Columbus, Georgia

Georgia's First Consolidated Government

Post Office Box 1340
Columbus, Georgia, 31902-1340
(706) 653-4013
fax (706) 653-4016

Council Members

Honorable Mayor and Councilors

City Manager

City Attorney

Clerk of Council



Subject: (REZN-01-19-0007) Request to amend the text of the Unified Development

Ordinance (UDO) regarding Table 3.1.1. ? Health and Fitness Facilities to read

as follows:



UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE REVISIONS

(Explanation of Revisions)



1. Explanation of Revisions: Amend Table 3.1.1. by permitting Health and

Fitness Facilities with a Special Exception in the following districts:



Use

Category HIST RE10 RE5 RE1 RT SFR1 SFR2 SFR3 SFR4 RMF1 RMF2 MHP UPT CRD NC RO CO GC SAC LMI HMI TECH NOTES

Health & Fitness Facility SE P P P P P P P



2. Explanation of Revisions: Create Section 3.2.73 regarding Health and Fitness

Facility:



3.2.73. Health and Fitness Facility

A. Location

1. HIST zoning district

(A) A Health and Fitness Facility locating in the HIST zoning district shall

not be permitted outright as a principal use. Said use shall meet the

following criteria to be considered for a Special Exception Use as provided in

Section 3.1.1 and Section 10.2.7:

a. A Health and Fitness Facility shall be required to occupy a building that

encompasses 15,000 square feet or more of gross floor area.

b. A Health and Fitness Facility shall only be permitted in existing structures

(built prior to 2019).

c. A Health and Fitness Facility shall be required to meet the parking

standards of the Unified Development Ordinance as referenced in Section 4.3.

Off-Street Parking and Loading.

d. No Alcohol



Additional Information:



This Text Amendment would allow Health and Fitness Facilities into the Historic

District as a Special Exception Use. This also includes single parcel lots

located outside of the Historic District but are zoned Historic, those include

parcels located in Waverly Terrace, High Uptown and Highland Hall.



Attached map includes the list of buildings that meet the criteria of the

special exception in the Historic District. Those addresses are as follows:



01. 800 Front Avenue

02. 18 9th Street

03. 710 Front Avenue

04. 627 2nd Avenue

05. 543 3rd Avenue

06. 222 5th Street

07. 425 3rd Avenue



The central issue of this application is the request to amend the Unified

Development Ordinance to allow for health and fitness uses as a Special

Exception in the Historic zoning classification. It is not at this time the

purpose to discuss whether a special exception should be allowed at a

particular location. That will come later should the Council approve this

request.



There are some Pros and Cons about this request that Council should take under

consideration before approving this request:



Pros:

? As a Special Exception, a use of this type would be required to address

access, traffic and pedestrian safety, adequacy of public facilities, hours of

operation, and compatibility

? Use would be required to be located in an existing building that is a minimum

of 15,000 square feet

? Unless granted a variance, all parking requirements would have to be met

? Under the 2038 Comprehensive Plan, this historic area calls for a mixed-use

neighborhood

Cons:

? Approving this amendment will limit the placement of this use based upon the

available parking within the historic district itself.

? A large section of the off-street parking near the River Valley Regional

office is public parking controlled by the City and is now used for overflow

parking from the Trade Center

? Variances for parking requirements would be heard by the Board of Zoning

Appeals and not Council

? The definition of health and fitness uses may need to be revisited to insure

compliance with surrounding neighborhood needs.



Background:



In August 2018, a permit for building alterations at 710 Front Avenue were

issued to the contractor and the plans were approved. In September-October

2018, inspections were performed and the occupant (Crossfit CSG) received a

Certificate of Completion. On October 8, Joanne Cogle, the business owner,

came in to pull a Certificate of Occupancy for a Health & Fitness Facility.

However, said use is not a permitted use in the HIST zoning district. Upon

consultation with the Planning Department, it was deemed a government facility

(where zoning does not typically apply). Ms. Cogle was permitted to operate.



On November 12, 2018, the Planning Department received an email of complaint

from a neighbor. The Planning Department forwarded the email to the City

Attorney?s Office for an opinion. On November 13, the City Attorney provided

case law that stated, ?In their use of land, a state government or its agencies

are immune from operation of local zoning regulations government agencies.?

The Planning Department forwarded said opinion to the neighbor. The neighbor

countered this opinion and after some back and forth, the City Attorney ruled

on November 16 that the property was not exempt from zoning due to O.C.G.A.

50-8-2, which concerns regional commissions (the River Valley Regional

Commission is part owner of the building). Special Enforcement was sent to the

property on December 3 to advise the business owner to come into zoning

compliance.



Ms. Cogle appeared on the December 11 City Council Public Agenda to request a

temporary Certificate of Occupancy until she can pursue the rezoning/text

amendment process. Council was presented with two options: rezone the property

from HIST district to CRD district or amend the text of the UDO to allow Health

& Fitness Facilities as a Special Exception Use in the HIST district.



Council approved a temporary Certificate of Occupancy of 120 days on December

11, 2018. The extension was approved on February 12, 2018 for an additional

120 days.



Recommendations:



The Planning Advisory Commission (PAC) considered this text amendment at their

meeting on January 16, 2018. The PAC recommended denial with a 4-3-1 vote.



Councilor Woodson made a motion on February 12, 2018 for the Text Amendment to

be sent back to the Planning Advisory Commission. A Public Meeting was held on

February 28, 2018 to discuss all viable options for the case.



The Planning Advisory Commission (PAC) reconsidered this text amendment at

their meeting on March 20, 2018. The PAC recommended approval with a 5-3

vote.



The Planning Department recommends approval.



Sincerely,





Rick Jones, AICP

Director, Planning Department



Attachments


Back to List