HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.d. PUD Approval Processr
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
City Council Meeting Date: July 14, 2004
AGENDA ITEM:
Discussion of PUD Approval Process
AGENDA SECTION:
PREPARED BY:
Kim Lindquist, Community Development
Director
AGENDA NO
ATTACHMENTS:
None
APPROVED BY:
RECOMMENDED ACTION: For Discussion Only
ACTION:
ISSUE
Staff is recommending changes to the processing of PUD applications. Staff would like to
require more. information at the front end of the approval process, during the concept plan
review stage. Additionally, we are recommending a change to the way property is rezoned so
that it clearly is listed as a PUD zoning rather.than only listing one of the traditional zoning
districts.
DISCUSSION
Concept Plan Review
Recent planning reviews have raised the issue of how much information is necessary to allow
adequate review and assessment of particular development projects. Current and past
practice allows for concept review and approval with very little information being forwarded to
the City. In some cases, the concept submittal was a site plan. There was little, if any,
information on stormwater ponding, grading, traffic, and architecture. The problem that
presents is that those requirements often have a dramatic impact on a site plan. If not
properly planned for in the beginning, the final PUD development plan can vary greatly from
the approved concept plan.
An example of the above is the Brockway project. Staff had requested a significant amount of
information during the concept plan stage, information that is typically requested at the final
development plan stage. A traffic analysis, grading, and stormwater information were all
obtained early in the process. The availability of this information for the Brockway project at
the concept level meant that the staff and developer could address issues associated with
traffic and stormwater. Revised plans demonstrated that improvements could be made to
address future traffic generation, which areas of the site would be graded, and how ponding
r
would be addressed, and allowed staff, the Commission, and Council to evaluate whether
they would support reguiding the property.
In looking at the ordinance, the zoning ordinance does not require a significant amount of
detail with the concept plan. Over time, the ordinance should be amended so that
expectations are clearer. In the meantime, staff will be requesting additional information
through the review process.
Rezonings
The other issue relates to rezonings for PUDs. In other communities I have worked a PUD
becomes the zoning for the property. Rosemount has traditionally rezoned properties to a
traditional zoning district category that most closely fits the proposed use. The risk by
rezoning to the District is that another developer or the same developer could modify a plan,
and so long as it met city ordinance standards, would be entitled to approval of the modified
plan. By rezoning to PUD, the approved plan that prompted the rezoning would be the
development for the property. If the developer walked away from the project, a new owner
would have to build the approved project or request an amendment to the PUD. This process
means that there is additional certainty that the project approved will be the project
constructed.
The City Attorney recommends that the zoning be listed as PUD R -1 or PUD with some other
appropriate zoning classification. This recognizes the PUD nature of the project, and that
development standards may not be consistent with the traditional zoning category. However,
the combined zoning also means that where the PUD approval does not specifically vary
from the District standards, those district regulations govern the development. For example,
in the Minea development there are reduced lot widths called out in the approval. However, if
the approval is silent on other regulatory aspects, such as rear yard setbacks, then the R -1
standard, 30 foot setback, would govern.
Similar to the Brockway project, staff will be waiting to rezone the property until the final
development plan approval stage. First, this provides additional leverage to the city during the
review process. Second, a rezoning to PUD means that the details of the plan need to be
articulated; that would happen at the final development plan stage.
SUMMARY
Staff wanted to update the Council on a change in process that we will be implementing
pending Council concurrence. Some developers may not be happy with the change because
it can require a greater expenditure of money at the front end of the development review
process. However, staff believes that the complexity of projects warrants the provision of
more information earlier in the review process.