Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 2012-04-12 Item 3 - Adoption of 3/22/12 MinutesCity of Tukwila Planning Commission Board of Architectural Review (BAR) Minutes Date: March 22, 2012 Time: 6:30 PM Location: City Hall Council Chambers Present: Brooke Alford, Chair, Thomas McLeod, Vice Chair, Commissioners, Louise Strander, David Shumate, Mike Hansen, and Aaron Hundtofte Absent: Commissioner Jeri Fmngello- Anderson Staff: Minnie Dhaliival, Planning Supervisor, Jaimie Reavis, Assistant Planner, and Wv_ netta Bivens, Planning Commission Secretaiv Chair Alford opened the public hearing at 6:30 PM. Minutes: Adoption of the Februaiy 23, 2012 minutes: Commissioner Shumate requested that the minutes be revised to include his inquli on whether staff notified the affected residents surrounding the C /LI of the public hearing. Staff responded that they only notified the property owners in the C /LI, and that the standard notice Nvas published in the newspaper. Commissioner Strander made a motion to adopt the Febivai 23, 2012 minutes as revised. Commissioner Hansen seconded the motion. The motion Nvas unanimously approved. CASE NUMBER: L12 -005 (Design Review Major Modification), L0_)8 -079 Preliminary Subdivision Amendment) APPLICANT: Mike Overbeck REQUEST: Request to change conditions of approval of the original preliminai approved subdivision and the approved design review to allow phased development of a 31 unit townhome development, including associated infrastructure and site improvements. The proposed phasing includes a temporal recreation space, as part of Phase I that was not reviewed as part of the original design review. LOCATION: Six tax parcels located at 14420 14426 34 Ave S, and 3421 -3429 S 144 Street (parcels 0040000087, 6391100000, 6391110000, 0040000083, 0040000088, 0040000094). Chair Alford swore in those wishing to testify. Staff asked the Planning Commissioners the Appearance of Fairness questions. Jaimie Reavis, Assistant Planner, Department of Community Development, gave the presentation for staff. She provided background information, explained the review process, and gave an overview of the project. Preliminary Plat: When the Preliminary Plat Nyas originally approved, in November 2009, it Nyas Nyith the condition that all utilities for the private access road, sideNvalks, and the recreation area located on the West and North sides of the private access road be completed as part of the Public Works construction permit. The applicant is requesting an amendment to remove the condition in order to allow phased development of the project. The first eight townhomes would be developed in Phase L The 23 additional townhomes would be developed in Phase 11. Access isn't currently shown for lot 100, and as part of the subdivision process, legal access to all Page 1 of 3 BAP 1 fearing Minutes March 22, 2012 lots must be established. One of the phasing criteria is that all phases must be able to stand alone without relying on future phases to meet code requirements. Phase I does not include rear yard landscaping, so in the event that Phase II does not occur Phase I would not meet the rear yard landscaping requirements. In addition, there is no room for guest parking on the site or street. Staff recommends approval of the Preliminai Plat with the original ten conditions, and the three neiv conditions as listed on page 17 and IS of the March 12, 2012 Staff Report. Design Review: Major modification changes are proposed to the design of Phase I in the event that Phase II is not constructed. A six foot high wood perimeter fence would be constructed to enclose Phase 1. The locations of the mailboxes were approved on the Phase II site. Therefore, a neiv mailbox needs to be included on the Phase I site until Phase II is constructed. Rear yard landscaping is required for Phase I to meet the landscaping requirements. Additional guest parking will be a condition of the major modification approval, to be added as part of Phase I and removed when Phase II is constructed. Staff recommends approval of the Design Review with the original five conditions, and the six new conditions as listed on page twelve of the March 12, 2(_)12 Staff Report. Commissioner Alford asked for clarification on the following; when the determination would be made for the fence to be constructed, and when would the landscaping on the south side be determined and completed. She also inquired on the amount of units that a subdivision is required to have in order for Board of Architectural Review (BAR) to occur: The fence shall be constructed, and landscaping