02 - Laserfiche WebLink

brief background of the previous development applications for the site. She reported that in March 2006, the Planning Commission heard the proposal for an NSSP amendment to change the land use designation thereby increasing the number of lots on the project site from three to five and supported the proposal. However, no further action was taken by the applicant to pursue the development of the site until 2018. Planning and Permit Center Manager Dennis reported the applicant submitted a preliminary review application for a similar five lot PUD and subdivision proposal. She noted the Planning Commission reviewed the project and stated it could generally support three homes fronting Sycamore Creek Way if they were designed to be comparable to the design, setbacks, building mass and bulk, and floor area of the adjacent Sycamore Heights homes on Sycamore Creek Way. She explained the Planning Commission suggested the future home on Lot 1 be less visible and maintain the rural character of the area. Planning and Permit Center Manager Dennis reported the Bringhurst family filed their formal application for a five lot PUD subdivision and provided an overview of NSSP amendments, the PUD rezoning and development plan, the Vesting Tentative Map, and the Growth Management Allocation. She provided drawings of the proposed project layout. Planning and Permit Center Manager Dennis reported staff's analysis will focus on consistency with the General Plan and the NSSP. She advised staff believes allowing an amendment to the NSSP to suit the project proposal would be inconsistent with the goals of the NSSP. She advised staff does not support amending the NSSP land use to increase the density for the proposed development. She noted the Planning Commission considered the proposed project on January 22nd, disagreed with the staff position, and indicated they may be able to support the project, but requested adjustments to the building area and setbacks as well as visual renderings for Lot 1 before rendering a recommendation. Planning and Permit Center Manager Dennis reported the Planning Commission reviewed the information provided by the applicant and unanimously concluded the development as proposed is acceptable and thus supported a recommendation for approval of the NSSP amendment and five lot project as proposed to the City Council. She advised staff continues to believe developments need to be proposed in a manner consistent with the NSSP based on its land-use plan instead of amending the NSSP to accommodate proposed development and does not support the amendment. In response to Councilmember Brown's inquiry, Community Development Director Ellen Clark explained the City Attorney's Office determined the Bridal Creek Homeowners Association (HOA) could invite the property to the HOA but the City could not compel that to occur. Project Planner Jenny Soo clarified the front yard setback for Lots 2, 3, and 4 is 25 feet and the line Councilmember Brown was referring to was the grading break line. In response to Councilmember Narum's inquiry, Project Planner Jenny Soo reported Design Review was taking place at the administrative level and not at the Planning Commission because design criteria are incorporated into the design guideline. She also reported staff did not feel the need to go through the Planning Commission because there is a set of design guidelines and existing homes in the neighborhood. Community Development Director Clark explained the Planning Commission felt there were enough guidelines to be comfortable with the staff-level approval of the home design. She noted the applicant could appeal at a public hearing if they had a concern. In response to Councilmember Narum's inquiries, Community Development Director Clark explained one of the clear expectations set by the Planning Commission was the three homes would look and feel like they are part of the adjacent subdivision. She clarified the Dale Way easement was provided by the prior owner in 1997 and is described as a transmission pipeline and access road easement. She also noted public access is permitted on Dale Way at present and access would be dedicated as part of the subdivision which the owner could not dispute. Project Planner Soo interjected and advised if the City City Council Minutes Page 5 of 14 August 18, 2020