My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-23-2024 Council Packet
>
City Council Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2024
>
10-23-2024 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/31/2024 11:21:34 AM
Creation date
10/31/2024 11:17:16 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
144
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
3 | P a g e <br /> <br />3. An ingress/egress and drainage easement that exists on the south-western side of the side <br />(Attachment 2) <br /> <br />The easements will not be needed for the current proposal. As part of the replatting and PUD, the <br />applicant is providing the City with a required 6’ drainage and utility easement around the perimeter of <br />the site. <br /> <br />2. Planned Unit Development Overlay Zoning (Rezone) <br />The applicant is seeking to rezone the properties to a PUD Overlay Zoning district to receive relief <br />primarily from the setback standards of the C-2 - Corridor Mixed zoning district. <br /> <br />Because a PUD is a form of rezoning, City Ordinance requires that the application/request be evaluated <br />based on the following: <br />1. Whether the proposed amendment corrects an error in the original text or map <br /> <br />Staff Comment: Not applicable for this proposal. <br /> <br />2. Whether the proposed amendment addresses needs arising from a changing condition, trend, or <br />fact affecting the subject property and surrounding area <br /> <br />Staff Comment: The primary reason for a rezoning request from C-2 – Corridor Mixed to a PUD is to <br />deviate on setback standards, allowing the applicant to maximize the utilization of this property for a <br />permitted use. Although not technically a changing condition, the specific location of the building relative <br />to property lines and other minor nuances of the project could only be caught once the developer had <br />produced a formal site plan after receiving an approval from the Council last year. <br /> <br />3. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with achieving the goals and objectives outlined <br />in the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br />Staff Comment: It is Staff’s opinion that the proposed deviations under the PUD process result in a <br />project that is consistent with the goals and objectives outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed <br />PUD aligns with the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map and is consistent with the <br />goals and objectives of the plan. The property has a Future Land Use Classification as Commercial and <br />the proposed rezoning request would be consistent with the Plan as a PUD overlay of the C-2 – Corridor <br />Mixed, zoning district. <br /> <br />Moreover, the project is specifically in alignment with the City’s stated goals for Rice Street to “maximize <br />hospitality and housing “ and to improve the “function and appearance” of structures along the <br />corridor. Further, the project proposes to redevelop an existing lot and will increase the amount of <br />affordable housing within the city, both of which are specific objectives in the Housing Chapter of the <br />City’s Comprehensive Plan <br /> <br />The applicant also submitted a required narrative with their application addressing the compatibility with <br />the Comprehensive Plan (Attachment 1). <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.