SR 05:258 - Laserfiche WebLink

ATIACHMENT 4 MEMORANDUM Date: July 21, 2005 To: Planning Commissioners From: Donna Decker, Principal Planner Subject: PUD-37. Winter Planned Unit Develovment Application to rezone a 0.26 acre infill development site from RM-15 to PUD-HDR and allow the construction offour (4) single family detached residential units and two (2) attached multi-family residential units located at 520 St. John Street Honorable Commissioners, On May II, 2005 Case No. PUD-37 was continued to allow time to bring back additional information to the Planning Commission for consideration of this project. The Commission continued to have concerns related to architectural design, affordability, and the loss of the black walnut tree. The Commission requested the project be subject to peer review and had interest in having the Housing Commission provide comment. The Commissioners had the following comments: . Chairperson Maas did not mind the tandem parking, expressed that a peer review would be beneficial and suggested Commissioner Arkin bring the project to the Housing Commission; . Commissioner Arkin expressed support to have the Housing Commission comment on the project and had some concem regarding the density of the number of units per acre being proposed; . Commissioner Blank expressed that the architecture did not seem distinct enough, that the roof slopes should be evaluated, had concem regarding the proposed number of units, felt that the duplex parking should perhaps have garages and that those be conditioned for parking only, and that any trees destroyed should be replaced and pay a mitigation fee; . Commissioner Roberts expressed concern about the architecture, that the roof slopes were too similar, and that the black walnut would be removed but recognized it could not be transplanted, was a messy tree in a residential area, very large for the site even if the number of units were decreased and confirmed a conversation with Mike Fulford that if it were saved, it would likely decline and cause real property damage to the new residences, adjacent residences and potentially within the street due to limbs breaking and falling, etc; . Commissioner Fox supported the project as it was presented, expressed that the project did represent the downtown character and that the architecture was compatible with the surrounding area and did not support the project review by the Housing Commission because the project was not subject to the Inclusionary Zoning Code. U:\PUD-37_72105