PC meeting 06/22/05

ITEM NO 15:            PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PARK WEST GARDENS; NORTH OF OVERLAND DRIVE BETWEEN EISENHOWER DRIVE AND E 1000 (QUEENS) ROAD (PGP)

PDP-05-04-05:  Preliminary Development Plan for Park West Gardens.  This proposed 70-unit multiple-family residential subdivision contains approximately 5.652 acres.  The property is generally described as being located north of Overland Drive between Eisenhower Drive and E 1000 (Queens) Road.  Submitted by Paul Werner Architects for Castle Rock, LC, property owner of record.

STAFF PRESENTATION

Mr. Patterson introduced the item, describing the surrounding area and stating that the subject property was previously platted as part of the Park West development.  He said the current proposal included 9 buildings, all 2-story, with 70 units (1- & 2-bedroom) each. 

Staff recommended approval of the development plan with conditions as listed in the Staff Report.

Several elements of the development plan were noted:

• The applicant proposes 12.4 dwelling units per acre when 15 are allowed in this zoning district.
• The plan provides more than the required open space and parking. 
• Each unit includes an attached garage.
• There is a 65’ rear yard separation between the subject property and the multi-family development to the north.
• There is an existing recreational trail along the southern property line and an existing sidewalk on the east side of Eisenhower Drive.
• A 5’ sidewalk is recommended by the Public Works Department on the west side of Eisenhower Drive.  
• This project is designed for rental units, but it may be possible to split ownership through the Townhouse Provision.
• It was likely that the existing mature trees along Overland Drive will have to be cleared to properly grade the property.  Retention of these trees is not indicated on the plan.

APPLICANT PRESENTATION

Paul Werner, Paul Werner Architects, spoke on behalf of the applicant.  Mr. Werner said the applicant questioned the condition for a 5’ sidewalk along the west side of Eisenhower Drive because the street was brand new.  He indicated existing pedestrian connections that the applicant felt were adequate.

Ermeling asked about the possibility of moving the shown landscaping to the outside of the sidewalk (along the curb) to create more separation between the street and the pedestrian walkway.  She said this design option was discussed at the recent New Urbanism conference.  It was discussed that the property owner was responsible for landscaping maintenance, but placement of street trees was regulated by the Public Works Department and must take utility line placement into consideration. 

Ermeling asked that Staff communicate to Public Works a request that the department look into other sidewalk placement and landscaping design options in the future. Ms. Stogsdill said the location and function of sidewalks had been a subject of significant debate between departments when the Street Tree Ordinance was revised a few years ago. To date, utility locations still outweighed Planning Staff’s comments about urban design.

It was established that the new 10’ recreational path was paved with concrete per Public Works requirements.

Mr. Werner responded to questioning that the placement and design of the trash receptacle and its enclosure was based on City requirements.

STAFF CLOSING

Mr. Patterson outlined Staff’s reasoning behind requiring the sidewalk on the west side of Eisenhower Drive:

• Code requires sidewalks on both sides of collector streets and a collector designation was given to Eisenhower Drive after the Park West development was approved.
• The Preliminary Plat was approved with a condition requiring this section of sidewalk.
• The City Engineer states that the sidewalk is needed.
• Surrounding development (both existing and approved) will be able to use the sidewalk to access the recreational path on Overland Drive if/when the sidewalk is extended in the future.

Staff noted that moving the sidewalks to allow more separation may result in greater right-of-way or pedestrian easement dedications, as well as other code changes.

COMMISSION DISCUSSION

It was clarified that Eisenhower Drive as newly constructed with a sidewalk on only one side because it was designated as a local street at that time.  After construction, Eisenhower Drive was redesignated as a collector street, which carried the dual-sidewalk requirement.

The Commission discussed benefit districts or inclusion in the CIP as ways to get the west-side sidewalk constructed.  Staff said it was possible to require an Agreement Not to Protest a benefit district for sidewalk improvements, so the western sidewalk could be constructed at a future date.  However, Staff did not recommend this option.

Erickson said she appreciated the project’s provision of extra open space and that she looked forward to a time “when we don’t think so much paved surface is needed.”

ACTION TAKEN

Motioned by Krebs, seconded by Burress to approve the Preliminary Development Plan for Park West Gardens and forward it to the City Commission with a recommendation for approval, based on the findings of fact presented in the Staff Report and subject to the following conditions:

1. Provision of the following revisions to the Development Plan:

a. Modify note no. 2.6 to, “A photometric plan will be submitted for approval with the Final Development Plan”;

b. Modify note no. 2.15, change “liscensed” to “licensed”; and

c. Include a 5’ wide sidewalk along the west side of Eisenhower Drive.

2. Provision of the following note on the face of the Development Plan:

a. “Public improvement plans will be submitted to Public Works before the Final Development Plan is filed at the Register of Deeds.”

3. Execute an Agreement Not to Protest the Formation of a Benefit District for Improvements to Queens Road and to the intersection of Queens Road/Overland Drive.

Motion carried 9-1, with Burress, Erickson, Ermeling, Haase, Harris, Jennings, Krebs, Lawson and Riordan voting in favor.  Eichhorn voted in opposition and Student Commissioner Wright voted in the affirmative.