#21 - Kramer Lake Overlook - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

2 DOCSOPEN\LA515\117\949553.v2-4/26/24 serve with public utilities. Required utility connections and alignments create a need for broad coordination amongst current and future property owners in the area; and 4. Feedback was provided by the City to the Applicant relating to the flexibility that would be required to be sought through eventual variances. For example, the proposed number of twin home units will exceed the maximum permitted by the City’s shoreland planned unit development ordinance, even when the density bonuses are applied. The proposed twin homes also do not meet minimum setbacks required by the City’s shoreland planned unit development ordinance, which provides for flexibility. In addition, a majority of the twin home lots do not comply with the 30 percent impervious surface requirement in the City’s Shoreland District. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT based on the above findings of fact, the City Council does hereby deny the Applicant’s Request for an amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The City Council’s denial of the Request is for the following reasons: 1. That the Request is to allow a development in 2020-2030 which is 10 years prior to the year 2030, which is when the Comprehensive Plan allows for the Property to be developed. 2. The reason for the Property not being able to be developed until at least 2030 is because the Applicant will need to ask for flexibility with respect to the City’s shoreland overlay ordinance either through variances. Even though the City has provided the Applicant with these concerns, the Applicant has not provided information as to how these concerns will be addressed. 3. The Property is difficult to serve with public utilities and will require broad coordination amongst current and future property owners in the area, most of which are not prepared to develop at this time. Furthermore, the City does not wish to create a situation where the Property is served by City utilities but the property that it surrounds is not. The Applicant also has not indicated how the utility extension and required Hudson Boulevard improvements will be addressed. 4. It is not in the best interest of the City to amend its Comprehensive Plan that would allow for a development that will not be able to meet the requirements of the City’s Shoreland Overlay ordinance and variances or a planned unit development will not be able to provide the necessary flexibilities.