Laserfiche WebLink
� � f <br /> 16-3847 Page 8 <br /> Shadywood Villas <br /> July 18, 2016 <br /> A gravity sanitary sewer line runs along the south property line, feeding a lift station on the north <br /> side of Shadywood Road. Water is available, also on the north side of Shadywood Road. It <br /> appears that Sewer and Water connection charges have already been paid, though each unit will <br /> pay individual SAC charges at the time of building permit. <br /> City Engineer Comments <br /> The city engineer is currently reviewing the development plans and comments will be incorporated <br /> into the final preliminary platy. <br /> Style and Appearance of Proposed Homes <br /> The applicants have provided conceptual depictions of elevation views and floor plans for the <br /> proposed homes. Planning Commission should review these (Exhibit F) and determine whether <br /> there are any concerns. <br /> Public Comment <br /> To date staff has received written comments on the project, attached in Exhibit L. The developer <br /> also plans an open house with the neighborhood on Saturday, July 16`h. Staff will not attend this <br /> open house. <br /> Summary of Issues for Consideration <br /> Staff suggests that the primary focus for consideration and discussion by the Planning Commission <br /> should include the following topics: <br /> Comprehensive Plan Amendment <br /> 1. Applicants propose development at a density of 3.28 units per acre rather than the 4-15 <br /> units per acre for which the eastern half of the property is guided, and have requested a <br /> Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow the lower density. <br /> - Should the City be striving for more density or less density at this location? <br /> - Is the single-family concept right for this area? Does it match the City's goals in <br /> terms of housing type and density? <br /> - Will the City benefit from a development, such as this? Should the entire property <br /> be developed in this manner, or should this site incorporate more than one style of <br /> houses? <br /> In general, the responses to these questions during prior reviews has been that the <br /> proposed development density is acceptable. If that is the case today, a Planning <br /> Commission recommendation for approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is <br /> appropriate. <br /> Rezoning from B-4 and LR-IA to RPUD <br /> 2. Planning Commission should consider whether RPUD is the appropriate rezoning option <br /> for this development. Staff believes RPUD is the only viable option for development of <br /> this parcel in the manner proposed by the applicants and the CMP. <br /> P�•eliminary Plat Review <br /> 3. Is the Commission comfortable with the level of flexibility requested, recognizing that <br />