tables, more detailed maps, and the act of flipping between sections to review how an underlying district or an overlay district interacts with a base district. For example, a C base district may have both a Traditional Neighborhood Overlay and a Derivative Architecture Overlay, likely leaving the landowner to wonder what regulations must be followed.

Second, the glossary section (Chapter 1350) offers the user a central repository of terms and their definitions. The consolidation of terms in one section is a widely accepted best practice.

However, the development code includes some definitions which are found in other chapters, such as adult uses definitions in Chapter 1150, sign definitions in Chapter 1230, alternative energy system definitions in Section 1250.10, donation box definitions in Section 1250.12, and floodplain management definitions in Section 1260.11. The users of the code may find it difficult to locate a term’s definition with multiple definitions sections. Furthermore, while most use terms are defined, there are some that are not included in the development code, such as dormitories (Chapter 1130), private pool, and commercial pool (Table 1140B).

Third, the development code

17

employs the use of tables. Tables are excellent at displaying regulations in an easy-to-use layout, decreasing the length of the code, eliminating many long paragraphs, and increasing the speed at which a user can locate information.

However, many of the development code’s tables are very extensive and include many superscript characters that relate to table notes that, in some cases, stretch on for a full page. In this scenario, the reader is tasked with understanding multiple tables and referencing multiple table notes, eliminating much of the advantage of the table on usability. As an illustration of this overuse of tables, consider that a reader attempting to understand what signs are permitted and in which manner those signs may be erected on their property must consult the text of Chapter 1230, Table 1230B and its notes, Table 1230C and its notes, Table 1230D and its notes, Table 1230E and its notes, Table 1230F and its notes, Table 1230G and its notes, and Table 1230I and its notes.

While the development code may overuse tables, it under-employs graphics. Graphics may include illustrations of neighborhood character, diagrams of lots and buildings, or photographs of structures and local scenes that relate to zoning regulations and goals. They are essential in presenting information to a lay audience in an easy-to-understand manner that transcends language.

Peer cities include graphics to illustrate fence heights, setbacks, parking lot standards, and more; this development code does not include any graphics.

Lastly, the development code, as available for download in PDF format, uses a very small font (size 7.5) that may not be user friendly for those with impaired vision or reading disabilities.

Legally Defensible Echoing comments made in the Clear and Consistent subheading above, the development code is exceptionally well-written. Its clarity and comprehensiveness leaves little to be interpreted, likely leading to infrequent disputes, appeals, and litigation.

One section that is legally suspect, however, is the Amortization Overlay District. This overlay may be applied to any property and can indicate a particular nonconformity that must be amortized within a specified period. This requirement to eliminate nonconformities, especially considering that it can be applied on a property-byproperty basis and target individual nonconformities with case-specific timelines, may invite lawsuit.

DOWNTOWN The comprehensive plan sets forth the goals of building off of the architectural assets of downtown, repairing broken blocks, attracting

18

tenants, and emphasizing downtown as the focal point of Barberton.

of the PO District could protect more historic properties from demolition and preserve the architectural aesthetic of downtown Barberton (Chapter 1350). It also supports the comprehensive plan’s directive to “Extend Architectural Review Board jurisdiction for downtown redevelopment to properties adjacent to Wooster Road and historic residential properties around Lake Anna” (page 57). Buildings developed or redeveloped within the PO District must seek a Certificate of Appropriateness, which requires compliance with City Councilapproved design standards.

This provision (Section 1310.08) supports the community’s objective for a cohesive, aesthetically pleasing, walkable downtown.

The development code is moderately successful at supporting this objective.

Some provisions that promote the downtown objectives are listed below: •

First, the comprehensive plan indicates that buildings in the downtown should be more than 2 stories. In the code, Table 1110D allows buildings in the C-D District to reach up to 50 feet in height--well over 2 stories--and to develop with a FAR of up to 4.0. Table 1110D also does not limit lot coverage or institute a minimum lot area, and Table 1110E does not require a front, corner side, interior side, or rear yard setback, effectively allowing buildings in the C-D District to make efficient use of small lots.

