Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 02-21-20241 Approved Minutes February 21, 2024 Approved Minutes Planning Commission Meeting February 21, 2024 Chair Boo called a Meeting of the Plymouth Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard, on February 21, 2024. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Michael Boo, Marc Anderson, Julie Olson, Jennifer Jerulle, Josh Fowler, and Neha Markanda COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Bill Wixon STAFF PRESENT: Planning and Development Manager Chloe McGuire, Engineering Services Manager Chris McKenzie, Senior Planner Lori Sommers, Senior Planner Kip Berglund, Senior Planner Shawn Drill, Community and Economic Development Director Grant Fernelius, City Council Liaison Julie Pointner Chair Boo led the Pledge of Allegiance. Call to Order Public Forum Approval of Agenda Motion was made by Commissioner Olson and seconded by Commissioner Fowler to approve the agenda. With all Commissioners voting in favor, the motion carried. Consent Agenda (4.1) Planning Commission minutes from meeting held on February 7, 2024. (4.2) Review city council strategic goals and priorities Motion was made by Commissioner Fowler and seconded by Commissioner Jerulle to approve the consent agenda. With all Commissioners voting in favor, the motion carried. 2 Approved Minutes February 21, 2024 Public Hearing (5.1) Review rezoning, PUD general plan, and preliminary plat request for redevelopment of the former Prudential Insurance site, 13001 County Road 10 (SPRC Land Ventures Plymouth – 2023082) Senior Planner Drill presented the staff report. Commissioner Anderson referenced the proposed 925 units noting that residential density was based off the total size of the site and asked the type of density that would be calculated if they were only looking at the residential area of the site. Senior Planner Drill replied that he did not calculate that, as that is not how the city calculates density. He estimated that the density would be roughly double if it was only based on the residential lots. Commissioner Markanda referenced Summit Orthopedics, which was mentioned as a commercial business. She asked the hours of operation that the commercial components would have. Senior Planner Drill replied that the applicant could better address that. Commissioner Fowler referenced the statement that the city would connect this site to the bus route and asked if a bus shelter would be proposed on the site. Senior Planner Drill stated that is has not been determined at this time. He explained that development for the site would be phased over roughly eight years, therefore the demand for that service may not arise until Year 3 or 4 of the development. He confirmed that when that demand is present, there would be a bus stop and possibly a shelter at this location. Planning and Development Manager McGuire stated that she had just calculated the density based on only the residential lots, and it is about 42 units per acre. Commissioner Jerulle referenced the ask for a variance for parking and asked if that was related to the residential or commercial uses. Senior Planner Drill provided details on the number of stalls required for commercial and residential uses of this nature. He stated that a slight reduction is being requested but that would not be a variance, but rather through PUD flexibility. Commissioner Jerulle commented that she does support lesser parking given how things are evolving. Chair Boo referenced the multimodal use reduction that was applied and asked how eligibility is determined. 3 Approved Minutes February 21, 2024 Senior Planner Drill provided examples, such as shared parking opportunities between the residential and commercial uses. He stated that staff attempts to right-size the parking for the overall site to ensure they do not create a sea of parking. Chair Boo noted that the traffic study had a list of recommended improvements and asked whether those would all be implemented for this development. Senior Planner Drill replied that there were some on-site issues that have already been addressed in the plans and confirmed that those five recommendations have, or will be, included. Chair Boo stated that there was a statement that a range of housing would be provided on the site and asked when the determination would be made as to the economic groups would be identified for housing. Senior Planner Drill replied that is happening in the background as the developer is looking at a tax increment financing (TIF) package that would support some level of affordability. Chair Boo introduced Dan Salzer of Scannell Properties, and Ross Stiteley of Roers Companies, representing the applicant. Mr. Salzer shared some renderings to provide an idea of the look and scale of the proposed development. He stated that commercial hours of operation would vary based on the use. He stated that there will be some 24-hour operation but would not necessarily be open to the public at all hours. He provided the example of Summit which would have surgery and recovery suites. He stated that care would be provided 24 hours a day, but the business would not have members of the public coming in during all of those hours. Commissioner Anderson stated that the commission has seen this proposal move through the process from conceptual and EAW to the current rendition proposed today. He stated that this is the first time the commission has heard a user for the site, which is exciting. He asked for more details on the reaction of the marketplace and whether this vision could come to life based on current market demands. Mr. Salzer commented that there has been a lot of excitement to this