Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-11-23 P&Z Minutes.,_. ~ KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting, November 23, 1983 Kenai City Hall Lee Lewis, Chairman AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. AGE NDA APPROVE 3. PER SONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD a. Edwin R. Lowry - 1) Rezoning Portion of Lot 2, Block 1, Spur S/D No. 1 from General Commercial (CG) to Urban Residential (RU) 2) Amendment to lease of city-owned land s )J~r /~ / ~~/ j'~- , f , ~J ~.t~ ( ~~~~~.L.~~ G ~7 i v GI. Kf X ~-~' , .., ~r-~ L'Y..~. Ff,_GI,.~CL.~~ "' J' ~~. Gi_-6 ~ _ ~ 4 ~J PUBL C HEARING . 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of November 9, 1983 ~ 6. OLD BUSINESS a. Discussion: City-Owned Lands Within Section 31, T6N, R11W, S.M. b. Discussion: Acquisition of Private Lands Adjacent to Kenai Municipal Airport c. Discussion: .Planned Unit Residential Development (PURD) - Draft Ordinance PLEASE BE SURE TO BRING YOUR DRAFT COPY WITH YOU 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Resolution PZ83-73, FBO S/D North Addition b. Resolution PZ83-74, Alyeska S/D Merit Addition c. Resolution PZ83-75, Whatt S/D d. Resolution PZ83-76, Fiocla Wilson Property e. Discussion: Topics suggested by Mayor Wagoner: 1) Assumption of Zoning Powers 2) Consideration of Illegal Businesses f. Discussion: Recommended Planning Study Projects for 1984. ~ 8. PLANNING 9. REPORTS a. City Council Report b. Borough Planning Report c. City Administration Report 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD 11. COMMISSION COMMENTS & QUESTIONS 12. ADJOURNMENT ~° No material received from Mr. Lowry as of packet time. ~~ Map will be available at the meeting KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting, November 23, 1983 Kenai City Hall Lee Lewis, Chairman 1. ROLL CALL 2. Present: All Commissioners present Commission remains one member short AGENDA APPROVAL Chairman Lewis stated that Airport Manager Jim Swalley has asked to be placed on the agenda to speak on the purchase/ exchange of 80 acres, item 6-b Agenda was approved with the addition 3. PERSONS PRESENT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD a. Edwin R. Lowry - 1) Rezoning Portion of Spur S/D No. 1 from General Commercial Residential (RU) 2) Amendment to lease lands. Lot 2, Block 1, (CG) to Urban of city-owned Mr. Lowry absent, Chairman Lewis went ahead with Mr. Swalley. b. Mr. Jim Swalley, Airport Manager A copy of the appraisal from Mr. Warfle on the land to the north of the airport was handed out to the Commission. Mr. Swalley noted the widespread interest in the float plane basin with the FAA making an unoffical visit on this matter. "Regardless of whether or not we want to go ahead and follow the master plan as it is now or amend the master plan and improve the existing waterway, in either case this land (the 80 acres adjacent to the airport being considered) would still be necessary to do anything with the airport and float plane basin as the existing waterway is too short by FAA standards. FAA requires a minimum of 500' more of usables than what we have now." Mr. Swalley rendered his personal opinion that if the city is going to do it, don't do it by bare minimums either, the city will outgrow it too quickly. The city is conceivably going to get locked in on this side as far as direct access to the runway is concerned. Commissioner Oleson asked Mr. Swalley to share his knowledge of the expansion of the Soldotna airport. Mr. Swalley stated that the new terminal would facilitate up to three commutor air lines and that it is his personal feeling that the main source of funding for the Soldotna airport is the KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting, November 23, 1983 Page 2 same as for Kenai. In view of the fact that there are 2 airports 10 miles apart, the funding source is not going to get involved in a tug-of-war between two towns, and are not going to put like money into 2 airports this close together. Councilman Wise stated that "FAA has the money but does not have the control over it. I strongly suggest we make an official pitch and get him down here. If the state doesn't support us we're dead". Chairman Lewis asked if by the city getting involved in acquisition of this land, would it not be committing itself to the float plane basin, Councilman Wise stated absolutely nat. MOTION: Commissioner Smalley moved that the Planning Commission make the recommendation to the Council that the City pursue this issue for the acquisition of the 80 acre parcel described, seconded by Commissioner Osborne. VOTE: Motion passed with unanimous roll call vote NOTE: Mr. Lowry present in the audience The Commission discussed past and present condemnation proceedings and development of the west side of the airport not related to the float plane basin. a. Edwin R. Lowry - 1) Rezoning Portion of Lot 2, Block 1, Spur S/D No. 1 from General Commercial (CG) to Urban Residential (RU) 2) Amendment to Lease of City-owned Lands NOTE: Due to the nature of the discussion, several portions were taken verbatim and appear in quotations. Mr. Lowry stated that, "the property we're talking about is the leased property we leased from the City of Kenai here about two months ago to be Sprucewood S/D and I think your talking about the part that's just the residential portion. It was our intent and it was indicated in the lease that we had 3 phases of that portion