Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutALL DOCS - 08-00316 - Summerfield - Preliminary Master Plan for PUDv Preliminary /Final Plat XB LR C r� BEN City of Rexburg )riginetiot gate: Center 3 3 � !) r a ) " Phone: 208.359.3020 I www.rexburg.org Fax. 208.359.3022 ompleti4 CITY OF REX America's Family Gommuniiv VV I L-W • • .— • p LOCAL STATE aco Cc) - 3 1 12/SToAAGE ❑ ARCHIVES S o. v►1. City of Rexburg Records $ W--h&n for Approval of Preliminary Subdivision Plat •m el" �rn N -D The attached Subdivision plan has been prepared in accordance with the Subdivision Regulations of the City of Rexburg, and the following items are shown on the plan or plans, or explanations given with respect thereto. Requirements for Preliminary Plats ° r All Preliminary Plats shall be 24'x 36' foldable, drawn to scale, North point, dated. FA? The following shall be shown on the Preliminary Plat or shall be submitted separately: 1. The name of the proposed subdivision: —skm ner'TW 2. The location lao W`.-t o st.-Ih Acreage ev 2SIO Number of Lots 3. The names, addresses and telephone numbers of the subdivider or subdividers and the engineer or surveyor who prepared the plat: 4. The name and - address. of all property owners within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the subdivision whether or not bisected by a public right -of -way as shown on record in the County Assessor's office. 5. The legal description of the subdivision. -Lv, Lo-* h - (14 3s) x'10-- 9 (6 °i (q`1c� Subdivider Name: Address: 601 wesl 17W .so.A , t yjAp, Phone Numberr: ,7s' S - 70a7 Cell u `1 f40 Number: Engineer _7S? 14-65) Name: V& VAe- Lro p t /� t( Address: 38© S Ar;oi j Gr /toad . p rarij"ea e Phone Number: 752- 9 7SS Cell Number: 7S7- 51 ,1 Surveyor Name: de Grow Address: 380 Sar;n. Greek fi j. Pro Phone Number: 7sz ,- ° 17SS Cell Number: 4. The name and - address. of all property owners within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the subdivision whether or not bisected by a public right -of -way as shown on record in the County Assessor's office. 5. The legal description of the subdivision. 6. A statement of the intended use of the proposed subdivision such as: Residential — (single family, two- family and multiple housing); Commercial, Industrial, Recreational or Agricultural. Show sites proposed for parks, playgrounds, schools, churches or other public areas. A XrJ use Of SiAde 1` , !WO 14M1��1/ An� A.JJJ plt hyu5;41 7. A map of the entire area scheduled for development if the proposed subdivision is a portion of a larger holding intended for subsequent development. 8. A vicinit ma showing the relationship of the proposed plat to the surrounding area (1 /2 mile of minim radius, scale optional). 9. Streets, street names, rights -of -way, and roadway widths, including adjoining streets or roadways, curbs and sidewalks. 10. Lot lines and blocks showing the dimensions and numbers of each. 11. Contour lines, shown at five (5) feet intervals where land slope is greater than ten percent (10 %) and at two (2) feet intervals where land slope is ten percent (10 %) or less referenced to an established bench mark, including location and elevation. 12. A" 1roposed or existing utilities including, but not limited to, storm and sanitary sewers, irrigation laterals, ditches, drains; bridges, culverts, water mains, fire hydrants, power, gas, street lights and their respective profiles and easements. 13. A copy of any proposed restrictive covenants and /or deed restrictions. (To be attached or submitted with final plat). 14. Any dedications to the public and /or easements, together with a statement of location, dimensions, and purpose of such. Please complete the following: (If not applicable, please fill in with N /A) 1. What is the,land use and existing zoning of the proposed subdivision and the adjacent land? 2. Does subdivision conform to present zoning? 3. Requested zoning. Pub 4. Variance Requested: Yes No X (If yes, attach written request) 5. Requesting annexation to City? 'YO 2 • o� QEXa V v v CITY OF REXBURG - __ America's Family Community � �� " vz_ Kt,tifc.k.�tie2 ro lz��uy General Planned Unit Development, File # 08 00064 and #08 00316 Summerfield Preliminary Master Plan and Preliminary Plat These Conditions of Approval are based on the Planning & Zoning meeting minutes of August 7, 2008, and the City Council meeting minutes of September 3, 2008. Conditions of Approval 1. The final master plan/final plat application for each phase shall include all required submittal standards and incorporate all conditions of approval. 2. All recommendations and requirements from the City Engineer shall be adhered to and incorporated in the submittal of each phase 's final master plan✓final plat. 3. Language shall be clear in the CC &Rs that no approval granted by the HOA or Architectural Committee shall violate City Code (e.g. accessory structures, building heights, fencing, location of building on lot, etc.). 4. The final CC &Rs shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior the recordation of a plat. S. Requirement of the underlying zoning prevails where no specific requested variation has been considered and granted in this PUD request. 6 The City's clear vision area of 30 feet shall be observed. These areas shall be clear of all permanent and temporary obstructions. Driveways shall not be included in the clear vision areas as parked vehicles constitute a temporary obstruction. Vegetation and fencing in these areas shall follow City standards. 7. Block 11, Lot 27 shall be allowed to be a created lot in this subdivision of land, but shall not be considered part of this PUD master plan approval. This will require the owner of Block 11, Lot 27 to apply for a separate PUD in the future if he should wish to develop it as a PUD. All requirements of the LDR2 zone or current zone shall apply to lot 27, and no part of this PUD overlay shall apply to this lot. Gary Leikness Planning and Zoning Administrator 19 E. Main Rexburg, ID 83440 P. O. Box 280 Phone (208) 359.3020 ext. 314 Fax (208) 359.3022 garyl @nxburg. org mavw. rexburg. org • 0 8. No garages or car ports shall be located within 20 feet of a front property line in order to ensure adequate space for off-street parking (15-feet is not deep enough for the City's parking standards) and to allow for a streetscape not dominated by garage doors, which is in harmony with planned unit development that seek a more traditional neighborhood ambiance. In addition, this reduced setback shall only be granted to allow for well defined porch areas, not just the fronts of buildings. This would apply to all types of residential uses. Other land uses such as churches, parking lots, etc shall maintain the setbacks as required under the LDR2 zone. 9. All side yard setbacks shall not be less than S feet. 10. All rear yard setbacks shall follow those as defined in the LDR2 zone, rather the I S foot fixed setback as requested. 11. If final platting requires adjustments to lot dimensions, then those changes shall be substantially the same as those found on this preliminary plat. If changes are substantially different than what is found in the preliminary plat proposal then the applicant shall re- submit a preliminary master plan/preliminary plat. 12. The City Engineer may determine that any of the roads may function as collector roads which may need greater right -of- way. The applicant shall discuss this with the City Engineer and any required modifications shall be shown on the final plat. 13. The developer shall provide safe routes to school, specifically the new elementary school and the new high school. Proposed improvements should receive support by the Madison School District, the Trails of Madison County, the City's Traffic Safety Committee, and the City Engineer, prior to submitting for final plat approval for any phase. The proposed improvement should include improvement details, costs of improvements, agreements between parties for funding, and a timeline for installation of improvements. Bonding for improvements may be required as part of the development agreement the developer will make with the City of Rexburg, as determined by the City Engineer. 14. The applicant, in promoting pedestrian connectivity and safety, has provided an easement, or access way in the south Gary Leikness Planning and Zoning Administrator 19 E. Main Rexburg, ID 83440 P. O. Box 280 Phone (208) 359.3020 ext. 314 Fax (208) 359.3022 gagI@rexburg.org sv - xburg.org • . east portion of the PUD which is intended to provide a pedestrian connection from the PUD to 1000 South (74h South). Unfortunately, when overlaying the proposed PUD on an aerial photo this connection appears to interfere with the property to the east and therefore, the applicant shall provide more information as to the connection's feasibility during the final master plan/final platting for this phase, which is Phase 1. 15. In order for the City to maintain an efficient transportation network in and around the proposed PUD, the applicant shall provide additional road connections to adjacent property and roads consistent with Figure 1 of this staff report, or as modified by the City Engineer. 16 Traffic Impacts the development shall incorporate all recommendations found in the provided traffic impact study. In addition, the development shall incorporate to all onsite and offsite improvements to streets and roads that the City Engineer may identify as being necessary to mitigate impacts of the proposed development. Performance Standards 17. Utilities All new utilities must be placed underground. 18. Water Conservation The final master plan for each phase shall show, in sufficient detail, how the proposal will incorporate low volume irrigation systems throughout the landscaped areas of the development. 19. Individual lot owners shall be required to incorporate low volume irrigation systems throughout their landscaped areas; this requirement shall be stated in the CC &Rs under Section 4.13. 20. Refuse Bins Individual trash bins shall be screened form the public right -of -way on days of no trash service in the neighborhood. 21. Future trash receptacles intended for trash service pick -up and that are placed in the common areas such as proposed parks must be screened in a manner that is similar in material and character of the neighborhood. This shall be incorporated in the final CC &Rs. Gary Leikness Planning and Zoning Administrator 19 E. Main Rexburg, ID 83440 P. O. Box 280 Phone (208) 359.3020 ext. 314 Fax (208) 359.3022 gary)@nxburg.org nova -xbuq oq 22. Glare Reduction The proposal must adhere to the City's lighting standards, details shall be provided with the final master plan/final plat for each phase. Common Open Space 23. Required Common Open Space The applicant shall consider not only proposing an open space /park at 10 acres in size, but shall also work with the City in determining if this area should be a City park. 24. Maintenance As the common areas are proposed to be private rather than public, the homeowners association shall be responsible for common space maintenance. Until such time as a homeowners association is established, the applicant or owner of record shall be responsible for all maintenance of common areas and all unsold lots. 25. Hardscape In order to determine hardscape percentages the final landscape plan, submitted with the final master plan, shall provide detailed information on hardscape percentages. 