SARPY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING. July 18, 2017

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "SARPY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING. July 18, 2017"

Colleen Watts
5 years ago
Views:

1 SARPY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING l. CALL MEETING TO ORDER A meeting of the of Sarpy County, Nebraska was convened in open and public session at the call of Chairman Tom Ackley at 7:00 P.M. at the Sarpy County Courthouse in Papillion, Nebraska. Chairman Ackley noted that this meeting is being held in accordance with the Nebraska Open Meetings Act a copy of which is posted on the north wall of the Sarpy County Boardroom. Roll call attendance was taken followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. Present: Jerry Torczon, Michael George, Doug Whitfield, Tom Ackley, Charly Huddleston, Marty Giff, Deanna Korth, and Gayle Malmquist. Absent: Mike Sotak, Jan Davis, Pat Lichter. Notice of the public hearing was given in advance thereto by publication in the Omaha World- Herald dba Bellevue Leader, Papillion Times, Gretna Breeze and Springfield Monitor and The Daily Record of Omaha. Proof of Publication is on file in the Planning Department. Notice of the meeting was simultaneously given to all members of the of Sarpy County, Nebraska. Availability of the agenda was communicated in the published notice and in the notice to members of the of this meeting. Sarpy County staff present: Bruce Fountain, Planning Director, Donna Lynam, Assistant Planning Director, Kelly Jeck, Planning & Zoning Assistant, and Nicole Spitzenberger, Deputy County Attorney. ll. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Minutes from the June 20, 2017 meeting. MOTION: Korth moved, seconded by Giff, to approve the Consent Agenda. Ballot: Ayes Torczon, George, Whitfield, Ackley, Huddleston, Giff, Korth and Malmquist. Nays: None. Absent: Sotak, Davis and Lichter. Motion carried. lll. REGULAR AGENDA 1. PUBLIC HEARING AND RECOMMENDATION: Sarpy County Planning Department requests approval of the New Sarpy County Comprehensive Plan. Bruce Fountain, Planning Director, presented the new Sarpy County Comprehensive Plan developed over the past two years with the consulting team consisting of: JEO, HDR, SB Friedman and Steven Jensen Consulting. Mr. Fountain stated that the Planning Advisory Committee consisting of approximately 40 people, with a good mix of expertise and interests in the community, provided input throughout the process. In order to gain the input of the public, the consulting team conducted focus group meetings with each of the five Sarpy County communities, held one-on-one interviews with key stakeholders in the community, and held two public workshops with over 300 people attending at Papillion-La Vista South High School. One of those workshops was in conjunction with the Platteview Road Corridor Study which helped draw people out to the workshop. In addition, Mr. Fountain said online forums/surveys through MySidewalk and Survey Monkey were utilized to get additional input from the public if they could not make a meeting.

2 Mr. Fountain said part of the reason this Plan has been two years in development is that there were several other studies going on simultaneously that really needed to be completed and implemented into this plan including the Platteview Road Corridor Study, the Southern Ridge Wastewater Treatment Study, the Sarpy County Trails Master Plan, the Transit Feasibility Study, and the new proposed alignment of 180 th Street south of Harrison Street that will curve over to 192 nd Street and tie into an interchange at I-80 to provide a major north-south corridor in the future. Mr. Fountain gave an overview of each of the nine chapters within the New Sarpy County Comprehensive Plan: Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 2: County Facilities & Services Chapter 3: Land Use & Growth Management Chapter 4: Utilities & Infrastructure Chapter 5: Transportation Chapter 6: Environmental Resources & Recreation Chapter 7: Economic Development Chapter 8: Energy Chapter 9: Goals & Implementation Mr. Fountain said there are two appendices within the document and staff is proposing to add a third one to address some of the issues that came up at the last meeting related to the buildthrough subdivisions. The three Appendices within the final document would be: Appendix A: Zoning Relationship to Future Land Use Plan Appendix B: Sarpy County Master Trails Plan Appendix C: Procedures and Criteria for Urban Reserve Zone Boundary Adjustments and Exceptions Mr. Fountain described two additional edits recommended by staff relating to the Land Use Map in Chapter 3 and Appendix A: Land Use Map - minor changes to the land use designations in two areas, a) near the rerouted corridor connection between 180 th Street to 192 nd Street, and b) near the future dam site No. 19. Appendix A (page 236) recommending the removal of IL Light Industrial District under Zoning districts compatible with the Business Park land use. Discussion focused on Chapter 3 and how the Build-Through Overlay Zoning Regulations would work in the Urban Reserve District. Mr. Fountain explained that the purpose of the Urban Reserve Zone is to ensure that sufficient land is set aside in the County to accommodate projected demand for future urban development. The County needs to protect that area from being used up by acreage type developments. Mr. Fountain said in the current Comprehensive Plan there are certain areas that require buildthrough subdivisions, but this plan refines that based on the current sewer study. To ensure that sufficient development density occurs and that proper access and utility easements are provided, development in the Urban Reserve Zone shall follow the Build-Through Overlay Zoning District provisions of the Sarpy County Zoning Regulations. The regulations currently call for a minimum of 40 acres of which 40% of the property could be platted; the other 60% would need to be put into an outlot that would not be further platted or developed until such time as municipal utilities are available. In this way, the majority of the property has been set aside for future higher density development.

