Laserfiche WebLink
• Page 10 <br /> 1 Planned Unit Development zoning district for the Apache Plaza property based on the <br /> 2 following: <br /> 3 <br /> 4 • the July 27, 2000 Preliminary and Final Plans <br /> 5 • the August 1, 2000 Exhibit A, as modified by John Shardlow <br /> 6 • recognizing deferred approvals for the Comprehensive Sign Plan; <br /> 7 the Lighting Plan, which must be consistent with City plans; and the <br /> 8 redevelopment of the'New Market site. <br /> 9 Further, the Planning Commission finds that: <br /> 10 <br /> 11 • the proposed Plan is consistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan; <br /> 12 • Apache Plaza is an underdeveloped commercial property and has been in this <br /> 13 condition for several years during which time the City has seen no significant <br /> 14 interest in redevelopment from developers; <br /> 15 • Apache Plaza property represents the most significant underdeveloped asset in <br /> 16 the City's non-residential tax base; <br /> • recent adjacent development has failed to rekindle the commercial <br /> redevelopment of the Apache Plaza property; <br /> 19 • the project developer, Hillcrest Development, has demonstrated a successful <br /> 20 history of similar redevelopment in nearby areas; <br /> 21 • there are no detrimental impacts to nearby properties; <br /> 22 • the proposed project will be of significance to the City through its planned <br /> 23 improvements to the building exterior, interior, landscaping, storm water quality <br /> 24 treatment, and through general revitalization of a long underused property; and <br /> 25 • the proposed project represents. reasonable and viable high and low use of the <br /> 26 property and that City abandonment of the proposed plan at this time would <br /> 27 send a negative message to other potential developers. <br /> 28 A few additional questions and comments were made: <br /> 29 <br /> 30 Hanson asked if we change zoning now, will that zoning be forever. Bergstrom <br /> 31 answered yes, unless the proposed project failed. At that point, the zoning would <br /> 32 return to what it is now. Hanson also wondered if residential for that site is ruled out. <br /> Bergstrom responded it is ruled out for the Apache building itself. Stille said he is still <br /> 40. hopeful that the mixed uses would include residential. <br />