Adopt Resolution #20-266 Providing Direction to Lennar Related to Rivenwick 4th Concept Plan (Project 20-134)

This case was updated on the evening of December 3. By consensus recommendation, the Planning Commission recommendation remains to retain the original vision and not reducing the amount of planned retail in favor of residential. Attached to the case is an exhibit illustrating this direction.  

The purpose of this case is to review a request from Lennar (the "Developer") to amend the Planned Unit Development (PUD) of Rivenwick on the south side of Highway 10 to include additional residential units abutting Highway 10 where it was previously planned for retail/commercial space. The Planning Commission may remember a similar request that came forward in 2019 related to the Suite Living Project. Previous direction from the Planning Commission and City Council was to not amend the existing PUD and continue to guide the land adjacent to Highway 10 for retail/commercial. Planned areas for retail is important feedback from our community, in addition to concerns about compatibility of residential land use abutting a major Highway (noise mitigation).

No notification required. If this moves forward to a formal application, notice will be sent to those within 350 feet of the site as well as all that are currently within the Rivenwick PUD.

Project Information
The proposed project is located within the Mixed Use Planned Unit Development District. It is guided the same in the Comprehensive Plan. The Development is proposed to be made up of three (3) main components. The MU/PUD is the guiding, or umbrella district. Within that guidance, Staff is applying the appropriate traditional districts for review based on the land use and density types. A map is included to visualize this breakdown.

1. Two (2) Acre Commercial Parcel (using the B-2 Business District for review)
2. Two (2) Acre Assisted Living Parcel (using the R-3 High Density Residential District for review)
3. Detached Townhome Neighborhood (using the R-2 Medium Density Residential District for review)

This is a unique district that is only applied in a couple areas of the community. The Rivenwick Neighborhood is the only existing neighborhood/development where the District actually applies. The main intent of this district was to provide flexibility in final layout versus strict district boundaries. This should not be interpreted to require urban mixed-use buildings. The current version of the MU/PUD District states that any one use may not comprise of more than 75% of the project area. According to Staff Review for the original subdivision, this remaining parcel was to develop as a retail/commercial use. However, the maximum coverage per land use type at the time was 70%, which was amended to 75% and then for the Suite Living Project, amended again to 80% residential (and 20% commercial/retail). The entire PUD is approximately 30 acres, with the Subject Property of this case (proposed amendment area) being just over 9 acres.


Current Request
 

	Original	First Amendment	Second Amendment (Suite Living)	Current Proposal
Residential	70%	75%	80%	~93%
Commercial/ Retail	30%	25%	20%	~7%

Staff Review
The largest change on the proposed layout is additional residential units along Highway 10. Staff routed this request through their Development Review Team and identified a talking points with this proposal. Staff is comfortable with the residential units along Riverdale Drive, but would like to suggest retaining the planned retail area along Highway 10 consistent with previous direction.

• Noise Impacts: Housing units along Highway 10 require sound studies and based on nearby housing, will require a sound wall along Highway 10. With recent instruction to improve the image of Highway 10, Staff does not feel a sound wall would meet that goal. Additionally, after the units are built, the City is liable for any additional noise or impacts from the Highway to residential units. The City would prefer to not take on that liability and potential future cost (unless constructed by the Developer at Developer Cost today).
• Desire for Retail: Residents continue to request additional retail and commercial in the City. The City has previously amended the plan to allow additional residential, thereby reducing the amount of planned retail in the community. Although this is a relatively small parcel, Staff is concerned about removing additional land guided for retail/commercial, especially land along Highway 10.
• Economic Development Perspective: Staff has heard from retailers that visibility along Highway 10 is key to a successful retail pro-forma. This land is directly adjacent to Highway 10 and has great visibility. The City's Economic Development Department reviewed the viability of the site as-is (guided retail/commercial) and feels it is a strong site for retail/commercial. Additionally, Economic Development Staff would prefer that this portion of the site remain guided for retail, but would support any decision the City Council would make. The Economic Development Department has provided some information for this request, which is attached.
• Site Layout: The Public Works, Engineering, and Public Safety team preferred the previously directed option which included a through-road, room for ponding, and division of uses. The currently proposed plan has housing directly adjacent to retail/commercial with no room for buffering, and a public road ending in a T intersection with private roads. If this were to move forward as presented, there would need to be additional modifications to the proposal, regardless.

Staff is handling this request as part of normal duties. Once a formal application is submitted, the Applicant is responsible for costs associated with review.

Motion to adopt Resolution #20-266 confirming direction to retain the original zoning approval of no more than 80% of the Rivenwick PUD to be residential with the remaining 20% planned for retail with a public road separating the two uses.