Laserfiche WebLink
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 16th. 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 />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 />Preliminary Plat Review <br />3. Is the Commission comfortable with the level of flexibility requested, recognizing that <br />