2010-09-29_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, September 29, 2010 Page 3 Paschke advised that the parcels had been guided under the City’s 100 Comprehensive Plan since the 1980’s or earlier as HDR, with surrounding 101 properties having a designation of HDR or MDR; and advised that the Planning 102 Division did not see a compelling reason to reduce the parcels from high to low 103 density; and recommended that they remain HDR. 104 In a related note, Mr. Paschke advised that the owner of the southern-most 105 subject parcel (3253) was currently in the process of selling the parcel for 106 redevelopment for multi-family housing, based on the existing land use 107 designation as HDR; and referenced a letter from the developer of the property at 108 3253 Old Highway 8 for the record, attached hereto and made a part thereof. 109 Discussion among staff and Commissioners included whether the parcels had 110 been analyzed for MDR (Medium Density Residential) designation rather than 111 HDR, given the apparent local opposition and a way to compromise, with Mr. 112 Paschke advising that it could be a consideration, but had not been the City 113 Council’s directive to staff at this time; clarification for 5-12 units per acre for 114 MDR and 12-plus units per acre for HDR; and summarizing the developer’s intent 115 for the parcels for thirty-seven (37) independently-owned units with underground 116 parking and other site improvements; along with staff clarifying that the parcels 117 had been guided and marketed as HDR for many years, as previously indicated. 118 Further discussion included staff advising that staff was not aware of any pending 119 sale and/or redevelopment of the 3261 subject parcel; and at the request of 120 Commissioner Wozniak, Mr. Paschke provided staff’s rationale for their 121 recommendation to retain the parcels with HDR guidance, other than their 122 apparent proximity to major roadways. 123 Mr. Paschke responded that the location to major arterials was certainly one 124 consideration, as well as staff’s analysis of existing roadways and traffic, and the 125 capacity of the road design to adequately support current and additional traffic 126 and vehicle movements at those intersections; and given other medium and high 127 density developments adjacent to these properties, a designation guiding to HDR 128 seemed appropriate. 129 Further discussion included traffic turning movements, with staff noting that any 130 redevelopment in that area, as with other development, would require a traffic 131 study, but without a proposal before staff, there was no way to address or 132 condition development until specifics were available. 133 Property Owners 134 John Rehnquist, Trustee for the John Hens Trust, 3253 Old Highway 8 135 Mr. Rehnquist provided a detailed history of this property and adjacent 136 properties, with the owner deceasing in 2005 and his subsequent responsibility 137 as the Estate’s Trustee. Mr. Rehnquist reviewed difficulties with the property 138 following construction of the adjacent townhomes on the south side and their 139 encroachment across the 3253 property lines and his subsequent negotiations 140 and settlement with the townhome ‘s homeowner association management over 141 several years in finding resolution to the encroachment and their significant 142 drainage issues onto the 3253 property, due to the failure of the townhome 143 contractor to install drainage tiling to prevent those problems. Mr. Rehnquist 144 advised that those problems were identified in approximately 2003 when Mr. 145 Hens was still alive, but in declining health, and had been inherited by the heirs 146 of the property and him as Trustee. Mr. Rehnquist advised that the resolution 147 had been for the estate to provide easements to address the townhome’s three 148 (3) encroachments across property lines; allowing him to finally list and market 149 the property for multi-family development. 150 Mr. Rehnquist noted that, during that extensive listing period, he had received no 151 serious interest or offers from anyone for replacement of the blighted single- 152