Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 06_OBrien_presentationEastview* at O’Brien Farm Preliminary Plat Meeting #2 March 16, 2021 *Working name of the Project for Permitting Purposes. 2 3 Presentation Overview ●Presentation reviews staff report in order commencing with the last comment reviewed at hearing #1. ●Each numbered staff comment is discussed. ●A number of discussion points were not enumerated but are important and are also discussed here in order. ●Screenshots and excerpts from staff report are provided. Staff report text is BLACK and RED ●Applicant text is in BLUE ●Excerpts from City Reports and Applicant Narrative are labeled throughout but may appear in black text as well. ●Applicant has added emphasis to staff report comments with RED underline. Pavement Marking Plans ●Applicant is pleased to define roadway types and provide sections of each road, but would prefer to provide striping and signage plans at final plat for the overall project. 4 Industrial and Commercial Lots and Easements •In analyzing the issue raised by Staff regarding the connection to Tilley Drive extension, Applicant has needed to re- arrange this lot layout. •A new layout and road orientation will be provided for review at the next hearing, and Applicant recommends tabling this discussion until that time. 5 Industrial and Commercial Roadway ●Applicant has proposed a compliant subdivision under the zoning regulations. ●This subdivision includes the construction of a roadway which is prescribed in size and feature by the Zoning Regulations. ●The zoning regulations require certain roadway characteristics, which we are happy to meet, as directed by the Board. ●The proposed roadway location will be in line with the official map connection and new plans will be provided for the next hearing. 6 Legacy Farm Road Extension ●Applicant can expand this road to 20’ wide and will add a separate sidewalk. ●Applicant will provide supplemental information on these proposed plan changes prior to the next hearing for discussion but the ability to create this additional connection is part of an overall plan adjustment responsive to feedback received. 7 O’Brien Farm Road East ●Applicant has located the cul-de-sac in the R1 District as required by the regulations. ●Zoning plan at left shows the R1 in red. The commercial 1 Limited Retail is shown in purple. ●Applicant has placed this road to allow for it to be used on both sides, preserving the efficiency of construction and making use of R1 land where larger developments are prohibited. ●Waiver request was to plant the center of the cul-de-sac, to enhance the sense of place. 8 O’Brien Farm Road East ●Applicant has provided a proposal for a large city park, a large playground and a fully enclosed dog park to be constructed by Applicant for the benefit of the public at the end of this street. ●Applicant considers this a feature and a destination. ●Applicant has proposed a road to access this destination and several planned homes. ●Environmental and other resources prohibit extension of this road beyond where shown, or where the easement is provided.9 O’Brien Farm Road East ●Applicant will be providing additional information dedicated to this area for the next hearing as requested by the Board. ●Applicant is happy to provide information that is helpful in the Board making its decision but the roadway standards of the regulations are the guide for permitting a road. ●Any future projects could of course modify the permitted roadway ●To proceed with investment in the park and homes on this road some road must be approved for construction and be built. 10 O’Brien Farm Road East Amenity Phasing ●Staff has requested that Applicant work with the Board to determine appropriate phasing for the project (Comment 1). ●Applicant is happy to work with the Board on specific proposals for timing of construction of amenities as stated above. ●Applicant would suggest this specific item be discussed in the broader context of phasing and amenity construction. 11 12 Resident Clubhouse and Adjacent Homes •Applicant will provide supplemental information and proposed changes to the club amenity and this area prior to the April hearing. •Applicant would like to discuss this specific issue in the context of the new plan/adaption proposed in part to address this concern. 13 Meadow Loop Road Architecture •Applicant would be happy to offer split garage doors on some units and will provide two elevations for each unit type including this option. •Applicant believes that the units designed are attractive and very much create an attractive streetscape 14 Meadow Loop Cottage Cluster 15 SF5 Home Type Architecture O’Brien Farm Road East Planned Townhomes ●Homes are identical to those proposed in Hillside and which were approved as the transitionary home from the Hillside residential to the Hillside multi-family areas of Phase I. 16 O’Brien Farm Road East Planned Homes 17 O’Brien Farm Road East Planned Homes ●Phase I has built this exact Townhome with the exact retaining wall and rear yard condition planned for Eastview. ●The stone walls accent the yards and create privacy, they have been landscaped and have been a feature. ●We saw significant increase in demand for homes that had the taller wall and more privacy. ●We do not feel that the proximity or grading is problematic as this product type has seen significant market absorption and price appreciation at Hillside with identical conditions.18 19 Planting Plans 20 Planting Plans 21 Safe Pedestrian Movement ●Applicant will work with its landscape architect to locate benches and pause places throughout the plan. ●Applicant can assess the feasibility of ramp construction and will endeavor to include ramps in lieu of staircases where possible. ●Applicant would request that this be reviewed at final plat, once each stair location can be identified and reviewed for feasibility and when the green spaces, paths and connections are solidified. 