Laserfiche WebLink
Memo to the Planning Commission <br />Apri125, 1995 <br />----------------------------------------------------- <br />Page 4 <br />change exists because of either special reasons or a change • <br />in conditions. <br />4. Whether the rezoning is designed to correct an improper <br />situation or would result merely in the granting of special <br />privileges. <br />5. How can the surrounding areas be protected to establish a <br />compatible land use between the two uses. <br />6. Is the proposed concept plan adequate for the proposed site and <br />what design elements could/should be made part of the project to <br />eliminate impacts on adjacent land uses. <br />7. Have times and conditions changed enough to warrant a change <br />in the use and zoning. <br />In order to adequately assess the change of land use and zoning for the <br />subject property, one needs to step back and ask a few "comprehensive" <br />questions. <br />1. How far north along Highway 169 should commercial extend? • <br />2. Should the City, through comprehensive planning efforts, guide <br />this type of commercial to other areas of the City? <br />3. Can a transportation system be designed to serve this <br />development without impacting the residential areas? <br />4. Would this rezoning be in conflict with the goals and policies of <br />the comprehensive plan? (Refer to Attachment H). <br />5. Does the City have an adequate inventory of available and <br />future commercial opportunities without this rezoning? <br />Concept Plan for PUD <br />As mentioned earlier in this report, the concept plan is supposed to illustrate <br />how the development can "fit" within a given area without causing undue <br />hardship upon adjacent land uses and infrastructure. Staff's cursory review <br />of the concept plans, as they relate to the PUD zoning, would include the <br />fallowing comments: <br />• <br />s:planning:pc:lua95-4 <br />