PC Minutes
3/26/08 DRAFT
ITEM NO. 13 ANNEXATION OF 154.9 ACRES; NW CORNER N 1800 RD & E 900 RD
(SLD)
A-02-02-08: Annexation
of approximately 154.9 acres, located at the NW corner of N 1800 Road & E
900 Road. Submitted by
Steven Schwada, agent for Stonewall Farms LLC; JDS Kansas LC; Pert LC; Penny J
Tuckel; Axrom LLC; Venture Realty Corporation; Arco Sales Corporation; Venture
Properties Inc; Industrial Square Corp; JDSS Limited Company; Radol LC; Tuckel
Russell L JR; Northland Ventures LC; and Oread LC, property owners of record.
Referred by City Commission on 2-12-08.
Due to the late hour, Chairman
Eichhorn indicated that he would like to limit the public comment on this item
to one half hour after the applicant’s presentation.
STAFF PRESENTATION
Ms.
APPLICANT PRESENTATION
Jane Eldredge, attorney
representing the property owners, identified a fourth option which was approval
of the requested annexation subject to rezoning to an appropriate City
designation. She indicated that the
property owners had made this request at the suggestion of the City
Manager. She asked the Commission to
reaffirm their previous decision on the County industrial rezoning
decision. The annexation would not be
completed until a new rezoning was done.
Ms. Eldredge noted that the request conforms with the existing Chapter 7
of Horizon 2020 and with the annexation policies contained in the plan.
Comm. Harris asked Ms. Eldredge
to explain her difference of opinion with staff regarding consistency with
annexation policies.
Ms. Eldredge said there is no map
in the existing Chapter 7 and Horizon 2020 calls for voluntary
annexations. She referenced the statute
for island annexations. She reiterated
that the proposed land uses are compatible and that there is no need for a
Sector Plan.
Chairman Eichhorn asked staff to
provide more information regarding the annexation policies.
Ms. Day stated that annexation of
property outside of the Urban Growth Area was premature. She referenced a denial several years ago of
an annexation request for property west of K-10 that was located in Service
Area 3 of the UGA. Examples of recent
island annexations have been for specific public uses such as pump stations and
the Wakarusa Water Reclamation Facility.
Comm. Moore asked why the UGA
line was drawn in the middle of the road in this area. He noted that the line is through a section on the south
side of the UGA rather than in the road.
Staff did not know how the
boundary in this area was originally determined.
Comm. Harris asked why
Planning Director Scott McCullough indicated it was an island
annexation, in part due to Farmland Industries, and that the City has grown out
to it. He noted that many policies have
changed in the twenty years since
Ms. Eldredge mentioned that it was developed as a partnership
with DCDI.
Beth Johnson, Lawrence Chamber of Commerce, said that East
Hills was developed through a partnership with the City and County. She
indicated it was an island annexation, and is still an island today. Through the partnership, City services were
extended to serve the business park.
Comm. Finkeldei noted that the staff report says it is
premature to annex land outside of the UGA. Why was the recommendation made to defer
until the Sector Plan is completed? He
asked if the Sector Plan will recommend changing the UGA boundary.
Mr. McCullough said the staff recommendation recognizes the
need to plan first. Currently this
location is not identified for development and staff needs to make
recommendations based on adopted policies and plans. He indicated that staff is willing and
actively pursuing looking at some changes to policy documents. He noted that
staff is on a fast track for completing a sector plan. Staff recognizes that there
is a willing land owner, and a need for industrial development.
Comm. Finkeldei asked if the sector plan would assume
movement of the UGA.
Mr. McCullough replied yes. It will be an honest look at
the growth area. The boundary is up for discussion.
Motion by Comm. Finkeldei, second by Comm. Chaney, to
extend meeting to midnight.
Motion carried 7-1 (Lawson)
PUBLIC COMMENT
Ron Schneider, an attorney representing a number of property owners,
stated that Staff’s recommendation is correct. The appropriate action should be
to deny the application. Development should come after planning. He reiterated
that this property is outside of the UGA.
This community spends a lot of time discussing the meaning of the Urban
Growth Area; if we are going to change it, we need to consider the impacts of
that decision. Services (basic
utilities) are more than a mile away. We
need to consider the cost of other service calls including fire, police and
other enforcement obligations.
Mr. Schneider stated that the applicant is really seeking a
conditional annexation. Zoning seems to be being asked for in advance.