•

In Chapter 1210: Parking, Loading, & Vehicular Areas, the development code exempts the C-D District (downtown) from parking requirements in order to reduce the frequency of curb cuts and, as a result, improve the pedestrian experience downtown.

•

Finally, the development code gives authority of the Design Review Board to recommend the expansion of the PO District to City Council. An expansion

Other provisions detract from the goals of the comprehensive plan and are highlighted below: •

The downtown area is diverse and contains several distinct use groupings, such as historical homes, business streets, and auto-oriented commercial strips.

This diversity is echoed in the zoning map, which assigns 10 different districts to downtown (e.g., I-2, I-3, C-D, C-2, C-3, O-1, O-2, RM-30, RT-40, and RS-40).

To simplify the code and more effectively promote the desired downtown character, the City should consider consolidating

19

downtown into three districts: Downtown Residential, Downtown Mixed-Use, and Downtown Lake Anna.

•

•

•

In the C-D District, multifamily residential uses are permitted on upper floors, but single-family, two-family, and attached residential use types are not permitted, as groundfloor residential units are not permitted in commercial areas.

While downtown is ideal for denser, multi-family residential uses, the code should not prohibit other residential uses that could take advantage of small lots or form rows of attached townhomes.

While Section 1240.10 does require a building permit to commence a demolition, it does not require that demolitions in downtown Barberton undergo a special process. The development code does require a Certificate of Appropriateness for demolitions within the Preservation Overlay District, which may curtail demolition of contributing structures that provide character in Barberton, but the Preservation Overlay District is not displayed on the online zoning map.

Many uses require off-street parking, even in the downtown area. These requirements exceed the comprehensive plan’s suggestion of 3-3.5 parking

spaces per 1,000 square feet of commercial use. (See page 34 of the comprehensive plan.)

•

The development code fails to require affordable housing minimums in downtown residences, an initiative recommended by the comprehensive plan (page 57).

•

The comprehensive plan encourages the redevelopment of Magic City Plaza and Downtown East to mixed-use, with up to 4 stories height (page 40). While the current zoning designation, C-3, allows for residential and commercial uses, it only allows structures to be built up to 50 feet, or up to 35 feet when adjacent to residential districts, which does not facilitate 4 stories.

NEIGHBORHOODS The comprehensive plan set forth the goals of enhancing neighborhood connectivity and walkability and maintaining appropriate scale and architectural design.

The development code is moderately supportive of this objective.

Some examples of provisions that promote this objective are listed below: •

The provision of the Traditional Neighborhood Overlay District

20

(Section 1110.06) supports this objective. In the TNO District, community is built through careful design of the built environment. For example, the neighborhood may benefit from more people on the sidewalk: in the TNO District, pedestrian retail areas are required if the base zoning is a C district.

Also, parking areas, which can decrease the aesthetic appeal of a neighborhood, is minimized by allowing parking requirements to be satisfied with on-street parking or in lieu payments to support shared parking.

Additionally, the TNO District encourages traffic calming and quieter streets by capping pavement widths on new streets.

•

•

Walkability in neighborhoods is also enhanced by the development code’s Chapter 1240: Other Planning & Improvement Standards. In Section 1120.40, street trees are required to be planted at defined maximum intervals.

Streets with trees are more hospitable to pedestrians, as they provide shade, shelter from rain, protection from moving vehicles, and general beautification.

Chapter 1240 also requires that “Blocks longer than 900 feet should be so oriented that the longer side does not impair access from residential areas to activity centers such as schools,

parks, houses of worship, and shopping areas” (1240.03(a) (2)). Another section requires sidewalks to be installed by developers along the full frontage of each building site (Section 1240.08(e)). Lastly, the chapter requires ramps at curbs for accessibility and allows the Planning Commission to require a pedestrian way linking the end of a cul-de-sac to a nearby school, park, shopping area, playground, or other activity center.

•

Keeping neighborhoods safe and quiet, Chapter 1250 limits trips and hours of customer visitation (1250.01(c)(2)) and presence of commercial vehicles (1250.01(d)(2)) at home occupations. It also limits the storage of hazardous materials (1250.01(g)) at home occupations and requires buffers between outdoor activities associated with home occupations and any adjacent residential uses (1250.01(f)).

