Agenda - Council - 06/08/2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Case #8: Consider Request for Comprehensive Plan Amendment; Case of Patrick Filzpatrick Assistant Community Developmer~ Director Trudgeon explained the 2001 Comprehensive Plan shows the pmtmrty located at 9I 50 [-}ighway 10 as Low Density Residential. Patrick Fitzpatrick resides on thc sul',jcct property and recently became axvare of the parcel's residential land use designution. Mr. l:itzpatrick does ~ot agree with the residential designation and is requesting a comprehensive plm~ amendment to change the land use designation from Low Density Residential t~ I'laccs to Shop. $tai'£ found maps fi'om 1999 showing the property as residential. Stal't' is unst~rc, why that pm'tieul~r piece of land had changed, but thinks the surrounding neighborhood played a part in that, and the fact that there is currently a residence on the subject property, M~'. Fitzpatrick has ext::,t'essed concern that he did not receive notice about the re- designation. Eta~'l' did send ~qoti,ze to all postal patrons during the process, although Mr. Fitzpatrick would likely still cent{md that he was not fully aware of the changes. A public hearing was held ztt the Planni~g C(~m~.~issJon meeting and the Commission recommended denial el'thc comprehensive plan ~m~endm,~'nt, as well as the rezoning. Assistm~t (',ommu~ity Developn~ent Director Trudgeon advised while it may not be clear what the exact teasel] xw~s ~k)r changit~g ti~e subject property's land use in the Comprehensive Plan, the property has bec~,~ historically re::idential and is located directly on the river. In recent Comprehensiw: l~l~m amendment r~'qu~:,sts, the City Council has indicated a preference for non- commercial uses directly o~ the rix. er~ with the possibility of changing to a commercial use if a desirable plan is brought forward i;y the land owner. The redevelopment of this parcel for a commercial tt$c tn;fy also be const~atincd by its location directly on the river and potential need for expanded access to ltighway 10. He noted Mr. Fitzpatrick is also asking that the City waive the upplication fees Ibr thc Comprel~ensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment. Pat l"itzpatricl<, 9150/lighway 10 NW, stated the property he resides in has been in his family for 35 years. I-lc was not awm'c the City was rezoning it so he did not have a chance to move Forward bct'oro. I-I(. asked to halve staff' send him what would have been sent to him regarding the rezoning, and xvhai ho received w~s ~ newsletter. In the newsletter he cannot tell where his property is. It shows the working rzritical boundary area 1-1/2 miles away from his house. He spoke to a com~ncrcial realtor and developer, and they said mixed use, rather than B-2 would be the most appr~leriatc zoning for the ?roperty, it would allow his residence to stay conforming and have R-2 dcvc:lopment. His tmdorstand[ng is that the property at 9340 Highway 10 was aware of thc ro>',oni~g ~tl~cl cttmc {'orwarct, an{i xvas granted mixed use zoning. He is asking for the same thing. Mayor Gamcc commented a plan gi~,¢s the Council a better opportunity to look at what is being proposed. [lc commented nolificatiort has always seemed to be a problem, but the City does its best to noti I'y 1)cop I.c through the newsletter and notices. Counci lmembcr K urak inqu/red if tl~,~ pt'operty at 9340 had a plan for a nursing home. Assistunt Corn m tm ity Development !)i r(.~ctor Trudgeon responded in the affirmative. C~ty Council/May 25, 2004 Page 16 of 27