Mr. Schneider summarized statements from the Growth
Management Chapter of Horizon 2020 and noted that the plan was based on the
presumption that annexation should be logical and contiguous and that areas
outside of the UGA should not be annexed.
He stated that East Hills is distinguished from this application because
a public partnership is clearly different from a private development
proposal. He stated that annexing this
property outside of the UGA and with need for significant extension of services
is clearly unprecedented and he encouraged the Planning Commission to deny the
request.
Dave Ross, President of the Scenic Riverway Association, stated that
the request was premature. He stated
that property owners presented a valid protest petition against the rezoning of
this property four years ago with over 50% of the necessary property
owners. That proposal was denied. Following the recent County rezoning request, more
than 86% of necessary property owners filed a valid protest petition. He
suggested that this annexation request was just a way to get around the
Mr. Ross expressed
concerns with the intensity of the requested I-2 zoning. He indicated that the developer has indicated
he cannot use I-1 zoning because he needs to keep his options open. The association has a concern with the unknown
and indicated that is like providing the developer with a blank check. He
reiterated that annexation and zoning before a sector plan is done by the City
is premature and that this request should be denied. He also commented that the
property is within three miles of Lecompton and wondered if there had been any
comments from the City of
Rick Stein, a resident in the area, read the introductory language in
Horizon 2020. He listed key features of
the plan that states the plan promotes development in the UGA of well planned
areas; the plan calls for progression of land uses to prevent abrupt changes;
and that the UGA identified the limits for the planning period. Mr. Stein stated the need to plan for the area
with a sector plan, adjust the UGA, look at infrastructure and look at what it
will cost the City and County to serve this area.
Marguerite Ermeling, a resident in the area, stated the request is premature
since there is an open rezoning request for the same property. She indicated that the applicant knows what
the users are, but the community members don’t. She asked whether the community should grow to
the northwest when the growth rate has slowed and we are planning to grow south
with the decision to locate the new WWRF to the south. She read policy statements from the Growth
Management chapter of Horizon 2020 and recommended denial based on time frame. She
also stated that residents in the area have offered to meet to discuss proposed
uses and reiterated the need for design standards for industrial development.
She indicated she agreed the area had great potential, but stated that it
should be planned before decisions were made.
Beth Johnson, Lawrence Chamber of Commerce, indicated that a local user
has already expressed interest in this
site. She has also heard from
Ron Schneider asked the Chair to note that multiple people were here for
this item but had to leave due to the late hour.
Bill Kelinhoffer, resident, said that he has
lived in the nearby bluffs for 15 years.
He would not have moved here if he had known the are would develop as
proposed. He said he was surprised to
find out he might have industrial as a neighbor and that he looks right at the
ridge on this property.
CLOSING COMMENTS
Ms. Eldredge stated that Horizon 2020 is a policy plan. The strategies in Chapter 7 identifies the
need to increase jobs and provide more employment locations. The Commission needs to look to the
Industrial Chapter’s direction on annexation.
The site planning and zoning processes provide the tools for quality
development, but we need the means to get the end user. She stated that rural infrastructure can
support some interim users and she directed the commission to the memo from the
Planning Director indicating that infrastructure cost issues are items the City
Commission will consider in their decision-making process.
Ms. Day noted that Chapter 7 limits development to
designated locations on the Future Land Use Map.
Chairman Eichhorn indicated the annexation does not change
the pending zoning of the property.
Ms. Day noted the property would need to be rezoned to a
city designation and that there is not a complete development package before
the commission at this time.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION
AND ACTION
Chairman Eichhorn asked about the concerns from Rural Water
District No. 6 and what that limitation might mean for this property.
Ms. Eldredge indicated there are existing facilities on the
ground. She noted that there is
sufficient water supply to support a warehouse use.
Chairman Eichhorn noted that the proposed Sector Plan is on
fast track. He asked Ms. Eldredge to
comment on the proposed schedule and potential to defer action until the plan
is completed.
Ms. Eldredge indicated we seem to have some difficulty
getting a revised Chapter 7. Past
experience has shown that it will take a lot of time to move through the
process. In the past Sector Plans have
been initiated on an agenda with input and direction from the Governing Bodies.
She also noted that Staff has initiated
the plan, without a public hearing.
Comm. Finkeldei asked Staff if industrial uses were to be
approved at these locations, would we prefer them to be built to city of county
standards.
Ms. Day indicated the preference would be to build to city
standards.