•

Neighbors across the US have conflicts over fences; Barberton’s development code may reduce such conflicts and elevate the architectural aesthetic of a neighborhood through its highly detailed fence regulations.

However, the fence regulations could be improved through the use of illustrations that show the “finished” and “unfinished” sides of fences and diagrams

21

illustrating the required distance between fences and building walls (Section 1250.07).

•

The development code also detracts from this objective, as highlighted below: •

Chapter 1240 includes provisions that interfere with neighborhood quality and, especially, walkability. For example, Table 1220D: Prohibited Street Trees and Table 1120E: Recommended Street Trees recommend small street trees, while they likely reduce interference with overhead powerlines, do not provide as much shade and shelter as the native shade trees on the prohibited list.

•

Table 1240A, too, requires that all roads, except alleys, are 2 lanes wide. Many neighborhood streets benefit from being one-way and one lane with onstreet parking on both sides, which encourages cars to slow down and is safer to cross for pedestrians.

•

Walkability in neighborhoods is also affected by the occurrence of driveways cutting across a sidewalk. In Barberton’s code, Table 1240E mandates a minimum width for driveways, which may lead to greater proportions of sidewalks being shared with driveways and, therefore, more pedestrianvehicle collisions.

Finally, while Chapter 1240 requires sidewalks to be included for all new lots, it includes many exceptions, such as along minor streets with lots over 150 feet in width or along culde-sacs serving fewer than 10 dwellings (Table 1240I), resulting in a decrease in neighborhood walkability and connectivity.

HOUSING The comprehensive plan set forth the goals of increasing the diversity of housing types and costs, adding new single-unit dwellings for families to “move up” into, and increase the supply of senior housing available, particularly around downtown.

While Barberton is experiencing a slow decline in population and may, in areas, have a housing surplus, housing access and affordability is an important consideration in equity. The development code in some ways supports housing diversity, as illustrated below.

•

The zoning map shows that large areas of Barberton are designated as single-family detached dwelling districts.

However, many of these districts in Barberton have smaller minimum lot sizes than those of peer cities, allowing the more efficient use of residential lands.

Furthermore, there are some areas in Barberton that allow for two-family dwellings (such

22

as around downtown), attached dwellings, and multi-family dwellings; and most commercial districts allow multi-family dwellings as permitted uses, which increase housing diversity and may encourage young families to relocate to Barberton.

•

Chapter 1250 supports housing diversity. It helps keep residential uses from converting to non-residential uses by limiting structural changes that would render the building of a home occupation unsuitable for future residential use (1250.01(h)).

•

Section 1250.03 offers housing flexibility by allowing zero-lotline yards and includes helpful requirements, such as 5-foot easements for repairs on the zero yard side, but it prohibits windows on the zero yard side of the house, which may prevent homeowners from enjoying light and air.

The development code also includes provisions that interfere with this objective. Some examples are as follows: •

Pre-fabricated or modular homes may become more desirable in the future, but the development code limits their proliferation by requiring sloped roofs on single- and two-family detached dwellings (Section 1250.02(b)(3)). Many prefabricated and modular homes have flat roofs.

•

Section 1250.02(b)(6) requires homes to be a minimum of 24 feet in width, eliminating some housing types, such as modular homes and tiny homes.

•

The first finished floor of singleand two-family detached dwellings must be no more than 2 feet above grade, but the code does not provide exception for homes built in the floodplain (Section 1250.02(b) (5)). Additionally, many homes in mixed-use areas across the country are built with their first floor 3-5 feet above grade to provide privacy to the inhabitants from sidewalk passersby; the development code does not provide for this commonplace exception.

•

Homes may be inflated in price by the provisions in Section 1250.02(b)(8) that require dwellings under 1,200 square feet to include storage areas, all dwellings to provide garages, and no roof line facing a street to extend further than a 30-foot horizontal run.

The comprehensive plan particularly targets housing for current residents to move-up into.

