PC Minutes 7/25/07 DRAFT

ITEM NO. 6:        RS10 & COUNTY A TO RS5; .954 ACRES; 523-543 ROCKLEDGE (MKM)

 

Z-11-28-06: A request to rezone a tract of land approximately .954 acres, from RS10 (Single-Dwelling Residential) to RS5 (Single-Dwelling Residential). The property is located at 523-543 Rockledge. Submitted by Paul Werner Architects, for LC Anuff, property owner of record.

 

STAFF PRESENTATION

Mary Miller presented the item. Ms. Miller went over the following points.

 

·         Property is currently platted with 3 lots. Rezoning to RS5 is being requested to allow the property to be replatted and developed with 5 lots.

·         This Rezoning request was considered by the Planning Commission at their December 20th meeting. The rezoning was requested to allow the property to be replatted and developed with 6 lots and the Commission recommended denial of the rezoning request to RS5.

·         Applicant requested the City Commission to refer the item back to the Planning Commission for consideration of a revised plan.

·         The property was final platted as part of the Country Club Terrace Final Plat; recorded in September of 1935 and has not been developed.

·         Two rezonings have been approved recently for the lots on the northeast end of this block (lots 18-21 of Country Club Terrace Subdivision). These rezonings were from RS10 (Single Dwelling Residential) to RMO (Multi-Dwelling Residential-Office) and RSO (Single-Dwelling Residential-Office) Districts.

 

APPLICANT PRESENTATION

Paul Werner, of Paul Werner Architects, stated that they have tried to reach a compromise since the last hearing and that single-family homes provide better transition. He stated that the proposed number of lots had been reduced to five and that the average lot size was 7,600 square feet. He discussed with staff the option of requesting a zoning of RS7 with a variance for lot width. The applicant agreed to larger side yard setbacks on perimeter. Mr. Werner went on to comment that the 3 curb cuts with shared drives would allow the residents to pull out onto Rockledge rather than backing out and would provide safer access to the street.

 

Jeff Arensberg, of LC Anuff, stated that they are sensitive about the neighbors concerns and want to insure that the project would enhance the neighborhood. He feels it is a well thought out, quality project and that the rezoning would benefit the neighborhood. He is renovating a house located right behind this property so the rezoning was more than just profit. He felt the current zoning was obsolete considering the changes over time that have been developed across the street. He stated the proposal would buffer the larger homes to the west from the commercial uses to the east and would help stabilize the neighborhood.

 

PUBLIC HEARING

John Immel, representing neighbors in the area, expressed opposition to the rezoning project. He said that he found covenants on file that say they cannot have lots less than 6,000 square feet. He stated that these lots had not been developed since 1935 by choice from the land owners.

 

Dan Simons, 444 Country Club Terrace, stated that he would like to see the historical character of the neighborhood kept by only building 3 houses on the lots. He went on to say that the average Rockledge lot width was 115 feet, and the average lot depth was 240 feet. He said that it was a bad decision in 2003 when RO zoning was first granted. 

 

Nathan Kolarik, 535 Rockledge, was opposed to the project because he felt it was too high of density and was concerned about traffic increasing. He did not feel that limiting the amount of curb cuts would do anything for the density. He thought that some of the units would become rental units. He stated that the property had not been developed since 1935 because the previous owner did not want to develop it. He also felt that this project could have a negative impact on the neighboring property value. He did not feel that the design of the housing was compatible with the surrounding area and thought that this rezoning would set a terrible precedence.

 

Dick George, 521 Rockledge, stated he has lived in the neighborhood for 50 years and enjoys the privacy of the large lots. He stated that the neighborhood was established in 1935 with 11 houses on 20 lots which allowed for privacy. He felt that the project would jeopardize his privacy. He stated that in 1968 he split his lot but had to maintain a 75 foot frontage on his lot because all other lots in the subdivision were that way. He was opposed to the rezoning and thought there should be no more than 3 houses on the proposed lots.

 

Commissioner Finkeldei inquired if after the lot split, were the lots at least 6,000 square feet.

 

Mr. George replied, yes, they were over 10,000 square feet.

 

David Carrius, felt that the applicant held off on the project for so long waiting for the new Planning Commissioners to be appointed. He felt the proposed project was inconsistent with the area and said it was not infill, but rather overfill.

 

APPLICANT CLOSING COMMENTS

Mr. Werner, realized it was an emotional issue, and was sincere about listening to concerns. He stated that infill development is difficult. He also stated that new sewer service was being added to Rockledge that other neighbors would benefit from. He went on to say that they are not here to damage the neighbors’ homes and that these new homes will not be rental properties. He said that Dick George’s comments prove the point of it being a great location for single family homes.

