Developers who want to build a medical office on the northwest corner of the busy 70th Street and Nebraska Parkway intersection tried Monday to convince City Council members it was a good plan despite opposition by city planners.
Robert Otte, the attorney representing the developers, addressed city planners' opposition — primarily that the land should be a residential development, not commercial, and that access to the development should not be allowed off of Nebraska Parkway.
Because of that opposition, planners recommend that the council deny a zoning change, comprehensive plan amendment and use permit that would allow waivers to various setbacks.
Otte said if his clients could have developed the land as residential, they would have.
“We’ve offered this property to any number of developers and builders and quite frankly have not been able to give it away,†he said. “Simply put, housing doesn’t work. If it would have worked we would have done it.â€
People are also reading…
Although the city opposes allowing access from Nebraska Parkway, that issue has already been settled because — as the city learned after developers proposed the medical clinic — the state controls access to what was once a state highway.
After the South Beltway opened, the city took ownership of Nebraska Highway 2 within city limits and renamed it Nebraska Parkway. Because the roadway has been considered an expressway for the past 40 years, city policy doesn’t allow driveway access off it, despite two exceptions.
However, it’s the state’s decision, and after initially denying the request to allow access, developers submitted a second study and Nebraska Department of Transportation officials changed their minds.
Glenbrook LLC wants to build 51,000 square feet of office space for a medical clinic on the triangular-shaped plot of land. Their plans include adding a right turn lane on South 70th Street and adding a deceleration lane from the westbound lanes just west of the 70th Street intersection along Nebraska Parkway.
Developers argue that semitrailer traffic has been reduced since the opening of the South Beltway and that allowing such access is an “innovative solution for a complicated property.â€
Lincoln Transportation and Utilities Director Liz Elliott told the council Monday that crash data for the intersection at 70th Street and Nebraska Parkway is double what it is at similarly busy intersections in Lincoln.
She said the development would add about 100 cars at peak traffic hours.
In addition to the right turn lane on 70th Street on the north side of the intersection, the city also wants the developers to pay to lengthen the left-hand turn lane on 70th Street on the south side of the intersection.Â
The developers asked the council to waive the requirement that they pay to lengthen the left-hand turn lane on the south side, and asked that they require the city to help pay for the right-hand turn lane on the north side of Nebraska Parkway.
The Southfork Neighborhood Association — representing the neighborhood adjacent to the proposed development — supports the plan.
Ann Post, their attorney, said their biggest concern was increased traffic on 69th Street, which is part of their development and a street not maintained by the city.
Developers worked extensively with the Southfork residents and agreed to an extensive set of covenants that include restrictions on various issues such as buffers, landscaping, retail uses and height restrictions.
Residents of other neighborhoods, including those in the Country Meadows Association across Nebraska Parkway, oppose the development, though none of them spoke at Monday’s public hearing.
Otte said their biggest concern is that motorists will make a U-turn at 66th Street to access the clinic, and there are ways to mitigate that.
David Clausen, who represents the developers, said the clinic would add $213,000 in property tax revenue to the city, more than a residential development.
The planning commission voted 5-3 to recommend denial, though only after Commissioner Dick Campbell, who supports the proposal, changed his vote to recommend denial simply to ensure there were enough votes to allow the question to move forward to the City Council.Â
The City Council delayed a vote on the issue until Nov. 18.