plan, and they continue to receive a lot of interest from the retail and business campus uses. He stated that they are finally at the stage where they can start marking out where users could go and believed that the demand to fill those areas would come quickly. Commissioner Olson asked if there would be a parking variance. Mr. Salzer reiterated that this would not be a variance, but a flexibility within the PUD. He stated that parking was a big part of the discussion from early on in the process. He stated that they worked with Summit closely to determine the actual parking needs as they do not want to overpark the site. Commissioner Olson asked and received confirmation that there would be underground parking for the apartments. She asked if there would be parking on the street for the park use. Mr. Salzer replied that they do not anticipate street parking, identifying the proposed parking lot for the park. 4 Approved Minutes February 21, 2024 Commissioner Olson asked for details on the phasing of the plan. Mr. Salzer stated that they would begin with the infrastructure and roads with Summit as the first project to move forward. Mr. Stiteley stated that they are still working through the design of the first phase of multi-family but anticipated that the first phase would include about 400 units. Commissioner Fowler asked the percentage of parking that would be internal compared to surface for the residential building. Mr. Stiteley commented that as they redefine the plans that will ebb and flow but typically, they like to have a 1:1 ratio for underground parking but recognized that will be limited by the footprint of the building and therefore some parking could be pushed to surface lots. Commissioner Fowler asked if the structured parking would be replacing underground or surface stalls. Mr. Salzer replied that the intent would be for the structured parking to offset some of the multi- family parking along with the waterfront retail area. Commissioner Fowler referenced the requested maximum building height of 100 feet and noted that the plans appear to show a height of 75 feet. Mr. Salzer replied that it is best to have flexibility in the case that they want to go taller as they develop. He commented that it would be unlikely that 100 feet would be requested for a use outside of residential, noting that any request of that nature would need to come back before the commission if it were to occur. Commissioner Markanda stated that the traffic study period was from 2017 to 2022, recognizing that the site is no longer an active corporate site. She asked if there is potential concern as this moves forward in phasing if there were higher crash numbers reported due to increased traffic. Engineering Services Manager McKenzie stated that the traffic study used data from 2017 to 2020, recognizing that is the higher end of traffic as it was pre-COVID. He stated that crash data is continually reviewed, and they will continue to monitor traffic with the county to address any issues through signal timing. Chair Boo opened the public hearing. Chair Boo introduced Molly Munz, 5935 Norwood Lane N, who expressed concern regarding increased traffic. Chair Boo closed the public hearing. Engineering Services Manager McKenzie commented that Bass Lake Road and Northwest Boulevard have the capacity to address the potential traffic. He stated that the roadways were 5 Approved Minutes February 21, 2024 designed to the ultimate use of the Prudential site. He recognized that traffic will increase slightly as a result of the development, which is why additional turn lanes will be added and signal timing will be adjusted to manage that. Commissioner Anderson recognized that there are still some unknowns with timing and the residential buildings and asked if the commission would see any of these plans again. Senior Planner Drill replied that this would be the only time the commission would formally review the request, but staff could provide updates as development begins if that is requested. He stated that the maximums (height, etc.) are specified within the draft resolution, along with parking ratios. He stated that if anything is proposed outside of those specifications, the developer would need to come back to request an amendment to the PUD. Commissioner Anderson asked if staff feel that the specifications for height, parking, and exterior materials would ensure quality development. Senior Planner Drill replied affirmatively. Commissioner Jerulle commented that this is a well thought out plan that provides a variety of uses. She believed that parking could perhaps be reduced further, below the 1.5 specified. Chair Boo commented that the developer would obviously have a desire to reduce parking if it were not found to be needed and asked if there would be flexibility to do so. Senior Planner Drill commented that the city attempts to walk a line between having enough parking without overparking. He stated that staff is comfortable with the 1.5 specification and if there was a desire to reduce, staff would want to bring that back to the commission for review. He stated that the market and end user will provide input on their parking needs as development occurs and therefore this is a compromise that would meet all needs. He stated that they will monitor the issue and they can bring back an amendment if it is appropriate. Commissioner Olson commented that she would be concerned if the parking were less than 1.5 because of the number of residential units proposed. She asked for information on the mix of units proposed for the buildings, as there would be two- and three-bedroom units. Mr. Stiteley commented that the final unit mix is still to be determined