Laserfiche WebLink
#06-3201 875 Wayzata Boulevard <br /> May 8,2006 _ <br /> Page 8 <br /> D. Are There Compelling Re�sons to Amend the CMP? <br /> Iii considering this application, staff would offer the following questions to be answered to assist <br /> in deterinining whether the proposed amendment should be approved: <br /> 1. Is the property currently gttided in a ma.iuier tllat allows the owner some reasonable use <br /> of the propei�ty? <br /> 2. Does the unique location of the property suggest cei�aiii types of uses may be more <br /> appro�riate than others? . <br /> 3. Would re-guiding the propei�ty tend to promote some specific goal of the City in terms of <br /> lalzd use? <br /> 4. , Given that the areas recently re-guided for higher density housing have not yet <br /> developed, is it premahue to consider additional area,s for lugher density? Would it be <br /> more appropriate to wait until those areas have developed, then consider whether <br /> additional such areas are warranted? . <br /> 5. Siinilarly, if in the future the areas to the north in Long Lake are redeveloped at a higher � <br /> density, would that be a nlore appropriate time to consider higher densiiy at this site? <br /> 6. Can tlie visual and activity impacts associated with the Luban density proposed, be <br /> initigated sufficiently to result in no negative impacts? <br /> Staff Recommendation � <br /> Staff would note that tlus request, while niuch less iiitense than the 36 unit proposal made by the <br /> previous owner in 2004, still may be out of character with the sunoiuiding iieighborhood, and <br /> may have unpacts that caiuiot be sufficiently mitigated. Additionally, a strong basis for <br /> a.mending the CMP may be lacking. Consider the following: <br /> ♦ The basic characteristics used to establish the areas recently re-guided luglier density <br /> residential use are not present at this site. Primarily, the site is not near a coiiunercial <br /> area that can provide the urbali services, neaiby shopping, public transportation, <br /> walkability, etc. tliat were compelliiig reasons for the recent re-guidings near downtowil <br /> Loilg Lake. <br /> ♦ Iiisertion of higher density housing into tlie defined Rural Area for a property that the <br /> owner iinds difficult to develop, does not necessarily proiiiote or advance the City's <br /> housing goals of providing life-cycle housing where appropriate urban services caii Ue <br /> provided. <br />