Laserfiche WebLink
Item 06A <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />options 1, 2, 3, and 4 discussed above. The developer then presents a concept plan to the <br />Planning Commission and City Council. Typically, the developer will ask for everything they <br />want (maximum density, minimal setbacks and parking reductions). Commissioners and <br />Councilmembers will provide feedback, and the developer revises their plans accordingly. <br />During the concept plan stage, there has not been a lot of feedback provided to developers, <br />which is a signal to the Developer to submit a formal application for everything they want (e.g <br />lots of deviations from City Code requirements). <br />It is Staff's opinion that the Commission/Council is over -relying on PUD's and the flexibility it <br />provides, when the problem is the City Code itself. For example, when there are frequent <br />Variances approved to deviate from a specific code requirement (e.g. driveway setback), it's a <br />sign that the code may be the problem. If PUD's are frequently being approved with higher <br />densities, lesser setbacks, and lesser parking, then should the City Code be amended to allow <br />these by -right? <br />Within the foreseeable future (1-5 years), it is likely that PUD applications will be submitted for <br />several townhome and apartment projects. <br />Analysis: <br />PUD's are divided into; Residential (3+ acres), Commercial/Industrial (5+ acres), and Mixed -Use <br />(4+ acres). Each PUD type has specific requirements such as density bonuses and setbacks, <br />which contradicts the "flexibility" intended by PUD's. Thus, it is the Council's interpretation of <br />the Code that matters (is it a good project?), but still needs to be justified (it is a good project <br />because the reduction in setbacks "here" allows for preservation natural features "there"). <br />The purpose and intent of PUD's are (paraphrased):4 <br />1. Coordination of development as opposed to parcel by parcel development; <br />Note: The City has verbally agreed to reduce the minimum Residential PUD project <br />size, from 3 acres to 1 acre.5 6 <br />2. Flexibility of site design and architecture, to conserve land and open space; <br />Note: A number of projects have been approved with reduced landscaping, and <br />building materials.' Within the Boulevard corridor, a minimum of 50% of every <br />wall must be stone, masonry, glass, or comparable/superior material. This can <br />be subjective.8 <br />"Usable Open Space" is intended for active or passive recreation. In practice, <br />everywhere grass and trees can grow is open space (reduced at Gray Stone <br />Flats9). Should there be a minimum sized "active" recreation area? <br />n City Code §160.315 (Purpose and Intent) <br />5 Long Lake Cove concept plan, Planning Commission, Aug 3, 2022. <br />e Simons concept plan, City Council, Aug 9, 2021. <br />The Villas of Mounds View (landscaping), Gray Stone Flats (landscaping) <br />$ Caribou Cabin PUD Amendment; cement board siding (superior material) in place of masonry. <br />9 Gray Stone Flats was reduced from 625sf open space p/unit to 461 sf p/unit. <br />i nu rviuunus view visiun <br />A Thriving Desirable Community <br />