Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Councilmember Menth introduced the following resolution and moved for its adoption: <br /> <br />RESOLUTION #20-266 <br /> <br />RESOLUTION CONFIRMING LAND USE DIRECTION RELATED TO REMAINING <br />TH <br />LAND IN RIVENWICK 4 ADDITION <br /> <br />RECITALS. <br /> <br /> <br />1.Lennar, the “Applicant” has requested that the City consider modifying their direction for <br />the Rivenwick Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow additional residential guidance. <br /> <br /> <br />2.The original Rivenwick Planned Unit Development (PUD) was proposed as a retail and <br />residential hybrid, with 70% residential and 30% retail. <br /> <br /> <br />3.The City has twice revised the PUD standards to include 75% residential and most recently, <br />80% residential for the Suite Living Project. <br /> <br /> <br />4.Lennar has requested the City consider approximately 93% residential and 7% <br />retail/commercial. <br /> <br /> <br />5.The Planning Commission considered the request on November 5, 2020 for an informal <br />review and unanimously recommending retaining the existing guidance based on the <br />following findings: <br /> <br /> <br />a.Staff has heard from retailers that visibility along Highway 10 is key to a successful <br />retail pro-forma. This land is directly adjacent to Highway 10 and has great <br />visibility. The City's Economic Development Department reviewed the viability of <br />the site as-is (guided retail/commercial) and feels it is a strong site for <br />retail/commercial. <br /> <br />b.Housing units along Highway 10 require sound studies and based on nearby <br />housing, will require a sound wall along Highway 10. With recent instruction to <br />improve the image of Highway 10, Staff does not feel a sound wall would meet that <br />goal. Additionally, after the units are built, the City is liable for any additional noise <br />or impacts from the Highway to residential units. The City would prefer to not take <br />on that liability and potential future cost (unless constructed by the Developer at <br />Developer Cost today). The City prefers to enhance the vision and corridor of <br />Highway 10 and does not favor the aesthetics of noise walls in this location. <br /> <br />c.Residents continue to request additional retail and commercial in the City. The City <br />has previously amended the plan to allow additional residential, thereby reducing <br />the amount of planned retail in the community. Although this is a relatively small <br />parcel, Staff is concerned about removing additional land guided for <br />retail/commercial, especially land along Highway 10. <br /> <br />d.The Public Works, Engineering, and Public Safety team preferred the previously <br />directed option which included a public through-road, room for ponding, and <br /> <br />