Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />August 13, 2020 <br />Page 8 of 12 <br /> <br /> <br />Turner shows the commissioners the constraints they have and how it affects the <br />industrial portion and the trailer port. She also addresses truck turning on the site and <br />how the 180 ft. depth on the building is important to get quality tenants. <br /> <br />Kevin Kelley, United Properties <br /> <br />Kelley discusses his disagreement of Director Zuccaro’s summation. He mentions that <br />in the last five years, Etkin Johnson has not built a building in the CTC that is less than <br />180 ft. deep and have not built a truck court less than 130 ft. Every modern industrial <br />building that attracts quality tenants has this standard. He states that they will not build <br />less than 180 ft. deep. <br /> <br />Discussion by Commissioners: <br />Howe says that he understands the need for this to be marketable for the developer. <br />What is most important for this proposal is what is facing 96 th St. W ithout this setback <br />determination, there cannot be a good tenant and it will increase vacancy. This land has <br />been an eye sore for a while. Unfortunately this lot is very awkward, being between <br />commercial and open space. We need to minimize the retail vacancy and try to honor <br />this rural entryway. The question is if the city wants to develop this land. If not, then we <br />should say that we must have this setback. If we do, then we have to create a setback <br />that will attract future tenants. He says that he is torn in between the two and would hate <br />to have to fight between ten feet. To compare this to the CTC is unrealistic. This is not <br />commercial/industrial. It is also not retail like Delo Plaza. He thinks that we need a <br />compromise between both parties to find a solution. <br /> <br />Diehl says that the rural entryway is a key component to the comprehensive plan. He <br />recognizes that this is a unique property. He discusses more in depth of the importance <br />of maintaining the rural entryway and how to sustain that with new d evelopment in this <br />location. He wants to work with both parties involved so that that the rural entryway is <br />not compromised. <br /> <br />Moline says that he agrees with Diehl. He is hopeful that they can find a solution and <br />appreciates the applicant trying to find a solution. He also appreciates what Director <br />Zuccaro said during his summation. In the 16 years since this has been zoned with this <br />setback, that setback is just as important now than when it was first instituted. <br />Protecting and preserving the rural area from 96th St is essential. He thinks having the <br />10 or 15 feet additional buffer would retain that and is an important consideration. <br /> <br />Williams says that when she looks at the comp plan and how it has had this criteria for <br />a rural gateway for many years, she has to heavily consider that. When she looks at the <br />adopted GDP of 60 feet and how staff has already created a condition of approval at 55 <br />feet, she thinks the city is working with the developer. She thinks that that is reasonable <br />at this point and leaning in that direction. <br /> <br />Brauneis says that he finds that this property is different. From going to 60 to 55 feet, <br />allowing the parking to face 96th St, and in allowing drive aisles within that setback <br />space, he thinks that perhaps they have gone too far. He mentions that there was