 

Mr. Arensberg, did not want to be penalized for RO zoning that happened down the street. He said that Mr. George’s comments were true and that people who have lived next to an empty lot for 50 years would have a hard time accepting the new development but he pointed out that they would be building nice homes with amenities such as sod and a sprinkler system.

 

Commissioner Finkeldei asked Mr. Werner to comment on the 6,000 square foot covenant that was mentioned earlier in public comment.

 

Mr. Werner said that all lots would be built to that size and the plat is still to come.

 

Commissioner Harkins inquired about the history of the RO zoning that was mentioned earlier.

 

Mr. Werner stated he did rezone the lot down the street to RO for an office but he did not recall anyone showing up to protest it. He said that Planning Commission recommended the adjacent lots be zoned to eliminate spot zoning.

 

Commissioner Harkins asked if the covenants affected the office lots. He stated that the turnpike did not exist in the 1930’s, and wondered when the character of Rockledge changed from rural.

 

Mr. Werner stated that the neighborhood character might have changed when the commercial zoning started across the street.

 

Mr. George said that when he first moved to Rockledge in the 50’s the road was gravel. He said that 6th Street and then the Turnpike were built. He said that the City wanted to connect the sewer from the Turnpike to 6th Street. There was no access from the Turnpike to US 40 W so Rockledge was used as an access road to get trucks up the hill. Mr. George also said that he does not mind having a view from his house of the backside of the hotels because there are no balconies and that the motels do not create any unwanted noise.

 

Commissioner Moore asked what kind of classification Rockledge would be.

 

Mr. Rexwinkle stated that Rockledge would be a major collector.

 

COMMISSION DISCUSSION

Student Commissioner Robb thought that the previous minutes from this item indicated consensus for 4 lots.

 

Commissioner Harkins stated that the interpretation of the minutes was incorrect. There was discussion of going from 6 to 4 lots but that discussion was stopped when it was determined that Planning Commission should not change the request.

 

Commissioner Finkeldei said that he voted against the last proposal when it was 6 lots. He said that every time there is an infill development they have changed a vacant lot into something else and there are neighbors that are not happy. He went on to say that he built his own house next to a field that is now being developed. He did not think that neighbors are ever excited about the neighborhood changing. He understood the neighbors wanting the land to remain as 3 lots but he did not feel that they would be marketable.

 

Commissioner Eichhorn had a hard time considering this infill when they are 3 platted lots. He felt that the zoning was being changed because the applicant wanted to do something different than allowed. He would support denial of the rezoning. 

 

Commissioner Harkins said that in 1935 that this was an area of Lawrence remote and nobody anticipated the type of development that would occur. It was created in a time period that does not exist anymore. The neighborhood was changed when a major thoroughfare was built through it. He was comfortable with approving the rezoning because he felt that infill was an important opportunity to develop valuable piece of property.

 

Commissioner Eichhorn stated there were houses on Ohio that were going through something similar right now. He said that areas do change and can keep the original character of the neighborhood.

 

Commissioner Moore said that topography makes it difficult to conceptualize these lots on this property. He had a hard time visualizing those lots on that land and said the lot widths would have been more helpful. He inquired about the landscaping condition on the Staff Report.

 

Ms. Miller said that the landscaping conditions were to maintain streetscape.

 

Commissioner Lawson said that there seem to be more applications involving sprawl on the outside of town and they need to find ways to use the space inside the town. He supported the rezoning request and followed in the same thought process as Commissioner Harkins.

 

ACTION TAKEN

Motioned by Commissioner Harkins, seconded by Commissioner Blaser, to approve the rezoning of approximately .954  acres from RS10 (Single-dwelling Residential) District to RS5 (Single-dwelling Residential) District and forwarding it to the City Commission with a recommendation for approval based on the findings of fact found in the body of the staff report and subject to the following conditions:

 

1.       Staff recommends conditioned zoning with the following conditions:

a.      Development restricted to 5 lots.

b.      Additional setbacks required: 25’ front yard setback and 10’ peripheral side yard setback (southern side of lot 1 and northern side of lot 5).

c.       Building envelopes must be shown on the plat.

d.      Development restricted to 3 curb cuts onto Rockledge Road.

e.      15’ wide street planting yard be provided along Rockledge Road with a planting rate of 3 ornamental or understory trees and 8 shrubs per 100 linear feet. Native grasses, forbs, bushes, and trees should be utilized to minimize maintenance. 1/3 of the plantings shall be evergreen species. 

2.       Recording of a final plat prior to publication of the rezoning ordinance.

 

Motion carried, 4-2-1, with Commissioner Jennings abstaining. Commissioners Harkins, Blaser, Lawson and Moore voted in favor. Commissioners Finkeldei and Eichhorn voted in opposition. Student Commissioner Robb voted in opposition.