Laserfiche WebLink
Page 7 <br /> <br /> <br />• Concrete vs. Bituminous Sidewalk – Per LEC 105.12.1060(f) a traditional sidewalk is to <br />be constructed along the roadway. The applicant is proposing to construct an 8-foot wide <br />bituminous sidewalk along the roadway in addition to the existing trail <br />requirements/standards. The reason for this request is for a contiguous trail system. Since <br />the applicant is proposing the HOA maintain the sidewalk and trails, staff find this <br />request reasonable. <br />• 30% vs 40% Impervious – Per LEC 105.12.1060(e) the maximum impervious surface per <br />lot is 30%. The applicant is proposing a blanket approval of 40% impervious surface per <br />lot. The reason behind this is due to unique lot shapes and the amenities that the residents <br />expect. Across the entire development site, impervious surface will be ~19%. Staff <br />findthis request reasonable. <br /> <br />RECOMMENDED FINDINGS: <br />OP PUD Review Criteria. When evaluating a PUD proposal, the Planning Commission and <br />City Council must find an OP PUD meets the criteria contained in Article 17 (Sec. 105.12.1070) <br />and meet the minimum requirements for an OP PUD. Staff find that the proposed development <br />appears consistent with the following criteria for approval: <br />(a) The proposed development is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the <br />comprehensive plan. <br />(b) All prerequisites for an open space PUD as outlined in LEC 105.12.1030 are met. <br />(c) All open space PUD design standards (as outlined in LEC 105.12.1050) and all open <br />space development standards (as outlined in LEC 105.12.1060) are met; or if deviations <br />are proposed, that all such deviations are supported because they achieve the following <br />three goals: <br />(1) The deviations allow for higher quality building and site design that will enhance <br />aesthetics of the site; <br />(2) The deviations help to create a more unified environment within the project <br />boundaries by ensuring one or more of the following: architectural compatibility of <br />all structures, efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation, enhanced landscaping <br />and site features, and/or efficient use of utilities; and <br />(3) The overall design provides appropriate solutions to eliminate adverse impacts that <br />proposed deviations may impose on surrounding lands. <br />(d) If the proposed PUD involves construction over two or more phases, the applicant has <br />demonstrated that each phase is capable of being a stand-alone development independent <br />of other phases. <br />Recommended Findings for Preliminary Plat. Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary <br />Plat based on the following findings: <br />1. That the Preliminary OP PUD Plan would be consistent with the intent of the 2040 Lake <br />Elmo Comprehensive Plan and the 2040 Land Use Map for this area. <br />2. That the preliminary plat generally complies with the City’s Subdivision regulations and <br />does not meet the criteria for denial in Section 103.00.090 (d)(2). <br />3. That the preliminary plat generally complies with the City’s Zoning Code with the <br />exceptions provided for in the OP PUD. <br />4. That the preliminary plat generally complies with the City’s design standards.