Laserfiche WebLink
<br />2. The Community's expenditures for new or additional services required by the proposed <br />land use will be recovered if the proposal goes forward. <br /> <br />Staff is of the opinion that the proposed land use change will not increase the City's expenditures <br />compared to the current land use designation. The subject property is currently within the <br />MUSA. <br /> <br />3. Environmentally sensitive resources should be known, as per section 9.21.01 of the city <br />code "development shall be so regulated as to minimize risk of environmental damage to <br />these areas. " <br /> <br />There is significant tree cover on the site, a portion of which will be permanently preserved. <br />There are no other known environmentally sensitive resources on the site. <br /> <br />4. The potential of the parcel containing a greenway corridor or open space area should be <br />reviewed and if present, appropriate preservation strategies shall be employed. <br /> <br />Not applicable. <br /> <br />5. Sewer and water capacity is adequate to service the proposed development. <br /> <br />Sewer and water have been extended down Ebony Street to service this property, as well as <br />adjacent properties. <br /> <br />6. The type of density transition that will be utilized as part of the land use shall be <br />identified and approved by the City Council. <br /> <br />< <br /> <br />Density transition is discussed in the preliminary plat case. The submitted plans meet City Code <br />requirements on the eastern property line, but no transitioning is required on the southern <br />property line because that lot is currently vacant. <br /> <br />7. No urban development, other than cluster subdivisions as allowed by Section 9.20.11 of <br />City Code, will be considered north of Trott Brook until the completion of the <br />Comprehensive Plan Update. <br /> <br />The proposed development is south of Trott Brook. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Geisler stated staff originally recommended approval of the request for <br />Comprehensive Plan Amendment, based on staffs interpretation of the criteria listed in the <br />Interim Policy, and the appropriateness of using twinhomes as a buffer between existing <br />businesses and single-family homes. The Planning Commission considered the request for <br />Comprehensive Plan Amendment at their September 7, 2006 meeting and recommended denial, <br />due to the lack of a compelling reason to amend the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Geisler explained the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, if approved, would be <br />followed up with a rezoning of the property from B-2 Business to Planned Unit Development <br /> <br />City Council / September 26, 2006 <br />Page 27 of 38 <br /> <br />P47 <br />