Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezone topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
St. John Council denies rezone for Grove development, cites parking, landscaping and design concerns
Summary
The Town Council voted 3-0 on Feb. 12 to deny Ordinance 18-54, a proposed planned-unit development rezone for the Grove, saying the project as proposed lacked required parking, perimeter landscaping and adequate design protections for surrounding properties.
Vice President Christian Jorgensen moved and the Town Council voted 3-0 on Feb. 12 to deny Ordinance 18-54, a proposed planned-unit development (PUD) rezoning for the Grove development.
The motion to deny came after Jorgensen said the proposal “will be detrimental to the property value surrounding the areas, will impair the use or enjoyment of surrounding properties, and won't have a beneficial effect.” He detailed concerns about insufficient parking, landscaping, utility areas, and failure to preserve natural features such as streams, wetlands and woodlands.
Jorgensen told the council the proposed PUD “does not contain the required parking spaces, landscaping, utility areas necessary for creating and sustaining a desirable and stable environment.” He also said the development as presented would “impose an undue burden on public services, such as police and fire protection, schools, parks, and libraries.”
After the motion and a second, the council voted to deny the ordinance. The council did not adopt any amendments as part of the vote; the motion was to deny consideration of the ordinance in its entirety.
In discussion before and after the vote, Jorgensen offered changes that he said could make the project more acceptable to the council, including prohibiting duplexes, making all lots single-family residential at 80-by-140 feet, and completing the extension of Klein Avenue within the subdivision’s design. He prefaced those suggestions by saying they were his recommendations after reviewing the plan and made no promises about future outcomes if the developer revised the plan.
Town Attorney Joe clarified procedural questions during the exchange about the effect of a denial, and the council recorded the vote as 3 to 0 to deny Ordinance 18-54.
The council did not provide a detailed timeline for when, or whether, the developer would return with revisions. No formal waivers or conditional approvals were adopted during the meeting.
