Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council directs staff to draft resolution on Sunburst PUD master plan amendment

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Midway City Council reviewed a proposed master-plan amendment for Phase 3 of the Sunburst Planned Unit Development, heard developer and resident concerns about landscaping, trails, drainage and retaining walls, and voted to direct staff to draft a resolution reflecting council discussion and the developer–HOA agreement.

The Midway City Council on Monday reviewed a proposed master-plan amendment for Phase 3 of the Sunburst Planned Unit Development and directed staff to draft a resolution that reflects council feedback and items agreed between the developer and the homeowners association. The council’s move followed presentations from city planning staff and the applicant, public comment and questions about landscaping, emergency access, drainage and retaining walls.

Planning staff member Michael summarized the application: Phase 3 covers about 16.52 acres of the larger Sunburst PUD, is divided into R1-22 and R1-43 zones, and would add 36 building pads. He said the proposal would retain roughly 8.44 acres of open space within Phase 3 — the majority of the development’s currently designated open space — and requires a public trail easement to secure emergency access across the nearby Lundin property to Swiss Alpine Road and down toward Lion/Line Canyon. “We do need to make sure on the proposed plat that a trail and emergency access is from Swiss Alpine Road to the Lundin Farm property,” Michael told the council.

Dan Reeve, representing Toll Brothers Homes, said the developer proposes all 36 detached homes (rather than the previous mix of attached and detached units) and that the revised layout reduces overall grading and, the company believes, will reduce retaining-wall impacts compared with the 2010 plan. Reeve said the developer and the HOA had signed a memorandum of understanding adding two deliverables: early review of a draft irrigation plan by the HOA and provision of as-built irrigation drawings after installation. “We intend to preserve as much of the ground and just not touch it as much as possible,” Reeve said.

Councilors pressed staff and the applicant on fire-safety landscaping in the wildland-urban-interface, the extent and maintenance of irrigation, trail alignment and whether the public easement and the emergency access line up with the historic ditch on the Lundin property. Several council members emphasized the city’s limited ability to adjudicate private disputes between an HOA and a developer and noted that some items — such as architecture approval letters from the HOA before building permits — can be enforced administratively but others (for example, subjective judgments about landscaping “quality”) are difficult to police.

Residents speaking during public comment urged careful attention to irrigation and wildlife. Becky Yee, who said she lives on Summers Lane, said irrigating native-grass areas raises both water-use and fire-safety trade-offs and asked the council to weigh those when approving conditions. Property owner Randy Lundin said historical irrigation has been limited in the upper field and cautioned against introducing irrigation there.

On technical issues, staff confirmed that stormwater detention and retaining-wall designs will be required and reviewed during preliminary and final engineering; staff said there is some flexibility in locating storm drain basins during detailed design but that those systems must be shown to function in later submittals. Michael reminded council that water shares for the development were dedicated to the city in the 1990s.

After discussion, a council member moved to direct staff to draft a resolution that attempts to accommodate the points raised by council, neighbors and the developer and to return the resolution for council review (potentially in about two weeks). The motion was seconded and the clerk then recorded Ayes from council members identified in the transcript as JC, Andrew, Andy, Kevin and Lisa. The chair thanked participants and the council took a short recess.

Next steps: staff will draft the master-plan amendment resolution, including the developer–HOA letter as a condition of approval and language requiring the public trail easement and demonstration that emergency access aligns with the Lundin property; the draft resolution will be returned to council for further review and any required preliminary or final approvals.