Minutes - Council - 10/24/2017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Community Development Director Gladhill stated that this request would fall under the conditional rezoning request, which is acceptable to the City. He noted that the City Attorney provided input and did not feel that this would be contract rezoning. He stated that the applicant can also provide input on why they would want the conditional rezoning before spending the large amount that will be required to move through the process for this proposed development. Alan Roessler, Paxmar, stated that they have spoken with the Council, Planning Commission, and the neighborhood in previous meetings. He stated that they have significantly changed their proposal throughout this process in attempt to appease all parties. He noted that the current proposal would include 97 units, would not require a Comprehensive Plan amendment, would fit within the R-1 zoning standards and density, would provide a buffer zone and the required buffer zone plantings, and would provide the trail easement for the greenway corridor. He reviewed the concerns that they heard from adjacent residents about the original development proposal and reviewed the related elements that were made to the plan to address those concerns. He stated that there were some comments expressed by residents at the meeting of the Planning Commission expressed that they would like the property to simply develop under R-1. He noted that the properties along the eastern border match the R-1 lot width and therefore the views of those neighbors will be the same regardless. Councilmember Kuzma asked why the zoning amendment is requested prior to the Preliminary Plat. Mr. Roessler replied that the Preliminary Plat is the most expensive part of the preparation process. He stated that they would not want to spend that $200,000 without some assurance that the requested density for the project would be allowed, as that item would be the deciding factor in whether the project would be financially viable. Councilmember Riley stated that staff identified some risks to rezoning prior to the project and asked if there are also tools in place that would appease those concerns. Community Development Director Gladhill confirmed that there are tools in place that require the necessary protection. He noted there will also be an additional agreement recorded through this process to ensure that what is agreed upon is provided. Councilmember Johns asked if the buffer would become City property. She referenced the greenway corridor and noted that it was mentioned that is off this plat and asked for additional details. Community Development Director Gladhill confirmed that the greenway corridor is off this plat but will become a part of the plat during this process. He stated that the City will not own the buffer area. He stated that the depth for R-1 is not met by the eastern boundary lots and wanted to ensure that it is clear that is part of the PUD. He stated that a separate easement would be placed over the buffer, similar to what occurred with the Woodlands development. City Council/October 24, 2017 Page 11 of 16