2010-06-02_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, June 02, 2010 Page 11 Mr. Paschke concurred, noting that rezoning did not automatically provide access 508 rights onto a public street; and without any proposal on the table, it was difficult to 509 predict future needs or requests, and regardless of how the property was zoned, 510 it didn’t impact the access issue, without any such request going through the 511 public application process based on the PUD currently on the property and/or 512 creation of future zoning district standards. Mr. Paschke further noted that the 513 existing parking lot was required for Har Mar Mall to meet their parking 514 requirements, and in order for those requirements to go away, some other use 515 would need to go on the site, with consideration for such approval or denial going 516 before the Planning Commission and/or City Council. 517 Commissioner Cook observed that adjacent residents did not want additional 518 buildings in that area, whatever tool was used, but appeared to not be opposed 519 to the parking lot. 520 Commissioner Boerigter observed that there were lots of neighbors who didn’t 521 want specific uses adjacent to their properties; however, he noted that this didn’t 522 necessarily mean that such a use was predicted, and didn’t convince him that the 523 Commission should exclude future redevelopment of the site. 524 Mr. Paschke advised that, even if the zoning were changed to some designation 525 other than Community Business, it didn’t guarantee that some other use may go 526 on the site, potentially even residential on those southern properties, which may 527 be palatable to adjacent residents. Mr. Paschke advised that residential use is 528 identified as an appropriate land use designation within a Regional Business 529 district. Mr. Paschke advised that, under the current PUD, there were two (2) 530 specific agreements in place conditioning any redevelopment done on site, and 531 that those existing agreements would not go away, with the PUD superseding 532 zoning code. 533 Commissioner Gottfried noted the intended logic of the Comprehensive Plan 534 Update and Rezoning process to eliminate dependence on a patchwork, PUD 535 approach to land use by applying more consistent and equitable rules city-wide. 536 Commissioner Gottfried noted Commissioner Boerigter’s comments as to 537 whether the intent of this discussion was to retain the status quo providing 538 confidence to adjacent residential properties that the existing use, as it had over 539 the last twenty (20) years, would continue, or whether a Comprehensive Plan 540 Amendment was indicated to zone the property something other than Community 541 Business. 542 Chair Doherty opined that the conflict was that this issue was not unique but 543 similar to every other development project brought before the Commission in 544 non-property owners trying to control development of actual property owners. 545 Chair Doherty concurred with Commissioner Boerigter’s point that the entire area 546 was a shopping center, and attempting to say it couldn’t be developed was 547 attempting to infringe on the rights of property owners if they were abiding by 548 existing rules and regulations placed upon parcels by the City. 549 Commissioner Boerigter questioned whether it was prudent to attempt to dictate 550 whether this small portion of a larger shopping center designated area should be 551 restricted, by recommending Comprehensive Plan Amendment by super majority 552 vote, and what that actual recommended amendment would be. Commissioner 553 Boerigter noted the current use was as a parking lot as a part of Har Mar Mall 554 and to continue to designate it R-1 seemed irrational. Commissioner Boerigter 555 suggested it may be more prudent to address the use as part of the Community 556 Business definition and guarantees that a buffer zone remained as part of new 557 design standards; and questioned if there were other areas with similar issues for 558 adjacent residential properties and potential future redevelopment concerns. 559 Commissioner Boerigter, however, expressed his concerns and lack of support of 560 proposed design standards. Commissioner Boerigter was not supportive of 561