HomeMy WebLinkAboutA005 - minutes of April 15, 1977 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting Noml &MJYUZZJJ�YY_ 4y-�"� nA--4-"
Don and Margaret Stewart request to rezone property located on the south
side of Ken Maril Road, from South Duff Avenue one-half mile east, from
A-1 (Agricultural ) to R-1 Sin le Family Dwelling) :
Frank Johnston, Attorney appearing on behalf of Don and Margaret Stewart,
said that he was quite surprised to receive a letter from the City Clerk
stating that the public hearing had been set for April 19. He stated
that he has had an opportunity to review the staff report on this request
and would have no exception to the report, finding it '-o be quite explicit
and factual , and very neatly lays out the dilemna Mr. and Mrs . Stewart
find themselves in. He commented that he approved al ', of the staff report
except the last line giving staff opinion that Alternative Number 3 be
approved, which states "Recommend the eastern portion of the requested
area be rezoned R-1 with the western portion to be retained at A-1 pend-
ing the Airport study. " He said he would like to speak to the opinion of
the planning office to rezone a portion of the property and leave the
westerly portion A-1. He believed the first question to be asked would
be "What portion? Where is the line drawn?" He added that this request
is for the entire tract to be rezoned, not just a portion, wherever the
line may be drawn. He thought the report points out the inconsistency
of annexing the property to the City of Ames , levying this kind of special
assessment on a "22 acre soybean field", and saying at the same time that
nothing can be done with the property except to farm it. He believed that
recommndation of Alternative Number 3 places another inconsistency in the
problems the Stewarts already have. He said that if this were adopted we
would then have the westerly area of the property, upon which the special
assessment has been levied zoned A-1; it is still a 232 acre field serviced
by sanitary sewer and cannot be developed for residential purposes when it
is the area where the utilities are most readily available. This would
leave the easterly portion, where the utilities are least available and
upon which there is no special assessment, zoned R-1. He thought this -
would compound the problems that already exist.
Mr. Nichol commented that as the Commission left this request last time,
Mr. Johnston felt that if the property was not rezoned he would have a case
for getting some sort of reduction in the assessment. Mr. Nichol questioned
Mr. Johnston as to whether, with this City Council action, this
alternative has "gone out the window. "
Mr. Johnston stated that he did not know why the City Council did what they
did. He speculated that they looked at this and believed that since the
Commission had tabled the request to an April S meeting, that would give
On S'�_i� l _ = +1C= `.� '+ = —commendation for a meeting of
tnc our,- i on Apr i l r,e stateo tnat 1- �f,� property 1 S n0� rezoned,
anc `" rr,c ins A-1, and if the Council �,Jil! not a'Ke the special assessment
::ff " r,_ is going To sun_ nem.
lc r_ I !eo an _ c J�Utn i��ii St': 2c�
questioned whether or not the undeveloped pr Derty or the north side of
South 15th Street ti%,as participating in the assessment for the paving and
utilities of that particular street.
Mr. Wooldridge stated that the property on the north side of South 16th
Street was participating in the assessment, and added that they have fought
it in court.
Mr. Bledsoe stated that a nearer parallel might be the development of a
farm north of town where the water tower now stands . He said that sewer
and water extensions were placed in there and the assessment was fought
through the courts , in which time the property values probably tripled.
He commented that even though the owners continued to farm the property,
it has been subdivided since that time. He believed that we are looking
at a long range project on this . He stated that he did not agree with
the recommendation of the staff and felt the Commission should delay the
zoning until we get the report from the airport. He believed the study
is going to present a picture of the continuation or development of our
airport and that we are going to have to have some restrictions in that
area as to residential development, at least letting the people know
under what circumstances they can develop the properties .
MOTION (Shaughnessy, Nichol ) That we turn down the request from
A-1 to R-1 at this time until we
hear from the Airport study.
Mrs. Shank questioned why this request is for R-1 zoning rather than another
residential designation, possibly R-2. She said that she was concerned with
any kind of development of this area because of the blind hill on U. S. 69
at the intersection of Ken Maril Road, where residents of this area would
gain access to a north route into the City.
Don Stewart interjected that in the 31 years he has lived in the area of
this intersection, he has never seen an accident on this particular corner.
Mrs. Cholvin stated that if we leave this as agricultural , and if City
Council goes along with it, it will give Mr. Johnston the opportunity to
ask that the assessment be removed, and move from there. She commented
that the only thing that might put this in error is the fact that the
Commission is tabling the request until the airport study comes out. She
believed that, perhaps, the Commission should simply deny the request and
then after the study is available the Commission may change its mind about
the zoning for the area.
Mr. Lex stated that the sewer and water lines are in there anticipating
urban development and yet we are in a position where we are refusing to
w•e rmii U-I pan o_'.'e l umer . which is ref = --` ve of the sewer and wale
foci l i ti es. he slated that ne would sU:' t continui ng the l and 1 n .r.-1
zoning pending conclusion of the airpo! study, along with the possibility
CT a TemporaryabateiTe"i, of the
Ge!o t 1 zJiIC S 1i sE al rpor-. CO: Y . i SUCYI .lip tha study
is commieted. he thought that maybe, if the study shows the airport to
remain where it is, other zones might be more appropriate for that area
that is within the city than residential . l,
Mr. Lex did not believe that the court would support urban assessments
against agricultural land such as this.
Mrs . Shank stated that she believed the City got itself into a bind on this
because of the Teagarden sewage problem and they took the 200 feet to the
south because they did not want to stop in The middle of the road for the
corporate limit line. She added that she gathered the feeling of the Com-
mission was that we do not feel this is appropriate for urban development
at this time in an R-1 category.
VOTING AYE: Shaughnessy, Nichol , Lex, Sh-=nk, Riis , Cholvin, Bledsoe.
VOTING NAY: None.
Whereupon motion carried unanimously, 7-0.