The development code does not expressly promote upgrade homes, but it does indirectly support more expensive homes through minimum lot widths, minimum lot areas, and mandatory garages.

The comprehensive plan also

23

pinpoints senior housing availability as a special objective. In Section 1240.03(b)(1), the development code requires that all lots and building sites front a street, which reduces the likelihood of cottage courts and sidewalk communities, which are popular senior housing options. Furthermore, multi-family dwellings, which are particularly suitable for seniors who may not desire the maintenance demands of single-family homes, are disadvantaged by the development code, which, on Table 1110C, requires a minimum lot area of 1,405 square feet per 1-bedroom unit and 3,350 square feet per 3-bedroom unit in the RM-18 District. This requirement may increase the minimum costs of units in multifamily dwellings, which may harm seniors that must afford expensive housing on fixed incomes.

RECREATION The comprehensive plan set forth the goals of developing a system of parks, trails, and other recreational opportunities.

The development code largely fails to promote this objective.

Some examples of this failure are described below: •

Tables 1130 A-F allow Use Group 1: Conservancy in only the LC and the AE Districts. Conservancy uses, including reserves, open space, without buildings, playgrounds without buildings,

picnic areas, and hiking trails, are important elements in improving the recreational opportunities in Barberton and should be permitted by right in every district.

•

Table 1240B provides right-ofway widths for new roads and includes additional right-of-way width for accessories such as tree lawns, sidewalks, and utility rights-of-way, but it omits multiuse paths.

INDUSTRY The comprehensive plan set forth the goals of facilitating smallscale light industrial “start-ups”, which, if successful, may expand employment within Barberton.

The development code does little to support this goal. One example of this support occurs in Table 1110D, where the code permits most C districts to develop up to a floor area ratio of 2.0. (Some districts, such as C-1, C-4, and O-1, allow a FAR of only 1.0, whereas the C-D District allows a FAR of 4.0.) A FAR of 2.0 is denser than what we typically see in many peer cities, and this allowance gives Barberton an advantage in attracting light-industrial “start-ups” that may want to build densely on small parcels.

Many more examples exist that interfere with this objective. Some are highlighted below: •

First, the hyper-comprehensive

24

listing of heavy industrial uses in Table 1130J, Use Group 19, may result in confusion about whether a use is a light industrial use or a heavy industrial use. For example, a use that manufactures cosmetics would fall into the list of industrial products under Use Group 17: Light Industrial Uses but may also fall into Use Group 19: Heavy Industrial Uses due to its processing of synthetic polymers and resins. This dual categorization increases the regulatory risk of development, as the desired location for the facility may permit light industrial uses but not heavy industrial uses, and this risk may result in hesitation of “start-ups” to invest in Barberton.

•

•

Second, the zoning map labels much of the area south of downtown as industrial.

However, while the industrial area is expansive, it is a puzzle of I-2 and I-3 zoning districts. This uneven zoning assignment may stymie investment in the area, as a large industrial user may not be able to use portions of the site for heavy industrial uses if such portions are zoned as I-2, and likewise may not be able to use other portions of the site for office center uses if those portions are assigned I-3.

Third, the development code specifically recommends attracting light industrial uses to

the area between North Wooster Road and Coventry Road.

However, much of the land in that area is currently assigned to the C-3 District, interfering with small, light industrial “start-ups.”

•

Additionally, while the development code permits home occupations, which could be “start-ups” that later expand and grow employment in Barberton, it greatly limits home occupations to a small list of acceptable businesses, not even allowing full-time office work, which has become commonplace during the coronavirus pandemic (Section 1250.01). Furthermore, home occupations are prohibited in garages, which, for many types of work, such as woodworking, upholstery, or mechanical repair, is the most optimal location in the home.

•

Finally, the development code does not institute special design and landscaping guidelines for commercial and industrial thoroughfares (e.g., Wooster, State, Norton Barber, Van Buren, and 5th St. NE) as recommended by the comprehensive plan (page 58).

GENERAL WELFARE COMMENTS Below is a list of additional comments regarding provisions that promote the inherent government interests of safety,

25

health, and general welfare.