of the project and the first 2 phases basically took the middle of Sprucewood S/D lots 2-5 block 1 and lots 10-13 block 1 and all of block 2 lots, three of them that front on Tern. The four lots that abut the commercial property become a portion of that and allows more depth from the highway there. For that reason I went to the Borough Planning Commission and protested the rezone that as it was stated and basically because I wanted to have it where just where we're going to build the apartments the other thing that kinds seems like a problem is, to me there KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting, November 23, 1983 Page 3 was not a legal description of the land to be rezoned." "Until the subdivision's platted you can't spell out particular lots so, I don't know how it could be described until it is plotted to be rezoned." "I kind of feel that what we should do is delay until there's a plat filed on that and then the rest of the zoning of that portion. I'd also like to note that we bought it and the appraiser made a very specific point of it all being commercial property and its valuation of it and certainly it will be devalued to rezone that portion that abuts the commercial to RU." "Our plans are not to do anything there for two years". A map of the entire area was produced and the Commission and Mr. Lowry discussed his future plans extensively. Mr. Labahn noted that three things were involved; con- sideration of the existing lease and whether it needs to be amended, the subdivision plat (it would need to be revised with the changes mentioned by Mr. Lowry), and the rezoning depending upon what comes out of the first two. ~ The Commission asked Mr. Lowry what he specifically wants from the Commission, answer; to delay the rezoning until the plat is filed so there is a legal basis for defining which lots are to be rezoned. Commissioner Bryson stated that he felt that was reasonable and if Mr. Lowry was serious about making changes to the lease and the subdivision plat it would give Mr. Lowry time to amend his lease, Mr. Labahn agreed. In the mean time, the property and lease are still under the constraints of the RU zone. Commissioner Bryson stated, "I stronly recmmend withdrawing the motion for reconsideration. One other thing I can say that might effect us down the way is if the City sells the property, I suppose the City could still initiate a rezoning." It was the unanimous consent of the Commission that no action be taken, thus the zone will remain the same until such time as the Sprucewood S/D plat becomes final and legal descriptions are clear. Commissioner Bryson will not ask for reconsideration at the Borough Planning Commission meeting. a. Discussion: City-Owned Lands Within Section 31, T6N, R11W, S.M. Mr. Labahn introduced a map to the Commission and discussion began. Mr. Labahn explained that this subject came about following the request for sale of government lot 11. KENAI PLANNING ~ Regular Meeting, Page 4 Motion: Commissioner application seconded by ZONING COMMISSION November 23, 1983 Bryson moved to recomend the denial of for negotiated sale of Government Lot 11, Commissioner Oleson. Commissioner Bryson stated that for the same reasons as stated several weeks before, "I feel the parcel is not appropriate for negotiated sale because its acquisition by the adjacent property owner or denial of acquisition by the adjacent property owner would not prejudice that person, will not damage him, and it may damage the public at large by not having the chance to bid at an open auction." Chairman Lewis asked if Commissioner Brysons intent was to shut off the original petition by Mr. Sipperly. Commissioner Bryson agreed, saying that "it does not delineate an area and what he feels an appropriate use". Commissioner Osborne felt that, "no part of this should be sold. It has a continuation and if you cut off half of that lot you break this greenstrip in half." Jeff Labahn stated that at particular point, the concern was what would be acceptable to the Commission and the City as far as disposing of any excess land that might adjacent to the greenbelt and still retain the integrity of the gully area. Commissioner Bryson stated that the real problem is where is the greenbelt other than being green on a map. Is it's sphere of interest 50' from the bluff or at the bluff line, or what which will apply to the other side also and is it appropriate to have houses hanging over the bluff if the area is ever developed for recreation or do we want to discourage it. Mr. Labahn agreed, this area is subject to erosion such as the bluff at the inlet and this needs to be defined. Commissioner Zubeck stated that none of it should be sold because at one point in Anchorage, they designated greenbelts, purchased property that was hanging over the bluff and now they've got bike and jogging trails going through these places. There may be more problems further down the line just to reserve that conservation area through there. There is plenty of property available in the City of Kenai without distributing that section through there. It could be a scenic area with a little bit of work. