Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council splits on Larkin Road PUD concept; asks for economic analysis and flexibility on density
Summary
Council reviewed a 70‑acre planned unit development (PUD) concept from Maplewood Development proposing low‑density residential on Larkin Road; members generally favored more open space and trail connections but asked staff to return with an economic/unit fiscal analysis and clarification of PUD flexibilities and shoreland impacts.
Corcoran City Council members discussed a concept plan from Maplewood Development Inc. to re‑guide about 70 acres on Larkin Road from light industrial to low‑density residential and to process a planned unit development (PUD) for roughly 189 units. Planning staff presented the concept and asked the council for early feedback; no formal vote was taken.
"The comprehensive plan is a living document that can be changed at the discretion of the city council," planning staff told council, noting the parcel would need a comprehensive plan amendment, rezoning, PUD review, possible Wetland Conservation Act permits, and watershed approvals if the applicant proceeds. Staff said the current concept proposes 24 twin homes, 68 50‑foot lots, and 97 65‑foot lots; gross density under preliminary numbers is roughly 2.99 units per acre and may reach 3 units/acre once environmental deductions are accounted for.
Council members praised the proposed connections to the Diamond Lake regional trail and the consolidated open space but debated whether the site should remain designated industrial for tax base reasons. Several members asked staff to produce an economic unit analysis comparing low, medium and industrial uses to help determine long‑term tax and service impacts. One councilor said the proposed plan is preferable to a large distribution center and supported the idea of higher density near the eastern edge and single‑family to the west as a transition from existing homes to the industrial area.
Staff identified PUD flexibilities the applicant may request: reduced minimum lot sizes (below RSF‑3 standards), 50‑foot lot widths, deviations for shoreland overlay lot widths and impervious surface limits, and possible allowances for garages that exceed the viewable ground‑floor frontage standard. Staff also noted required public benefits that could accompany flexibilities, including internal trail connections, consolidated open space (13.08 acres proposed vs. 9.47 acres required), and landscaping buffers along County Road 50.
Council direction included: ask the applicant to consider shifting attached units toward the east and single‑family to the west to provide a transition; explore whether higher density (up to 5 units per acre in places) could be feasible; and staff to return with a scoped fiscal/economic analysis and a timeline for incorporating the issue into the city’s 2050 comprehensive plan process if needed. No permit or zoning decision was made at the meeting; staff characterized the feedback as nonbinding guidance.
