PC-2026-06 - Laserfiche WebLink

Resolution No. PC-2026-06 Page 3 of 6 that accessory development is encroaching into what is intended to function as a shared visual buffer along the street edge. Additionally, locating the structure closer to the roadway may affect visual sightlines along a corridor that includes an EVA roadway and functions as a secondary circulation route. For these reasons, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council determine that the proposed Minor PUD Modification would not be consistent with the neighborhood's design objectives, and the City Council cannot make this finding. 2. The plan is consistent with the City’s General Plan and applicable PUD standards Although PUD-25 generally follows the standards of the R-1-6,500 zoning district, COA 14 deliberately established more restrictive setback requirements for detached accessory structures, including a 20-foot street-side yard setback for corner lots. These standards were adopted following extensive public review during Planning Commission and City Council hearings and were intended to apply uniformly throughout the development. As part of that process, the City Council required the subdivision developer to construct the EVA corridor adjacent to the Property to address project traffic impacts by directing new vehicular trips away from Lund Ranch Road and toward the Sunset Creek Lane extension serving the easterly lots of the subdivision. The City Council did not indicate that the EVA corridor would alter the applicability of the PUD development standards for the Property as a corner lot. Accordingly, all PUD-25 standards remain applicable, including the 20-foot street-side yard setback for detached accessory structures. Allowing a reduction to eight feet would conflict with the adopted PUD standards and weaken the consistency and predictability of the development framework established through the PUD approval process. The requested modification would effectively alter a core development standard that was intentionally adopted as part of the overall neighborhood design. Accordingly, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council determine that the Project is inconsistent with the applicable PUD standards, and the City Council cannot make this finding. 3. The plan is compatible with previously developed properties in the vicinity The Property is a corner lot with frontage along Vista Oaks Court and Lund Ranch Road/Spring Creek Terrace. Other similarly situated corner lots within the PUD are subject to and expected to comply with the same 20-foot street-side yard setback requirement for detached accessory structures. Comparable properties include, but are not limited to, 1012 Vista Oaks Court, 2192 Countryside Court, and 2175 Shadow Creek Court. Allowing the proposed reduction would result in an accessory structure being located substantially closer to the street than permitted on comparable lots, creating an inconsistent development pattern and altering the established visual character of the neighborhood. Docusign Envelope ID: 258AEAD3-D649-4183-A554-D5096B1FBE83