Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2017 02 09

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes January 12, 2017 Page 8 of 29 Zuccaro says yes. O'Connell asks where the closest residences are. Zuccaro says north of Dillion and immediately to the north. O'Connell says I am concerned about flooding if this development does have an impact on the floodplain. Zuccaro says the nearby residences would not be affected. The applicant has done required modeling for the floodplain permit, showing they will not impact the boundaries. O'Connell says regarding open space and the business park, do we have precedent for looking at the overall business park versus? Zuccaro says in some planned community districts and mixed use districts, Staff looks at proposals on a development -wide basis. When Staff looks at "meeting the intent" of underlying development requirements, what is the development as a whole? Sometimes little pockets do not meet it, but it may be a better design. O'Connell asks if this is a better design? Zuccaro says Staff looks at several things such as adjacency to open space and design amenities. We believe this is a good design and appropriate for the business park. It does not feel overly dense. Rice says next month when the neighboring building says, I am under the footprint for my PUD and I want to expand, have we pushed it as a total development do -over? Zuccaro says there was an intent in the original PUD to share square footage. When the original Coal Creek Business Park PUD was approved, "unused density on an individual lot may be transferred to another lot". You still have the 70/30% split, but this is an example of wanting flexibility in a development. Sheets asks if you need an agreement from the parties. Zuccaro says yes, before they were all developed. If you want to exceed your percentage, you had to get an agreement. Now that they are all developed, there is no possible trading. Sheets says the assumption is that the same company will continue to use the business in the same manner. Is there consideration that the use could change? Zuccaro says future users are a concern. The landlord may be limited in the types of leases they can offer based on this parking restriction. Sheets says when we were looking at the floodplain picture, there are houses at the southeast corner of the picture. Are there houses by the golf course? Zuccaro says there are homes on the golf course. The applicant's engineer took development parameters and modeled it. The City Engineer reviewed the report and concurs with the findings that there would be no impact on the floodplain. There is storm water detention for the increase of impervious surface for the captured and released water. Sheets says I want to make sure we are complying with the Code. When we deviate from a Code, we do it for a reason. The applicant says that other jurisdictions are using lower parking ratios. Is there any flexibility for us to change those in the future? How do we comply with them? Zuccaro says some cities with business districts are starting to look at parking a little differently. Cities are trying to reduce the number of vehicle miles travelled and promote other modes. We assume there is a 4 spaces/1000 SF demand, but often times there is not. Sometimes a blanket regulation does not fit all sizes. We have PUDs because our regulations do not fit all sizes. Brauneis says my current biggest concern is surrounding open space and dropping the allowance from 30% to 24%. Furthermore, there is the question of letting the landscaping extend into the conservation easement and whether it is valuable. What happens as it relates to landscaping and species selection? Do you think permitting landscaping in this area is beneficial? Zuccaro says I am aware of six other similar conservation easements, but have not reviewed them. In this case, it does not say landscaping can or cannot be added. It says you can have trails and drainage facilities, and it can be amended by City Council to allow additional types of development. It strongly says it is intended to be open space and public access in perpetuity.