Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />NOVEMBER 12, 2020 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />4 <br />would live in the homes. He stated that the market will bring a certain price for the home and <br />there is nothing a builder or developer can do about that. He explained that price must be <br />divided between the cost of land and the cost of the home. He stated that if the price of the land <br />is higher, there are amenities in the home that cannot be included such as energy efficiencies. He <br />stated that having a lesser cost for the lot would allow them to create more efficient homes with <br />better architectural design and more amenities. He stated that this proposal would help to <br />preserve the resources of land and energy. <br /> <br />Chair Schwalbach referenced the length of the cul-de-sac and asked if there have been any <br />comments from public safety. <br /> <br />The City Engineer replied that the Public Works Director was comfortable with the cul-de-sac <br />length for plowing and maintenance but noted that public safety would still review that element. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kwapick asked if this would be the last time the Commission would review this <br />request or whether the Commission would review the request again in the future. <br /> <br />The Community Development Director explained that this would go before the Council at its <br />next workshop and if there are no changes the request would go before the Council at a regular <br />meeting for preliminary/final plat approval. She noted that if there were significant changes <br />proposed by the Council, it would come back to the Planning Commission. <br /> <br />Commissioner Kwapick commented that this appears to be a good development for a challenging <br />property. He stated that in previous applications there were comments from neighboring <br />property owners. He stated that this plan appears to be an improvement from past requests and <br />appears to be a good fit for the community. He also recognized that the job of the Commission is <br />to adhere to the City ordinances and while he likes the plan and hears the comments from the <br />developer, he is unsure of what his recommendation would be as a member of the Commission. <br /> <br />Chair Schwalbach asked if staff could read the public comments received prior to the meeting. <br /> <br />The Community Development Director commented that both of the comments received by staff <br />were related to stormwater and wetlands, to ensure that the submit addressed any potential <br />drainage issues. She commented that this is a unique and challenging property and staff believes <br />that this would be the highest and best use that fits within the desired density for the site. She <br />stated that this would be similar to a conservation development, with more narrow widths at the <br />street and more land in the back. She stated that staff believes that this design would fit within <br />the character of the neighborhood and the overall community. She stated that the variances for <br />the cul-de-sac length and lot widths are necessary in order to have a buildable piece of land on <br />this challenging parcel. <br /> <br />Chair Schwalbach referenced the minimum density per acre rule and asked staff to provide <br />details on that calculation.