Laserfiche WebLink
Presentation <br />Community Development Director Gladhill presented the staff report stating the purpose of this <br />case is to consider a recommendation on a Zoning Amendment for R-1 Residential (MUSA) to <br />Planned Unit Development. The Planning Commission has reviewed this project on multiple <br />occasions. The current proposal has been modified by the Developer in order to address comments <br />received by the Public, Planning Commission, and City Council. Key issues at that time included, <br />but were not limited to the following. <br />1. Density Transitioning <br />2. Reliability/Consistency of the Comprehensive Plan <br />Community Development Director Gladhill explained the original concept has undergone Sketch <br />Plan Review with the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission outlined a number of <br />concerns indicated in the attached minutes from June 13. The City then held a public workshop on <br />August 3, 2017. A follow up workshop was scheduled to be held on Thursday, October 12. <br />Community Development Director Gladhill reported the original proposal was classified as a <br />medium density residential development (4-7 units per acre). This area is guided as low density <br />residential (2-4 units per acre) in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The original proposal would have <br />required a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a Zoning Amendment. There were subsequent <br />revised concepts prepared and reviewed. <br />Community Development Director Gladhill indicated the current proposal has been modified in <br />an attempt to remain in the low density residential category. This is the fifth revised concept <br />prepared by the Developer. The gross density is 3.69 units per acre. However, the City (and <br />Metropolitan Council) calculate Net Density, which would subtract wetlands from the net <br />buildable area. Staff has requested this calculation, as the net density appears to be close to the <br />maximum density allowed within the low density residential classification. Finally, the proposal <br />still requires a Zoning Amendment to Planned Unit Development (PUD). While the density of the <br />current concept is within the range of the Comprehensive Plan (planning/visionary document), the <br />actual proposed lot sizes and lot widths are deficient of the minimums required by the Zoning <br />Code (official controls/implementation tool) for the R-1 Residential (MUSA) District. Said Zoning <br />District does allow density up to four (4) units per acre with the use of a PUD. <br />Community Development Director Gladhill reported the City has significant discretion in review <br />of this project. Since the project requires a Zoning Amendment, the City is not obligated to approve <br />and the Developer must demonstrate a compelling reason to approve the change. This results in a <br />higher standard of review compared to projects that meet all minimum standards of their respective <br />zoning district. Finally, since the concept has changed significantly from the original proposal <br />when the current set of public comments were received, Staff has removed these comments from <br />the agenda packet and is re -setting the public hearing and public comment period. <br />Citizen Innut <br />Planning Commission/October 12, 2017 <br />Page 5of15 <br />