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting, November 23, 1983 Page 5 b. Discussion: Acquisition of Private Lands Adjacent to Kenai Municipal Airport Taken care of under 3-b. c. Discussion: Planned Unit Residential Development P.U.R.D. - Draft Ordinance The Commission discussed partial verbage with Councilman Wise. Councilman Wise stated that he would withdraw his objections to the minimum parcel size but is violently opposed to the total floor space requirements. "The townhouses that were built at the foot of Fathom would not be permissible under this proposed ordinance." Councilman Wise felt that," it defeats the intent to allow affordable housing." Mr. Labahn stated that no provision would be violated by the townhouses as far as area. Also, to keep in mind is that this is a starting point and is in line with other Alaska municipal zoning ordinances and is very middle- of-the-road as far as square footage and is meant to be negotiated up or down. The decision was to go ahead with the public hearings to be scheduled for the next meeting, December 14th. 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Resolution PZ83-73, FBO S/D North Addition The Commission reviewed the plat and administrative comments. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved, seconded by Commissioner Osborne to approve PZ83-73. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously b. Resolution PZ83-74. Alveska S/D Merit Addition The Commission reviewed the plat, noting the missing build- ings and the status of the utility easements. An encroachment problem exists with the lot lines as they exist. The current plat was done by deed. Councilman Wise stated that he felt there were assessments owing, even though none were found in the files. This will be checked further. KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Regular Meeting, November 23, 1983 Page 6 Councilman Wise suggested changes in the wordage: first line after "shall be submitted", specify "to Kenai Advisory Planning & Zoning Commission". On 7th line after "required parking spaces", "additionally, a general floorplan of principal buildings, a development scheduled, together with such other information as Kenai Advisory Planning & Zoning Commission may require shall be submitted". MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved to approve PZ83-74, seconded by Commissioner Osborne. MOTION AMENDMENT: Commissioner Bryson moved to incorporate the staff comments as part of the resolution pointing out the concerns stated above, consented to by second. VOTE: Both motion and amendment passed by unanimous roll call vote. c. Resolution PZ83-75, Whyatt S/D The Commission discussed the cul-de-sacs, ROW's and utilities at length with suggestions for the developer gaining more lots with a different design. Commissioner Zubeck noted that, should the city decide to sell those gully lots, more planning would be necessary. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson moved to approve PZ83-75 and require the developer meet with administration regarding utilities and ROW's with correction of negative findings, seconded by Commissioner Oleson. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously d. Resolution PZ83-76, Fiocla Wilson Property The Commission reviewed the plat. MOTION: Commissioner Bryson, seconded by Commissioner Oleson, approval of PZ83-76 per the staff recommendations. VOTE: Motion passed unanimously. i e. Discussion: Topics suggested by Mayor Wagoner: 1) Assumption of zoning powers 2) Consideration of illegal businesses Councilman Wise stated that even before discussion takes place, there should be a cost estimate. This item will be taken up at the next meeting due to the lateness of the meeting. f. Discussion: Recommended Planning Study Projects for 1984. Mr. Labahn informed the Commission that the Borough was eager to lend assistance in the recommended projects. The Commission will take up this item at the next meeting. 8. PLANNING None 9. REPORTS a. City Council Report Councilman Wise reported that the FAA "antenna farm" is now available for sale or lease. b. Borouoh Plannino Report Commissioner Bryson reported that there were 4 City of Kenai plats for review which passed. The rezoning requested by Mr. Lowry was denied based on the protest by Mr. Lowry. Commissioner Bryson asked for reconsideration at the next meeting pending the desires of the Kenai Planning Commission Commissioner Bryson reported on the discussion by the Borough on recreational subdivisions. The Commission discussed the topic at some length. c. City Administration Report Mr. Labahn reported that there will be a meeting with the state legislators on December 14th at 6:00 pm and the Commission is invited to attend. The regular meeting will begin at 7:30 pm. The housing count has been completed and will add 400 - 500 more people to the census. 10. PERSONS PRESENT NOT SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD None 11. COMMISSION QUESTIONS & COMMENTS 12. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:50 pm. The next meeting will be Wednesday, December 14th at 7:00 pm. Submitted by: Janet Loper, Secretary KENAI PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ~~ b. Jim Swalley, Airport. Manager. A copy of the appraisal from Mr. Warfle on the land to the north of the airport was handed out to the Commission. Mr. Swalley noted the widespread interest irL the float plane basin with the FAA making an unofficial visit on this ~riatter. "Regardless of whether or not we want to go ahead and follow the piaster plan as it is now or amend the master plan and improve the existing water way, in either case this land will still be necessary to do anything with the float plane basin. The existing waterway is too short by FAA si.andards. FAA requires a minimum of~.