Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />JUNE 11, 2020 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />2 <br />The City Planner stated that staff is asked for a recommendation of approval for this section of <br />the zoning ordinance. She explained that a PUD is a helpful tool in the zoning code to allow for <br />development/redevelopment and provide flexibility to standards. <br /> <br />Bill Weber stated that the City has a planned unit development zoning classification, but the <br />current process is very cumbersome. He stated that this amendment would allow flexibility <br />through a PUD. He stated that there will be guidelines from the underlying zoning districts <br />along with guidelines related to other zoning elements (signage, parking, etc.). He stated that the <br />PUD allows negotiation rather than strict application of existing regulations. He stated that the <br />City could negotiate for features and benefits that otherwise could not be obtained through the <br />typical zoning process. He stated that if a site has the PUD overlay district applied to it and <br />redevelopment is requested in the future, the City would review the original terms of approval <br />and complete a rezoning to remove the PUD overlay. He noted that there is no minimum project <br />size proposed. He explained that through negotiation, the developer could receive variances to <br />things such as setbacks without needing a variance and a developer could also request a density <br />bonus. He noted that in return the City could request open space or other design benefits in <br />return. He stated that the PUD overlay should result in a better-quality design or additional open <br />space in return for the flexibility in regulations. He stated that this tool would most likely be <br />used in the Rice Creek corridor for development/redevelopment and mixed-use development. <br /> <br />Commissioner Buesing asked for examples of community benefit that could be provided, such as <br />open space. <br /> <br />Mr. Weber stated that is something that can be negotiated with the developer that could not <br />legally be required through typical development. <br /> <br />Chair Schwalbach asked what would happen to properties that already have PUDs if this <br />amendment is approved. <br /> <br />Mr. Weber explained that existing PUDs would continue as approved. He stated that if changes <br />were desired in the future for those properties, they would come in under the new ordinance <br />regulations. <br /> <br />Kwapick introduced the following motion: <br /> <br />RECOMMENDING THE APPROVAL OF THE FINAL DRAFT OF THE PLANNED <br />UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. <br /> <br /> The foregoing motion was duly seconded by Westadt. <br /> Ayes (4). Nays (0). Motion passed. <br /> <br /> <br />