PL PACKET 09252017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 28 , 2017 Page 5 1 Ms. Rothstein stated there has been much interest in this proposal, starting last year and 2 continuing to -date. Staff has received almost 100 emails since the sketch plan phase. 3 Additionally, staff has spoken with many residents and concerned neighbors. A summary of the 4 concerns are as follows: 5 • Concerns over the density and height of the proposal. The most common concern is the 6 opinion that the Comprehensive Plan should not be amended to accommodate this 7 development and that heights should be consistent with those around the site. 8 • Concerns over the loss of affordable housing. People have expressed the need to 9 retain/replace affordable housing on the site. 10 • Concerns over traffic and safety. People have stated the increase in traffic on Stinson 11 Parkway will reduce livability and increase congestion at key intersections. 12 • Concerns regarding views for existing Kensington Terrace residents. People have 13 expressed concern over the reduction in views from their units. 14 • Concerns over tree removal. 15 • Concerns over school capacity and other public services. 16 • Concerns over the handling and treatment of storm water runoff. 17 18 Ms. Rothstein stated there have been other concerns expressed, and also support expressed for 19 the project, the overwhelming majo rity have stated the concerns listed above. Staff has 20 evaluated the request for the Comprehensive Plan Amendments using the standards set forth in 21 Section §152.002 which establishes the purpose and intent of the city of St. Anthony’s zoning 22 code. Staff responded to two questions being 1. Does the Comprehensive Plan amendment to 23 increase the maximum allowable density from 40 to 48 units per acre achieve the following 24 findings? 2. Does the Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the land use at 2401 Lowry 25 Avenue from commercial to high density residential achieve the following findings? The written 26 responses to these questions was provided for Commission review. 27 28 Ms. Rothstein stated staff has completed a thorough review of the Preliminary PUD 29 Development Plan and Preliminary Plat proposal and has comments and requested changes for 30 full streetscape exhibit, landscaping plan, details regarding building plans, details on parking, 31 and area breakdown by use, staging detail, revised plans for Building E, and vacation of 32 easement. Engineering and Police and Fire Departments’ comments were provided. A thorough 33 Staff Review was conducted of the Comprehensive Plan, City Zoning Code, Environmental 34 Assessment Worksheet (including traffic study and addendum). Additional information has been 35 requested by Staff on landscaping, streetscape, building elevations (with grades), bio-retention 36 area, retaining walls/grade changes, and parking location details. The increase in density is not 37 supported by staff and it should stay at 40 units per acre as noted in the Comprehensive Plan. 38 39 Ms. Rothstein reviewed Staff’s recommendation that the Planning Commission take the 40 following actions: 41 • Concerning the Comprehensive Plan amendment to increase the allowed density on the 42 site from 40 to 48 units per acre – Staff recommends denial of the Comprehensive Plan 43 amendment to increase density, based on the findings enumerated in the staff report. 44 • Concerning the Comprehensive Plan amendment to change 2401 Kenzie Terrace land use 45 designation from commercial to high density residential – Staff recommends approval of 46 5