`50C' more of usabies than what we have now. Mr. Swalley gave his personal opinion that if we're going to do it, don't want to go to bare minimums either. It would. be more desirable to go a bit more than the FAA minimums. G7liatever way the Committee Besides to go, this tract of land to the north will be necessary. Even if something falls through on the fioa. plane basin, that lard will still be availablexan~ at a later date to the airport. We are conceivable going to get ourselves locked in on this side as far as direct access to the runway, while we have a request in to come down about this far by rlr. Bielefeld"s. Commissioner Zubeck asked who owned the property now, Mr. Swalley stated that Mr Mueller is representing the owners of the property. Comm. Oleson inquired about the new terminal in Soldotna. Mr. Swalley stated that the new terminal would facilitate up to three commutor air lines. ~^*~ ~~~G~-- }^' '~'°-~`°°°M~r. Swalley stated that his personal opinion is that the Yy~.y.-"' CllG. 1. main source of funding for the Soldotna airport is the same as for Kenai. In view of the fact that there are 2 airports within 10 miles apart, the funding source is riot going to get involved in a tug-of-war between two towns, not going to put like money into 2 airports this close tcgether. Sa~~a~kris The main vein of Soldotra's improvements so far, is for the advancement of general aviation which we are also concerned with advancing general aviation.nahz~h Kenai is the primary ccmmercial airport for the central peninsula region and the FAA is not going to go over to Soldotna to make the improvements necessary to make it a bet*_er airport than Kenai's. It cJOUId not be feasible. Councilman Wise - FAA has the money but does nothave the control over it. Strongly suggest we make an official pitch and get him down here. If the state doesn't support us we're dead. Bryson - any action required? Jeff, Council will be taking this up in discussion at their next meeting and a recommendation would be desirable, advising whter or not the city should go forward and enter into some kind of negotiation with the land owners, realizing that if we do there is still a considerable amount of work ahead of us. ~~~; P&Z Page Smalley - It would be difficult to come up with a recommendation until there is some sort of idea of cost approximation, we have basically an appraisal on the land itself, but the renovation of the basin, the number of potential users, etc. before we get involved in saying yes, we do want to get involved in a land trade. Jeff - I mean to go even more basic than that, is the city or are they not at least interested in pursuing the acquisition of this property. Whether .its at that price, or again we haven't even talked about what property we might be exchanging. Lee.- wouldnt the city getting involved in acq>>iring title to this property commit th3 city on the float plane basin. Wise - no absolutely not. Jeff - generally speakingagina, the west side of theairport and future development, whatever that might be, there's no commitment from that standpoint, the owners may have another idea as to price of the land also. Wise - what is being brought out here is that the city tried to condemn that land, we had an FAA grant, ADAP grant to acquire that land. WE went through condemnation and comdenation failed based on the fact that the city had no immediate need for that lnad. No firm engineering or difinitive plans to put anything in over there, it was simply a future need. It was faught by the owners and it faught and given back to the FAA. The owners remain the same, they offered the entire 160 acres available for sale up to a year ago, it was offered to the city at that time, it was a cash sale and it simply wasn't pursued. We have since changed our mind and are willing to take a land swap, value for value. If the airport is to develop the west side of the airport, I think the map shows and Mr. Swalley commented it is a logical acquisition and I would encourage you to take a stand on the acquisition, there's no question in my mind that, if we acquire it it will be on a value for clue basis. MOTION: Commissioner Smalley, move that the P&Z make the recommendation to the Council that the city pursue this issue for the acquition for the 80 acre parcel, seconded by Commissioner Osborne. Smalley - perhaps the city attorney should look into it and again the possibility of condemnation again, realising that they didn't have a project set inmind at that point in time, whether the courts would be willing to say now you have something I don't know. Bryson - the city has effectively recieved an offer to sell the property and until that's denied or a counter proposal made, a condemnation proceeding would be inappropriate. Wise - what your saying is that you really want the land. Mr. Lowry no`~a present, ~o `~ a. Ed n R. Lq'wry ° No . 