3 Mr. Fountain said some of the concerns that came up at the last meeting involved what impact the build-through requirement would have on a farmer who just wants to carve off one lot for an heir or close relative, and if the process would be too onerous and expensive. Mr. Fountain said the development team met to address some of these concerns and developed the proposed Appendix C - Procedures and Criteria for Urban Reserve Boundary Adjustments and Exceptions. This appendix provides criteria for boundary adjustments and exceptions within the Urban Development Zone. Mr. Fountain said the first section, Boundary Adjustment Requests, would allow amendments to the Urban Reserve Zone boundary under certain criteria. For example, if a developer can show that after the proposed grading of a portion of a plat that the property can be served by gravity flow to an existing municipal sanitary sewer line in the Urban Development Zone. Steven Jensen, consultant, said the second section, Exception Requests, lists four criteria that can be used to consider a request for an Exception from the Urban Reserve Zone requirements for a Build Through subdivision plat. The first says that if someone is in the process of platting when the Comprehensive Plan is adopted they are allowed to continue through with their project the way it was permitted under the previous plan. The other two exceptions address the issues that came up at the last meeting that if someone is trying to settle an estate, it would allow that person to follow through with a subdivision to resolve those ownership issues; and, the last exception would allow someone to create a single lot for an immediate family member provided they have followed the County s guidelines for utility and drainage easements as well as roadway access and connections. Two examples of how a build-through subdivision would work on a piece of property in the Urban Reserve District were presented. One example used a 240 acre parcel owned by Mr. Iske, a property owner in Sarpy County that expressed concern about the Build-Through subdivision at the last meeting. Chairman Ackley opened the Public Hearing on this request at 7:56 p.m. Carl Weiss, Pflug Road, questioned if there is any kind of a timeline for the Platteview Road corridor that is proposed south of Springfield and out to the interstate system. Mr. Weiss said there is a lot of farmland along that corridor which is fairly inexpensive to purchase right now and recommended that if the location of the road is set in stone then the County should consider placing an easement along that corridor to prevent development and future expense to the County for that road project. Mr. Fountain said there currently is no timeframe because it is an extremely expensive project and will probably take some state and federal assistance in the future. However, the Platteview Road Corridor study did provide some initial safety areas that need to be improved and Public Works is looking at those intersections first - the one at 108 th Street near the high school, and straightening out the 84 th Street intersection area. Mr. Fountain said the Platteview Road Corridor Study did identify the right-of-way width needed for the future improvements. One of the reasons there is a transportation section in this new Comprehensive Plan is to identifying right-of-way so that when plats are proposed the County can make sure appropriate right-of-ways are protected and the County can get it dedicated as part of a proposed project. Mr. Fountain added that Public Works is looking at the potential adoption of corridor protection plans for Platteview Road and other major arterials throughout the County. Jarel Vinduska, S Hwy 31, representing his family and the Schram Association for a Viable Environment (SAVE), spoke in support of the Conservation Zone of the County, in the hope that the area will be protected.

