Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREVISED MEMO Z13131.EllisViewPUD.ccmemo_updated.pdf Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Chris Saunders, Policy and Planning Manager Wendy Thomas, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Ellis View Estates, a preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) in conjunction with a major subdivision with nine residential lots, two open space parcels, and a park parcel. Eight relaxations to development standards are requested as part of the project. 3601 Good Medicine Way – File No. Z-13131 REVISED MATERIALS COVER MEMO MEETING DATE: November 4, 2013 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action (quasi-judicial) RECOMMENDATION: The City Commission conduct the public hearing and with consent of the applicant continue the item to December 9, 2013. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “Having reviewed the application materials, considered public comment including the offer of the alternative public utility easement, and considered all of the information presented, I hereby move to continue this hearing to December 9, 2013 to allow additional time to complete the process to obtain an alternative public utility easement and to revise conditions of approval accordingly.” Staff report page references: conditions of approval, page 5; requested relaxations, page 8; review criteria and findings, page 9; code provisions, page 7, 23. BACKGROUND: Many of the public comments on this project have applied to the installation of a sewer main within an existing public utility easement. The existing easement location is considered to be disruptive and undesirable by the property owner of the adjacent property through which the easement passes. An offer has been received from the adjacent property owner to allow an alternate easement location. Staff believes the new location is beneficial to the applicant, land owner, and the City. A copy of the new location and the offer has been provided to the Commission. This issue is discussed under site plan review criterion 12, see page 14 of the staff report. This new alignment is the one discussed as alternative two. The new easement would make requested relaxation Number Five no longer necessary as there would be no manholes on the new alignment which would require an access road. The new easement would make condition Number 32 (see page 8 of the staff report) also unnecessary. It is important to note that this is an offer for an alternative easement and not the easement itself. The receipt of the easement offer is welcome and the new alignment is beneficial. The additional time would allow an opportunity for the easement to be completed and the reconveyance to be prepared. This would significantly simplify any conditions required for action on this item. REVISED ALTERNATIVES: 1) This is the staff preferred option. Conduct the public hearing and then continue to December 9, 2013 to allow time to complete the offered easement and reconveyance of the existing easement. This will reduce the number of questions and contingencies to be addressed with the conditions of approval. Staff would then be able to provide a recommendation with fewer conditions and contingencies for City Commission final action. This option would require written consent from the applicant to continue the subdivision review process beyond the 60 working days required by statute. The 60 day time for review ends on November 15, 2013. As of the writing of this memo staff had not been able to discuss this option with the land owner. We continue to reach out and hope to have a clear answer prior to the Commission meeting on Monday. 2) Approve the preliminary planned unit development with conditions and code requirements identified by staff including approval of Relaxations 1-4 and 6-8; omitting conditions 29-32 (which address requirements in the event that the relaxations are not granted), and adding an additional condition to reflect the proposal by the Sundance Springs Homeowners Associate to provide an alignment for a public utility easement to serve Ellis View Estates to be located between Ellis View Loop and Peace Pipe Drive as shown on a letter dated October 27, 2013 from the Sundance Springs Residential Owners Association. This new condition should be numbered sequential to the last condition and shall read: “The sewer service to the Ellis View Estates planned unit development may utilize a location as offered by the Residential Owners Association in correspondence dated October 27, 2013. The public utility easement shall conform to standard City of Bozeman utility easement requirements. Upon City Commission acceptance of the new public utility easement the existing public utility easement from the end of the Good Medicine Way right of way to Peace Pipe Drive shall be released and reconveyed to the property owner. In the event the alternate public utility easement is not completed and accepted by the City, then Ellis View Estates planned unit development shall be authorized to utilize the existing public utility easement located between lots 24 and 25 of Sundance Springs Subdivision Phase 1A. For either public utility easement location, an all weather access road shall be provided to all manholes that are located outside a street or parking area. The access road to the sewer manholes shall utilize an alternative support material so that the all weather surface within the Ellis View Estates and Sundance Springs open spaces or any private lot appears as no more than a 6 foot wide gravel fines pedestrian trail. A fully vegetated all weather access is also acceptable if corner markings acceptable to the Public Works Director are provided for the roadway.” If the Commission decides to use this alternative staff suggest the following motion language: “Having reviewed the application materials, considered public comment including the offer of the alternative public utility easement, and considered all of the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application Z-13131 and move to approve the preliminary planned unit development including requested relaxations 1-4 and 6-8, subject to all applicable code provisions and conditions recommended in Alternative Two of the revised cover memo. ” 2) Make alternative findings and approve the preliminary planned unit development with revised conditions and code requirements. 3) Make alternative findings and deny the preliminary planned unit development FISCAL EFFECTS: None identified. Attachments: Oct 27, 2013 letter, all other attachments were provided previously Report compiled on: November 1, 2013