1 f ro~i Gener Leas` o~ city-ow ceed with 3-a. k 1, jS~ur S/D 2 ) Amedment to' 1) Rezoning Portio`gi of Lot 2, B 1 Commercial to Urban REsident~, s Include Dick Mueller Bryson asked for clarification of intentions. Smalley - intent was to look m P&Z Page 3 ~ into the matter of negotiations for purchase AT the smae time as deciding the float plane basin, a malley that would be one of the possibilities, again if your looking at the expansion of the west side it woulsn't necessarily have to be afloat plane basin, your talking about parking, about a numberof things. Mr. Lowry now present, proceed with 3-a a. Edwin R. Lowry - 1) Rezoning Portion of Lot 2 etc. & Amendment to Lease Lowry - The property that we're taling about is the lease property we leased from the City of Kenai here about two months ago to be Sprucewood S/D and I think your talking about the part that's just the residential portion. It was our intent and it was indicated in the lease that we had 3 phases of that portion of the project and the first Z phases basically took the middle of sprucewood S/D lots 2 - 5 block 1 and lots 10 - 13 block 1 and all of block L and what we had intented was to leave the zoning in place as to the other 7 lots, 3 of them that front on Tern Ave. the-~-~e~s-~~e~ tape II the 4 lots that abut the commercial property become a portion of that and allow us to have more depth from the highway there. For that reason I went to the Borough Planning Commission and protested the rezone that as it was stated and basically because I wanted to have it where just where we're going to build the apartments the other thing that kinda seems like a problem is, to me there wawn.t a legal de description of the land to be rezoned and one of the reasons why we haven't initiated this in fact we did initiate this about a month prior to ya'll's initiation of it and ah, there's, until the subdivision's platted you can't spell out particular lots so, I don't know-how it could be described until it is plotted to be rezoned. What the, to address what I think your concern is, what is being rezoned, ah, ah, is to progibit some other acitivity from happening back there, ah, the Ibelieve the building inspector was instructed to issue a building permit only on the basis that. one of the conditions of that permit be that we use it accordingto the RU requirements and that was the case on the past building permits and I would assume would be the case in future ones unless there was some action by t'a'll to change that. So I I kind of feel that what we should do is delay until there's a plat filed on that and ha, then the rest of the zoning of that portion. I'd also like to note that we bought it and the appraiser made a very specific point of it all being commercial property and its valuation of it and certainly it will be devalued to rezone that portion that abuts the commercial to RU. Lewis - Jeff do you have a map. Map introduced. My immediate question would be, what your talking about is altering the dimensions of Tracts B & C to bring it down. My concern is not so much perhaps the rezone although that will have to be dealt with, but I guess .the first thing is that we're actually then revising the preliminary plat. So, if if that's going to be brought down a certain distance, you know, there's going to have to be a revised P&Z Page 4 plat. That`1 have to come before this body. Lowry - ok, what we intended to do was to replat that. Jeff - I guess my .other question would be do you intend to bring that rear lot line back to abut on that street or were you going to draw it off. Lowry - we did, to do that, ah, one of the requirements of the lease was to fence this off and let this be very distinctly not adjoining and that's what we intend to do also. And there ah, we would bring this line through here and the balance is this Lewis - so what your talking about is this property right here, is that all your talking about. Lowry - no also these three lots down here on Tern AVe. Lewis - ok, say it again, why, what's your concern about these three lots. Lowry.- ok we feel like they might have some value for something other than aprtments and ah, since our plans are not to do anything there for two years, we'd like. to preserve the zoning as it is. Until at which time we can determine I think there's a purchase on this now or Jeff - yea, there's this tract D & E have been requested for purchase. Lowry - this. still haven't been resolved to my knowedge as to whether or not that will be allowed to go through there. Those would all be considerations this tract to be considerations as to how that should be zoned I would think Bryson - technically what your' doing, youve got a lease agreement with the city, you know you've made a series of statements and yet you arn't conforming to them. Lowry - oh yea we're conforming to them, specifically I think though we intended to do phase I here, phase II here and phase III here and here if at that time we didn't want to come back on this property Bryson - and yet you protested the zoning of the apartment use Lowry - well we didn't talk about this phase and the potential to come back at the time of the lease. Smalley - what is spelled out in the lease. Jeff - essentially the lease incorporates this plan B which was, there was three plans that were considered, a,b, & c. Plan b is incorporated by P&Z page 5 reference in the lease, ah, this is what is presented and of course it was agreed that this would be looped through here, ah, and there is time require ments for the for the development of phases I through III. Ah the lease does not specify whether its commercial or residential for each phase or for each lot ah, but I believe it was the understanding ah on the lease that the small lots essentially the 7200 to about 9600 sq. ft. .lots would be reserved out for multi family residential and these two tracts which are actually tracts a & b would be ah would be commercial, so again again