•

•

The development code allows for shared parking when the times of use of multiple uses do not conflict (Section 1210.03.(b)(4)).

It also allows for the reduction in parking requirements for uses sharing patrons (such as a gasoline station and convenience store) and those with captive markets (such as a restaurant at the base of an office tower) (Section 1210.05(a) (2)). Lastly, Table 1210A: Required Number of Off-Street Parking Spaces for Residential & Lodging Uses does not require off-street parking for single- or twofamily detached dwellings on existing lots of record having a lot width of less than 60 feet and lacking access to an alley. These provisions may result in less land area devoted to underutilized parking lots, which could decrease stormwater runoff and yield higher water quality in nearby creeks and rivers.

Section 1240.02(a)(2) allows new streets that continue existing streets to have narrower pavement widths, which may reduce the City’s maintenance expenses in the long-term.

This provision supports the comprehensive plan’s comment that “...the City should carefully evaluate the services that it will [be] able to provide for these new areas” (page 20).

•

Section 1250.10 permits solar energy systems in all zoning districts, which could improve the energy resiliency of Barberton. This provision stands out among peer cities, many of which over-regulate solar energy systems.

However, safety, health, and general welfare are harmed by some other provisions of the development code, such as the parking requirements, which require 20 off street parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of restaurant floor area. This provision hurts small business development (general welfare) by requiring expensive parking lots to be provided. It also increases paved areas in Barberton, leading to heat island effects, increased stormwater runoff, and degraded streams.

OTHER COMMENTS The development code has many issues with language, organization, or processes that are worth mentioning.

•

The labeling of the zoning districts is illogical. RS-32, for instance, allows up to 12 dwelling units per acre, and RS-100 allows up to 1.5 dwelling units per acre.

The reader is left to wonder what the “32” and “100” relate to.

Furthermore, in the RS districts, as the numbers increase, the density of dwellings decrease; however, in the RM districts, an increasing number represents

26

an increase in dwelling density.

(For example, the RM-18 District allows for up to 18 two-bedroom units per acre, whereas the RM50 District allows for up to 50 two-bedroom units per acre.)

•

•

•

Many tables, within groups of tables, are not consistent in their X versus Y orientation. As an example, Tables 1110B, C, and D, include district names for columns, and standards for rows, but Table 1110E has standards for columns, pivoting the table’s orientation and confusing the code’s users.

Table 1110F, which describes the computation of density transfers from the Land Conservation District, is very difficult to understand due to its many algebraic formulas, its heavy use of acronyms, and superscript characters that relate to table notes. Additionally, Table 1140C could cause confusion, as it lists a minimum projection of “-25% inches” for awnings/canopies and eaves, sills, and cornices.

Table 1140A appears to indicate that a maximum of 1 residential accessory building is permitted, other than a detached garage.

If we are interpreting the regulation correctly, it would prohibit a homeowner from having both a shed and a pool house, as these are 2 accessory buildings, a prohibition that is not found in most codes that we

review.

•

Table 1140D: Prohibited Yard Obstructions on Singleand Two-Family Lots is comprehensive and addresses the permitted locations of a broad range of accessory structures, from arbors & trellises to tennis courts; however, the level of detail may be overwhelming and incomprehensible to some readers.

•

Section 1250.05 regulates satellite dish antennas, but satellite dish antennas are increasingly antiquated and may not need regulation.

•

The Flood Management Program (Chapter 1260) does not present its requirements in a clear and concise way that is accessible to most landowners.

•

Chapter 1310: Development Approvals provides a clear list of the many development approvals. However, it is missing some commonplace approvals, such as general building permits, fence permits, sign permits, and floodplain permits.

•

While Chapter 1320: Approval Procedures offers clear descriptions of procedures, the length of the section diminishes its effectiveness with the general public.

•

Table 1340A: Mandatory

27

Elimination of Nonconformities may be intended to simplify the communication of regulations to the code’s users, but, because there are so many table footnotes--over a page of notes--the table effectively makes the code more difficult to understand.

