02 - Laserfiche WebLink

City Attorney Daniel Sodergren stated the application currently before Council is for a design review for which there is specific criteria in the PMC. Council is limited to those, tonight, and they do not include requirements for parking but are more design -related. Mayor Thorne opened the public hearing. Minh Lee expressed concerns with past issues with the subject property owners in terms of drug use, police visits, renters and visitors. He added he has three small children and is concerned for their safety. He reported the property owners currently have four cars worried about parking with the addition of renters. Additionally, he referenced the project's massing and stated it does not fit in the neighborhood. Joe Cravotta, General Contractor, representing the applicant, reported staff concerns have been addressed in the Conditions of Approval, and reported on the neighborhood layout, challenges with the shape and size of the lot, neighborhood stroll views, removal of existing trees, design compatibility with the neighborhood, adjacent homes, proposed elevations and landscaping. Councilmember Brown asked whether existing trees are heritage trees and Mr. Cravotta stated one tree is a heritage tree but is causing foundation issues and is diseased. The tree inspection resulted in determining two trees need to be removed. Councilmember Brown noted it is well- known some houses in Valley Trails have foundation issues and asked whether it has been determined the subject property is foundationally sound. Mr. Cravotta reported the site has been inspected by engineers and any foundation issue has been addressed. Councilmember Brown noted the site has no landscaping. Mr. Cravotta reported there are fruit trees in the backyard and stated the property owner was in the process of replacing landscaping. Councilmember Pentin noted that removal of the two diseased trees would expose new massing, and Mr. Cravotta agreed but added it is currently exposed. Councilmember Olson noted the landscaping plan was judged not to be of sufficient detail, by staff, and the applicant has not submitted new landscape plans. Mr. Cravotta reported he is addressing landscaping with staff and it is included in one of the Conditions of Approval. Councilmember Olson indicated Council is being asked to approve something that has insufficient planning with respect to landscaping. Mr. Cravotta reported it was his understanding that a landscape plan was not necessary, at this point. In response to Councilmember Pentin's question, Mr. Cravotta confirmed he was present during Planning Commission hearings and is aware of the rationale of the Planning Commission in denying the application. One of the reasons included the need for landscaping. Mr. Cravotta reported he understood landscaping was not required prior to the Planning Commission's determination. They met the original submission requirements but felt the conditions kept getting tighter and tighter. He added landscaping is the last thing that needs to be addressed and indicated they are willing to do so. Councilmember Brown confirmed the applicant had an Administrative Design Review approval and is appealing the decision and approval process with conditions. She asked if there are reasons why they initiated an appeal of an approval process that included reasonable requests. Mr. Cravotta reported the original approval added conditions that were not acceptable. Doug Farmer shared his experience living on Yellowstone Court and reported the neighbors began noticing a lot of activity coming from the subject residence. They decided to start a Neighborhood Watch group and had regular contact with the Police Department in terms of unusual behavior. With time, the unusual activity turned into suspicious behavior that would be City Council Minutes Page 5 of 9 October 3, 2017