my concern isn't as much the rezoning as opposed to the the replatting in this case of these lots and the amendment to the lease that might be necessary as a result of any changes being being done there. The zoning is sort of sort of a minor issue ah, in a sense, the whole picture. Bryson - except your going to leave a strip of commercial right through right through Jeff - uh huh Bryson - potentially through two residential areas Smalley - right. potential areas and thats what I think this body was attempting to protect. With its thoughts of rezoning Jeff - so you really have three things, you've got a consideration of the lease the existing lease and whehter it needs to be amended or not ah, the ah, the subdivision plat again if we start ah altering some lot lines we'll have to we'll have to look at a revised plat and ah the .subsequent ah rezoning essentially whatever comes out of those first two. Wise - where is the plat Jeff - preliminary approved by the city and ah, by the borough, ah, this has been vacated, it has not been filed to date. Wise - when are you going to file Jeff - its ready to final right now and essentially um, it was in Lowry - just the final details on it, the installation agreement for portion of remaining Jeff - and once thats Lewis - these lots and these lots he wants excluded from any rezoning. See this was all to be rezoned as ah, urban residential and he wants a line like so, is that it, contiguous with this street here, Lowry - right Lewis - and these three lots excluded from that, left as they are P&Z j Page 6 Jeff - you really wouldn't be looking at replatting these here its just a question of use but here we're talking about replatting, probably be affecting actually two larger. tracts and these five lots. Bryson - I might add, ah as a result of Ed's protesting the ah, the rezoning the planning commission voted to deny the rezoning application, ah presently its ah, I requested reconsideration at the next meeting, ah thats not particularly ah, being held up if ah, unless the city comes up with a good reason ah, ah for it to be held up. Wise - your the commission but I would say until you get a plat, you know, its a point of where are you rezoning is a very valid one until its described legally your kind of groping. Jeff - I think the real point is Wise - can't hear all voices over riding. If again, I don't remember all the details but I'm sure people can remind me but there and I think certain its going to be discussion on final plat is to if these are commercial is this to be the access to those commercial lots. I think your opening a bucket of worms. Smalley - well I think this body basically looked into that as it was our 1 understanding when that lease agreement was reached that the concept of .this whole area being protected by rezoning the possibility of rezoning it to prevent those kinds of things from happening. Wise - I think you've got a problem. You've got commercial access coming up through a residential Lzswx~Z~__ - we specifically dont wart that and we specifically were required I think by the council to have a fence to prohibit access through,there we would also have to do the same thing Lewis - what would you have the fence along the street Bryson - are you proposing moving the row .or Lowry - no no there'd just be a fence right down the back line Wise/Smalley - you wouldn't have access to them then. Lewis - he said there wouldn't be any access. (too many uoices to make out) Lowry - no no this will become a part of this. Bryson - ok your porposing wiping these these lines out and constructing a line here Lowry - yea P&Z Page 7 Bryson - where will the row. abut, right where it is Lowry - right toomany voices Lewis - would the lot become bigger or what Lowry - we can hook into that or look into readj many voices Jeff - I think the agreement was made on this design was because you would have essentially a residential buffer here that there wouldn't be any fence necessary and I I think if we went ahead and replatted it it would propably have to look at um, you know, making some type of a stipulation that a barrier be imposed that there would be a fence or something many voices Jeff - if that's the way the commission wants to go. Lowry - there has to be an approved site plan by the building inspector before there can be a permit issued. He has to approve of all the access parking the layout of the entire site. Jeff - of the 8 foundations we're missing lot 2 - yes Smalley - now you also wanted to have thse remain. commercial lots is that correct. Lowry - many voices, can't make out Lewis - and that's because its part of your phase III. Lowry - right. What we want to do is we want to be allowed to have the time to pursue this being connected with Walker LAne ...see what these people are going to do, what they`re intentions are before we decide what to do with that. Smalley - now you in fact haven't purchased this its leased is that correct. Lowry - thats correct. Jeff - this is the key I guess the immediate key area is as far as um, as far as replatting that and essentially um, amending whats been incorporated by reference into the ah, into the lease. When this was actually was first P&Z '~ Page 8 agreed upon was was ah, later on after theoriginal was submitted. Smalley - Jeff I think part of .,.the confusion I think we're having here is that there is all brand new stuff to us, we were never ever, at lease I was never informed I