Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4343 Staff AnalysisDecember 18, 1984 Item No. F - Z-4341 Owner: Johnson Ranch Partnership Applicant: Thomas L. Hodges/Greenbelt Properties Location: Highway 10 West of North Katillus Road Request: Rezone from Unclassified to "MF -12 and 18," "0-2" and "C-2" Purpose: Multifamily Office and Shopping Center Size: 147.9 acres + ("MF -12" - 19.1 acres, "MF -18" - 7.8 acres, "0-2" - 57.7 acres, and "C-2" - 63.2 acres) SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant, Unclassified South - Vacant and Single Family, Unclassfied East - Vacant, Zoned "R-2" West - Vacant, Unclassified STAFF POSITION: Staff is recommending that this item be deferred for at least two months to allow the Board of Directors to address various policy questions associated with the requested rezonings. The principal issue is that the property is outside the city limits and beyond the "official annexation boundary lines" as adopted by the Board of Directors Resolution No. 6351 and amended by Resolution No. 6761. Resolution No. 6351 establishes "an official annexation boundary line encompassing those areas to be brought into the City until the year 1990." The property in question does abut the city limits on the east side which is also the annexation line. Until the Board of Directors determines the City policy on annexing outside the annexation boundary, staff is not prepared to address the rezoning or related land use issues. It is staff's understanding that the applicant will request some type of deferral also. December 18, 1984 Item No. F - Continued PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (10/30/84) The applicant had submitted a letter requesting deferral to the November 13, 1984, meeting. Staff felt that this was not enough time to satisfactorily address the annexation issue and recommended a deferral to at least the December 18, 1984, meeting. Seth Barnhard representing the applicant addressed the staff's concern and understood the situation but asked that the item be deferred to the November 13th meeting. A motion was made to defer it to the November 13th meeting. A motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (11/13/84) The applicant, Tom Hodges, was present. There were no objectors present. Prior to any discussion on the rezoning, the Planning Commission addressed a resolution requesting the Board of Directors to provide direction to the Commmission and staff regarding annexation of the property in question. The Commission voted: 10 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent in favor of approving the resolution and forwarding it on to the Board of Directors. The Commission then proceeded with the hearing on the rezoning request. Staff reviewed the various issues and indicated to the Commission that none of the planning studies for Highway 10 addressed this section of the highway. The staff also stated they could not support the request as currently filed. Tom Hodges then spoke and discussed a number of items. He said that there was a total of 604 acres in the ownership and approximately one-half would not be developed because of being in the floodplain. He stated that no development was planned for years and that the proposed project would be similar in scale to Pleasant Valley and Otter Creek communities. Besides the office, commercial and multifamily areas, there would be 240 single family lots. Mr. Hodges then went on to discuss Highway 10 and the Johnson Ranch property. He said that Highway 10 would be four lanes in the future and not a suitable environment for normal single family lots. Mr. Hodges described the Johnson Ranch as the largest piece of land under single ownership close in, having a one -mile frontage along Highway 10 and the property's topography being conducive to the type of development being proposed. He also stated that the location was a logical commercial mode because of the future street network, as shown on the Master Street Plan. Mr. Hodges went on to say that some protective covenants had been developed and agreed to by the other property owners in December 18, 1984 Item No. F - Continued the area. The covenants included no development prior to 1990, except for a 20 -acre tract; a greenbelt area along the Highway 10 frontage, a 100 -foot building line, restrict both signage and lighting and building heights not to exceed the permitted heights in "0-2" and "C-2." Ed Willis spoke and discussed the covenants. He stated that the major property owners in the area supported the proposal. Jack Brown, a property owner west of the Johnson Ranch, spoke in favor of the request and said that everybody was satisfied with the proposal. A long discussion was held and then a motion was made to defer the item to the December 18, 1984, meeting. The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 2 noes and 2 absent. