05-09-2016 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

#16-3822 May 4, 2016 Page 5 of 8 Fire Department Comments A review of the plat by the Fire Chief is pending, subject to a final road system layout. The property is planned to be served with municipal water. Dwelling Unit Design The applicant presented a number of dwelling designs (Exhibit J of PC packet) which were reviewed by the Planning Commission. As noted above, applicant is requesting flexibility with regard to the 2-1/2 story limit due to the topography and orientation of the units facing the wetland. Additionally, as indicated in the table on page 5 of the April PC memo, flexibility to many of the single-family lot standards is requested. Public Comments The only public comments received to date are those made at the public hearing by Allan Engleman of 315 Old Crystal Bay Road North, who suggested that turn lanes on Wayzata Boulevard should be required. He also commented on the proximity of the Met Council sewer force main in the right-of-way, and runoff treatment relative to the dump location. Summary of Issues for Consideration Staff suggests that the primary focus for consideration and discussion by the Council should include the following topics: Comprehensive Plan Amendment In reviewing the amendment, Council should attempt to set aside the details of the proposed development and look at the broader picture, consider the following: 1. Does the amendment further the City’s goals for development of higher density housing? 2. Are there specific aspects of this site that support a reduction of the density from the current guided density? 3. Are there any negative aspects to reguiding this site for lower density? 4. Aside from numerical density concerns, does Council have any concerns about revising the development parameters for this site from multi-family use in one or two buildings to single family individual homes? 5. The developers have suggested the possibility of developing a multi- family building within the landfill site, which would require extensive mitigation (remove landfill contents in area being developed). That is not part of their current request. Does Council find that adding a multi-family building would be desirable if it helps increase density on the property? 6. Are there specific conditions that should be established as part of an approval of the reguiding? 7. With the proposed amendment, the City’s overall development density is expected to drop below 3.0 units per acre. The City will need to identify more opportunities for higher density housing. Rezoning from RR-1B to RPUD Council should confirm that RPUD is the appropriate rezoning option for this development. Staff and Planning Commission believe RPUD is the only viable available option for development of this parcel in the manner proposed by the applicants. RPUD