Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 04/08/2004

Home

CASE #: PUBLIC HEARING FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SITE PLAN REVIEW OF RIVENWICK 4TM ADDITION CASE OF TURTLE MOON INC. AND RYLAND HOMES By: Megan Wald, Associate Planner Background: Dave Shulte of Turtle Moon Inc. owns a 32.45 acre parcel zoned Mixed Use Planned' Unit Development (MU-PUD). The property is generally located north of Riverdale Drive and south of U.S. Highway #10. Mr Shulte has a purchase agreement with Ryland Homes to develop 20.91 acres of residential town homes. The preliminary plat and site plan review have been combined into one Staff Review Letter and Case Cover. The following items are enclosed for your review: a) b) c) c) Site location map Preliminary Plat Architectural renderings of the proposed units City Staff Review Letter dated March 5, 2004 Notification: In accordance with State Statute and City Code residents within 700 feet were notified of the preliminary plat. Observations: The intent of the Mixed Use Plmmed Unit Development district is to help create,a development that can provide a variety of housing styles, price ranges, and a combination of uses. The MU- PUD Zoning allows the Plmming Commission and City Council to consider deviations to the strict zoning regulations. The MU-PUD (Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development) district states that at least 70% of the project area is to consist of residential development, the preliminary plat is providing approximately 61% residential uses. The intended use for the subject property has been commercial or retail development for at least the past 10 years. The adoption of the Comprehensive Plan changed the subject properties zoning from commercial to Mi>ced Use. During the rewrite of Chapter 9, staff attempted to draft a MU-PUD ordinance that allowed the property to be developed as it was intended, with a heavy emphasis on a mixture of commercial, retail, and professional services. However, in drafting the new MU-PUD language staff' inadvertently stated that the development had to contain a minimum of.70% residential uses instead of a maximum of 70% residential. It is staff's opinion that the subject property will provide commercial and retail amenities to an established single-family residential neighborhood and to future residents within the area. These pockets of connnercial nodes should be capitalized on instead of imposing additional housing requirements. Staff will bring to the April Planning Commission meeting a proposed an~endment to the current MU-PUD ordinance that reflects the 15