The development code also has some instances where language, organization, and processes are effective. Some of those instances are highlighted below: •

The development code outshines the codes of many peer cities in its comprehensiveness. For example, Section 1130.01(c) (2) includes a complete list of outdoor retail activities that are permitted in Barberton, including vending machines, news boxes, pay telephones, lemonade stands, farmers markets, street vendors, and more. Such uses are often missing in other codes we review, which could result in legal ambiguity.

•

Chapter 1150: Sexually Oriented Businesses is concise, and its regulations limit the proximity of sexually oriented businesses to schools, residential districts, and churches.

•

Section 1220.05(d) allows developers to reduce the number of new trees required to be planted and cared for,

provided that they preserve mature trees on site.

•

The separation of “Standards Nonconformities” and “Use Nonconformities” in Chapter 1340 is logical and clear and simplifies the scheme of most peer cities, which identify nonconforming uses, structures, lots, and signs.

28

Recommended Updates Chapter

04

29

C h a p te r 4 : R e c o m m e n d e d U p d a te s The following updates are recommended in order to better achieve the goals of the comprehensive plan and general zoning best practices.

Parking Recommendations •

Eliminate off-street parking and residential garage requirements, an action which may result in more affordable housing options and more walkable neighborhoods. Many peer cities have or are considering the elimination of off-street parking requirements.

environment.

•

Allow Conservancy uses (Use Group 1) in every district, which may improve recreational opportunities in Barberton.

•

Allow all types of residential uses in the C-D District, even on the ground floor, which may facilitate infill residential develop in Barberton’s core.

District Recommendations •

Reduce the number of districts.

•

Name districts logically, eliminating confusing schemes such as RS-32, RS-40, RS-50, RS70, etc.

•

Eliminate underlying districts, overlay districts, and transitional overlay districts.

•

Consolidate the industrial districts into two categories:

Use Recommendations •

Eliminate ultra-specific use listings, such as “hearing aid stores” (Table 1130I #30), and replace with generalized listings, such as “medical device stores,” which may increase the flexibility of the code in a changing retail

Eliminate off-street parking requirements city-wide and residential garage requirements, an action which may result in more affordable housing options and more walkable neighborhoods.

30

heavy industrial, which is appropriate for areas with existing environmental degradation and separation from residential uses, and light industrial, which is less dangerous and offensive to residential uses. By consolidating industrial districts and applying each across large tracts, the City may encourage industrial enterprises to expand to contiguous lots that fall into the same zoning district.

•

Rezone downtown Barberton to only 3 districts: Downtown Residential, Downtown MixedUse, and Downtown Lake Anna, an action which may simplify the code and allow for standards that are more tailored to promote downtown’s unique character.

•

Rezone commercial areas near Barberton High School to C-1, which is most appropriate for walkable neighborhoods surrounding busy civic centers, such as schools. (See page 46 of the comprehensive plan.)

•

Rezone C-3-zoned parcels over 1 acre in area between North Wooster Road and Coventry Road to facilitate light industrial growth, as recommended in the comprehensive plan (pages 1819).

•

Create a new district tailored to the unique character of Robinson Avenue surrounding

the Anna Dean Farm barns. (See page 52 of the comprehensive plan.)

•

Rezone the area north of Norton Avenue to allow for a return to floodplain conditions, as recommended in the comprehensive plan (page 45).

Building Standards Recommendations •

Allow heights of up to 60 feet in Downtown East and Magic City Plaza, as suggested by the comprehensive plan, to allow for 4-story buildings.

•

Allow heights of up to 60 feet in light industrial areas where adequate buffers are provided between industrial uses and residential uses.

•

Change the description of the vision clearance triangle to measure not from the “right-ofway line” but to any paved area intended for moving vehicles, so as not to include parking lanes and sidewalks. This action would reduce the necessary setbacks for buildings at the intersections of roads and/or alleys, benefiting the efficient use of land, especially in downtown.

Walkability Recommendations •

Require multi-use paths of at least 8 feet width on all new streets, except alleys, culs-de-sac, and minor streets under 1000 feet long.

31

•

Require sidewalks of at least 5 feet in width along all streets, regardless of the street’s length and the lots’ widths, which may increase the walkability of Barberton’s neighborhoods.

