PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF AUGUST 9, 2006
PRESENT:
Randy Hagerty, Chairman
Glen Novinger, Jr.
John Witt
Danny McDowell
Doug Kollar
John Buckwalter
Charles Giovannini
Jill McCord, Councilmember
Paul Frazier, Code Administrator
ABSENT:
Dean West
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Hagerty called the meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission in the City Hall Council Chamber to order at 7:00 p.m.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Chairman Hagerty asked for changes to the agenda. Staff Representative Paul Frazier stated at the last minute Joe Hatcher, the proponent for the rezoning on South Baltimore, called his office to report he would not be able to attend the meeting. Due to the absence of Mr. Hatcher, Paul Frazier recommended postponing the public hearing until next month. Chairman Hagerty asked the audience if Mr. Hatcher had a representative present in the room, with no response. Chairman Hagerty asked the Commission if they wished to move on with the public hearing. Mr. Novinger recommended postponing the public hearing until next month. With no further input, Chairman Hagerty called for a motion. Mr. Novinger made a motion to reschedule the public hearing for the rezoning of 320 South Baltimore Street until next months Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Mr. Witt seconded the motion. The motion carried with the following vote: Hagerty, aye; Buckwalter, aye; Novinger, aye; Witt, aye; McDowell, aye; McCord, aye; Giovannini, aye; Kollar, aye; ABSENT: West. Chairman Hagerty declared the agenda amended.
RECOGNITION OF NEW & RETIRING COMMISSION MEMBERS
Chairman Hagerty introduced and welcomed back members John Buckwalter, Danny McDowell, and Charles Giovannini to the Planning & Zoning Commission. He also expressed his thanks to Bill Cundiff and Zel Eaton for their years of service on the Planning and Zoning Commission. The chair stated it would entertain a motion thanking Mr. Cundiff and Mr. Eaton for their service to the commission. Mr. Witt made the motion. Mr. Kollar seconded the motion. With a general consensus, the motion was approved. Chairman Hagerty asked staff to prepare a letter thanking them for their service, listing the names of those who served with them, and asked the commission members to sign the letter at the next monthly meeting.
APPOINTMENT OF NOMINATION COMMITTEE
With the turn over of personnel signifying the start of a new Planning and Zoning year, Chairman Hagerty asked for members to serve on the nomination committee to select a Chairman and Vice Chairman for the upcoming year. Mr. Novinger, Mr. Kollar, and Mr. Giovannini were appointed to serve on the committee and would report their nominations at the next meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairman Hagerty asked for changes to the minutes of May 10, 2006. With no changes, Chairman Hagerty declared the minutes approved as published.
NEW BUSINESS
Public Hearing. Rezoning Request for 701 West LaHarpe Street, from R-1 Single-Family Residential to R3-P Multi-Family Residential Planned. Chairman Hagerty opened the public hearing at 7:07 p.m.
Mr. Frazier handed out a memorandum to the commission members containing additional information the commission members needed to consider when making their decision on the rezoning request.
Mr. Frazier explained the request was from Clear Stream Enterprises, LLC, to rezone property at 701 West LaHarpe Street from R-1 Single-Family Residential to R3-P Multi-Family Residential Planned. Mr. Frazier explained the concept of planned zoning to the commission and audience. Explaining that under planned zoning the developer and/or owner would put together a development plan to be submitted and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Amenities such as site buffering, landscaping, parking and perpetual maintenance of these improvements should be a part of the development. Mr. Frazier stated this request, if passed by the Commission, would allow for twelve/four unit residential complexes located on the south side of the 700 block of West LaHarpe Street. The concept of the development would allow for two entrances onto West LaHarpe Street with multi unit residences arranged along both sides of the private driveways. Off street parking will be constructed at each unit and does meet the zoning code requirements. A detention area will be located in the southwest corner of the development to allow for ample drainage control so not to affect the property to the south. The multi-family units are planned to house students and families, and will not be government subsidized housing units. Mr. Frazier stated to the Commission, if they choose to except the rezoning and send a recommendation on to the City Council, there are several issues that need to be addressed. Is this considered spot zoning? Is there a need for such a development? Will the rezoning injure surrounding property values? Is the zoning change in accordance with the City’s Comprehensive Plan? He also stated that since this development would be a planned development, the Commission could request the developer install a privacy fence to be used for site buffering purposes. Mr. Frazier further stated that the Commission could request an environmental impact study of the proposed development. He explained that an environmental impact study is used to assess property values, traffic management, and the effects of such a development on the neighborhood and city. Mr. Frazier pointed out to the Commission that they need to consider if the rezoning change would set precedence for future rezoning in the area. In closing, Mr. Frazier stated that if the Commission perceives this rezoning as harmonious to the neighborhood, and not a threat to the health, well being and safety of the community, they need to look at this project in a positive manner.
