Laserfiche WebLink
#06-3249 CMP Amendment <br /> November 15,2006 . <br /> Page 3 ' <br /> Heiilpel Properties Proposal. In June 2006 Hempel Properties proposed a iiiedical office . <br /> and retail strip center for ihe site, requesting a fiirther aniendment of the CMP to remove <br /> the condition that one of the buildiiigs liad to be a ph�macy/conveiuence store. Although <br /> the Plaiuiing Conuiiission reconuiieilcied approval of such a chasige, the City Couiicil after <br /> a nuinber of nieetings aiid iizuch discussion voted on September 25, 2006 to deny the <br /> requesteci CMP amendment. Heiiipel suUsequently formally withdrew their application. <br /> Current Status. Tliere a.re no current applications for development of Outlot.A. The City <br /> � Council has directed City staff to proceed with a CMP ameiidmeilt that would in effect <br /> "L111C10"the cha.iiges tliat were adopted in 2004. The property owners have been notified via <br /> tlle standard mailed legal iiotice of tlus proposed anlendment, but as of this writing have <br /> not weighed in with staff as to their position on the matter. The City Council has broad <br /> discretion to revise the Compreheiisive Plan as it sees fit after folIowiilg the proper <br /> � notificatioil and public healing process. <br /> R.R-1B Zonin�is I�ZCOnsistent wifli CMP. The City Attorney has iizdicated that because the <br /> curreiit RR-1B zoniiig does not iiiatcll the City's intent for Outlot A nor the proposed <br /> guidiiig, the City should consider rezoiling to a zone that reflects the City's intent. The � <br /> City puiposely has not done so to date, aiid has siiiiply been usiilg the R.R-1B zoning as a <br /> `hold'uig zone' for this and other properties that were re-guided from SFR to something else <br /> (IVIFR, Conuiiercial, etc.) uz past actions. The Coluicil's inteilt for Outlot A appears to <br /> niost closely match the�B-6 district sta.�dards, which allows offices, banks, libraries, and <br /> motels/hotels. The Stonebay uiilbrella developinent agreements require Outlot A to <br /> develop via the PUD process. ' <br /> Staff aiid the City Attorney reconunend that Outlot A be rezoiied to B-6 PUD with <br /> reference to a basic `uildeveloped' stuvey of the property as �lie approved developnieiit <br /> plan. The rezoiung would be shuchued so that aii arriendment of the B-6 PUD zoiung <br /> would be required for any developmeizt plan pro�osed for the site. Til this way, flie B-6 <br /> PUD zoiiing beconies tlie `liolding' zone, and this would allow for the zoning aiid coinp <br /> � plan to be coiisistent as required by State Stat�rte. <br /> Proposed Amendment <br /> Please review the attaclied exhibits, especially the excerpts from the original 2000-2020 <br /> CMP la�iguage that guided the area between Kelley Parkway and Highway 12 for primarily <br /> . office use. The City Council duriiig the Henipel application gave considerable tliottght fo <br /> whether any sigiiifieant level of retail is still �.ppropriate for Ouilot A, and a sense of that <br /> ciiscussion appea�s iiz the Septeiilber 25 Couiicil ininutes attached. <br /> Couiicil's general conclusioii in 2004 was that the magiui�ide aiid types of retail proposed <br /> for Outlot A at ihai tiiiie would liave miiuinal inipact oii Long Lake's ability to move <br /> forward wifili its Downtown Master Plan. The Couiicil today apparently no longer adheres � <br /> to tliat school of thoughfi. . <br />