complete prior to final approval of Phase 1. Review before the BAR occurs when a subdivision has at least ten lots with an associated Design Review. Commissioner Shumate asked when the condominiums would be removed from the project site, and whether the guest parking will be paved or gravel. He also asked if there is a limit on the timeframe between developing Phase I and Phase IL The condominiums will remain during Phase I development. The guest parking will be paved. From the date of the Preliminaiy Plat approval, the applicant has five years to receive final plat approval. If Phase II is not developed after five years the applicant can apply for an extension. After expiration of the extension period, a new application would need to be submitted. Commissioner Hundtofte inquired whether the five year timeframe for development will affect condition number three regarding constructing a fence if Phase II is not constructed. He asked what would be the timefrale for constructing the fence: The perimeter fence would be constructed as part of Phase I development, and a portion of it would be removed when Phase II is developed. For clarity, staff suggested amending condition number three to read: `as part of Phase I development a perimeter fence shall be constructed.' Commissioner Hansen commented that condition number three needs to be amended. He asked clarifi_-ing questions regarding the Preliminaiv Plat approval, the timing of Phase I and Phase II development, and suggested being mindful of the timefrale for the construction of the southern fence. The applicant's intent is to sell and develop the first eight toiynhomes before developing Phase IL Therefore, there would be a time lapse between developing Phase I and 11. Commissioner Strander inquired on the number of available guest parking if both Phases are completed. There will be 12 parking spaces. Page 2 of 3 2 BAP 1 fearing Minutes March 22, 2012 Commissioner McLeod inquired whether the project will look incomplete if Phase II is not constructed: The recommended conditions will ensure that Phase I looks like a completed project. Commissioner Alford asked, what is driving staffs recommendations. Mike Overbeck, the applicant, stated that he does not have any issues with the required conditions. He confirmed that the fence will be constructed on the south side of the site. He explained it was always his intent to construct the project in phases, and provided explanation on why the project was delayed. He said from his perspective the only thing that is really changing is the installation of the road, the fact that the road does not continue, and the construction of the two recreation spaces in Phase II instead of Phase L Mr. Overbeck stated he wants the Commission to know that he takes pride in the community and that it's important to him that the project leaves a mark. TESTIMONY: There vvas no public testimony. The public hearing vvas closed. The BAR deliberated. MOTIONS: COMMISSIONER HANSEN MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE CASE NUMBER L12 -005 DESIGN REVIEW /MAJOR MODIFICATION AND CASE NUMBER L08 -079 PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION AMENDMENT IN PHASES WITH STAFF'S FINDING, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND ALL CONDITIONS. COMMISSIONER STRANDER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL WERE IN FAVOR. COMMISSIONER MCLEOD MADE A FRIENDLY MOTION TO AMEND COMMISSIONER HANSEN'S MOTION AND RECOMMENDED APPROVAL IN PHASES; IN ADDITION AMENDING NEW APPROVAL CONDITION 9 1, AS ADVISED BY STAFF, WITH THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE: "THE LANDSCAPING SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION OF THE FIRST UNIT THAT IS CONSTRUCTED; AND FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR PHASE I CAN BE ISSUED WITH A BOND FOR LANDSCAPING." COMMISSIONER HANSEN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL WERE IN FAVOR. COMMISSIONER STRANDER MADE A FRIENDLY MOTION TO AMEND COMMISSIONER HANSEN'S MOTION AND RECOMMENDED APPROVAL IN PHASES; IN ADDITION AMENDING NEW APPROVAL CONDITION 9 3; TO THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE: "AS PART OF PHASE ONE, A WOOD PERIMETER FENCE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AROUND THE SIDES AND REAR OF PHASE I PROPERTY." COMMISSIONER HANSEN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL WERE IN FAVOR. Director's Report: Another Design Review project will come before the BAR for review in April. Submitted Bv_ Wvnetta Bivens Planning Commission Secretaiy Adjourned: 7:40 PM Page 3 of 3 3