Mr. Witt stated that he had been by the area, and voiced a concern about density issues, since the project was a high density project, and the area to be rezoned is a low density area.
Mr. Frazier stated that his concerns were legitimate however, by using planned zoning, the Commission could require specific open space areas.
Mr. Witt stated he had concerns regarding the traffic, and questioned if LaHarpe Street is a feeder street.
Mr. Frazier stated that LaHarpe Street is an arterial street that extends from the east to west city limits.
Councilmember McCord voiced her concerns about the existing trailer court and that it was grandfather into the zoning area.
Mr. Frazier stated that she was correct and that once the existing trailer court is vacant the area would revert back to R-1 single-family residential zoning.
Chairman Hagerty asked if once the trailer court is vacant the only thing that could be placed in that area would be single-family homes.
Mr. Frazier stated that was correct.
Chairman Hagerty asked if the Commission had any more questions or comments for Mr. Frazier. With no further questions Chairman Hagerty asked for public comments.
Proponent
Mark, Matt and Dan Wine of Clear Stream Enterprises introduced themselves, with Mark Wine addressing the Commission. He thanked the Commission for giving him the opportunity to address them regarding the project. He stated that the property they are requesting to rezone is currently vacant, and it is the intent of Clear Stream Enterprises to produce upscale attractive housing for students and young families in the Kirksville area. He further stated to reinforce comments made by Mr. Frazier regarding spot zoning and the comprehensive plan, he has done legal research and the comprehensive plan is an advisor document. He quoted sections from the Missouri Revised Statutes which states a land plan is a guide and recommendation, rather than an instrument to control land use. Mark Wine went on to state that he had researched spot zoning.
Chairman Hagerty responded that he didn’t feel the Commission disagreed with him in regard to the comprehensive plan land use, but asked why Clear Stream Enterprises chose this particular location for their development.
Mark Wine stated the proximity to the university, the site was attractive and it required minimal surface preparation to accommodate such a development. The site is within two blocks of existing multi-family apartment developments to the east, and the development would be an enhancement to the neighborhood. Mark Wine then passed out concept drawings to the Commission so they could get an idea of what the units might look like. Mark Wine commented that in regard to spot zoning all the cases Clear Stream Enterprises reviewed, they all stated that as long as the core zoning stayed the same it was not classified as spot zoning, and in this case the core zoning would remain residential. He also stated that another positive to the rezoning is that it would be planned, so they would be working hand in glove with the Codes Department and the City Engineer in developing the entire site.
Chairman Hagerty stated that south of the proposed development is all single-family homes, and south of the College Park development is a new subdivision that is also zoned single-family. He asked Mark Wine, why the Commission shouldn’t come to the conclusion that the development taking place in the area be consistent with single-family homes, and what is Mark Wine’s response to the fact that this proposed zoning doesn’t seem to fit in with the direction of the growth of the area.