think other members were. not informed of the concept of three phases, you know Jeff - well this was in fact this was the plan b that was approved .now when this was approved by ah, by the council. ah, the instruction was given to administration to ah, particularly deal with this access whether or not is was going to be extended it was decided at that time that it wouldn't be and also of the looping here. Those were really the only two items that were changed, the lots have been, the lots are are pretty similar to the concept of the preliminary plat. Ah, Bryson - this is the final approval of the lease itself. Ah you say access was approved Lewis - it already was approved Bryson - yea I know, Jeff - when it was approved by the council essentially they told administration ~ to work out any problems yn~e~~ in regard to access and thats why we ended up eliminating this and looping that, but phase I, II, & III are incorporated by reference to the three three phases. Bryson - was it the councils intent to require the rezoning, in that area, into an appropriate use. Lewis - yes, wasn't it Jeff - it really came from this body. The the stipulation was made that the um, the small lots essentially the 7200 s. ft. plus lots would be developed under the RU standards and that was incorporated into the lease. Ah I recommended to the council, to the commission at a later meeting that to be consistent with the zoning that really should be cleaned up and zoned UR. It was actually the commission that initiated the ah, the rezone. Bryson - ah another thing ah one. of the concerns Mr. Lowry ah, mentioned at the meeting was ah, he was the lease holder of record and ah, he had not been notified of the ah proposed zoning change. Jeff - I can't speak for the borough, well I guess I can because I talked to them I asked them about it after that came up and ah, ah, he was not notified by the borough, owners of record only per their code are ah are P&Z Page 9 ,~ notified so as a lessee he would not have been notified. He was sent a copy of the ah, agenda at least ah for our meeting because he has an interest in the ah, in the rezoning. But there was no formal notificiation from the borough. Ed are you propsing to come back ah, before the commission with ah, with a replat then Lowry - we're going to go ahead and finalizine this plat first, its a time factor involved in the ah redoing the appraisal. I would assume.. Bryson - I think that if he has a use that is counter to the zoning it should be submitted as part and and ah, submitted as part of the lease either through a modification of the lease ageement or whatever but it should ah, if he has different plans now he should upgrade them in light of ah, what r_he zoning is and ah, maybe should be in the future. Jeff - do you have any plans, well I guess not this year but I I guess when wehn do you intend on really developing this part of ah ah Lowry - before spring, we deal with the replat. Jeff - yea, so so far theres no problem as as what whats developed out there but ah, yea, you know its got to be ironed out as far as the replat and ah and ah, the authorization of the use ~ Smalley - yes. Jeff - but your intent is to go ahead and. and to ah, have the plat filed as is and then amend it at a later later date. ok Lewis - so all your asking, what are you asking of us, you want us to Lowry - delay the rezoning until which time the plat is filed and we can spell out which lots and we can talk about ah, whether or not these should be rezoned Lewis - delay the rezoning of what, the whole thing Lowry - well I don't think we can say anything but this entire parcel its. the only legal. description there is. Bryson - just from a legal standpoint I would I would think there's that something that might be appropropirate, yeu know that aspect of it anyway. At that same time maybe he can come in with a modified lease Jeff - I would .have no objection to that the city is probably as the lessee to finalize that plat because we have an interest in the real estate here and here. Ah, I would say lets go ahead and move towards filing the plat ah P&Z Page 10 once the plat is filed then I guess I would. suggest if your see~e~d- serious about making changes then come come forward then with a ah, plat or a lease amendment or both at that time for the commission to consider. Ah I guess I would agree with Phil I don`t object to holding the rezoning in abeyance until the plat is filed. Bryson - what it will do if I I ah, withdraw my request ah, well. either way, ah, it'1 just, it'1 fail and it will have to be complete reinitiated by whatever. Jeff - I believe that would be correct. It will probably, you know be a meeting or two before the plat is filed Bryson - they would have to readvertise anyway. Lowry - we initated this once. about a month prior to ya`11 doing it, so the probably that I'm talking about- (can`t hear) I don`t know if there's anything in writing but this was., we talked about the potential to use this and .the way it is laid out and why the three phases are the way they are to allow for the commercial, go on back there is a lease amendment that is brand new to me, I ah didn't realize that that would be required or, I, that hadn't been presented to me until I read the agenda tonight. Jeff - the only, the only identification in the lease as far as phase I II II is essentially in the timing of development, development ah,xi~ the lease is not succinct in in talking