PC minutes 11/14/05

ITEM NO. 16:           RS-1 TO RM-D; 3.04 ACRES; EAST SIDE OF HASKELL AVENUE, SOUTH OF E. 26TH STREET (PGP)

 

Z-09-61-05:  A request to rezone a tract of land approximately 3.04 acres from RS-1 (Single-Family Residence District) to RM-D (Duplex-Residential District).  The property is generally described as being located on the east side of Haskell Avenue, south of E. 26th Street [2620 Haskell Avenue].  Submitted by Larry Wedman for Thorvald and Elaine Holmes, property owners of record. 

 

STAFF PRESENTATION

Paul Patterson introduced the item and described the surrounding land uses.  He indicated that Staff was recommending approval of rezoning 3.04 acres from the RS-1 District to the lesser change of RS-2 (Single-family Residential) District based on the Lesser Change Table and forwarding the application to the City Commission with a recommendation for approval to RS-2 based on the findings of fact found in the body of the staff report.

 

Comm. Krebs asked what the minimum lot size was in RM-D.  Mr. Patterson indicated it was 7,000 square feet, the same size as required in the RS-2 District.

 

 

APPLICANT PRESENTATION

Thor Holmes, the owner of the property was present.  The applicant was unable to attend due to the fact his son was in the hospital.  Mr. Holmes noted that the proposed development would remove a curb cut from Haskell Avenue.  He indicated that the proposed rezoning to permit townhome development was compatible with surrounding land use.  He noted that there was RM-D property adjacent to the northeast corner of this site.

 

Comm. Erickson asked staff if rezoning to an alternative PRD-2 designation would include a density limit.  Staff indicated the commission could recommend a limitation on the number of units.

 

Comm. Burress asked about the current traffic load on 26th Street.  Mr. Patterson indicated that single-family homes typically generate 10 trips per day.  A traffic impact study is not required with a rezoning application and staff does not have any specific information about traffic counts in this area.  Comm. Burress indicated that theoretically the proposal would increase traffic by one-sixth based on the size of the area.  He wondered what the increased impact would be to local streets in the area.

 

 

PUBLIC HEARING

Jerry Schinze, 2512 Allison, said there were many duplexes in the neighborhood and most were in disrepair.  Parking in the area is limited and residents in many of the duplexes park in yards and over the sidewalks.  The neighborhood is a bypass for 23rd Street and the local streets carry a lot of cut-through traffic.  It is difficult to get out onto Haskell now.  He does not want more duplexes and doesn’t think there is a need for more since there were 37 duplexes for rent in tonight’s newspaper.

 

Debbie Brown, 1104 E. 26th Street, bought her property and thought the entire area was supposed to be for single-family homes.  If she wanted to live by rentals and short-term residents, she would have bought a home somewhere else.  Haskell carries a lot of traffic.  Allison and Ponderosa are used for cut-through traffic.  With single-family development, there will be better property maintenance.  She also had concerns about drainage issues with more development and more pavement.

 

Cathy Reid, 1004 E. 26th Street, lives in the second house east of Haskell.  She said there is a duplex next door with significant parking issues.  26th Street carries a lot of traffic from 25th, Natalie and Allison and the neighborhood suffers from the speed of traffic and the cut-through traffic.  She wanted to keep the neighborhood family-oriented.

 

Susan Harjo, 1013 E. 26th Street, said she was opposed to duplex development because of the traffic.  There is a significant amount of school traffic that accesses Haskell at 27th Street to the south.  This traffic makes it even more difficult to get out onto Haskell at 26th Street.

 

Earl Stafford, 1012 E. 26th Street, owns the only house that faces Ryan Court (the proposed access to the new development).  He indicated a year ago the City took down the street sign and required him to be addressed off of 26th Street.  He was concerned about all the traffic from the new development coming past his home and said the traffic in the area was already dangerous.

 

Mike Broadwell, 1009 E. 26th Street, said he was opposed to the duplex development.  He said the residents took pride in the ownership of their homes on the block.

 

Marcella Krones, 1008 E. 26th Street, was opposed to the rezoning.  She was concerned about flooding in the backyard and the impact of more development on the drainage in the area.  She was also concerned about the parking that is permitted on both sides of the streets in the neighborhood which restricts the traffic flow.  There is a duplex in the area that has six cars.  The neighborhood does not need the extra traffic or drainage issues from the development.

 

Janett Phelon, 1105 E. 26th Street, was opposed to the proposal because of the increase in traffic and safety concerns.  Residents have to walk in the street because of all the cars that block the sidewalks when they are parked double-deep in the driveways. 

 

Jerry Schinze added that there were sanitary sewer and water pressure issues in the area.

 

 

 

 

APPLICANT CLOSING COMMENTS

Mr. Holmes indicated he had no concerns with his neighbors and did not want to cause conflict.  He indicated that he and his wife were moving and wondered what they would do in his place?

 

STAFF CLOSING COMMENTS

Mr. Patterson indicated that with average trip generation rates, there would be about 200 new trips per day with the proposed RM-D zoning.  Staff recommended that the property be rezoned to RS-2 which would result in approximately 100 additional trips per day.  He reminded the commission that the applicant, Mr. Wedman, had provided a letter explaining his rationale for requesting duplexes along with a concept plan of how the area would be developed.

 

COMMISSION DISCUSSION

Comm. Burress indicated there were two major issues:  traffic and home ownership.  He asked staff if the commission could place a covenant on the development to require owner occupancy.  Staff indicated that the City could not enforce private covenants.  Ms. Finger noted that was a tool proposed in the new development code, but it was not available now.

 

Comm. Krebs indicated that it sounded like staff’s recommendation to RS-2 took care of the residents’ concerns expressed tonight.

 

Comm. Haase expressed concern about a previous opinion from legal counsel regarding use of the Lesser Change Table without the applicant’s agreement.  Ms. Finger indicated that reference was related to use of the Lesser Change Table across categories (from commercial to residential) as opposed to this situation where the recommendation was to rezone to another residential category.  Ms. Finger indicated the commission could defer action until the December meeting; however the Planning Commission just recommends action, so the applicant still has the opportunity to discuss the request at the City Commission level.

 

Comm. Riordan noted that this was similar to the Greentree duplex rezoning on the west side of the City where property owners had made investments based on expectations for single-family development within the neighborhood.  If the applicant wishes, he can request that the item be returned to the Planning Commission for more hearing when he can be present.

 

Comm. Harris indicated the issues was duplex housing type.  It is important to have affordable housing options, but this neighborhood already has enough duplex development.

 

 

ACTION TAKEN

Motioned by Comm. Harris, seconded by Comm. Krebs to recommend approval of rezoning 3.04 acres from the RS-1 District to the lesser change of RS-2 (Single-family Residential) District based on the Lesser Change Table and forward the application to the City Commission with a recommendation for approval to RS-2 based on the findings of fact found in the body of the staff report.

 

Comm. Burress indicated that at some point we will need to embrace rowhouses to address affordable housing.  He asked staff to point out where existing duplexes were located in the neighborhood.

 

Comm. Erickson commented that we shouldn’t have all of the affordable housing stock in one area of the community.

 

          Motion carried unanimously, 9-0.

 

The commission agreed by unanimous consent to extend the meeting to 10:30 PM.