Mark Wine stated that the upscale development that Clear Stream Enterprises is proposing makes an ideal transition from the small family developments north of LaHarpe Street. The development will not be low cost units, and the investment value will be comparable to the homes on Garrett Drive. The development should enhance the area along LaHarpe Street. As we understand it, this development meets the need for upgraded housing quality in Kirksville. The development is a significant improvement to the area, we feel it will improve property values, and it will bring economic development growth into the community. Clear Stream Enterprises intends on using local sub-contractors, and service provider’s dependant upon the competitiveness of the services offered. Once the project is developed it will provide economic growth to the community due to the fact the people living in the housing units will shop in Kirksville, buy goods and services, eat in restaurants, visit entertainment establishments and so forth. The property taxes currently generate approximately $475.00; once the project is completed the taxes will go up to approximately $25,000.00. Mr. Wine pointed out that in several R-1 single-family zoned areas of Kirksville, R3-P zoning has already been approved, specifically in the area of York Street. Mr. Wine further stated that Clear Stream Enterprises is asking for the same consideration. Mr. Wine spoke about the site buffering, and would like to see natural buffering used such as white pine and/or blue spruce, verses a wooden fence. Attractive plantings will be placed around the entire development. Mr. Wine went on to state that the detention areas would be in the southwest and southeast corners for ample water drainage. The property has a natural slope of about 3 to 3-1/2 percent which is right for minimal velocity drainage, the site shouldn’t be flat, this would allow for water to pool. The design of the property has been created with the consultation of a certified landscape architect out of Kansas City, Missouri, and we have worked together to try to minimize the amount of the run-off area. Lighting fixtures with industrial cutoff fixtures will be installed to luminate roadway and parking areas. Cutoff fixtures have inside lamp deflectors which help minimize unintended lighting. The walkway area lighting will be lamp post and entrance lighting. Apartment management will be handled either by Clear Stream Enterprises or contracted with a local property manager. Landscape, snow removed and yard maintenance will be contracted out. Mark Wine asked Matt Wine to comment on the possible request for an environmental impact study.
Mr. Matt Wine stated that in his past work history he has never come into contact with a request for an environmental study. In his experience such studies are usually for larger commercial developments or projects such as new highways. He further stated that he has rarely come into contract with issues between moving from one form of residential zoning to another. In closing Matt Wine asked the Commission to consider the rezoning.
Mark Wine stated that questions had been asked about how the sanitation would be handled. He stated that Clear Stream Enterprises would work hand in glove with the City Engineer to develop the sanitary hookups to city standards, and upon completion of the project Clear Stream Enterprises would turn them over to the city with the appropriate easements. He further stated in regard to density issues, the proposed developments density is less than the multi-family eight plex on Sheridan Street, and the Board Walk Apartments on Dodson Street. In closing Mark Wine asked the Commission for a favorable recommendation to the City Council for the rezoning of the property located at 701 West LaHarpe Street, from R-1 Single-family Residential to R3-P Multi-Family Residential Planned.
Chairman Hagerty asked the Commission if they had any more questions or comments for Mark Wine.
Mr. Novinger asked Mark Wine if Clear Stream Enterprises had conducted a formal housing survey, and if so what were the results.
Mark Wine stated they did not conduct a formal housing survey, but having grown up in the area, and his son Matt attended Truman State University, they are aware of the need or desire for better housing.
Mr. Novinger voiced a concern over the type of renters that Clear Stream Enterprises would be targeting to fill the units would be students and married couples, but there is no outside play area for the children of the married couples shown on the preliminary development plan. Mr. Novinger voiced his concern of where the children would play, and would they end up wandering onto private property.
Mark Wine stated that was a very good point, and stated it could easily be added.
Chairman Hagerty asked the Commission if they had any further questions for Mark Wine.
Mr. Buckwalter asked Mark Wine if he had had any analysis done of the soil. He further stated that the infiltration system Mark Wine spoke about is lawable and has a great deal of merit, but the City has an entire area of highly plastic clay which is virtually impervious.
Mr. Mark Wine stated that they have not conducted any soil analysis, and that their first goal was to have the rezoning approved.
Mr. Buckwalter asked what the expected occupancy is for each unit.
Mr. Mark Wine stated that each unit will be comprised of four, three bedroom, two bath, living units.
Chairman Hagerty asked the Commission if they had any further questions or comments for Mr. Mark Wine. With no further questions from the Commission Chairman Hagerty opened the floor for discussion.
OPPONENTS:
Mike Morehead – 414 Garrett Drive, stated that his backdoor is seventy feet from the back of the proposed development, and this is one of his majors concerns. He questioned why this development is good for Kirksville. He stated the development plan showed no concern for the neighboring properties, and no recreational area for children living in the proposed development. He continued to state that the area around the proposed rezoning site is currently zoned single-family residential, and he sees no reason for spot zoning. Mr. Morehead voiced his concerns regarding drainage issues, lighting, the noise level, traffic, and fencing around the proposed development.
Steve Baldwin – 710 West LaHarpe Street, stated he lives across from the proposed development. He requested the Commission not pass the rezoning request, and that he agreed with the statements that Mr. Morehead had made. He continued to state that he believes what Kirksville needs is affordable single-family homes, not multi-family units.
