Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />June 24, 2021 <br />Page 9 of 10 <br />Williams stated that the Commission had many things to juggle including the Comp <br />Plan, zoning, helping the adjacent properties, and providing continuity. This <br />development had some things but as far as adjacent land uses it was lacking. She <br />added that the Comp Plan had more commercial and it pained her to accept something <br />less. <br />Brauneis stated that it had been one of longest periods of economic prosperity in US <br />history and yet no one able to pull together a plan for this site. He was concerned that <br />the city was overbuilt already. <br />Hoefner stated that the Commission could not wish into existence commercial <br />development that was not possible in this market. Building more would not address the <br />vacancies they already had. He stated that the density was in line with the surrounding <br />area and he wanted to make sure that engagement continued, even increased, in the <br />PUD stage. He addressed the age restrictions, stating that he was not a big proponent <br />of regulating what kinds of people can live where based on the history of limiting where <br />different groups of people can live. He was also uncomfortable limiting rentals for the <br />same reason and added that the development should be consistent with inclusionary <br />housing principles. He stated that he wanted to hold open public comment as he <br />thought there were folks who may not have come tonight because it was recommended <br />for denial. <br />Diehl stated that big -box retail was over for the most part and this was an opportunity to <br />build a commercial center supported by Steel Ranch and the surrounding area. He <br />stated that doubling the number of townhomes fronting 42 was short-sighted, given also <br />that the commercial property tax limitations in the Gallagher Amendment may be <br />changing. From a development perspective, he understood that financial models work <br />better for residential than commercial not just because of the times but also because of <br />the margin. He stated that $2 million over 20 years was a rounding error but he didn't <br />want to see it continue to be in the red. He added that since there were moving parts <br />going on it made it hard to deliberate, responding to Vice Chair Dietrich's comments, but <br />he was comfortable with voting without additional public comment given that residents <br />would go to Council. <br />Williams asked what had changed with the fiscal analysis that staff had considered. <br />Ritchie replied that the fiscal analysis showed that it would be substantially unchanged <br />from the full build -out high scenario, since 100% construction effectively removed the <br />low scenario that was modeled. The guarantee of concurrency brought that fiscal <br />analysis slightly into the positive column. Staff had to make assumptions of uses and <br />had included a third of the development as sales -tax generating, which they felt was on <br />the conservative side. If the Commission wanted more analysis on different scenarios or <br />the fiscal analysis staff could provide that. <br />Diel stated that he did not need additional information to vote. <br />Brauneis stated that he was torn. He wanted to believe that retail would come back but <br />he did not think it would. He was comfortable with density as it was a good location for it <br />vis-a-vis traffic patterns and would reduce traffic overall with the residential use. <br />