26 Common Activi . Areas areas need to be provided at a ratio of 1000 square feet per single family lot, which amounts to 11.5 acres of common activity area for this PUD. These area need to include playground equipment or pathways with benches and tables through natural or landscaped areas. This requirement shall be shown on the final landscape plan to be submitted with the final master plan/final plat application for each phase. 27. Landscaping Per Unit The applicant has not addressed this requirement during the preliminary master plan/preliminary plat phase, therefore the final master plans for each phase shall reflect this on landscape plans. In addition, the final CC &Rs shall have the PUD ordinance requirement written into the CC &Rs. The final landscape plan shall to consider solar access as required by the PUD ordinance in the placement of deciduous and evergreen trees. 28. Water Conservation The final landscape plan shall identify drought tolerant species being used and where zones are located within the common space areas that can Gary Leikness Planning and Zoning Administrator V E. Main Rexburg, ID 83440 P. O. Box 280 Pbone (208) 359.3020 ext. 314 Fax (208) 359.3022 gagI@rrxburg.org nnvnerexburg.org 0 0 maximize water conservation by incorporating plants that have similar water usage demands. Master Plan Approval Time Limitations 29. The proposed preliminary master plan/preliminary plat shall expire within two years of approval if a final master plan/final plat has not been reviewed and approved by the City within that time. This requires that a complete final master /final plat for phase I be submitted to the City for review and approval within 1. S years of approval of this preliminary master planlpreliminary plat or the preliminary master plan/preliminary plat will expire. 30. Each additional phase (or remainder of unplatted portions of the proposed preliminary master plan/preliminary plat) shall expire within two (2) years of the approval of a previous phase in the order as shown on the proposed preliminary master plan, unless a final master plan/final plat is reviewed and approved by the City within that time. This will also require the complete application for a final master plan/final plat be submitted to the City within 1. S years of the previous approval. 31. An extension of up to one year per phase may be requested by the applicant. A request for extension must be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to any expiration date. In addition, once a final plat has been approved by the City, it must be recorded with the County within 6 months or it becomes null and void 32. Project shall provide 68 foot right -of -ways or current City street cross- sections. Gary Leikness Planning and Zoning Administrator 19 E. Main Rexburg, ID 83440 P. O. Box 280 Phone (208) 359.3020 ext. 314 Fax (208) 359.3022 garyl@ -xbugg org navn<rexbu%oq 0 Findings of Fact City of Rexburg 12 North Center Phone: 208.359.3020 Rexburg, ID 83440 www.rexburg.org Fax: 208.359.3022 ` � n O � gEXBUR U � � Cyar'LB7s REX America's Family Community Summerfield — PUD Preliminary Master Plan /Preliminary Plat 1. On June 25, 2008, Kartchner Homes presented to the Rexburg Planning & Zoning Coordinator a Request and Application for a PUD Preliminary Master Plan /Preliminary Plat for Summerfield. 2. On July 21, 2008, the City Clerk sent the Notice of Public Hearing to be published in the local newspaper for July 23, 2008 and August 2, 2008. A notice'was posted on the property and sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the above mentioned property. 3. On August 7, 2008, Troy Kartchner, the developer for this project, presented to the Rexburg Planning & Zoning Commission the Request for approval of the PUD Preliminary Master Plan /Preliminary Plat. Charles Andersen motioned to recommend approval to City Council of the Preliminary Master Plan and the Preliminary Plat for the Summerfield Planned Unit Development (PUD) at 12 West and 6t,, South, to include all of the thirty -one (31) conditions in the Planning Staff review, except to change condition number nine ( #9) to read "Side yard setbacks shall not be less than 5 feet." Thaine Robinson seconded the motion. None opposed. Motion carried. Proposed Conditions of Approval General 1. The final master plan/final plat application for each phase shall include all required submittal standards and incorporate all conditions of approval. 2. All recommendations and requirements from the City Engineer shall be adhered to and incorporated in the submittal of each phase's final master plan/final plat. 3. Language shall be clear in the CC &Rs that no approval granted by the HOA or Architectural Committee shall violate City Code (e.g. accessory structures, building heights, fencing, location of building on lot, etc.). 4. The final CC &Rs shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior the recordation of a plat. 5. Requirement of the underlying zoning prevails where no specific requested variation has been considered and granted in this PUD request. 6. The City's clear vision area of 30 -feet shall be observed. These areas shall be clear of all permanent and temporary obstructions. Driveways shall not be included in the clear vision areas as parked vehicles constitute a temporary obstruction. Vegetation and fencing in these areas shall follow City standards. 7. Block 11, Lot 27 shall be allowed to be a created lot in this subdivision of land, but shall not be considered part of this PUD master plan approval. This will require the owner of Block 11, Lot 27 to apply for a separate PUD in the future if he should 0 0 wish to develop it as a PUD. All requirements of the LDR2 zone or current zone shall apply to lot 27, and no part of this PUD overlay shall apply to this lot. 8. No garages or car ports shall be located within 20 feet of a front property line in order to ensure adequate space for off - street parking (15 -feet is not deep enough for the City's parking standards) and to allow for a streetscape not dominated by garage doors, which is in harmony with planned unit development that seek a more traditional neighborhood ambiance. In addition, this reduced setback shall only be granted to allow for well defined porch areas, not just the fronts of buildings. This would apply to all types of residential uses. Other land uses such as churches, parking lots, etc shall maintain the setbacks as required under the LDR2 zone. 9. All side yard setbacks shall not be less than 5 feet. 10. All rear yard setbacks shall follow those as defined in the LDR2 zone, rather than the 15 -foot fixed setback as requested. 11. If final platting requires adjustments to lot dimensions, then those changes shall be substantially the same as those found on this preliminary plat. If changes are substantially different than what is found in the preliminary plat proposal then the applicant shall re- submit a preliminary master plan/preliminary plat. 12. The City Engineer may determine that any of the roads may function as collector roads which may need greater right -of -way. The applicant shall discuss this with the City Engineer and any required modifications shall be shown on the final plat. 13. The developer shall explore safe routes to school, specifically the new elementary school and the new high school. Proposed improvements should receive support by the Madison School District, the City's Traffic Safety Committee, and the City Engineer, prior to submitting for final plat approval for any phase. The proposed improvement shall include improvement details, costs of improvements, agreements between parties for funding, and a timeline for installation of improvements. Bonding for improvements may be required as part of the development agreement the developer will make with the City of Rexburg, as determined by the City Engineer. 14. The applicant, in promoting pedestrian connectivity and safety, has provided an easement, or access way in the south east portion of the PUD which is intended to provide a pedestrian connection from the PUD to 1000 South (7 South). Unfortunately, when overlaying the proposed PUD on an aerial photo this connection appears to interfere with the property to the east and therefore, the applicant shall provide more information as to the connection's feasibility during the final master plan/final platting for this phase, which is Phase 1. 15. In order for the City to maintain an efficient transportation network in and around the proposed PUD, the applicant shall provide additional road connections to adjacent property and roads consistent with Figure I (see below after Proposed Conditions of Approval) of this staff report, or as modified by the City Engineer. 16. Traffic Impacts the development shall incorporate all recommendations found in the provided traffic impact study. In addition, the development shall incorporate to all onsite and offsite improvements to streets and roads that the City Engineer may identify as being necessary to mitigate impacts of the proposed development. Performance Standards 17. Utilities All new utilities must be placed underground. 18. Water Conservation The final master plan for each phase shall show, in sufficient detail, how the proposal will incorporate low volume irrigation systems throughout the landscaped areas of the development. 19. Individual lot owners shall be required to incorporate low volume irrigation systems throughout their landscaped areas; this requirement shall be stated in the CC &Rs under Section 4.13. 20. Refuse Bins Individual trash bins shall be screened form the public right -of -way on days of no trash service in the neighborhood. 21. Future trash receptacles intended for trash service pick -up and that are placed in the common areas such as proposed parks must be screened in a manner that is similar in material and character of the neighborhood. This shall be incorporated in the final CC &Rs. 22. Glare Reduction The proposal must adhere to the City's lighting standards , details shall be provided with the final master plan/final plat for each phase. Common Open Space 23. Required Common Open Space The applicant shall consider not only proposing an open space /park at 10 acres in size, but shall also work with the City in determining if this area should be a City park. 24. Maintenance As the common areas are proposed to be private rather than public, the homeowners association shall be responsible for common space maintenance. Until such time as a homeowners association is established, the applicant or owner of record shall be responsible for all maintenance of common areas and all unsold lots. 25. Hardscape In order to determine hardscape percentages the final landscape plan, submitted with the final master plan, shall provide detailed information on hardscape percentages. 