22 Open Space Ownership •Applicant is open to the discussion of public ownership of green spaces proposed. •Applicant would suggest that the conversation on ownership should be held in the context of an approved preliminary plat plan, with solidified open spaces and amenities. •Applicant requests that ownership arrangements be part of Final Plat submission and will of course work with City Recreation and Parks to confirm a proposal. 23 Parking Area Locations: Site Plan Criteria •Applicant is working on a redesign for this site. Applicant would suggest revisiting this item as part of a discussion of that redesign at the next hearing. 24 Height of Proposed Structures •Applicant will be submitting a proposed height plan for the C1 LR area. •Applicant will submit this guide in time for discussion at our April hearing. 25 Roadway Infrastructure and Access •Applicant is ok with this condition. The purpose of this Project and our aim is to solidify the road network and connections. 26 Business Park Lot 4 Access Easement •Applicant is happy to provide an easement for public access across the lot, however it is unclear where this makes sense as the entire area is a wetland and a flood plain. •Please provide more information on where you are trying to connect and we are happy to add this now or prior to final plat. 27 Applicant Waiver Requests •Applicant is happy to simplify the waiver request as much as possible. •Applicant provided a table with the setbacks for each lot listed individually for approval. •A uniform setback waiver that applied to all lots would essentially just be the smallest setback in the entire project, which we are happy to provide, though that would not be lot specific as currently provided at Exhibit 07. •Please provide additional detail and we can accommodate this request. 28 Applicant Waiver Requests •Applicant appreciates the opportunity to present a workable framework and will file such in advance of the April hearing for the Project. 29 Applicant Waiver Requests •Text of Applicant request is below •Text of the Regulation 30 Applicant Waiver Requests 31 Applicant Waiver Requests •Text of Applicant request is below •In reviewing the ordinance to prepare for this conversation applicant has noticed that this restriction only applies to adjacent buildings in the R4 district, which is not an issue for the Project. 32 Applicant Waiver Requests 33 Applicant Waiver Requests •Applicant requests is below •This finding was granted in Phase I and simply allows the board the ability to let Applicant place future site plan landscape requirements elsewhere in the project (with Board approval) if the board determines that this is a benefit to the project. •There is no reduction in landscape requirements proposed. 34 Applicant Waiver Requests •Applicant request seeks to exempt beds and trees that are surrounding/touching the foundation of single family, duplex and triplex homes from this requirement. •Applicant does not believe it is the City’s intent to enforce on homeowners forever replacing bushes in beds in their front and rear yards. •Gardening and personalizing ones individual flower beds is a public benefit, it is a health benefit and it is a community inspiring activity, which we hope to foster and not deter with this requirement that would prohibit homeowner modification. Regulation Text 35 Applicant Waiver Requests •This waiver was granted in Phase I •Applicant offers these options as additional purchases on most home models during the customization and purchase process. •The City had recommended this wavier in Phase I to allow for the easy addition of this common resident and homeowner request. To screen in or cover a deck on their home. •What is the process for a homeowner or the builder during construction if this waiver is not granted? 36 Applicant Waiver Requests •Applicant DID file a master plan, and in discussion with staff it was decided that it was not necessary 37 Applicant Waiver Requests •Applicant’s three specific requests are as follows. •If not waived would Sketch Plan review be required for amendments to the PUD such as changing a unit footprint type or potentially altering a landscape plan? •Sketch Plan for larger portions of future projects is largely for Applicant’s benefit, to ensure viability before expending time and effort on plat applications. •What is the City’s interest in requiring sketch plan for a project that is part of this PUD and has already received such extensive review? •This waiver was granted in Phase I. 38 Applicant Waiver Requests •Applicant’s specific requests are as follows. •Applicant requests the ability for final plat review only, specifically for amendments and not for other items that may require a larger review. •This is to avoid the need for two public hearings and two applications, which come with significant time commitments on behalf of Applicant, the Board and Staff. •This process waiver was provided in Phase I and was used on a few occasions and for great benefit. It significantly reduced the time and effort necessary to make minor plan changes necessitated due to construction. 