2-6-2023 BOC Regular Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

VOTE#2: TO APPROVE OR DENY THE UDO TEXT AMENDMENT: Motion Option 1: "1 make a motion that the Commissioners APPROVE the proposed UDO text amendment because it is reasonable and in the public interest given that other types of assembly uses are allowed in the Central Business District(CBD)zoning classification. Motion Option 2: "1 make a motion that the Commissioners DENY the proposed UDO text amendment because it is not in harmony with the existing development in the area. " Motion Option 3-Unioue motion:The Commissioners members are free to create a unique motion based on different articulated findings, information that was provided during the public hearing, or other matters deemed important by the Board. STAFF REPORT FROM JANUARY 9, 2023 AGENDA Recently, staff was directed by the Sanford City Council to prepare an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) to allow religious institutions (churches) within the central business district(CBD) zoning classification. Currently the UDO does not allow for religious complexes (churches) to be located within the central business district zoning classification. In April of 1999, the Sanford City Council took up this similar issue and adopted changes to the zoning ordinance that would promote relocation of the churches/religious uses into other areas of the city (the 1999 zoning changes reduced the restrictions and regulations associated with all other zoning districts). While adopting these new changes in '99. the Council also recognized that all existing churches would be grandfathered. In the months following, staff survey both the CBDs for Sanford and Jonesboro and created a master list of the churches then in operation. Over the years of this prohibition being in effect. Zoning staff has consistently tried to monitor and enforce this regulation. However, staff recognizes that we have a number of current sites within both the central business district of downtown Sanford and downtown Jonesboro that appear to be operating as unauthorized churches/religious operations. Complicating this issue is the concern regarding Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000. commonly known as ' RLUIPA". To learn more about RLUIPA, the following are excerpts taken fi•orn David Owens, Coates Cannons IOG Blog, August 2010: Religious uses have land use impacts, just as their secular C'oltrlterparts. Large places of worship create the scare traffic. noise. and congestion issues as do other places of assembly of.comparahle sire. The.fact that a community center, event space. school. daycare, homeless shelter. or,food pantry is sponsored by a religions rather than a secular organisation usually makes no difference in its land use impacts. So. a basic proposition that religions land ltses should he sltbject to the same land lt.se regulations as their comparable secldar counterparts makes sense and is noncontroversial. right?