26. Common Activity Areas - areas need to be provided at a ratio of 1000 square feet per single family lot, which amounts to 11.5 acres of common activity area for this PUD. These area need to include playground equipment or pathways with benches and tables through natural or landscaped areas. This requirement shall be shown on the final landscape plan to be submitted with the final master plan/final plat application for each phase. 27. Landscaping Per Unit The applicant has not addressed this requirement during the preliminary master plan/preliminary plat phase, therefore the final master plans for each phase shall reflect this on landscape plans. In addition, the final CC &Rs shall have the PUD ordinance requirement written into the CC &Rs. The final landscape plan shall to consider solar access as required by the PUD ordinance in the placement of deciduous and evergreen trees. 28. Water Conservation The final landscape plan shall identify drought tolerant species being used and where zones are located within the common space areas that can maximize water conservation by incorporating plants that have similar water usage demands. Master Plan Approval Time Limitations 29. The proposed preliminary master plan/preliminary plat shall expire within two years of approval if a final master plan/final plat has not been reviewed and approved by the City within that time. This requires that a complete final master /final plat for phase 1 be submitted to the City for review and approval 0 • within 1.5 years of approval of this preliminary master plan/preliminary plat or the preliminary master plan/preliminary plat will expire. 30. Each additional phase (or remainder of unplatted portions of the proposed preliminary master plan/preliminary plat) shall expire within two (2) years of the approval of a previous phase in the order as shown on the proposed preliminary master plan, unless a final master plan/final plat is reviewed and approved by the City within that time. This will also require the complete application for a final master plan/final plat be submitted to the City within 1.5 years of the previous approval. 31. An extension of up to one year per phase may be requested by the applicant. A request for extension must be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to any expiration date. In addition, once a final plat has been approved by the City, it must be recorded with the County within 6 months or it becomes null and void. W 440 S r f ¢ ; �• q i 7� wng" �, si'�'i I � d� � .•n ir C3 L t [`I' ote Wit!ow Wa f y I 26 _25 W 1000 S '� /� w =��, x._+ z irN �. ,�:.'� I n 35� 36 Figure 1. Potential Additional Road Connections On September 03, 2008 Troy Kartchner at 601 West 1700 South in Logan, Utah reviewed the PUD on the overhead screen. There are nearly 16 acres of common area. They want to provide a mixed development with all properties having home ownership without rentals. There are large landscaped areas on the entry ways with fenced areas. Attractive twin homes are laid out on the entry way with a dog park. The lots will vary in size from 6,000 to 8,000 square feet with 60 to 70 foot front yards and they are 100 to 110 feet deep. There will be a section of four /six plex town homes with one and two car garages. The next size lots will run 9,000 to 15,000 square feet. All of the homes are buffered by landscaping from the road. It is a large project with a long term build out plan including walking paths. The amenities will be installed over time. Council Member Erickson pointed out some green space areas. The main park is nearly four acres with a sw immin g pool planned. They had a discussion on basements and if basements will be available. Mr. Kartchner indicated basements are a possibility if ground water testing allows for basements. Mr. Kartchner reviewed home designs with a consistent look with varied craftsman designs and front porches. There will be a park and playground equipment up front with a club house built after 75 homes are sold. Every lot sale (new or resale) closure will pay ' / point to maintain the common area. Night sky lighting requirements will be followed. Mayor Larsen asked them to work with the city on benches and lighting. Mayor Larsen stated that it may be more beneficial for them to go with the city standard benches, as opposed to the ones in the slides. Also, he suggested changing the Victorian style lights into a more craftsmanship look. Mr. Kartchner indicated streets will be tree lined by the developer. All homes, including townhouses, will maintain a craftsmanship style standard. Mayor Larsen opened the public testimony hearing. Steve Kimball at 2313 West 440 South owns a home previously owned by Klem and Marie Thompson. He is also speaking on behalf of the Holly's. He is concerned with future roads crossing their properties in the future. He was concerned with starter homes on the entryways having young children. Can the starter townhomes be relocated to reduce the traffic? He wants to put more single family homes next to the ones that are already adjacent to this development. Joseph West at 125 Crestview wanted the Trails of Madison County System be included in their plan along 12`'' West. Mayor Larsen verified the trail system has a trail on 12 West. Julie Kimball at 2313 West 440 South was concerned with her children walking on 440 South and 12 West to the neighborhood grade school because she believes the road is unsafe. Her children will be walking to school on 12 West. They will be irrigating their property and they don't want to flood future basements. Will the town homes be done first? Mr. Kartcher explained timing for the different phases on the map and where the sewer line would be installed. There are four phases to the development. Within the four phases are some construction phases. The economy may drive the timing of these phases. He said it would be impossible to start the next phase within two years as indicated in the city code. Mayor Larsen closed the public testimony. Council Member Mann was favorable to the PUD's pictures; however, he was concerned with the widening of 12 West. He wanted safe walking areas for the children to walk to the schools. Council Member Schwendiman was concerned with roads like 12`'' West. The roads around the development will need to be improved. He inquired about the sidewalks, and the future of 12 West. Planning and Zoning Administrator Leikness went over the staff review. Planning and Zoning approved the PUD with conditions: ------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------- Charles Andersen motioned to recommend approval to City Council of the Preliminary Master Plan and the Preliminary Plat for the Summerfield Planned Unit Development (PUD) at I2? best and 6 th South, to include r 0 all of the thirty -one (3 1) conditions ' the Planning Staff review, except to change condition number 9 ( #9) to read `Side jard setbacks shall not be less than 5 feet. " Thaine Robinson seconded the motion. None opposed. Motion carried. Proposed Conditions of Approval General 1. The final master plan/final plat application for each phase shall include all required submittal standards and incorporate all conditions of approval. 2. All recommendations and requirements from the City Engineer shall be adhered to and incorporated in the submittal of each phase's final master plan/final plat. 3. Language shall be clear in the CC &Rs that no approval granted by the HOA or Architectural Committee shall violate City Code (e.g. accessory structures, building heights, fencing, location of building on lot, etc.). 4. The final CC &Rs shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior the recordation of a plat. 5. Requirement of the underlying zoning prevails where no specific requested variation has been considered and granted in this PUD request. 6 The City's clear vision area of 30 feet shall be observed. These areas shall be clear of all permanent and temporary obstructions. Driveways shall not be included in the clear vision areas as parked vehicles constitute a temporary obstruction. Vegetation and fencing in these areas shall follow City standards. 7. Block H, Lot 27 shall be allowed to be a created lot in this subdivision of land, but shall not be considered part of this PUD master plan approval. This will require the owner of Block 11, Lot 27 to apply for a separate PUD in the future if he should wish to develop it as a PUD. All requirements of the LDR2 zone or current zone shall apply to lot 27, and no part of this PUD overlay shall apply to this lot. 8. No garages or car ports shall be located within 20 feet of a front property line in order to ensure adequate space for off - street parking (15-feet is not deep enough for the City's parking standards) and to allow for a streetscape not dominated by garage doors, which is in harmony with planned unit development that seek a more traditional neighborhood ambiance. In addition, this reduced setback shall only be granted to allow for well defined porch areas, not just the fronts of buildings. This would apply to all types of residential uses. Other land uses such as churches, parking lots, etc shall maintain the setbacks as required under the LDR2 zone. 9. All side yard setbacks shall not be less than 5 feet. 10. All rear yard setbacks shall follow those as defined in the LDR2 zone, rather the I g foot fixed setback as requested. 11. If final platting requires adjustments to lot dimensions, then those changes shall be substantially the same as those found on this preliminary plat. If changes are substantially different than what is found in the preliminary plat proposal then the applicant shall re- submit a preliminary master plan/preliminary plat. 12. The City Engineer may determine that any of the roads may function as collector roads which may need greater right -of -way. The applicant shall discuss this with the City Engineer and any required modifications shall be shown on the final plat. 13. The developer shall explore safe routes to school, specifically the new elementary school and the new high school. Proposed improvements should receive support by the Madison School District, the City's Traffic Safety Committee, and the City Engineer, prior to submitting for final plat approval for any phase. The proposed 0 0 improvement should include improvement details, costs of improvements, agreements between parties for funding, and a timeline for installation of improvements. Bonding for improvements may be required as part of the development agreement the developer will make with the City of Rexburg, as determined by the City Engineer. 