about the use on each individual lot thats true. Lowry - would it be appropriate at this time to discuss what the city's intention is in here and here. Bryson - you said the council had addressed access to Tern St. to Walker Lane, had they mandated to access at that point Jeff - noWhen the preliminary draft was first introduced we were looking at at least platting this we looking at if there was a need or a desire to bring that through that it would align with Tern Ave. When Ed came in a t a very early stage, ah that was one of the things that we required that it be platted in such a way that it could be punched through. The decision was made at that point not of open the access but to consider that at a later time. Bryson - it seems like this whole tract is ah, sort of it should you know should have been approached from a planned unit development issue esp. if the proposed use drifts away from urban residential on those remaining lots. Lowry - has there been Bryson - my feeling is that the commission would like me not to ask for a reconsideration. P&Z j Page 11 Br~•so^ - r' ght now its " fai ...able n r zo__ing. A maj ority of the commissioners need to reconsider it Lewis - it'1 stay as general commercial and that is what you want isn't that right. Bryson - is that what you want Jeff - as I understood the commission it was a mater of waiting until the plat was finalized and and then taking up the necessary Smalley - if we take no action on it it would remain as general commercial until further Lewis - until the final platting is brought before us Smalley - which would in effect alter, could possibily alter the lease as far as the little statement in there only construction that is normally RU? So that would be null and void, that statement. Jeff - no there's nothing in the lease that would be null and void. Smalley - he would still then be allowed only to buildna do the pursue the 1 element of property that would only work under RU zone Jeff - tjats right and what the lessee is talking about probably will involve not only a replatting of those specific lots up there at the top but also an amendment to the existing lease. Smalley - speaking from strictly a very lay point of view, how can you require someone on a lease to follow through TAPE II Jeff - that's that`s the reason I suggested the body this body initiate a rezone so Smalley - so that protection was there Jeff - would be consistent in fact with the the lease Bryson - it seems to me that Pat Doyle wasn't allowed to get a building permit because he wasn't appropriately zoned and yet he's building 8 4-plexes out there and he isn't appropriately zoned. And he apparently couldn't get his building permit and ah, he has his building permit and ah at a later date. At the car wash. He was held up a numberof months because ah, the rezoning and other problems. P&Z ~~ Page 12 Jeff - this is a circumstance from the standpoint that because the time factor council approved the lease with .the provision in it that the RU standards apply and I believe with the understanding that the zoning would be altered ah, as a matter of course to ah, to be consistent with thelease. That's thats not the normal course of events but I believe that was the understanding once the lease was approved by council. That in fact he be allowed to develop multiple family units in those areas. Bryson - so presumably the same situation were to arise again as it undoubtedly will, ah, coucnil will take the position that they can over ride any building constraints or non conforming uses. Barring ah, any motion otherwise I will withdraw my reconsideration request. Lewis - ok, if we take no action the zoning will remain as it is untiol such time as the plat is replatted and we may at that time require rezoning. Bryson - we would have to reinitiate Lewis - right or, the alternative is to initiate a rezoning of the lots that are not affected. That portion of the parcel. Bryson - one of the rationales for not approving anything was that its not a legal tract yet. Its not the first time that type of thing has been approved contingent upon filing of the final plat. I don't think that would Lewis - that's the choices left open to us, either do nothing or initiating the rezoning of ah, that portion of the lease. Bryson - I strongly would recommend withdrawing the motion for reconsideration. One other thing I can say that would might effect us down the the way is if the city ells the. property, I suppose the city could still initiate a rezoning ah, it would probably be ah, Lewis - you mean on the sale of property. On leased property like this Bryson - its leased right now and the city is the owner Lewis - yes I know Bryson - if the city were to sell it. Lewis - if there's nothing further, ah, brings us to old business. a. City Owned Lands Result of last meeting, we were talking about this portion of government lot 11. It was decided by the commission that they wanted to look at this whole gully right herein relationship to the city owned. There are these 11 government lot owned by the city. In addition to the upland acreage that exists on lot 11 Ro 11 Call PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ~' ` Chairman Lee Lewis !-~X «<JJJ "Phil Bryson '~ ~~~ Bob Oleson \\ ~ ~ Ozzie Osborne ~ ~ ~ ~~\ ~~ ~ Hal Smalley - __.-_ ___._--__-_-- `~ Bill Zubek K _ i r0 ~D ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~- r ~y~~m ~ ~~1`/'~c~E_G~/ r l~ ~~ ~~~~ `) ~n