Planning Commission Minutes 2021 02 11

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes February 11, 2021 Page 3 of 10 • Prior to the City Council hearing, the applicant shall amend the PUD to modify the east elevation to meet CDDSG standards for architecture, including providing the same building materials and variation shown on the north, south, and west elevations. Rice asked about the deferral request, observing that there was not yet an agreement among the parcel owners. Ritchie replied that the terms of deferral would be outlined in the subdivision agreement and presented to Council. Rice replied that he did not think the Commission could pass judgement on an agreement if they did not know what it contained. He also stated that he did not think the Subdivision Moderation Criteria, Section 16.24.030 B, did not fit. All of the criteria were design -related and it seemed as though it was being pushed through on something that did not apply to the circumstances. He asked if there were other alternatives. Ritchie stated that she was not aware of other alternatives. She stated that the Code set forth the process to approve any revision of subdivision agreements and agreed that the language was not drafted to accommodate something of this nature. Zuccaro added that the preliminary application had a clear request for deferral and it was discussed in previous Commission and Council meetings but there were no criteria attached to it. He stated that the subdivision ordinance required this to be made at the Final Plat, so staff did not see how it could be deferred without a waiver and therefore it needed the modification. He noted that the final agreement language was not typically drafted until the application got to Council. He described staff's intent to have the three major parcels pay the fee -in -lieu for the middle parcel and for the first plat for either of the other two parcels to trigger the fee -in -lieu. The first subdivision on Parcel 2 would trigger the land dedication and the City would get current land values and appraisals to determine the land values, which would take place one year or five years from now, and the City would collect the fee -in -lieu at that time, as well. He asked the applicant to share if they had a different understanding. Rice replied that he did not have an issue with the deferral but he wanted to make sure the procedure was appropriate. Howe asked about the placement of the proposed stoplight. Ritchie replied that the stoplight was about a quarter mile from 96th and Dillon. A traffic engineer had evaluated the plan and Public Works looked closely at the application, as well. PW staff was comfortable that the addition of the signal, while it would add traffic based on the development and the signal, it shouldn't cause negative impacts to the traffic within the corridor. Diehl asked if the zoning had changed on the property and about the joint agreements among the property owners.