T-zone ordinance still on hold

PALMER -- The proposed transitional zone, or t-zone, a long-standing item of interest for both Palmer officials and landowners recently annexed or facing future annexation to the city, has been once again shelved for the time being.

Council Member Tony Pippel said he thought the t-zone ordinance was nowhere near completion. "I don't think it's perfect, but it's a step in the right direction," he said. Pippel's support of the ordinance derives from his view of it as designating land as "to be determined," in other words, having no set intent at the time of annexation.

The t-zone would provide a new category for annexing land to the city that would indicate that the land had traditionally not been subject to zoning and was either not in use or not in use as single-family residential land at the time of annexation, said a memo from Palmer City Manager Tom Healy to the council. The memo said the ordinance will allow existing land use on a parcel with a t-zone designation to increase, but will not allow changing of that use without a rezone.

Healy described the proposed t-zone document as "a pretty specific ordinance addressing potential for nonconforming property" at Tuesday's Palmer City Council meeting.

However, Healy said he thought the current ordinance wasn't yet comprehensive enough to address all of the needs of the city, and that he would like to see it develop further in the future.

Healy said it would be very difficult to work Pippel's notion of a "to-be-determined" zone into the actual wording of the ordinance, and that zoning is never certain anyway owing to constant rezoning cases. "There's no certainty in any zoning; it can always be changed," Healy said.

Healy recently added a number of amendments to the ordinance reflecting concerns raised at council and planning and zoning meetings over the last few months. Even with these additions, however, the council wasn't entirely sold on the ordinance.

Council Member Steve Carrington noted that even if the t-zone is put on the books immediately, it won't go into effect until Palmer starts annexing more land. For this reason, Carrington suggested that voting on the t-zone ordinance be postponed until a later date.

Council Member Ken Erbey came out in favor of the ordinance.

"Any time that you have annexation, you get a cloud of confusion," he said, adding that a t-zone could help clear up this befuddlement. Erbey said that countless Palmer rezoning cases, including the recent, highly unpopular commercial rezoning of annexed residential land near Brittany Estates, could have been alleviated with a t-zone.

Other council members said they were somewhat less enthusiastic about yet another round of working on the tired old ordinance.

"It took us 18 months to get to this point," said Council Member Brad Hanson. "I think we have to continue to pursue this."

Pippel put it more bluntly. "I'm sick to death of this thing," he said.

Palmer Mayor Jim Cooper voiced a number of concerns about the developing ordinance. He said that rather than becoming more refined and improved over the months, the t-zone proposition has instead become more muddled and confused as time goes on, and that it had strayed from its original purpose.

"This was not meant to be speculative," Cooper said. "This was meant to be for continued use."

Cooper gave a four-pronged plan for reform of city expansion: the rethinking of the city's comprehensive plan, the receipt of input from a University of Washington area study slated for this fall in Palmer, the addition of new zones to Palmer's existing zoning options, and pre-planning for further annexations and growth. Cooper said these four points would need to be in place before Palmer goes into its next annexation cycle.

"The wording of this ordinance hamstrings property owners," Cooper said, adding that he would prefer a greater number of zones to one catchall transitional zone.

Pippel responded by saying he didn't even really consider the t-zone a category with specific demands. "All this is is a holding pattern for the property," he said.

In any case, the consensus at the Tuesday meeting was that the t-zone would require more attention, but not immediately.

"This is just a baby step," said Council Member Kathrine Vanover. "But you have to take baby steps before you take big ones."

The council voted to postpone action on the t-zone ordinance until Oct. 12, when the University of Washington study should be completed.

Contact Daniel Spoth at daniel.spoth@frontiersman.com.