Comm. Finkeldei said that he understood Staff’s position,
but he had already voted, through the previous County rezoning, to support
industrial uses at this location. From
his perspective, it would be better to annex the property and have it develop
to City standards. He pointed out the
delays with The Exchange and the additional time it took to adopt the Revised
Southern Development Plan. From his
perspective, the Planning Commission has already taken a 7-2 vote to support
industrial development at this location.
He said that he supports the Sector Plan going forward, but cannot
support deferring this annexation until that planning effort is completed.
Comm. Jennings said that 50 years ago the West Lawrence
Turnpike interchange was new. The
Hallmark Plant was built and we have seen a lot of good development
follow. He doesn’t see the difference
with this next Turnpike exit. If the
opportunity years ago had been lost, he wondered where we would be today. He noted that, as a community, we couldn’t
move fast enough on the American Eagle proposal and now there are 600 jobs in
Comm. Harris commented that this location was different
than The Exchange and the issues addressed in the Revised Southern Development
Plan. Planning around medium density
residential is easier than for uses around industrial development. She noted that the Northwest Plan shows low
density residential development and people have relied on that plan. Those property owners should be included in
the planning process for this area. She
said that she agreed this particular location should not be low density
residential.
Chairman Eichhorn stated that he did not believe the
community would lose this location for development and he was confident that
Planning Staff could move the plan through the process in a timely manner.
Comm. Jennings said that neighbors in the area shouldn’t
expect a specific plan for the property until uses are identified. The type of uses will affect the ultimate
development of the property.
Comm. Hird restated the options before the commission –
approve, defer or deny.
Planning Director McCullough reminded the commission that
their action was to make a recommendation to the City Commission.
Comm. Hird said that he was weighing whether annexing the
property now offended the planning process and whether there was a reason to
make an exception. With deference to
Staff, he noted that
Comm. Lawson asked Comm. Finkeldei about formulating a
potential motion and suggested it should indicate that the City Commission
should take a look at cost issues.
Planning Director McCullough indicated that the Sector Plan
process allows public input on the surrounding uses and to weigh in on how much
of the area is appropriate for industrial uses.
The process will identify the broader issues that affect community
growth.
Comm. Hird asked if that input could occur during a City
zoning request.
Mr. McCullough indicated that we cannot plan in a vacuum,
it must be context sensitive planning.
Comm. Hird stated he was in favor of moving the request
forward and noted it was still not a foregone conclusion. There was still more opportunity for input
regarding the annexation at both the City and
Comm. Lawson asked whether Comm. Hird was supportive of a
Sector Plan effort at all.
Comm. Hird responded that he was in favor of a dual effort.
Comm. Lawson noted that his only concern with the Sector
Plan was that it was one more opportunity for delay and it is important that we
move ahead with creating additional industrial base for the community.
Chairman Eichhorn asked whether the City Commission would
take public comment on the annexation request.
Mr. McCullough indicated they would. He stated that Staff was in favor of moving
forward and had proposed a very aggressive timeline. He was concerned about comments he heard that
the planning process is a hurdle to development.
Comm. Harris indicated she believed the comments were based
on past experience with planning efforts.
She made a motion to defer the annexation request until consideration of
a Sector Plan, based on the findings in the staff report. Chairman Eichhorn seconded the motion, noting
he supported industrial development in this area but thought it was important
to plan the area first.
Motion failed 2-6 (Harris, Eichhorn in favor; Chaney,
Finkeldei, Hird,
Comm. Finkeldei motioned to recommend to the City
Commission that the annexation be approved based on several Industrial
Development strategies outlined in Horizon 2020, Chapter 7 which encourages job
growth, and because Chapter 4 contemplates growth outside of the UGA when it
states that the plan does not seek to limit land for industrial
development. He stated that this
property presented a unique opportunity.
Comm. Chaney seconded the motion.
Comm. Harris stated that she would not support the motion
because the request is not consistent with Horizon 2020 based on the findings
in the staff report.
Comm. Chaney stated that the request meets the criteria for
future industrial and is one of the best sites for this development.
Motion carried 6-2 (Chaney, Finkeldei, Hird,
Comm. Finkeldei motioned to initiate the Sector Plan and
Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the K-10 & Farmer’s Turnpike Sector Plan. Comm. Hird seconded the motion.
Motion carried unanimously, 8-0.
Meeting was adjourned at 12:25 a.m.