07-15-2002 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

To confuse the issue, the RPUD ordinance (10.33 Subd. 6A) treats the Concept Plan Review as a very informal process. Planning Commission and Council merely make comments to the developer, no hearing is held, no vote is taken, and the comments of the Planning Commission and Council are “for guidance only, and if positive, shall not be considered binding upon the planning commission or city council regarding approval of the formal RPUD application when submitted”. Applicant ’s consultants have to some extent treated the concept plan approval as equivalent to the sketch plan stage, whereby the City is merely providing direction, “so you can go ahead and grant us concept plan approval and all the details will be worked out later”. The result of this divergence of perspective is the City ’s reluctance to simply grant concept plan approval without having all the details worked out, and the developer not wanting to commit his resources to providing great detail without some expectation that the project will be approved. The scope of this development necessarily places it under the umbrella of the Highway 12 PUD process. The RPUD element is secondary, given that the 50-acre property is guided and intended to be more than just a residential development. The mere determination of the route for Kelley Parkway has significant impacts on development outside the RPUD site. For these reasons, staff sees the granting of Concept Plan Approval under the PUD process as functionally equivalent to granting Master Development Plan approval in the RPUD process. Staff w ould argue that the level of detail and refinement needed for the Council to commit to this development may be somewhat greater than the applicants initially expected. 111. Comprehensive Plan Conformity A, PROPOSED LAND USES The proposed multifamily residential use north of Kelley Parkway is in keeping w ith the provisions of the CMP for this area. The variety of dwelling types will provide lifecycle housing options that are in keeping with the City ’s housing goals. The proposed Outlets for future commercial use south of Kelley Parkw ay likewise generally meet the CMP guidelines and would allow for the development of office uses as intended. The proposed location of Kelley Parkway will have some impact on the flexibility of these sites for future use, as noted below. Planning Commission should consider whedicr there are any concerns or negative impacts with allowing the commercially guided property to remain in an outlot status. B. DENSITY Background. The 1980 Orono Community Management Plan (CMP) guided this property for single family residential use at a density of one unit per 2 acres. By the mid-1980’s, support was growing for widening of Highway 12 in-place, to accommodate grow ing traffic levels. In anticipation of development pressure along the Highway 12 corridor through Orono. a stud^ -• ?.s commenced in 1985 that resulted in an amendment of the CMP in 1987. The amendment brought this area into the #02-2789(Ri-v|scd) Dablstrom Development LLC July 12,2002 Page 4 of 13