Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />August 11, 2022 <br />Page 8 of 10 <br />Zuccaro says it is saying that an applicant can't get a height waiver through that <br />document and can only get a waiver approved through the PUD process. Future <br />developers may request height waivers through the PUD process. <br />Howe asks if there has been any discussion on making the taller heights be located <br />more in the middle. <br />Zuccaro says that is a better question for the applicant. <br />Howe says in regards to the sewer expansion and lift stations, the lift station is planned <br />to be one mile. That seems like that may be too long. Is that a common length? <br />Zuccaro says he will refer that question to the applicant's engineers who are present for <br />the meeting. <br />Diehl asks if the city will have to cover any of the operating costs that come after it is <br />built. <br />Zuccaro says the applicant is responsible for building everything. When the city does <br />zone changes, staff does a fiscal analysis that analyzes what type of revenue the city <br />can expect such as property and use taxes. Through the collection of property, use, and <br />sales taxes, staff expects the city to collect enough to cover the costs of maintenance <br />on the roads, trails, and parks. <br />Moline references code section 16.16.010 and asks if staff looked at and analyzed this <br />section of the code. <br />Zuccaro shows the old Disc Drive on the north side of the property, it has largely been <br />left natural, as drainage and vegetation. Working with the applicant on where the public <br />land dedication should go, staff tried to overlay the park and open space lands where <br />you see that natural vegetation. <br />Moline says that you see this proposal meeting that criterion. <br />Zuccaro says that is correct. <br />Krantz asks what the best map is to see the natural vegetation and topography. <br />Zuccaro shows a map from his presentation displaying the grading and pond <br />expansion. <br />Krantz asks what will be left in the state it is today without being re -graded. <br />Zuccaro shows what will be staying from the presentation map. <br />Howe says of the proposed 155.3 acres, Tract C is a required buffer space. <br />Zuccaro says that is a required no build buffer. It is not required for it to be open space <br />though. It could be private open space but it is not required to be public. <br />Howe says he can imagine Tract L being a berm and it seems to be pretty unusable <br />space. <br />Zuccaro says that is correct. We do not foresee it having much public purpose. The <br />berm was created for StorageTek. <br />Howe says in regards to Paradise Lane, that is restricted by an Intergovernmental <br />Agreement (IGA) and can't be built on, correct? <br />Zuccaro says you can build up to five new homes there. <br />Diehl asks that at the next meeting, staff bring better clarification on what the net <br />dedication is versus what was already required. <br />Zuccaro mentions that if you look at other city developments, often times public land <br />dedications are in floodplain or drainage areas, or other areas that are not well suited <br />for development. Those are areas that are better suited for preservation. <br />Howe asks why we avoid the sustainability plan and LEED building and solar <br />requirements. <br />Zuccaro says when you are doing a GDP, the purpose is to address those types of <br />subjects and create restrictions or design standards within the GDP. Because this is not <br />