39 Applicant Waiver Requests •Applicant’s specific requests are as follows. •This process waiver was granted in Phase I. 40 Applicant Waiver Requests PUD Review Requirements 15.18A ●Sufficient Water and Wastewater Capacity ●Sufficient Grading and Erosion Control (Erosion control standards apply outside PUD) ●Suitable protection of wetlands and wildlife habitat under Article 12. ●Visually compatible with planned development patterns in the area as specified in the Comprehensive Plan. See Section 14.06(C)(1-2) ●Open space areas on the site have been located to maximize opportunities for open spaces between parcels. ●Layout reviewed by fire chief, street widths, vehicular access, hydrant locations etc. ●Roads, rec paths, stormwater, sidewalks, landscaping and utilities designed to be compatible with extension to adjacent properties. ●Roads, utilities sidewalks, rec paths are designed in a manner consistent with City utility and roadway plans. See Section 14.07(G) ●Project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the district. (See Section 14.06(A) ●Project design incorporates strategies to minimize site disturbance …infiltrate rainfall. (See Section 14.07(F)) •The review criteria of a PUD are outlined below. All criteria have been addressed for all the lots proposed in this subdivision. •Criteria that are NOT also reviewed/required at Site Plan are shown below in red. 41 Applicant Waiver Requests PUD Review Requirements 15.18A •Applicant is happy to provide additional information to facilitate a discussion and conclusions on those elements that would not have future review under site plan only. •Applicant is making finite commitments for large amounts of City infrastructure that are significantly out of balance with only the homes proposed for construction. •These commitments are meant to satisfy the PUD review criteria, and to permit this waiver simplifying future review and solidifying the major project details to create a mutually agreed framework and facilitate the project. •Subjecting individual lots within this overall PUD to individual PUD review at each application will create uncertainty and potential for conflicts with the planned development proposed here. 42 Applicant Waiver Requests •Applicant’s specific requests are as follows. •Conceivably, on the interior of a block of lots designed, some parking required for one lot may overlap with another. •Since applicant controls all lots, this is only a request to allow that parking on a different lot to be permissible with either Site Plan or Conditional use review. •This would create a framework for shared parking interior to building frontages and avoid the need to move lot lines and complicate the permit process. See next slide. 43 Example Layout Issue 44 Applicant Waiver Requests •Applicant is happy to work through these requests with Staff and present a proposal to the board at final plat. 45 Applicant Waiver Requests •Applicant is only requesting the time it feels is necessary to ensure that after a lengthy Act 250 process it is not in a position of having to start over with the City due to the expiration of this timeline. •This timeframe is provided for single structures on single lots as a standard. It makes sense for a project of a significant scale such as this to receive a longer time period to facilitate State permit approvals and to allow for changing market conditions or market challenges that might impede financing to start. 46 Applicant Waiver Requests •Applicant waiver request is below •The cul-de-sac is entirely within a residential district and we believe is allowed. •Applicant seeks a waiver (if needed) to allow for the landscaping of the center island, to accentuate it as a feature of the park area proposed. •If the Board likes this direction we can propose it as landscaped at final plat. The waiver is not necessary now. 47 Applicant Waiver Requests •Applicant waiver request is below 48 Low Impact Development Stormwater •Applicant will review issues raised specifically regarding unit spacing and easements and make any necessary adjustments prior to closing preliminary plat. 49 Hillside Green Construction Practices •Please see Applicant response to NRCC roofing question below. •Applicant proposes a compromise that it hopes will be successful. •Applicant appreciates the direction but a permit requirement for this item is challenging. The roofing product is integral to the longevity and safety of the home, and we must be able to choose products based on performance, availability and desirability. •We must be able to provide color choices that allow for buyers to have coordinated and attractive exterior color palette.