Review Resubmitted Concept of Shade Tree Cottages; Case of Shade Tree Communities

Shade Tree Communities has contacted the City and expressed a desire to resubmit a proposed plat known as Shade Tree Cottages. This is a project that went through City review approximately ten (10) years ago and received final plat and site plan approval as well as a zoning amendment to rezone the parcel to Planned Unit Development (PUD). The project is a mix of small-lot single-family and detached townhomes (villas/detached single-family with HOA maintenance). While the final plat and site plan have expired, the zoning of PUD has not. The applicant has submitted a revised concept plan taking into account current zoning regulations.

No notification is required since a formal application has not been received.
 

While the final plat and site plan have long since expired, the approval of the Zoning Amendment to Planned Unit Development is still valid as the City never considered a subsequent Zoning Amendment to revert back to the underlying Zoning District of R-1 Residential (MUSA). Staff has verified with the City Attorney that the project must go through the subdivision process again, due to expiration of the original plan and changes to regulations. Specifically, current standards related to lot depth and wetland setbacks are considerably different than when the proposed development was originally designed.

The applicant has submitted a revised concept plan that better complies with current regulations. For example, the applicant is attempting to account for the current 16.5 foot wetland setback and has adjusted roadway alignments to reflect adjacent property owner's lot boundaries. In reviewing the concept plan, Staff found several deviations from the current R-1 (MUSA) regulations. Specifically, lots 32 and 33 do not appear to meet lot depth requirements. The proposed net density appears to meet code requirements at approximately 2.7 units per acre. The code also requires 16.5 foot wetland setbacks, which appear to be met with the revised plan.

The applicant is working on articulating the public purpose for the PUD, but in discussions with the applicant, the public purpose has centered around permanent dedication of trails and wetlands. The applicant is also open to architectural standards for the new homes, such as requiring front porches, a mix of materials, and specific designs.

Staff hosted a public workshop regarding the project on February 1, 2018. Neighboring landowners attended the meeting and raised questions regarding dewatering of the wetland, utilities, infrastructure upgrades, and mitigating the impacts to surrounding property owners. The Planning Commission was introduced to this topic on March 1, 2018.

The applicant has requested that the City share the cost of paving Potassium Street. Staff is working with the applicant to get more precise estimates regarding the paving project, and will have a discussion regarding the cost-share with City Council when the estimates are available.

Rough estimates from the Engineering Department estimate $300 per linear foot for the paving which includes sidewalks, sewer, water, and a contingency of 25%. There will likely also be issues that arise during the planning process due to the number of wetlands onsite. At 1,500 linear feet, the project would cost approximately $500,000, including some contingency costs. Staff would like to discuss three possible funding solutions for the upgrading of Potassium Street:

1. 1/3 paid by applicant, 1/3 paid by City, 1/3 paid by assessments ($165,000 each)
2. 60% paid by applicant ($300,000) and 40% paid by City ($200,000)
3. No City contribution

Staff notes that this road is not a collector road and that strictly single-family residential projects typically pay 100% of development costs. Additionally, while this project is not an economic development project, it would be improving a gravel road, reducing regular maintenance costs.

Staff would also like to note that the wetland delineation for this project is not complete at this time.

Staff is handling this portion of the review as part of normal Staff duties. While not under the purview of Planning Commission Review, it is noted that the Developer is requesting assistance with improvements to Puma Street. That decision will come at a later date.
 

No recommendation needed at this time since a formal application has not been received.
 

No action requested.