Review Concept Plan for Rivenwick 4th Addition; Case of Lennar for Rivenwick 4th Concept Plan (Project 20-134)

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 with the Suite Living Project and another request from Lennar at their November 2020 meeting. 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). The Developer has slightly revised the request to see if it solves the concerns of the Planning Commission.

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)	Nov 2020 Proposal	Dec 2020 Proposal
Residential	70%	75%	80%	~93%	~87%
Commercial/ Retail	30%	25%	20%	~7%	~13%

Staff Review
The largest change on the proposed layout is the removal of residential units along Highway 10 based on the City's concerns related to removing commercial and having residential close to Highway 10 for noise issues. It does appear that the concerns related to noise impacts have been remedied with this proposal.

Other points

• Desire for Retail: Residents continue to request additional retail and commercial in the City.  This proposal allows for an approximately 3.8 acre commercial pad along Highway 10. The proposal is still slightly less land than previously guided for commercial, from about 20% to about 13%. Staff recommends keeping the breakdown at 80/20% but is open to a new layout.
• 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. This proposal keeps the land along Highway 10 guided for commercial. The Economic Development Department is open to the new proposal if the breakdown stays at 80/20.
• 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.

Staff is open to this compromise request if the land uses within the PUD contain the same amount of commercial as previously directed. Public Works and Public Safety had a few concerns about the public road ending at a private road, and do prefer the layout with the previous proposal, but can make this layout work with proper signage.

Based on discussion. Provide high-level policy direction to assist in continued discussions with current Property Owner (Seller) and Developer (Buyer).