14. The applicant, in promoting pedestrian connectivity and safety, has provided an easement, or access way in the south east portion of the PUD which is intended to provide a pedestrian connection from the PUD to 1000 South (7" South). Unfortunately, when overlaying the proposed PUD on an aerial photo this connection appears to interfere with the property to the east and therefore, the applicant shall provide more information as to the connection's feasibility during the final master plan/final platting for this phase, which is Phase 1. 15. In order for the City to maintain an efficient transportation network in and around the proposed PUD, the applicant shall provide additional road connections to adjacent property and roads consistent with Figure I of this staff report, or as modified by the City Engineer. 16 Tradic Impacts the development shall incorporate all recommendations found in the provided traffic impact study. In addition, the development shall incorporate to all onsite and offsite improvements to streets and roads that the City Engineer may identify as being necessary to mitigate impacts of the proposed development. Performance Standards 17. Utilities All new utilities must be placed underground. 18. Water Conservation The final master plan for each phase shall show, in sufficient detail, how the proposal will incorporate low volume irrigation systems throughout the landscaped areas of the development. 19. Individual lot owners shall be required to incorporate low volume irrigation systems throughout their landscaped areas; this requirement shall be stated in the CC &Rs under Section 4.13. 20. Ruse Bins - Individual trash bins shall be screened form the public right -of -way on days of no trash service in the neighborhood. 21. Future trash receptacles intended for trash service pick -up and that are placed in the common areas such as proposed parks must be screened in a manner that is similar in material and character of the neighborhood. This shall be incorporated in the final CC &Rs. 22. Glare Reduction The proposal must adhere to the City's lighting standards, details shall be provided with the final master planlfinal plat for each phase. Common Open Space 23. Required Common Open Space The applicant shall consider not only proposing an open space /park at 10 acres in size, but shall also work with the City in determining if this area should be a City park. Maintenance As the common areas are proposed to be private rather than public, the homeowners association shall be responsible for common space maintenance. Until such time as a homeowners association is established, the applicant or owner of record shall be responsible for all maintenance of common areas and all unsold lots. Hardscape In order to determine hardscape percentages the final landscape plan, submitted with the final master plan, shall provide detailed information on hardscape percentages. 24 25 26 Common Activity Areas areas need to be provided at a ratio of 1000 square feet per single family lot, which amounts to 11. S acres of common activity area for this PUD. These area need to include playground equipment or pathways with benches and tables through natural or landscaped areas. This requirement shall be shown on the final landscape plan to be submitted with the final master planlfinal plat application for each phase. 27. Landscaping Per Unit The applicant has not addressed this requirement during the preliminary master plan/preliminary plat phase, therefore the final master plans for each phase shall reflect this on landscape plans. In addition, the final CC &Rs shall have the PUD ordinance requirement written into the CC &Rs. The final landscape plan shall to consider solar access as required by the PUD ordinance in the placement of deciduous and evergreen trees. 28. Water Conservation The final landscape plan shall identify drought tolerant species being used and where zones are located within the common space areas that can maximize water conservation by incorporating plants that have similar water usage demands. Master Plan Approval Time Limitations 29. The proposed preliminary master plan/preliminary plat shall expire within two years of approval if a final master plan/final plat has not been reviewed and approved by the City within that time. This requires that a complete final master /final plat for phase I be submitted to the City for review and approval within 1.5 years of approval of this preliminary master plan/preliminary plat or the preliminary master plan/preliminary plat will expire. 30. Each additional phase (or remainder of unplatted portions of the proposed preliminary master plan/preliminary plat) shall expire within two (2) years of the approval of a previous phase in the order as shown on the proposed preliminary master plan, unless a final master plan/final plat is reviewed and approved by the City within that time. This will also require the complete application for a final master plan/final plat be submitted to the City within 1.5 years of the previous approval. 31. An extension of up to one year per phase maybe requested by the applicant. A request for extension must be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to any expiration date. In addition, once a final plat has been approved by the City, it must be recorded with the County within 6 months or it becomes null and void. ------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------- The Summerfield Planned Unit Development Preliminary Master Plan is a 139 to 140 acre subdivision with 502 dwelling units, 38 twin homes, 126 town homes, and 338 single family homes. There will add an estimated 1,862 residents. He asked the City Council to uphold the Planning and Zoning Commissions X N recommended conditions, including road stub -outs, parks, and safe routes to school. The developer is providing a safe route to the Burton Elementary School through the new development. The school district and this developer must work together to come up with a safe road crossing on West 7"' South (1,000 South) to the Burton Elementary School. Additional road stub outs are required to the east and to the south. It is good planning to have the stub outs for the future. If the neighborhood ever wanted to reduce their zoning to an LDR -2, they would have to have stub out connections. Council Member Erickson reviewed the additional road connections. He pointed out four stub outs on one side, and three stub outs on the other side of the development. He stated some roads stub out into 6 other residents' property across the development boundary. 12` West is a serious situation for getting children to school (adding sidewalks) and must be addressed in the approval process. Planning and Zoning Administrator Leikness indicated the school district does have some off site improvement monies for addressing these issues of funding sidewalks, etc. Council Member Erickson discussed funding options on 12` West to help the children walk to school. One idea was an LID for the area. Council Member Stevens was concerned one stub out was being directed to the neighbor's back yard. How many stub outs does the development need. Planning and Zoning Administrator Leikness stated that he hopes to form a road to straddle the property line. Council Member Stevens requested buffering (berm, etc.) to help protect the neighbors. Planning and Zoning Administrator Leikness stated that there was at present a canal that buffers the neighborhoods. Council Member Erickson indicated the Holly property has a big cul -de -sac that could be joined into a road system. The city code on time limits may not be possible due to the size of the development. Council Member Schwendiman discussed approving a future plat within two years. He asked if the time line could be extended to three years. Five years may be too long. Planning and Zoning Administrator Leikness stated that if the development dies at some point, it should be planned to be developed in a timely manner to encourage future development to continue at the current standards. He has seen a subdivision undeveloped for 20 years. Roads and other amenities were never required so it became a nightmare. It is nice to keep things current and flexible enough to have a nice development. If two years is not enough time to move to the next phase, maybe three to five years would work. The two year time line to move from phase to phase discourages developers from biting off more than they can chew. Council Member Mann asked if there has been a deal made with the church that is already there. Planning and Zoning Administrator Leikness stated that it is a done deal. Council Member Schwendiman is concerned with having basements in the area. Council Member Erickson said the canal will be kept full of water. One of the canals will be piped. Council Member Stevens asked whose responsibility it is to investigate flooding potential. City Attorney Zollinger indicated FEMA dictates flood plain requirements. An associate of Karchner Homes said they have been using piezometers for over 1 '/a years to test for the water depth and the meters show dry ground eight feet deep. Council Member Woodland has seen the sub in this area at two feet. Council Member Schwendiman asked the runoff water is being maintained on site. Planning and Zoning Administrator Leikness said yes. Discussion on surface area water rights. Troy Kartchner said a group wants to mitigate surface water rights to be able to pump sub - surface water. Mayor Larsen explained it is a way to convert surface water rights to sub - surface water rights. Council Member Schwendiman reminded the City Council of the city's policy requiring surface water rights to be transferred to the city when the property is developed. City Attorney Zollinger said the water rights transfer is subject to negotiations with the city through the Public Works Director. Mr. Kartchner and Public Works Director Millar have been negotiating the issue to add new sub - surface water well on site for a city well. Discussion on using surface water rights to water the lawns and common areas. Council Member Stevens moved to approve Summerfield Planned Unit Development Preliminary Master Plan and Preliminary Plat for Phase One with 68 foot right -of -ways including the Planning and Zoning Conditions; Council Member Mann seconded the motion: Discussion: Council Member Schwendiman recommended three years for a limit with a one year extension possible between phases; Council Member Stevens modified his motion to have a three year limit between phases with a one year extension possible; Council Member Mann seconded the amended motion; Planning and Zoning Administrator Leikness reaffirmed the proposal for a Planned Unit Development Preliminary Master Plan and Preliminary Plat for Phase One. Final Plats (Phase One; Phase Two; Phase Three; and Phase Four) will come at a later date. Mr. Kartchner clarified by asking if the phases are the constructions phases. He has five construction phases developed at five different times in Phase One of the development. No just the plating phases. He was concerned because phase one of 150 units in the construction phase will take awhile. Council Member Stevens confirmed the maximum time allowed for Phase One of the development would be four years including the extension period of one year; otherwise Phase One could be drawn out ten years. Mr. Kartchner explained the reasoning for the larger phases was to help provide the common areas up front due to the density of each area. Planning and Zoning Administrator Leikness added to Mr. Kartchner's remarks by stating that if he wanted to build town homes and small lots, PUD code states that you cannot come in during Phase One, build a lot of homes at maximum density, and then the project dies. Each phase of the PUD must meet the underlying density, which is why he has a larger phase because he has to offset the smaller lots with larger open space areas. Council Member Mann wanted to include working with the Trails of Madison County and look at it before the final plat. Discussion on Staff Review which covers "Safe Routes to School" and changing the language to say providing "Safe Routes to School ". Council Member Erickson wanted the language to say "Provide Safe Routes to School" All voted aye, none opposed. The motion carried. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that a Public Hearing will be held before the Planning & Zoning Commission of the City of Rexburg, Idaho, Thursday, August 07, 2008, at 7:30 p.m., in the City Council Chambers of the City Building at 12 North Center, Rexburg, Idaho, regarding a Preliminary Master Plan (PUD 08 00064) and a Preliminary Plat (PUD 08 00316) for a Planned Unit Development located at 2540 West 1000 South, Rexburg, Idaho. The property is currently zoned Low Density Residential Two (LDR2). The city code governing this request is ORDINANCE No. 926 "DEVELOPMENT CODE OF THE CITY OF REXBURG, IDAHO" (ADOPTED FEBRUARY 16th, 2005) and Amended 7/06/2005; 5/07/2007; 7/03/2007 The said parcel is located at 2540 West 1000 South, Rexburg, Madison County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Legal Description for Summerfield # 08 00064 Part of the southeast quarter and the east half of the southwest quarter of section 26, township 16 north, range 39 east of the Boise meridian, Madison County, Idaho described as follows: Beginning at a point which lies south 0 °22'09" east along the east line of section 26, 468.39 feet from the east quarter corner of said section 26 and running thence south 0° 22'09" east along said east line of section 26, 851.71 feet; thence south 89 °49'16'west, 1313.88 feet; thence south 0 °21'15" east, 1318.74 feet to the south line of said section 26; thence south 89 °52'48 "west along said south line of section 26, 1314.23 feet to the south quarter corner of said section 26; thence north 0 °20'21" west, 550.00 feet; thence south 89 °53'18" west, 871.20 feet; thence south 0 °20'21 "east, 550.00 feet; thence south 89 °53'18 "west 444.94 feet; thence north 0 °15'50 "west, 2631.88 feet; thence north 89 °45'44 "east, 3474.74 feet: thence south 0 °22'09" east, 468.39 feet; thence north 89 °45'44" east, 465.00 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 182.76 acres. At such hearing the Planning & Zoning Commission will hear all persons and all objections and recommendations relative to such proposed permit. The City Clerk will also accept written comments at City Hall prior to 4:00 p.m. on August 06 2008. This notice is given pursuant to the provisions of Section 67 -6509 and 67 -6511 Idaho Code, and all amendments thereof. DATE 11 A*� 21St day of July, 2008. O RPORA I , CITY OF REXBURG BY IL I3 � OF -- \N Blair D. Kay, City Clerk �!!! ! / / / N I I I I I I I ►1 1 111 � � \\ ublished: July 23rd, 2008 August 02 nd , 2008 • Planning and Zoning Department STAFF REPORT 12 North Center garyl @rexburg.org Phone: 208.359.3020 x314 Rexburg, ID 83440 www.rexburg.org Fax: 208.359.3024 a4 R xs °ac f a U 9 o CITY O F RE XBURG _______ Americas Family Community SUBJECT: Planned Unit Development, file #08 00064 and #08 00316 Summerfield Preliminary Master Plan and Preliminary Plat APPLICANT: Troy Kartchner 601 West 1700 South Logan, Utah PROPERTY OWNER: Same as Above PURPOSE: Establishment of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) through the approval of a Preliminary Master Plan and a Preliminary Plat. PROPERTY LOCATION: 2540 West 1000 South (near 12 West and 7th South) Rexburg, ID 83440 PROPERTY ID: RPRXBCA0264803 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: ZONING DISTRICT: City of Rexburg Development Code APPLICABLE CRITERIA: City of Rexburg Development Code (Ordinance Code 926) § 4.15 Planned Unit Development (PUD) Ordinance 658 and 708, Subdivision Ordinance AUTHORITY § 4.15(S)(1) The Commission shall recommend to the City Council that the proposed PUD be approved, approved with conditions, or denied. I. BACKGROUND The applicant has requested approval of a Planned Unit Development for purposes of creating a neighborhood of 502 total dwelling units: 38 twinhomes, 126 townhomes, and 338 single - family lots. The applicant has utilized the PUD ordinance to allow for clustering and variations from the standards of the underlying zoning. This PUD would potentially allow for 1862 people based on Rexburg's average household size of 3.71 people'. 'City of Rexburg DRAFT Comprehensive Plan 2020, pg 21 Case No. 08 00064 & 08 00316 Page 1 • , The PUD ordinance can be applied to any residential zone and is a permitted land use if it can be found that all applicable criteria for granting PUDs is met. Therefore, the City, upon receipt of a PUD request should review the proposal and either approve, deny, or approve with conditions. II. SITE DESCRIPTION The subject property is 182.76 acres, but the applicant is suggesting that Block 11, Lot 27 is not to be calculated as part of this PUD. Therefore, only 139.23 -acres are included in the calculated area of this PUD. Block 11, Lot 27 should be allowed to be a created lot in this subdivision of land, but should not be considered part of this PUD master plan approval. This would require the owner of Block 11, Lot 27 to apply for a separate PUD in the future if he should wish to develop it as a PUD. All requirements of the LDR2 zone or current zone shall apply to lot 27, and no part of the PUD overlay should created by this current request shall apply to that lot see proposed conditions of approval). The site is located north of W 7 th South and West of S 12 West. As proposed, the site will be accessed from 12 West and from 7 th South III. SUBSTANTIVE CRITERIA The following is a review of the minimum requirements of a PUD as well as determination of density and any related bonuses. Please refer to the PUD ordinance to view the entire description of each criteria, staff has only provided the headings followed with a review of each criteria. a. Uses Permitted- The applicant is requesting only residential uses, therefore this criterion does not apply. b. Minimum Area- The proposal is for 139 acres (not including Block 11, Lot 27). which exceeds the minimum of 3 -acres for a residential PUD. This criterion is met. c. Variations to Underlying Zoning- The applicant is requesting the following variations to the underlying LDR1 zoning: i. Front yard setbacks The LDR2 zone requires a 25 -foot setback from property line to front of building. Where a boulevard (landscape strip) is provided along the street, a 20- foot setback can be observed. The applicant is proposing that all front yards be reduced to a 15 -foot setback. Staff recommends that this PUD approval not allow garages or car ports to be located within 20 feet of a front property line in order to ensure adequate space for off - street parking (15 -feet is not deep enough for the City's parking standards) and to allow for streetscape not dominated by garage doors, which is in harmony with PUDs that seek a more traditional neighborhood ambiance. In addition, this reduced setback should only be granted to allow for well defined porch areas, not just the fronts of buildings. This would apply to all types of residential uses. Other land uses such as churches, parking lots, etc should still maintain the setback as required under the LDR2 zone. See proposed conditions of approval. The Commission may even look at allowing front yards to be reduced to 15 -feet in exchange for requiring garages and carports to be set back 25 -feet regardless of a boulevard provision in Ordinance 926. ii. Side yard setbacks The LDR2 zone requires a setback that is based on height (half the building height with a 6 -foot minimum). The applicant is requesting a reduced setback of 5 feet for all lots. There appears to be no justification for this request in the application material. Therefore, staff recommends not granting this reduced setback and recommends that the LDR2 side yard setbacks continue to apply (see proposed conditions of approval). Should the request be granted then it should not apply to any structure other than a single family detached home. iii. Rear yard setbacks The LDR2 zone requires a 20 -foot rear yard setback. The applicant is requesting a 15 -foot setback. There appears to be no justification for this request in the Case No. 08 00064 & 08 00316 Page 2 application material. Therefore, staff recommends not granting this reduced setback and recommends that the LDR2 rear yard setbacks continue to apply (see proposed conditions of approval). iv. Lot size and dimensions the applicant is requesting that the lot sizes be reduced in both area and dimensional standards. Such a request is what allows a PUD to create a clustered development that allows greater diversification between buildings and open space. Staff supports this variation only as shown on the preliminary plat. If the final platting requires adjustments to lot dimensions, then those changes should be substantially the same as those found on this preliminary plat. If changes are substantially different than what is found in the preliminary plat, then the applicant should re- submit a preliminary master plan/preliminary plat (see proposed conditions of approval). d. Street Standards- The proposal incorporates current City street and right -of -way standards. No variations have been requested. The City Engineer may determine that any of the roads may function are collector roads and may need greater right -of -way. The applicant should be prepared to have this discussion with the City Engineer and should show revised rights -of -way on the final plat (see proposed conditions of