Howard Hickman – 2008 South First Street, stated that the west side of his property will be adjacent to the proposed development. He continued to state that he has three main concerns regarding the development project, and each concern by its self would justify denying the rezoning. First of all, the city code requires the Commission consider neighborhood compatibility, and it is clear that the proposed development project is incompatible with the neighborhood. For this reason alone the rezoning request should be denied. Secondly, this project is not conforming with the city’s 2004 Comprehensive Plan. Nonconforming with the city’s Comprehensive Plan is a significant hurdle to overcome when requesting rezoning. He further stated there has been no demonstrated need to vary from the Comprehensive Plan, there has been no demonstrated deficiency in the existing Comprehensive Plan that would suggest there is a reason to deviate from the plan and approve this request. Lastly, Mr. Hickman stated that he believes this is a classic case of spot zoning. He explained that spot zoning is putting a small area in a different zoning than the surrounding area. He continued to state that not all spot zoning is improper, but the Missouri courts and cases break it down as, if the spot zoning is only for the sole benefit of the private owners then it is considered improper spot zoning. If it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and is for the public benefit or welfare than it is considered proper spot zoning. Mr. Hickman stated that it is clear the rezoning request is for the sole benefit of the developer, and there is no demonstrated need or benefit for this type of housing in this area, and therefore he would consider it improper spot zoning and should be denied. Finally, Mr. Hickman stated that the trailer park is considered preexisting nonconforming use, and should not be an issue when considering the rezoning request, and he respectfully requests that the Commission deny the approval of the rezoning request.
Sara Morehead – 414 Garrett Drive, stated she had photos she wanted the Commission to see showing the property. She voiced her concerns as to the close proximity of the proposed development, drainage and lighting issues, and decreasing property values.
Karen Snider – 416 Garrett Drive, voiced her concerns regarding drainage, noise level, and the lack of a recreational area for children. She also stated that she felt there is not a need for the proposed housing development in Kirksville. She stated it would bring an added liability to the Garrett Lake Association.
Robert Funk – 2100 South First Street, voiced concerns regarding drainage. He asked the Commission to do what he feels is best for the City, and not pass the rezoning request.
Eric Snider – 416 Garrett Drive, voiced concerns regarding the noise level, and the lighting. He also stated that he would consider moving outside the city limits if the proposed rezoning was passed.
Sam Nugent – 1916 South First, voiced his concerns regarding the additional children the proposed development would bring to the neighborhood and the lack of a recreational area for them. He also voiced concerns regarding the noise level, and drainage.
Steve Barteau – 410 Garrett Drive, stated that if he had known that an apartment complex was planned for development in his neighborhood, he would not have purchased his home, and would have looked for another location in the city. He also voiced concerns regarding the lack of recreational area for the proposed development, and drainage issues.
Matt Wine responded that he is a former student of Truman State University, and he can personally speak about the need for high quality, well kept housing in the city of Kirksville. He stated that the home that is currently on the property has been advertised for rent, and he received forty-six phone calls in six days from people wanting to rent in this particular area of Kirksville.
Mark Wine responded in regard to the comments on spot zoning, the recreational area, noise level, lighting, and drainage. He stated that what Clear Stream Enterprises is proposing would improve the drainage issues for the residents living south of the development.
David Todd – 22264 Oak Lake Trail, commented that Mark Wine had stated the proposed development would be affordable housing, he asked what the monthly rent would be.
Mark Wine stated he did not wish to comment at this time.
Chairman Hagerty stated that the City had received several phone calls and letters concerning the proposed rezoning.
With no further input, Chairman Hagerty closed the public hearing at 8:43 p.m. Mr. Witt made a motion to reject the rezoning request. Ms. McCord seconded the motion. The motion carried with the following vote: Hagerty, aye; Buckwalter, aye; Novinger, aye; Witt, aye; McDowell, aye; McCord, aye; Giovannini, aye; Kollar, aye; ABSENT: West.
Chairman Hagerty stated that under state statutes for this ruling to be over turned by the Kirksville City Council a 2/3 majority vote would be required by the City Council.
COMMISSION/COUNCIL INPUT
None
ADJOURNMENT
With no further input, Chairman Hagerty adjourned the meeting at 8:46 p.m.
Recording Secretary
Brenda Williams