The topic of building heights – a hot-button issue in Traverse City in recent years – will return to the forefront Tuesday as city planning commissioners consider sweeping changes that could affect building heights in almost every neighborhood of the city.

Planning commissioners will discuss a series of recommendations from the commission’s building heights committee, which met six times in 2017 to review possible changes to the city’s zoning code. The committee’s recommendations being presented Tuesday “would impact nearly every zoning district within the city limits,” according to a memo from City Planning Director Russ Soyring.

Key changes proposed to the zoning code include:

> Adding a story limit for most zoning districts. “Typically, people can more easily relate to number of stories for a building versus the numerical height of the structure,” Soyring wrote. He noted that because historical buildings in Traverse City often have taller story heights than modern buildings, adding a maximum story limit to the zoning code “will likely result in new buildings having proportions that relate better to the historic buildings.”

> Adjusting the maximum heights for several districts. The proposal recommends reducing the maximum building height in the Open Space and residential conservation districts from 35 feet to 25 feet. In most residential neighborhoods, the proposal also recommends that buildings with flat or mansard roofs be 10 feet lower than buildings with a pitched roof. Providing examples of how flat versus pitched-roof homes appear in scale (pictured), Soyring wrote that “a 35-foot tall home of the same footprint with a flat roof will be quite a bit more massive than a 35-foot tall home with a pitch roof.” The proposal also recommends slightly increasing the maximum height in the hotel-resort and C-4a regional center districts from 45 to 48 feet. “Both of these districts are proposed to have a four-story limit, and the three extra feet will allow for taller ceiling heights and higher quality interior spaces,” Soyring said.

> Allow buildings over 60 feet tall to be built by right. Under current city rules, most buildings over 60 feet tall require a special land use permit (SLUP). The building heights committee recommended allowing such buildings to be built by right, eliminating the SLUP requirement, “with the provision there are objective, measurable standards for taller buildings.” The committee found that SLUP requirements – which include “subjective” criteria like being harmonious with the surrounding neighborhood – “are difficult if not impossible to measure and are open to interpretation by the reviewer.” If the proposed change were adopted, developers of buildings over 60 feet tall would still have to meet the design regulations for taller buildings outlined in the zoning code, could only build in areas zoned for buildings over 60 feet, and would still have to go to a public vote for approval under the city's Proposal 3 charter amendment.

While the building heights committee held all of its meetings in public and accepted public input on its recommendations, the group also noted such meetings are typically not as well-attended as planning or city commission meetings. Therefore, the committee is recommending “that the planning commission conduct an advertised public input session on the set of amendments.” Planning commissioners are not expected to vote on adopting the building height changes Tuesday, but will instead discuss the proposal and consider next steps – including scheduling a possible public hearing – before taking action on changing the zoning code.

The discussion about building heights comes as planning commissioners are also set to look at development rules soon for neighborhoods throughout the city that act as “transition” zones between residential and commercial areas. The review of C-1 – or office service – districts comes after residents in Slabtown neighborhood complained about the size and scale of two three-story rental buildings constructed on West Front Street near West Side Beverage. Residents sought to change the zoning rules for five other parcels near that development to reduce the allowed building height from 45 to 35 feet, add setback requirements, and eliminate short-term rentals that are currently allowed on the properties.

Instead of making changes to just those five parcels – a targeted act of downzoning that could pose legal challenges and is opposed by several of the affected property owners – planning commissioners instead will review C-1 zoning rules throughout the city. Soyring tells The Ticker one option could be to split the districts into two different zoning categories, limiting building heights or short-term rentals in areas that are close to surrounding residential houses and allowing higher building heights or rentals in areas that are more isolated or commercially dense. “It does seem to lend itself quite well to splitting C-1 into two different districts based on intensity,” Soyring says.