12/17/1973 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

James Hosey, architect, noted the length of time his rezoning request had been before the Council and wondered how much longer before action would be taken. He felt action -- authorizing the proposed study by a private consultant would be unilateral action by this Council inasmuch the General Plan was adopted also by other governmental agencies. He called attention to his inventory of lands zoned for commercial uses and challenged the Council to show other areas suitable.for regional commercial uses. He said his client has offered to donate to the public considerable acreage for recreational use, and would pro- vide adequate access to the River. He cited statistics to answer concerns with regard to use of the auto versus public transportation and said commercial use in this area would provide a service, to those needing regional services - people driving from outlying areas without public transportation facilities. ' He concluded by saying that he felt it unjust and unfair to declare a moratorium to provide time for a study in view of the many studies on hand. William Loy, 2683 Elinor Street, commented that the General Plan was drafted under condi- ..tions different than those now existing - when there was plenty of gasoline and a car for everyone. He said extreme care should be exercised, through the moratorium and a good marketing study, to determine the best use for the area. Robert Moulton, attorney representing owners of 42 acres within the study area on which annexation request is pending, called the moratorium poor public policy in view of the comprehensive plan's designation of the Goodpasture area for commercial use and since that Plan was adopted only two years ago. He said the public should havetthe,right to .- depend upon guidelines adopted, and not have plans and development delayed when they do follow guidelines. He wondered how a study initially contemplated to take 18 months could be completed in six months. And hequestion~d whether refinement of the General Plan would follow completion of the study thus extending stay on development in the Goodpasture area for nearly a year. He noted the'possibility of losing the commitment for proposed development because of the delay, meaning not only a loss to the property owners but also to the community. As an alternative, Mr. Moulton suggested the Council consider criteria in the Fasano decision and decide zone changes upon proof of public need. He also suggested amendment to the ordinance, if it is decided to adopt it, to delete the moratorium on annexation; that would allow the Boundary Board consideration at least during the moratorium on zone changes. Or, he suggested, limit the effect of the ordinance to only those applications received after the date of its passage. Mr. Moulton recognized requirements of the community as a whole, at the same time, he said, more delay would lose commitments for further development. He urged action to permit annexa- tion now with zoning to be determined later under Fasano requirements for public need. Ellis Jones, 1030 Coburg Road, wondered why consideration was being given to'change in the 1990 Plan now and who sponsored the proposed study. Manager explained that discussion at this meeting was the result of rezoning and/or annexation application in the Goodpasture Island area and the feeling that the 1990 Plan ~ was not sufficiently definitive r~garding opportunity areas and uses to which they could -- be put to give the Council guidelines it felt it needed in making decisions. The decision to table the Hosey rezoning request reflected that thinking. Staff submitted a suggested resolution which would have declared a moratorium on any rezoning or annexation in the Goodpasture area until needs for that land could be analyzed and to ,define commercial uses suitable for that area as well as for other commercially zoned areas in the community. Council was unwilling to adopt that moratorium because it was felt there should be some effort to define its effect. Therefore, City Attorney was requested to narrow down the effect of the moratorium and perhaps set criteria for those things which should be considered. In view of the estimated 18-month period deemed necessary for the planning study, Attorney felt adoption of a moratorium for that length of time could be challenged and perhaps found unreasonable. The alternative was to go to a private consultant with expertise in economic analyses for answers to the Council's concerns with possible completion of a study within a six-month period. Attorney felt a six-month moratorium with a specific set of goals to be achieved in that time could be given legal support in event of a court challenge. The proposal, therefore, is not to use the six-month period to change the 1990 Plan, but only to develop better general economic information which would allow .Council to determine whether a Plan refinement is needed, or give better guidelines as ,to what is or is not clearly regional in terms of land use. It is not known whether anything will develop from the study to suggest amendment to the 1990 Plan as it affects the Goodpasture Island area. The original resolution was reworked into ordinance form because the action would involve =-.; certain Code items which would be suspended for a period of time. Mayor Anderson in response to some of the concerns expressed at this meeting said'there I would be full public hearing and public participation in any study before it was accepted by the Council. It was not the intent of the present proposal to change the 1990 Plan, it was primarily a refinement process. He added that the Plan in designating commercial uses for the Goodpasture area didn't rule out other opportunities. Many factors other than whether commercial is the best use would be taken into consideration - transportation, relation to areawide responsibilities, etc. Mayor Anderson felt important commitments 3; 2.- 12/17/73 - 7 . --