Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2016 07 14

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes June 23, 2016 Page 11 of 30 Vasbinder continues. In 1980 when the CTC was developed, there were certain areas zoned commercial and certain areas designated industrial. There is a recorded document that says this. However, the exhibit that was attached to that about which areas are which is nowhere to be found, and not part of the recorded document at the County. We have done title searches. While I will not argue with Robinson that 40 years ago, there was commercial, I am not convinced it was this spot. When we did the Business Center in 1998, we created this northern tier and it was requested by the City that we create these two different zones. We had the commercial zone along Highway 42 and had the industrial zone which was the balance of the property at CTC. When we did Filing 2 in early 2002, it is the property that goes down to Dillon Road, and the majority of that property was industrial. The corner piece that Robinson indicated is at the intersection of 104th and Dillon Road and is the City Service Center. It was a piece within Filing 2 that is commercial. All the rest of the Filings (we are up to Filing 4) are industrial. The PC was gracious enough to approve the rezoning on the parcel we call 2000 Taylor, which is the building currently under construction. That building is about 120,000 SF. I can tell you today that we have two active leases for the whole building. That is what's happening in the CTC. I cannot announce the two tenants, but you will be satisfied with the employment group. What we'd like to do in this particular rezoning is to take the 8 acres which is PCZD-C and create the PCZD-I and use the IDDSG for the development of this property. There are two things that are particular about this. The properties that front 104th Street that we have built have a 54' easement on the west side of 104th Street. It gives us an additional buffer which we use for landscaping and detention ponds. For this particular property at the corner, the easement runs along both the north side and the east side of this property. It essentially negates about 1.5 acre out of the 8 acres to be non -developable. We have more setback which we agreed to in 1998, and it gives us more room to create some landscaping and berms, and provide additional buffering along Highway 42. Since 1998, we have actively tried to market this property as commercial. We see some benefit to that as well since there is a large daytime employment base. Since 1998, we have not had one request or a proposal to build a building to lease to any commercial users. The problem is that it is a daytime employment base and there is no developable land to the north, which the City cemetery and open space. Everything to the east is open space to almost Highway 287 where there is a subdivision. When we built the Lafayette Corporate Campus and the hospital, we faced the same issues about trying to get retail along Highway 287, which has a substantially higher traffic volume. We were never successful. We have a cafe at Lafayette Corporate Campus that we subsidize and have for 10 years. It is a benefit to our tenants. There is retail now happening north of the hospital because there is some residential. We are asking for rezoning. I passed out a conceptual plan of this property that we are working on with an international user. We have not signed a transaction because we can't build this building due to zoning. This user has expressed a desire to be at this location. It is a well-known company which I cannot state. They have expressed a desire to vacate a location in one of the neighboring cities and relocate their operation here. We are coming to you for rezoning because we have active interest on this property. We will still build the building even if the transaction falls through. Over the last 5 or 6 years at the CTC, it is build it and they will come. We continue to have that success based on the services the City provides, the opportunity for housing, the retail in the area, and the attributes we love about the northern part of the City. Commission Questions of Applicant: Hsu says in your letter, you state you do not think the CDDSG are feasible with your intended use. Yet Staff mentions that there are two buildings that do comply with them. Can you speak about why you cannot comply? Vasbinder says the Lockheed building is a two-story office building with very little service area. They have one loading dock for their products. The Pearl Izumi building is an office building. It is their marketing center. We sold that property to them and they built their building. We think it is a great addition to the park. It is not a service building but an office building. Our buildings are