Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kirsten Valentine questions deed covenant required after March rezone
Summary
A resident, Kirsten Valentine, told the commission she and neighbors were asked to record a restrictive covenant after a March rezone and said the sample language reads like an advisory about noise and smells; she said recording could cost about $2,000 and asked what happens if a property owner does not file.
Kirsten Valentine addressed the commission during public comment to raise concerns about a rezone approved in March that, she said, included a condition requiring property owners to record a restrictive covenant or deed addendum. Valentine said the notice she and neighbors received uses language she described as advisory—warning of noise and smells from nearby industrial uses—rather than wording that would strictly limit use, and she asked why only some properties must record such an addendum.
"We don't really understand why there's an addendum required for our properties if all of the other residential properties in the area do not require the same," Valentine said. She said she consulted an attorney and was told recording the covenant could negatively affect future property transactions and that the recording cost could be approximately $2,000.
The mayor and city manager responded that the commission added the condition to protect existing industrial uses and to ensure disclosures carry over at sale. City Manager (S5) said staff provided example language and could walk property owners through filing but cannot give legal advice; he encouraged owners to contact staff (Esther) and consult public records to reach other affected owners. The commission invited Valentine to follow up with staff for clarification and any written comments.