4 Mr. Vinduska expressed concern about the Urban Reserve Zone. He said in steering committee meetings there was a lot of interest in protecting the farmland. He said the Buffalo Creek Watershed is the best farmland in Sarpy County and he would like the Commission to consider that farming and urban development do not coexist very well. He explained that if higher density lots are allowed on part of a property and no storm water controls are put in place, people will complain about herbicide drift, noise, and other issues related to farming. Mr. Vinduska is also concerned that the build through concept is going to create an implementation nightmare for the Planning Department staff. Mr. Vinduska stated that the County really has no business promoting development, and that it is the job of the cities. In his opinion, the County should not allow property less than 40 acres in size to be subdivided and in that way it is still set aside for build-through development as the cities expand and the sewer is extended. Mr. Vinduska said if the County adopts Appendix C it better clearly define immediate family member, and how far that extends into the family so it is not an implementation nightmare. Mr. Vinduska believes that the only way the County is going to keep some order is to keep the area farmland until the cities build out from the edges. Jim Hougas, 9211 Platteview Road, questioned if this plan would eventually force him to change the zoning on a portion of his land to Urban Reserve Zone. He said right now it looks like the only plan that would affect his property is the plan for the widening of Platteview Road to four lanes. Mr. Fountain replied that Mr. Hougas property is shown as being in the Rural Development Zone which is not a zoning district but rather a growth management plan designation and that does not force a rezoning of a property. If sewers are extended to the area then the land use designation may change from Rural Development Zone to Urban Development Zone, which only means that sewers are now available, but it would still be up to the individual property owner to determine if they want to sell their property for development or not. Jeff Ray, JEO Consulting Group, added that the Rural Development Zone is not envisioned to be sewered, so that area south of Platteview Road at 84 th Street will probably never be in that the Urban Development Zone. However, he noted that it is on the fringe so based on future engineering studies there could be some minor encroachments in that area if a property owner chose to pursue it. Jim Bollacker, S 156 th Street, came to the meeting to ask questions about a recent land sale of a 51 acre parcel south of Buffalo Creek and what the potential density of a development might be. Mr. Fountain said this area falls into the Urban Reserve Zone of the new Plan, but a proposed development would require a build-through subdivision even under today s Comprehensive Plan. Without knowing more details, an approximately 50 acre parcel would need to place about 30 acres into an outlot for future development and about 20 acres can be developed with 3-5 acre lots. Mr. Fountain noted that a proposed plat or a rezoning application would require property owners within 300 feet of the subject property to be notified of a pending public hearing on the proposed applications. For property owners outside of 300 feet of the subject property, staff also posts the property with a sign identifying that there is an upcoming public hearing, and all Planning Commission agendas are posted on the Sarpy County website. Jacob Alishouse, Stewardship Director of Nebraska Land Trust, read a testimony in support of the Environmental Resources and Recreation Element of the draft Sarpy County Comprehensive Plan.

5 With no one else coming forward to speak, Chairman Ackley closed the public hearing at 8:20 p.m. In regard to Mr. Vinduska s comments, Mr. Fountain stated that an entity similar to the Papio Missouri Watershed Partnership has now been established for the area south of the ridge line and it is working with professional engineering consultants on studies to further identify storm water management needs. Eventually criteria will be developed which will adopted into the County s and cities regulations to address stormwater management and other related issues. Steve Jensen clarified that Appendix C is intended to allow the creation of a single additional lot for the settlement of an estate for an immediate family member one time. A definition for that can be provided, but a property owner could not continually divide the property. Mr. Jensen reported that what they have discovered in the City of Omaha is that as the development of that watershed becomes consistent overtime there will be fewer of these requests because the property owners begin to calculate when their property is going to be available for development at a higher density. Mr. Fountain stated that the Planning Department s recommendation is for the approval of the draft of the Comprehensive Plan with the proposed amendments as outline above. Mr. Fountain reminded the Commission that approval of the Comprehensive Plan is a first step, and the development team is working on the Zoning Regulations and Subdivision Regulations that will be developed to help implement the goals of the plan. The proposed Comprehensive Plan received positive comments from the. Torczon congratulated the team on an excellent job done on this document. In his opinion, the plan is comprehensive and will be an excellent guideline that will help manage growth. He noted that as growth occurs in the County the plan can be adjusted as things change if necessary. George said the Urban Reserve Zone discussion was a concern for him, but believes this plan now strikes a nice balance between the property rights of current land owners and the economic issues and higher taxes to the rest of the County that can result if it is not done right. Giff agreed that it is a very good plan that gives a lot of guidance on the more rural parts of the County and gives the County some direction on the work that needs to be done. Whitfield asked for clarification about the conservation easements proposed in the Conservation Zone. Mr. Fountain replied that the easements proposed in this plan are no different than the easements that have been done through the conservation overlay in the zoning regulations today. The easements, identified as outlots on a plat are supposed to identify the areas of a property that are worth preserving, basically set aside not to be developed. It is not the conservation easement as done through the Nebraska Land Trust. Nicole Spitzenberger, Deputy County Attorney stated that conservation easements can be done a couple different ways. The preference would be to have something more substantial, but it does not have to be a full blown land trust easement.