approval). e. Density Determination- The site, before any density bonuses are applied, has the potential to yield a density of 526 residential units, or lots. The applicant has requested only 502 units in the current PUD proposal. f. Minimum Performance Standards - i. Single Ownership or Control The development will remain under single control by the developer until such time as a homeowner's association is established which will enforce the standards of this PUD and the material found in the covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC &Rs). ii. Scope of Plan The entire parcel under ownership of the applicant is included in the proposal with the exception of Lot 27 of Block 11. iii. Design Team A design team must be formed and will be identified on all material submitted for the final master plan. iv. Natural Features The land involved in the proposal does not include natural features that should be considered for preservation. v. Utilities All new utilities will be placed underground. vi. Phasing The project is proposed to be completed in four (4) phases, with multiple construction phases within each of the four phases. The only remnant parcel is Block 11, Lot 27. According to the PUD ordinance, this parcel, as a remnant parcel should be identified as "open space." However, rather than labeling this as "open space" this parcel should be treated as staff has listing in the above section II, Site Description. vii. Water Conservation The final master plan should show how, in detail, the proposal will incorporate low volume irrigation systems throughout the landscaped areas of the development (see proposed conditions of approval). Individual lot owners should be required to do the same; this should be stated in the CC &Rs (see proposed conditions of approval). viii. Refuse Bins Individual trash bins should be screened from the public right -of -way on days of no trash service in the neighborhood. Any future trash receptacles intended for trash service pick -up placed in the common areas such as the proposed park areas must be screened in a manner that is similar in material and character of the neighborhood. This should be incorporated in the CC &Rs (see proposed conditions of approval). ix. Glare Reduction The proposal must adhere to the City's lighting standards which require glare reduction and respect the safety aspect of lighting as well as recognition of the valuable night sky (see proposed conditions of approval). Case No. 08 00064 & 08 00316 Page 3 C� • g. Common Open Space i. Required Common Open Space This standard requires that each PUD provide at least 10% of the gross area as open space and recreational area. The applicant is proposing collectively 15.91- acres. As the gross area is 139.23- acres, this only requires the developer to incorporate 13.9 acres for open space /recreation area. The Planning Commission should determine if what is being proposed meets the intent of the PUD ordinance. The proposal may need to consolidate some of the areas designated as open space areas at the ends of blocks and behind buildings into a significantly sized area of open space /park area. Admittedly, the applicant needs to be creative with regards to providing areas for drainage as this is very flat site. However, it appears that what is being proposed may be so divided up that a significant open space /recreation element is lost. This area could very well benefit from a park the size of Porter or Smith park (10 acres). Indeed, these park sizes accommodate well the active sports programs that many children and adults in the community are involved in. By providing a larger and consolidated open space area, this likely would reduce the need for citizens in this area to travel to parks such as Smith or Porter for activity practices and competitions. The applicant should consider not only proposing an open space /park at 10 acres in size, but should also work with the City in determining if this area should be a City park. The City's subdivision ordinance requires this consideration for subdivisions involving over 100 units (Ordinance 658, Section 3.5 Public Site, Open Space and Natural Features). See proposed condition of approval. It appears that the townhome open space areas may be for the exclusive use of the townhomes and not for the overall development (see Article II, Section 2.07(iv)(a)). This would suggest private ownership and would be more of a yard, rather than open space /recreation area for the benefit of the neighborhood. ii. Dedication of Land for Public Use No portion of the open space is proposed to be dedicated for public use at this time. However, the City's subdivision regulation requires that for developments of over 100 units, 10% of the open space and park lands are required to be offered to the City at fair market price at time of development. iii. Maintenance As the common areas are proposed to be private rather than public, the homeowners association will be responsible for common space maintenance, as stated in the proposed CC &Rs. Until such time as a homeowners association is established, the applicant shall be responsible for all maintenance of common areas and all unsold lots (see proposed conditions of approval). iv. Clustering The ability to provide open space elements to this development is provided through the clustering of lots. The Commission should determine if the lots in general have been oriented towards the common space elements. The open space areas need to be focal points for the neighborhood and should be interconnected with the neighborhood's internal sidewalk/trail network. The Commission should also decide whether the open space elements are interconnected and are focal points for the neighborhood. v. Hardscape Staff was unable to determine hardscape percentages, as the final landscape plans are not yet submitted. Only preliminary plans are required at this time; the final landscape plan should be submitted for review and approval with the final master plan application (see proposed condition of approval). Case No. 08 00064 & 08 00316 Page 4 i • vi. Common Activity Areas Details of open space elements including the central park area have been provided and includes common activity area. The PUD ordinance requires that common activity areas are provided at a ratio of 1000 square feet per single family lot. As all lots in this PUD area considered single family lots, the applicant needs to provide 11.5 acres of common activity area. These area need to include playground equipment or pathways with benches and tables through natural or landscaped areas. This criterion further suggests the need for a larger consolidated open space /park area and possibly trail system that would satisfy this requirement. The Commission should determine if this requirement is met. This requirement should be shown on the final landscape plan to be submitted with the final master plan/final plat application for each phase (see proposed conditions of approval). vii. Landscaping Per Unit The applicant has not addressed this requirement. The final master plan for phase I should reflect this on the landscape plans. In addition, the final CC &Rs should have the ordinance requirement written into the CC &Rs (see proposed conditions of approval). The final landscape plan needs to consider solar access as required by the PUD "ordinance in the placement of deciduous and evergreen trees. viii. Water Conservation The final landscape plan should incorporate this requirement by identifying what drought tolerant species are being used and where zones are located within the common space areas that can maximize water conservation by incorporating plants that have similar water usage demands (see proposed conditions of approval). h. Density Bonuses- In the LDR2 zone, the range of housing density is set between 5.45 units per net developable area (Units/NDA), and 7.62 Units/NDA. The density of a PUD without density bonuses is 7.62 units/NDA. The applicant is not proposing to utilize density bonuses, therefore this section of the PUD ordinance is met. i. Density Bonus Calculations- This section does not apply to this proposal as no density bonus is being requested.. j. Density Bonus Design Requirements- This section does not apply as no density bonus is being requested. IV. ANALYSIS To approve a planned unit development certain criteria must be addressed and met. Below are those established criteria followed by staff's analysis. a. The proposed planned unit development is in compliance with the City's comprehensive plan and will be substantially compatible with existing development in the surrounding area; and undeveloped land in the surrounding area can be developed in a manner substantially compatible with the proposed planned unit development. i. Comprehensive plan The Comprehensive Plan Map designates this area as residential, therefore the proposal is in compliance with that component of the Comprehensive Plan. The Commission might make additional findings for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan should it be necessary. ii. Safe routes to school The proposal will be directly north of the new Burton Elementary school and the new High School. There will be the potential for a large number of children to walk or ride bicycles to school. Therefore the applicant should explore safe routes to the schools. This should include ways to cross 1000 South (7 South), which may include off -site improvements. The school district in obtaining a conditional use permit recently was required to commit to partnering with such a developer on helping to pay for costs of such Case No. 08 00064 & 08 00316 Page 5 improvements. Improvements may include flashing crosswalk lights, striping, ADA ramps, etc. Proposed improvements should receive support by the Madison School District, the Traffic Safety Committee, and the City Engineer, prior to submitting for final plat approval for any phase. The proposed improvement should include improvement details, costs of improvements, agreements between parties for funding, and a timeline for installation of improvements. Bonding for improvements should be required as part of the development agreement the developer will make with the City of Rexburg. The above language has been proposed as a condition of approval. The applicant, in promoting pedestrian connectivity and safety, has provided an easement, or access way in the south east portion of the PUD which is intended to provide a pedestrian connection from the PUD to 1000 South (7 South). Unfortunately, when overlaying the proposed PUD on an aerial photo this connection appears to interfere with the property to the east and therefore, the applicant should provide more information as to the connection's feasibility during the final master plan/final platting for this phase, which is Phase 1 (see proposed conditions of approval). iii. Smaller lots next to existing