Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Councilmember Menth stated that the only proposal he could support would be for 80-foot-wide <br />lots, as that is what everyone wants. He stated that 80 would be the minimum and some lots could <br />be larger than that. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Acting Mayor Riley, Councilmembers Specht, Heinrich, Menth, and <br />Musgrove. Voting No: Councilmember Kuzma. Absent: Mayor LeTourneau. <br />7.04: Consider Actions Related to Hunt Property Development Proposal (Project No. 20- <br />105); Case of Platinum Land, LLC <br /> <br /> Introduce Ordinance #20-08 Rezoning Hunt Property from R-1 Residential <br />(MUSA) District to R-1 Residential (Detached Villa) District and R-2 <br />Residential (Detached Villa) District <br /> <br /> Review Sketch Plan (Major Subdivision) <br /> <br />Deputy City Administrator Gladhill reviewed the staff report and explained that this is a legislative <br />(policy) decision, due to the required rezoning, staff needs broad policy direction before <br />formulating a recommendation. The Planning Commission recommended that the developer <br />remove the 55-foot-wide lots. This is a key time in the project to make major layout changes, <br />provide feedback on lot sizes, road alignment, trails, etc. before the developer incurs the expense <br />of detailed civil engineering drawings. Staff does believe there is room to compromise on a mix <br />of lot sizes. <br /> <br />Councilmember Heinrich stated that comments were made from the previous developer related to <br />providing housing needs for a broad array of residents. She stated that there are areas within the <br />City zoned for 55 and 65-foot-wide lots and asked staff to provide input. <br /> <br />Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that there have been plans within the past few years to <br />create a district for the smaller lots. He stated that there are not a lot of areas guided for that <br />development, but it typically is applied adjacent to Highway 10. He noted that discretion was <br />provided to the City in not labeling the land for that development but having the tool to use. He <br />agreed that the intent was to cluster higher density near Highway 10 and decrease density as you <br />move further out of the City. <br /> <br />Deputy City Administrator Gladhill reviewed written comments received that echo the comments <br />made in the previous case. He read a statement submitted from the resident at 17530 Nowthen <br />Boulevard who expressed concern for the sandhill cranes and geese and how the environmental <br />study would be done and speaking in opposition of the rezoning. <br /> <br />Jason Bebo, applicant, stated that he is looking to provide choices to buyers. He stated that he <br />does not have to do high density but would ask that some sort of choice be allowed related to lot <br />size. He stated that if the decision is 80-foot lots, that is what it is but explained that if every lot <br />is required to be 80 feet in width that would not provide many choices for buyers in this area. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kuzma stated that the Planning Commission supports a compromise within R-1 <br />to provide some flexibility and therefore he would also support that option. <br /> <br />City Council / May 26, 2020 <br />Page 14 of 16 <br /> <br />