Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCORRESPONDENCE - 08-00023 - Sunrise Dr - Founders Square Final PUDJanuary 22, 2008 Founders Sqaure, LLC _c/o Bill Collins PO Box 15540 Jackson, WY 83002 CITY OF REXBURG A..n&, F4mlly Community Re: File #08 00023 — Founders Square, Final Master Plan and Subdivision application completeness determination. Dear Mr. Collins: Thank you for submitting an application for the final `phases of a project that received many accolades through its preliminary approval process. This Final Master Plan approach is now seen as an enhancement to a concept that was already approved. With this application phase there is the need for the applicant to show in greater detail exactly how the concept approval will move forward. Once an application for a land use decision such as yours has been made, staff must determine that the application is complete. In reviewing your application, some items regarding completeness and concern have arisen. With regards to completeness as an application for a Final Master Plan and Final Subdivision Plat, the following items will need to be submitted to the Planning Department before staff can proceed with a review of the application: 1) A landscape plan must be submitted as part of the application that is designed by a landscape architect that is licensed to practice in the State of Idaho. This plan needs to address the standard design parameters of a landscape plan as well as specific conditions of approval found in the approval of Founders Square Preliminary Master Plan. In addition the PUD ordinance requires specific requirements for individual lots as well as open space elements. This was addressed at a concept level but needs greater detail at this time. A complete review of what was originally proposed and what the ordinance requires shold be fully examined again to assure compliance. 2) Application fees for a final master plan application have not yet been received. The above are the items of completeness that need to be addressed. Please let me know if you need further clarification. Of greater concern is the fact that your proposal has changed somewhat from what was originally proposed. Specifically, the PUD proposal has lost acreage, has one more unit Croy Leiknm Plammng and Zoning Administrator 19 E. Main Rexbng, ID83440 P. O. Box280 Phone (208) 359.3020 ext 314 Fax (208) 359.3022 ga7k7—bxg.og---bugog that what was approved, was not approved as a phased PUD, and the open space areas are not located in the areas as approved originally. This scope of modifications will require an amendment to the preliminary master plan as per Section 4.15 (U) of the PUD Otdinance(Modifications ofAppmved Pn&ming Master Plan). We are prepared to move forward with the application if the "modifications" are removed and the incompleteness issues are resolved. Please let me know if you have any questions. (Sincerely, Gary Leikness Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaq Leiknms Planing and Zoning Administrator 19 E. Mafn Fc bm,& ID83440 P. O. Box280 Pbw (108) 359.3020 ex1314 F" (108) 359.3022 garyka)nxbusgorg ma—b-g.og o au upc CITY OF ° ItEXBURG Memo To: Members of the Pluming and Zoning Commission From: Department of Planning and Zoning Dafe: 2/21/2008 Re: Interpretation of application status for the Founders Square PUD Request for Action Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, The Planning and Zoning Department seeks the Commission's determination on what application process the developers of the Founders Square PUD ate required to pursue. Two options for the applicant are to apply for a final master plan or go through the public heating process to amend their originally approved preliminary master plan. The Founders Square preliminary master plan was approved in August of 2007. Subsequent to this approval, ownership has switched bands. With the new ownership, modifications to the proposal have been made. The PUD ordinance does allow for some modifications to be made to an approved preliminary master plan, but if those modifications exceed a certain threshold, than the applicant must apply to revise the approved preliminary master plan rather thanapplying for a final master plan. Applying to amend an approved preliminary master plan becomes partiadady important when modifications are made because the final master plan process does not requite a public hearing where the public would have a chance to be notified of modifications. The applicant has applied for a final master plan. During the administrative process, it was determined by the Planning and Zoning Department that the applicant should be applying for an amendment to the preliminary master plan rather than applying for a final master plan due to the modifications being proposed. Though the modifications are not an unacceptable deviation from the original approval, the current proposal, as staff has determined, does exceed the threshold for allowable modifications. The PUD ordinance requires that a preliminary master plan be amended if the following has occurred: 1. Increase in density. 2. Change of boundaries. 3. No change of uses, specific or general. 4. No change in the location or amount of land devoted to specific land uses. It was determined by staff that there was an increase in density in that the proposal yields one more lot than what was approved. It was determined by staff that the boundaries have changed in that the overall PUD is approximately 1 acre smaller than what was originally approved. It was determined by staff that locations designated for open space have changed, and a new lot is proposed directly adjacent to an existing cell tower, which further encumbers the tower's development possibilities. In addition, the applicant is now proposing a phased approach to the development which was not shown or approved on their original plan. This phased approach is about timing of platting and PUD standards being addressed through each phase. This is different from phasing of construction which may have been discussed at the original hearing. As a matter of protocol, staff reviews submitted applications and informs the applicant if there are any deficiencies of if the proposal needs to go through a different review, process. Staff has informed the applicant of what process should take place for Founders Square, that being an amendment to the approved preliminary master plan. The applicant disagrees with staffs determination and wishes for the Planning and Zoning Commission to look at the issues and determine if staff has advised the applicant on the correct course of action or if the applicant can apply under the final master plan/final plat process. Attached are the following. letters to and from the applicant, a current proposal, and previously approved proposal. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, 2-- Gary �Leikuess Planning and Zoning Administrator 0 Page Feb 0� 18 08 04:39p Bill Collins February 18, 2008 3077341029 COLLINS PLANNING • A S S 0 C I A T E S Gary Leikness, P & Z Administrator City of Rexburg PO Box 280 Rexburg, ID 83440 Re: Founders Square — Updated Master Plan and Final Plat for Phase 1 Dear Mr. Leikness: We received your letter dated January 22, 2008 concerning the application we submitted for the subject project on January 10, 2008. The letter indicated the need to provide more information on landscaping and to pay the application fees. There was also a reference to the modification of the master plan requiring us to go back to the primary master plan phase because of some very limited modifications to the master plan, and concern over our desire to proceed with the subdivision on a phased basis. The purpose of this letter is to respond to the concerns you raised and to request the opportunity to move forward for P & Z review of our proposal. Since our initial submittal was over five weeks ago, it is very important that we be placed on the February 21, 2008 P & Z agenda and we respectively make that request. We had already sent our application fees by the time of your letter and we have now provided additional landscaping information beyond the level of detail required in the PUD ordinance; so these items have been addressed and satisfied. However, we take exception to your stated need to remove the modifications or return to the preliminary master plan stage for the subdivision for the following reasons: 1. We have taken a portion of the green space originally located in the southeast corner and have now proposed that it be located in the northwest comer of the subdivision. This provides a better balance and improved access to the open/green space by residents of the subdivision, and also makes it more appealing in that we now have the opportunity to construct a pathway from the subdivision through the new green space area on the northwest that will connect a pedestrian access to and from the subdivision and 2nd East. We now have open space in three locations dispersed across the subdivision that is readily accessible to all and precludes the need for subdivision residents to travel a lengthy route through the next subdivision to the south in order to access our open space area in the southeast corner. Further, we have added 7 4 0 LEAST P EAR L AVENUE. POST OFFICE BOX 7 4 4 1. J A C K 5 O N. W Y 830D2 PHONE: (3 O 7) 6 9 0- 4 4 3 6 FAX: (3 O 7) 734-1 0 2 9 C 0 L L I N s P L A N N I N 0@ B R E 5 N A N. N E T Feb 18 08 04:39p Hill Collins 3077341029 p.2 2 connecting pathways that allow better access by all to the green space areas. We believe this represents an improvement to the master plan and still provides the required amount (10%) of green space for the development. 2. In the process of re -distributing the open space and rearranging the lots, we were able to create one more lot than was shown on the preliminary master plan, However, our density is still far below the allowable level in the PUD ordinance and does not represent any violation of density restrictions or zoning requirements. 3. When the proposed subdivision was presented to the P & Z Commission and City Council for approval of the preliminary master plan, it was clearly indicated to both entities that the project would in fact be developed and constructed in phases. Although we did not provide a speck map at that time to delineate what those phases would be, nevertheless it was still made clear in the presentations (made by the previous owner) that it would be developed and constructed in that manner. Further, the City will soon have a development agreement with us establishing our contractual obligation to construct the entirety of the planned unit development, thus guaranteeing that even if we start building in phases we will be under legal and binding contract to complete the entire development. 4. We would understand the need to go back to the public on the subdivision if we had done anything that would change the impact to adjacent properties or that had changed the concept of the subdivision -- neither of which has occurred. Impacts to the surrounding properties are the same as they were at the preliminary stage and in fact we feel we have improved the benefit of the proposed subdivision to the community of Rexburg by better balancing and distributing the open space. Our preliminary submittals for the development were enthusiastically received both by the P & Z Commission and City Council, culminating in unanimous votes supporting the same. Therefore we cannot see any legitimate reason why we would have to go back to square one and incur costly additional expense and expend precious time and resources in reviewing things with the public when there has not been any change to the impacts of the area around the proposed subdivision or to the greater community of Rexburg. We are following the PUD process outlined in your ordinance and believe we have filed a legitimate application granting us the right to appear before the P & Z Commission to review the minor tweaking we have made to improve the overall PUD subdivision plan. We simultaneously filed the necessary application materials to also have the Phase 1 Final Plat considered for recommendation to the City Council for approval and likewise request the opportunity to have that considered by the P & Z Commission along with the updated master plan. Feb 18 08 04:39p Bill Collins 3077341029 p.3 We are anxious to move forward with a very worthy subdivision development which will be a great asset to the City of Rexburg. We therefore respectfully request consideration of the justification we have given and the opportunity to move this subdivision forward in the development process in a timely manner. Again, we request placement on the February 21, P & Z agenda. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Found" uare, LLC William E. Collins, AICP Manager cc: Mayor Larsen Stephen Zollinger