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (12/18/84) The applicant was present and represented by Tom Hodges. There were no objectors in attendance. Jim Lawson of the Planning Office described the staff's position and the issues that needed to be resolved. Mr. Hodges then spoke and addressed four specific items. He indicated that the owners had agreed to: (1) a 50 -foot "OS" strip, (2) submitting a preliminary plat with a 100 -foot building line, (3) working with the City on the dedication of land for a public facility or use, and (4) filing the new annexation petition for the entire ownership to the railroad tracks. Mr. Hodges then informed the Planning Commission that all interested parties have signed the protective covenants. At this time, there was a discussion about a 100 -foot right-of-way for Highway 10. Bob Lane of the Engineering staff discussed the issue, and after additional comments, Mr. Hodges agreed to dedicating 10' of right-of-way for Highway 10. Jack Brown, a property owner, spoke in favor of the proposal and said it was good for the area. The Planning Commission then voted on the application with the 50 -foot "OS" strip and that a preliminary plat with a 100 -foot building line be filed, 10' of additional right-of-way be dedicated and that a letter of intent be submitted for the public facility area. The vote: 10 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. November 13, 1984 Item No. F - Z-4343 Owner: Applicant: Location: Request: Purpose: Size: Johnson Ranch Partnership Thomas L. Hodges/Greenbelt Properties Highway 10 West of North Katillus Road Rezone from Unclassified to and 18, "O-2" and "C-2 "MF -12 Multifamily Office and Shopping Center 147.9 acres + ("MF -12" "MF -18'1 - 7.g acres 11 19'1 acres, acres, and "C_2 O-2 - 57.7 63.2 acres) SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North - Vacant, Unclassified South - Vacant and Single Family, Y, Unclassfied West Vacant, Zoned "R_211 - Vacant, Unclassified STAFF POSITION: Staff is recommending that this item be deferred least two months to least allow the Board of Directors for address policy questions associated with the requeto sted rariousP The principal issue is that the limits and beyond the "official annexation bo as adopted b property is outside the city amended b e the Board of Directors ReS°n boundary lines'' establishes it No. 6761, and encompassingTran Official annexationsboundar No. 6351 those areas to be brought into ythe nCit the ityear 1990 .eastThe property in thequestion does e' until e which is also the abut the city Until the Board annexation line. ° annexing outside the lannexationtY boundar the Cit Prepared to address the rezvnin Y Policy on ► staff is not It is staff's understandingg °r related land use issues. some t that the applicant will request ype of deferral also. November 13, 1984 Item No. F - Continued PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: 10/30/84 The applicant had submitted a letter requesting defer al the November 13. 1984, meeting. not enough time to satisfactorilyStaff felt that thisrwasto address issue and recommended a deferral toatleastethenexation December 18, 1984, meetin g. applicant addressed the staff's tconcern aand rd runderstood 9t the e situation but asked that the item be deferred to the November 13th meeting -he November 13th meetinA motion was made to defer it to the 0 noes and 2 absent. p' motion passed by a vote of 9 ayes, PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. 11/13/84 The applicant, Tom Hodges, was objectors present. Prior to anPresent. There were noy discussion on the rezoning, i the Planning Commission addressed a resolution re uest the Board of Directors to r Commmission and staff regardingdannexationnofothee ng in question. The Commission voted: Property 1 absent in favor of approving the resolution and ayes, 0 ofor forwarding it on to the Board of Directors. Proceeded with The Commission then warding reviewed the variouseissuesaringoandhindicated rezoning request. Staff that none of the planning studies for Highwaythe Commission this section of the highway. The staff also stated 10 dt ey could not support the request as currently filed. Tom Hodges then spoke and discussed a number of items. hey said that there was a total of 604 acres in the owners hip and approximatelyms• He beingnloodplainalfHeostatedt be developed because of Planned for years and that the that ro development was similar in scale to Pleasant Valley and project would be communities. y and Otter Creek areas there woulddbe 240 sing lees the rfami�lerc is and multifamily then went on to discuss Hi Highway y lots. Mr. Property. He said that Hi hwa y 10 and the Johnson Ranches future and not a suitablegenvironment10 lforenormal four lsins in the family lots. Mr. Hodges described the Johnson Ranch largest gle Piece of land under single ownership close in, the having a one -mile frontage alongHi property's topography being conducive eto theatd the development being proposed. He also stated tharetof he location was a logical commercial mode because of th street network, as shown on the Master Street Plan. a future Hodges went on to say that some been developed and agreed to by protective covenants had the other property owners in November 13, 1984 Item No. F - Continued the area. The,covenants included no development prior to 1990, except for a 20 -acre tract; a greenbelt area along the Highway 10 frontage, a 100 -foot building line, restrict both - signage and lighting and building heights not to exceed the permitted heights in "0-2" and "C-2." Ed Willis spoke and discussed the covenants. He stated that the major property owners in the area supported the proposal. Jack Brown, a property owner west of the Johnson Ranch, spoke in favor of the request and said that everybody was satisfied with the proposal. A long discussion was held and then a motion was made to defer the item to the December 18, 1984, meeting. The motion passed by a vote of 7 ayes, 2 noes and 2 absent.