2006_0828_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

8.0 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Staff recommends approval of the proposal by Moser and Zawadski Homes in cooperationwith the Mounds View School District for a COMPREHENSIVELAND USE MAP AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARYPLAT, REZONING, and GENERAL. CONCEPT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT for an 8 lot single family and 6 unit town home development at 2959 �azxaline Avenue based on the Staff review of Sections 4 and 6 and the comments, findings, and conditions of Section 7 of the project report dated August 2,2006. 8.2 Next Steps: Assuming the City Council approves the General Concept Plan on August 28 a Final Development Plan could be submitted for action by the City Council in October. A Final Development Plan action must include approval the final developmentplan, the planned unit development agreement, and the zoning ordinance. As listed in the staff report, there is a significant amount of developer work and staff review to be completed prior to the Council final action on the subdivision, development plan and agreement. 9.0 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: 9.1 On August 2,2006, the �asev��e Planning Commissionheld the public hearing regarding the Mounds View School Districtredevelopment. At the meeting 7 residents addressed the Commission expressing concern over the proposed four unit town home. Specifically, most citizens who spoke indicated concern over the four unit town home and its density not keeping with that of the direct vicinity. Others expressed concern over the four unit's access to �amli:�e Avenue, and another submitted a design that would flip the town homes and single family homes. 9.2 The Commissionwas split over the design change from the SKETCH PLAN of June 7, 2006, where three twin homes were reviewed and not a four unit complex. Two of the three Commissioners opposed to the four unit design indicated that they were supportive of town homes and the proposed density, but that a four unit structure was a mass that was considered too dense for this area. 9.3 Other Commissioners supported the proposal as presented indicating the very mix of this neighborhood and lack on specific identity, as well as a proposal that achieved the Comprehensive Plan directive regarding housing and that the submitted plan met the goals and objections of the City Housing Plan as approved by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority. 9.4 The Commission did recommend during its vote on the GENERAL CONCEPT PUD, to include two additional conditions. One to create diversity in housing design, and the second to require the staff and developer to explore the establishment of creating town home units tI�at are only owner occupied units. i��#��..��'�_�'�nn�� Fc_t�6?�C�r.dcrt Page 16 of 11