Agenda Packets - 2006/07/24 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Integra Report July 24, 2006 Page 4 The requested rezoning to R-3, Medium density residential, would not necessarily be out of character for the County Road 10 corridor and would not necessarily be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, which anticipated a mix of housing and commercial / office development in this area. The proposed development that would be permitted via the requested rezoning would increase the market values of the subject area by a factor of ten—from $460,000 to $4,750,000. While enhanced market value is desirable, the City needs to determine if the potential density allowed would be too intensive for the subject area, which is primarily lower density residential. The applicant feel this type of housing is in demand and would be a positive complement to the City’s housing stock. Some residents have asked that the City not accept the first redevelopment proposal presented but rather wait and see if the Vikings stadium is approved for Anoka County in which case the combination of a stadium and proximity of Medtronic could magnify the demand for developable land, specifically along the County Road 10 corridor. Based on the comments provided at the meetings, it appears that the residents’ underlying concern is that (1) the development is not what was originally intended when the area was guided as a mixed use PUD and that (2) approval would eliminate the possibility of a comprehensive, block-wide project. Only one resident spoke in favor of the project, a person residing across County Road 10 in the City of Spring Lake Park. Council Worksession At the Council’s Worksession on July 17, 2006, the council members discussed the project and reviewed the developer’s color rendering of the proposed building front-elevation. The rendering was of a four unit building, with each unit displaying unique design and character. The developer indicated a willingness to put additional design work into the facility if it were allowed to move forward. The Council also discussed the possibility of an alternative land use, that being senior assisted living. While the Mayor felt such a land use would be preferable to the townhomes, he remained opposed to any development which broke up the integrity of the overall PUD area, echoing the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission. The other two council members in attendance believed the townhome project had merit and directed staff to draft an ordinance to effectuate the rezoning. Given the absence of consensus, staff has drafted a resolution to deny the rezoning consistent with the Planning Commission’s findings and an ordinance to approve the rezoning. Summary The Planning Commission, on a 6 to 1 vote, adopted a resolution which recommends denial of the rezoning request, finding that the developer had not brought forward a compelling redevelopment plan and that the project was not what was originally intended for this area. The Commission further recommended to the City Council (unanimously) that the Council authorize a study of this area to determine the highest and best land use if the townhome project is rejected. If the City Council believes an alternative land use would be preferable (senior assisted living or offices, for example,) the rezoning request should be denied.