Laserfiche WebLink
Preliminary Planned Residential Development <br />Planning Commission Report; 5-21-19 <br /> <br /> <br />Page 13 <br />(cont.) <br /> <br /> Affordable housing targets for the City are 84 units at or below 30% AMI, 29 units <br />between 31% and 50% AMI, and 51 units between 51% and 80% AMI (4-49). <br /> Within the housing section of the plan, Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is <br />specifically identified as a tool that will be used to ensure an adequate supply of <br />quality affordable housing, and will specifically be used for projects that allow the <br />city to meet its housing goals (4-54). <br /> The Parks portion of the plan seeks to improve the health of the community <br />through safe, convenient, and accessible facilities. This includes creating a <br />community pathway network between City Parks, neighborhoods, and community <br />destinations; ensuring safe recreational places through thoughtful design and <br />inclusive access; and creating parks that reflect community interests (5-66). <br /> On transportation, the City plans to embrace road designs that increase safety, <br />minimize pollution, and decrease construction & maintenance costs; and to create a <br />comfortable street environment for pedestrians and bicyclists and balance the <br />needs of vehicular traffic with those of non-motorists (6-83). <br /> <br />PRD Standards:  PRDs in New Brighton are granted their flexibility by Section 7-020 which clearly <br />states that Council “…recognizes that in the creation of planned residential <br />development, variations in density, bulk, height, setback, and other <br />regulations…may occur that are not in strict accordance with other provisions of <br />the Zoning Code or any other ordinance of the City.” Typically PRDs will still be <br />held to a general framework of flexibility as outlined in code, but Section 7- <br />060(11) provides further flexibility in stating that “all or any of the foregoing <br />[referencing PRD standards] may be modified as deemed necessary by the City <br />Council for the preservation of the public health, safety, morals, and general <br />welfare of the residents of the planned residential development and the City” <br />Being the City is currently in-between comprehensive plans and does not have <br />zoning districts established for the new Mixed Use land use categories (to allow <br />for the uses and densities called for by the new plan), staff finds that utilizing the <br />full flexibilities offered by the PRD ordinance are appropriate at this time. <br />Accordingly, staff’s review herein focuses on the various technical aspects of the <br />development, and Council must ultimately determine the following things: <br />1) Is the proposed plan is in line with the goals and objectives of the 2040 <br />comprehensive plan? <br />2) Are the proposed improvements well suited to the site and surrounding lands? <br />and <br />3) Have the applicant’s taken necessary steps to mitigate impacts?