6 In regard to the build-through subdivision in the Urban Reserve Zone Whitfield said he likes the idea of easements for the future sewers and ingress/egress, however, he has a hard time holding 60% of a property in an outlot until the property is served by sewer, not knowing if that will be 5 years, 10 years, 100 years. In his opinion, that is a long time for those land owners not to have the ability to do something with their property when the sewer may never get there. Mr. Fountain said it becomes a policy decision for the County Board to decide whether they want to protect the area for future growth and for how long. Mr. Fountain pointed out that there are currently approximately 74,000 acres in unincorporated Sarpy County. Of that, 10,322 acres are in the Urban Development Zone, which is the area currently served by sewer and can be developed, and there are approximately 20,000 acres in the Urban Reserve Zone. The County needs to plan for the future growth now. Whitfield questioned if the sewer study should somehow be incorporated into this plan by appendix. Mr. Fountain recommended against including the sewer plan as an appendix. He said the sewer plan is referenced throughout the plan, but the sewer study could change quite a bit over the years and he is not certain the County Board would want to amend the Comprehensive Plan every time there is a change. Nicole Spitzenberger, Deputy County Attorney, agreed. Huddleston thanked the staff and team for all the work put into this plan. Mr. Huddleston said he was particularly impressed by the public involvement efforts because it gave everybody an opportunity to provide input and clearly the team has demonstrated that they have listened to people and incorporated their concerns in the document. Ackley said there is continual discussion of working with the five municipalities on growth and economic development, and the Executive Summary in this plan talks about that as well. There are also a couple of separate provisions in the plan that talk about the capital improvement programming (CIP), which comes from tax dollars the County pulls in from throughout the entire county. Mr. Ackley stated that because the entire county pays taxes he would like to see the plan better address how some of the CIP dollars can be reallocated to incorporated areas to achieve some of the growth called for in the plan. While unincorporated Sarpy County is trying to get the sewer infrastructure in the Urban Reserve Zone and it is absolutely necessary if that area is going to grow, there are whole areas in incorporated municipalities that also do not have sewer and they are prime land for industrial development. And unless the County expends some money within these municipalities that growth is just not going to happen. Ackley further noted that this Comprehensive Plan is a planning tool to help establish policies and it will change. But on page 216, 2c., it states that, Sarpy County should not approve a development or subdivision that is inconsistent with the County s adopted Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Ackley suggested that that statement be refined and end a bit differently because absolutely the County should be able to do things that are not in this plan and will do things that are not in the plan and eventually will change the Comprehensive Plan to catch up with it. Ackley said overall it is a good plan and a good balance of what the County is trying to achieve for growth going forward. But, again he noted that tax dollars are collected throughout the County and somehow in the plan for economic development and growth it cannot just be focused on unincorporated Sarpy County. It has to incorporate all municipalities within the County and the CIP certainly needs to reflect that going forward and somehow this Comprehensive Plan needs to help nudge that along as well.

SARPY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING. December 18, 2018

SARPY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING l. CALL MEETING TO ORDER A meeting of the Planning Commission of Sarpy County, Nebraska was convened in open and public session at the call of Chairman