larger lots The proposal is surrounded by farm land and single family homes. As a residential use, the proposal will be compatible with existing and developing land uses. However, farm land and residential land does have some inherent incompatibilities generally related to hours of farming and dust. These future homeowners are "coming to the nuisance" and therefore should understand the potential nuisances and are willing to cope with them until such time as adjacent farmland is converted to residential. Most homeowners enjoy the open space feeling that farms provide, so it is a balance. There are large lot homes to the north of this project. With lots being proposed that are around 8000 square feet in size, the Commission should determine if these proposed lots are compatible with the existing large lot single- family homes to the north. There is a canal which currently acts as a buffer between the lots. It is anticipated that as this proposed PUD develops, many of the larger lots in the area may seek to be further subdivided which will ultimately increase compatibility. iv. Road alignments Road alignments should allow for vehicles to easily navigate north to south and east to west without too much meandering or roads. This proposal does not closely adhere to the City's grid system which has been identified as being a critical component to new development. This proposal must adhere to the currently adopted comprehensive plan which does not stress the importance of grid to the same degree. Nevertheless, the proposal does minimize meandering streets and adheres somewhat to an internal grid. If the road identified as 1500 West connects through to the north and neighboring properties cooperate through annexation, subdivision, and development, a north south connection could continue to Highway 33. v Road connections, "stub- outs" It is apparent that the applicant has been working to establish appropriate road "stub - outs", or connections to adjacent parcels of land to provide maximum interconnectivy of roads and neighborhoods as the City grows and develops. Case No. 08 00064 & 08 00316 Page 6 • • As future subdivision of land adjacent to this property will be required to adhere to the City's street grid, it would be wise for the developer to adjust road connections to the west and north to closely adhere to the street grid in this area as identified on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Map, if it is adopted. This would be appropriate because this involves later phases of the PUD. This would likely require additional "stub- outs" to the west and to the north (see proposed conditions of approval). Staff recommends a "stub - out" to be established to connect to the west side of Lot 27 of Block 11 (see proposed conditions of approval). Staff also recommends that an additional two "stub- outs" be provided for the west side of the parcel identified as being owned by Mary Ann Beck. One of which should intend to line up with Arctic Willow Drive to the east as Mary Ann's property is developed (see proposed conditions of approval). Staff also recommends an additional "stub -out" be provided to the north side of the parcel that is located generally in the southwestern portion of the PUD (see proposed conditions of approval). Figure 1 below provides a graphic depiction of these potential road connections. vi. Traffic impacts A development of this size when completed will have impacts on the existing road infrastructure. As a result of these foreseeable impacts the City has required the applicant to produce a traffic impact study prepared by a transportation engineer. The study has identified potential impacts on surrounding roads and intersections. The study has proposed recommendations for mitigation of these potential impacts. Staff would Case No. 08 00064 & 08 00316 Page 7 Figure 1. Potential Additional Road Connections recommend a condition of approval that requires the developer to adhere to all recommendations the traffic impact study has identified. In addition, the development should adhere to all onsite and offsite improvements to streets and roads that the City Engineer may identify as being necessary to mitigate impacts of the proposed development. See proposed conditions of approval. vii. Street lights and exterior lights The applicant has provided information suggesting that decorative lights will be used throughout the PUD which will enhance the ambiance of the development. These lights will need to be Dark Sky Compliant and adhere to the City's lighting ordinance. Therefore, a condition of approval should be that as part of the final master plan/final platting of any phase, proposed lighting, whether they are street lights, park lights, or other, should be shown how they comply with the City's lighting ordinance and are Dark Sky compliant (see proposed conditions of approval). b. The number of years proposed for completion of the development or each phase of the development is reasonable, taking into consideration the possibility of changing land use patterns in or requirements of the city over time. In order to ensure that the development will be compatible with land use patterns in and requirements of the city at the time of approval of a final master plan, the planning commission shall recommend and the Council shall establish an expiration date for the preliminary master plan approval, not sooner than two years after approval of the preliminary master plan; may impose conditions requiring that a final master plan or phases thereof be submitted for commission review within a specified period or periods of time, not sooner than one year after approval of the preliminary master plan; or may impose conditions requiring commission and Council re- evaluation of as yet unbuilt portions of the development, for conformity with then - existing city zoning ordinance requirements in relation to then - existing conditions, not sooner than five years after approval of the preliminary master plan, and at such periodic intervals of not less than five years thereafter as the commission and Council deems appropriate to ensure conformity. The applicant proposes that the PUD approval to be in four (4) phases. The applicant has further broken down each phase into construction phases. The applicant has not stated when the phases will be completed. Staff recommends that this proposed preliminary master plan/preliminary plat expire within two years of approval if a final master plan/final plat has not been reviewed and approved by the City within that time. This will require that a complete final master /final plat for phase 1 must be submitted to the City for review and approval within 1.5 years of approval of this preliminary master plan/preliminary plat or the preliminary master plan/preliminary plat will expire. Each additional phase (or remainder of unplatted portions of the proposed preliminary master plan/preliminary plat) should expire within two (2) years of the approval of a previous phase in the order as shown on the proposed preliminary master plan, unless a final master plan/final plat is reviewed and approved by the City. An extension of up to one year per phase may be requested by the applicant. A request for extension must be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to any expiration date. In addition, once a final plat has been approved by the City, it must be recorded with the County within 6 months or it becomes null and void. See proposed conditions of approval. c. Construction of the development can be accomplished in a manner that does not create unreasonable negative impacts on the area surrounding the development or in the city. In order to assure the avoidance or mitigation of negative construction impacts on the area Case No. 08 00064 & 08 00316 Page 8 • , surrounding the development or in the city, the planning commission and Council may impose conditions including but not limited to: i. Requirements that removal of existing landscaping during construction be limited to areas of the planned unit development to be constructed shortly following removal and to portions of those areas on which construction will occur, ii. Prohibitions of open burning on the site during construction; iii. Restrictions on construction noise; and iv. Restrictions on construction traffic. It is not anticipated that construction of the development will create any unreasonable negative impacts on the surrounding area as the area is generally undeveloped. In addition, most truck traffic will not be required to go through local streets, rather trucks will use 12 West and 1000 South, both collector streets. The Commission should explore this criterion after pubic testimony and determine if any conditions of approval should be applied. d. The development will not create unreasonable negative impacts on the area surrounding the development or in the city. In order to assure the avoidance or mitigation of negative impacts, the planning commission may require the filing of restrictions in the county deed records including but not limited to restrictions: i. Prohibiting the removal of specified landscaping, and ii. Prohibiting open burning during construction. It is not anticipated that the development itself will create unreasonable impacts on the area surrounding the PUD, therefore this criterion is met. e. Street, water, sewer, drainage and drainage pre- treatment, storm water detention, and other similar facilities in the area surrounding the development and in the city are or will be adequate to provide for the health, safety and welfare for the development's population densities and the type of development proposed, taking into consideration existing and projected future demands on those facilities. Street, water, sewer, drainage and drainage pre- treatment, storm water detention, and other facilities are either located in the immediate area or will be extended for use of the site by the applicant. The applicant is intending to connect to all City services. Greater detail regarding all utilities will be required for the submission of a final master plan, and should be sufficient in detail for the city Engineer to determine adequacy and feasibility. The City Engineer will determine if proposed infrastructure is adequate for the proposed PUD as well as future development in the surrounding area. Based on the availability and installation of infrastructure in the vicinity this criterion is met. f. Street, water, sewer, drainage and drainage pre- treatment, storm water detention, and other similar facilities proposed to be constructed as a part of the development are adequate to provide for the health, safety and welfare for the population densities and the type of development proposed. The applicant has submitted preliminary details regarding the above mentioned facilities. Following established City standards for the installation of required infrastructure, the development, internally, will provide all utilities enjoyed by citizens of Rexburg; therefore this criterion is met. A thorough review of proposed utility infrastructure prepared by the applicant's engineers and be reviewed by the City Engineer to determine if they meet minimum City standards. This review will be completed by the'Eity engineer prior to the signing of any final plats for this proposal. Therefore, this criterion is met. Case No. 08 00064 & 08 00316 Page 9 0 • g. The proposed number of residential units does not exceed the maximum permitted number of residential units, and at least twenty percent of the gross area is dedicated to landscaping. For purposes of computing area dedicated to landscaping, dedicated open space and protected resource areas may be treated as area dedicated to landscaping, but parking areas may not. As was previously determined, the applicant has requested a density 502 dwelling units, which is below the 527 dwelling units that could have been requested; therefore this criterion is met. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Commission take public testimony and determine if the proposed planned unit development can be approved, denied, or approved with conditions. Following this determination, the Commission should make a recommendation to the City Council accompanied with findings that support such a recommendation. Should the Commission choose to recommend approval with conditions, staff has provided conditions of approval for consideration (see below). Also, the Commission may determine that a revised preliminary master plan/preliminary plat needs to be submitted if major /substantive modifications are needed before a determination approval status can be made. Proposed Conditions of Approval General 1. The final master plan/final plat application for each phase shall include all required submittal standards and incorporate all conditions of approval. 2. All recommendations and requirements from the City Engineer shall be adhered to and incorporated in the submittal of each phase's final master plan/final plat. 3. Language shall be clear in the CC &Rs that no approval granted by the HOA or Architectural Committee shall violate City Code (e.g. accessory structures, building heights, fencing, location of building on lot, etc.). 4. The final CC &Rs shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior the recordation of a plat. 5. Requirement of the underlying zoning prevails where no specific requested variation has been considered and granted in this PUD request. 6. The City's clear vision area of 30 -feet shall be observed. These areas shall be clear of all permanent and temporary obstructions. Driveways shall not be included in the clear vision areas as parked vehicles constitute a temporary obstruction. Vegetation and fencing in these areas shall follow City standards. 7. Block 11, Lot 27 shall be allowed to be a created lot in this subdivision of land, but shall not be considered part of this PUD master plan approval. This will require the owner of Block 11, Lot 27 to apply for a separate PUD in the future if he should wish to develop it as a PUD. All requirements of the LDR2 zone or current zone shall apply to lot 27, and no part of this PUD overlay shall apply to this lot. 8. No garages or car ports shall be located within 20 feet of a front property line in order to ensure adequate space for off - street parking (15 -feet is not deep enough for the City's parking standards) and to allow for a streetscape not dominated by garage doors, which is in harmony with planned unit development that seek a more traditional neighborhood ambiance. In addition, this reduced setback shall only be granted to allow for well defined porch areas, not just the fronts of buildings. This would apply to all types of residential uses. Other land uses such as churches, parking lots, etc shall maintain the setbacks as required under the LDR2 zone. Case No. 08 00064 & 08 00316 Page 10 i 0 9. All side yard setbacks shall follow those as defined in the LDR2 zone, rather than the 5 -foot fixed setback as requested. 10. All rear yard setbacks shall follow those as defined in the LDR2 zone, rather the 15 -foot fixed setback as requested. 11. If final platting requires adjustments to lot dimensions, then those changes shall be substantially the same as those found on this preliminary plat. If changes are substantially different than what is found in the preliminary plat proposal then the applicant shall re- submit a preliminary master plan/preliminary plat. 12. The City Engineer may determine that any of the roads may function as collector roads which may need greater right -of -way. The applicant shall discuss this with the City Engineer and any required modifications shall be shown on the final plat. 13. The developer shall explore safe routes to school, specifically the new elementary school and the new high school. Proposed improvements should receive support by the Madison School District, the City's Traffic Safety Committee, and the City Engineer, prior to submitting for final plat approval for any phase. The proposed improvement should include improvement details, costs of improvements, agreements between parties for funding, and a timeline for installation of improvements. Bonding for improvements may be required as part of the development agreement the developer will make with the City of Rexburg, as determined by the City Engineer. 14. The applicant, in promoting pedestrian connectivity and safety, has provided an easement, or access way in the south east portion of the PUD which is intended to provide a pedestrian connection from the PUD to 1000 South (7 South). Unfortunately, when overlaying the proposed PUD on an aerial photo this connection appears to interfere with the property to the east and therefore, the applicant shall provide more information as to the connection's feasibility during the final master plan/final platting for this phase, which is Phase 1. 15. In order for the City to maintain an efficient transportation network in and around the proposed PUD, the applicant shall provide additional road connections to adjacent property and roads consistent with Figure I of this staff report, or as modified by the City Engineer. 16. Traffic Impacts the development shall incorporate all recommendations found in the provided traffic impact study. In addition, the development shall incorporate to all onsite and offsite improvements to streets and roads that the City Engineer may identify as being necessary to mitigate impacts of the proposed development. Performance Standards 17. Utilities All new utilities must be placed underground. 18. Water Conservation The final master plan for each phase shall show, in sufficient detail, how the proposal will incorporate low volume irrigation systems throughout the landscaped areas of the development. 19. Individual lot owners shall be required to incorporate low volume irrigation systems throughout their landscaped areas; this requirement shall be stated in the CC &Rs under Section 4.13. 20. Refuse Bins Individual trash bins shall be screened form the public right -of -way on days of no trash service in the neighborhood. 21. Future trash receptacles intended for trash service pick -up and that are placed in the common areas such as proposed parks must be screened in a manner that is similar in material and character of the neighborhood. This shall be incorporated in the final CC &Rs. 22. Glare Reduction The proposal must adhere to the City's lighting standards , details shall be provided with the final master plan/final plat for each phase. Case No. 08 00064 & 08 00316 Page 11 Common Open Space 23. Required Common Open Space The applicant shall consider not only proposing an open space /park at 10 acres in size, but shall also work with the City in determining if this area should be a City park. 24. Maintenance As the common areas are proposed to be private rather than public, the homeowners association shall be responsible for common space maintenance. Until such time as a homeowners association is established, the applicant or owner of record shall be responsible for all maintenance of common areas and all unsold lots. 25. Hardscape In order to determine hardscape percentages the final landscape plan, submitted with the final master plan, shall provide detailed information on hardscape percentages. 26. Common Activity Areas areas need to be provided at a ratio of 1000 square feet per single family lot, which amounts to 11.5 acres of common activity area for this PUD. These area need to include playground equipment or pathways with benches and tables through natural or landscaped areas. This requirement shall be shown on the final landscape plan to be submitted with the final master plan/final plat application for each phase. 27. Landscaping Per Unit The applicant has not addressed this requirement during the preliminary master plan/preliminary plat phase, therefore the final master plans for each phase shall reflect this on landscape plans. In addition, the final CC &Rs shall have the PUD ordinance requirement written into the CC &Rs. The final landscape plan shall to consider solar access as required by the PUD ordinance in the placement of deciduous and evergreen trees. 28. Water Conservation The final landscape plan shall identify drought tolerant species being used and where zones are located within the common space areas that can maximize water conservation by incorporating plants that have similar water usage demands. Master Plan Approval Time Limitations 29. The proposed preliminary master plan/preliminary plat shall expire within two years of approval if a final master plan/final plat has not been reviewed and approved by the City within that time. This requires that a complete final master /final plat for phase 1 be submitted to the City for review and approval within 1.5 years of approval of this preliminary master plan/preliminary plat or the preliminary master plan/preliminary plat will expire. 30. Each additional phase (or remainder of unplatted portions of the proposed preliminary master plan/preliminary plat) shall expire within two (2) years of the approval of a previous phase in the order as shown on the proposed preliminary master plan, unless a final master plan/final plat is reviewed and approved by the City within that time. This will also require the complete application for a final master plan/final plat be submitted to the City within 1.5 years of the previous approval. 31. An extension of up to one year per phase may be requested by the applicant. A request for extension must be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to any expiration date. In addition, once a final plat has been approved by the City, it must be recorded with the County within 6 months or it becomes null and void. Case No. 08 00064 & 08 00316 Page 12