2011 08-16 CCP - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Tuesday, August 9,. 2011 TO: City of Gem Lake; Planning .Commission and City Council Members FROM: Thomas Hansen; Hansen ,Investments;: LLC, regarding: City of Gem Lake; Ordinance No.122; Garden Overlay District; Zoning Request .Application and Interim Use Permit for 18 Acres Dear Gem Lake:Planning Commission Chairperson Kuny, Planning Cornrnission Members, Mayor Uzpen and City Council Members,. Thank you for your efforts in developing the: Garden Overlay District; Ordinance No.122. Attached is the Zoning Request Application and the Interim Use Application together with supportive documents and comments regarding these applications. As noted in my/ourconversations at the July 19, .2011, Gem Lake City Council meeting, this processis intended tobe a "streamlined rezoning" process, since the purpose of the "rezoning" procedure is not to change the underlying property zoning,its final use, or to build upon or change the topographyof the property_ The purposeof the "rezoning" andinterim permitting is to allow an interim use of the property, namely for community gardening, until the property isdeveloped for the use it is zoned for in the Gateway District.:[ think it also important to note, that our 1.8 acres is already being used for the purpose for which we are applying; gardening, Essentially, the "rezoning" and "permitting" will not change anything relative to the current property use. Gem Lake has allowed gardening on another parcel for the past seven years. The same persons who have carefully and responsibly gardened for thepast seven years on that parcel, are also the people who areand will be gardening our 18 acres. That being the case, I am submitting documentation which I believe is reasonably necessary to approve both zoning and interim use of our property. I am also submitting the corresponding fees and escrows: as required in the Garden Overlay Ordinance. recently approved by the Gem Lake City Council under protest. As highlighted in my e-mail of July20, 2011 (a copy is attached), I believe the "rezoning" fees ($4,000 fee, plus $4,000 escrow), and the permit fees (typically $250 for other Interim Use Permits, now $600 for gardening) are extremely unreasonable giventhis particular process and in no logical way correspond to the costs .incurred for the City. My hope is that the City will be sensitive while navigating through present andfuture change and development in Gem Lake. This process and especially its fees feels punitiveto me. 1 also hope for a simple and pragmatic approval process to achieve the regulatory outcome the City of Gem Lake desires which will dispense with any unnecessary costs and excessive regulation. Thank you, Respectfully Submitted, Thomas M. Hansen Chief Manager, Hansen. Investments, LLC