•

Allow homes to be narrower than the current minimum width of 24 feet, which may facilitate the construction of narrow, lowmaintenance homes.

•

Remove minimum driveway widths (Table 1240E) to reduce the proportion of sidewalks occupied by vehicle-use areas and encourage a more walkable environment.

•

Allow for homes to be built with the first finished floor more than 2 feet above grade in the case of sloped topography, floodplains, and mixed-use districts.

•

Allow the planting of native shade trees, many of which are currently prohibited by Table 1220D, which can thrive in the climate of Barberton, provide shade to pedestrians, reduce summertime air conditioning demands, and improve property values.

Eliminate the limit of 30 feet runs along roof lines of singleand two-family dwellings, an action which may result in more affordable homes, more architectural freedom, and easier-to-maintain roofs.

•

Require that all new streets and all new parking lots direct stormwater runoff to vegetated swales, detention ponds, or rain gardens as opposed to conventional storm sewer systems.

Remove the minimum lot area per dwelling unit requirements for multi-family dwellings (Table 1110C), an action which may reduce the costs of multifamily units and increase the acessibility of housing for Barberton’s seniors.

Readability Recommendations

Environmental Recommendations •

•

•

Reorganize tables to simplify the user experience and eliminate the need to reference many tables and table notes. Ensure that sequential tables maintain row and column organization, such as consistently listing district names across the row headings.

•

Simplify the standards of the TNO District, and describe those standards in a clearer, more user-

Housing Recommendations •

Eliminate the need for all lots to front streets, legalizing cottage courts and sidewalk communities that are popular housing options for seniors.

•

Allow homes to have flat roofs, which may facilitate diverse housing types.

32

friendly manner.

•

Improve the ease-of-use of Table 1110F Computation of Density Transfer from LC District by reducing the use of acronyms, simplifying the algebraic calculations, and including examples and graphics.

•

Simplify regulations regarding accessory uses and projections, including a minimization of the complexity of Tables 1140 A-D, which may increase the accessibility of the code to lay users.

•

Simplify regulations displayed in Table 1340A: Mandatory Elimination of Nonconformities, an action which may increase the ease of use of the Zoning Code.

•

Incorporate Table 1110H into Section 1110.06(c)1.E. Approval of TND Plan.

•

Produce an Approval Procedure Quick-Reference Sheet, which combines Tables 1310 C-J and Tables 1320 A-B and is easy to distribute to permit applicants.

•

Merge Chapter 1350: Administration with Chapter 1310: Development Approvals so that building permits, certificates of occupancy, variances, and conditional use permits are all in one location, an action that could make the Zoning Code easier to navigate.

•

Add graphics to improve the user experience of the Zoning Code. Graphics could be added to illustrate standards related to building projections (Table 1140C), fences, parking space and aisle dimensions (Table 1210D), vehicle stacking spaces (Section 1210.07), street trees (Section 1220.04), sign dimensions (Section 1230.04), sign types and forms (Section 1230.03), sign bonuses (Table 1230I), intersection right-of-way radii (Section 1240.02(e)), street and alley pavement and rightof-way widths (Table 1240A and Table 1240B), driveway standards (Table 1240E), standards for sidewalks and pedestrian ways (Table 1240I), and zero yards (Section 1250.03).

•

Centralize all terms into one glossary chapter.

•

Ensure that all use terms are defined.

•

Remove regulations on satellite dish antennas, which are less and less common, an action which may shorten and simplify the Zoning Code.

•

Increase the font size to a minimum of 10 to improve the accessibility of the code to those with vision or reading impairments.

•

Correct any inconsistencies in the paragraph and indentation scheme (Section XXXX.XX(a)(1)

33

A.1.).

•

Correct any inconsistencies in the use of bold and/or italics in section or subsection headings.

Legal Recommendations •

Review the Amortization Overlay District for compliance with applicable laws. If the Amortization Overlay District violates any laws, remove the district from the Zoning Code.

•

Consider adding a purpose statement for Chapter 1150: Sexually Oriented Businesses that describes why limiting the location of such businesses helps advance a government interest.