but noted that it will be a good mix of unit sizes. He confirmed that they are sensitive to parking demands for residential units as a building will not be attractive to residents if there is not sufficient parking. Commissioner Olson commented that while times are changing, they have not changed yet and most people in the residential buildings would still have vehicles. Motion was made by Jerulle, and seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to recommend approval of findings of fact for a rezoning of land and ordinance amending chapter 21 of the city code to reclassify certain land located at 13001 County Road 10, and a PUD general plan and preliminary plat for SPRC Land Ventures Plymouth for the SPRC Land Ventures PUD for roughly 75.5 acres located at 13001 County Road 10, subject to the conditions within the draft resolutions. 6 Approved Minutes February 21, 2024 Further discussion: Commissioner Fowler suggested that a ten percent parking reduction be allowed, which could be approved administratively, as the users and demand are better defined. He confirmed that could be considered as a friendly amendment to the motion. Commissioner Anderson stated that there are a lot of unknowns and therefore if parking demands change, he would prefer to see the request. Commissioner Fowler stated that he is confident that staff could make the determination as to whether that reduction could be made. Commissioners Jerulle and Anderson denied the requested amendment noting that they would prefer to see the request return if there is a requested change to parking. Chair Boo commented that this is a well thought out development and will be a great addition to the community. Upon a roll call vote and all Commissioners voting in favor, the motion carried. (5.2) Review rezoning and preliminary plat request for 22 single-family lots on the 10.64- acre Silver Buckle property located at 16700 Chankahda Trail (Sai Brinda, LLC – 2023068) Senior Planner Berglund presented the staff report. Commissioner Anderson asked the type of disruption that would occur for the removal of the rubble, as it was his understanding that there is a substantial amount of rubble that would need to be removed and hauled offsite. Senior Planner Berglund stated that perhaps the applicant could estimate the number of truckloads. He stated that if this were to be approved, the grading operations would continue to have temporary access from Chankahda Trail using the current driveway location. Chair Boo asked if a street easement could be requested along with the utility easement for the property to the west. Engineering Services Manager McKenzie replied that the only way gravity sewer would work is the from west, which is why that utility easement is required. Chair Boo acknowledged that there would be more options for traffic, which is why that cannot be requested. He referenced the cost of maintenance for connection to Comstock and asked for more information. Senior Planner Berglund replied that there is an emergency access point and until the full connection to the west would be made, the maintenance and continued use of the emergency access point would be required. 7 Approved Minutes February 21, 2024 Commissioner Markanda asked if there is an ETA on the timing of reforestation if this were to be approved. Senior Planner Berglund replied that if this were to be approved, the trees marked in red would be removed through grading operations while the others would be protected through fencing. He stated that the plantings typically occur after grading but before homes are constructed. He stated that at the time of final plat, a revised landscaping plan would be required showing a minimum of two trees per lot. Commissioner Markanda referenced the correspondence from neighbors received related to this request, noting that there seems to be concern with an additional access point. Chair Boo clarified and asked why an access would not be placed directly on Chankahda. Engineering Services Manager McKenzie replied that there are a number of reasons that a connection to Chankahda is not included and provided explanation. He noted that there are a number of developments in this area that follow similar practice. He recognized that some traffic will be added but the roads have capacity to manage that traffic. He stated that the city has spent a significant amount of time and money to improve the traffic and safety of Chankahda. He stated that the more accesses they put on Chankahda, the more opportunity for accidents and crashes. Chair Boo introduced Narisi Reddy, 18933 64th N, representing the applicant, who stated that he is representing his friends who are proposing to create this neighborhood to build their homes. He stated that the group is currently working with a consultant who is working closely with the PCA to create a plan to remove the rubble from the site. He was unsure of the number of truckloads. Commissioner Anderson commented that it is always nice to give the neighborhood an estimate of the amount of truck disruption that will occur during construction and therefore asks the question often during these reviews. Bob Molstad, Sathre-Berquist, stated that they have completed samples and have some approximate estimated of 6,000 to 10,000 yards of material. He stated that they will then review the amount of material that will need to be removed from the site and estimated one to two weeks for that hauling to occur depending on what they encounter. Commissioner Olson asked the type of homes that would be constructed. Mr. Reddy replied that they would be constructing detached single-family, two-story homes. Chair Boo opened the public hearing. Chair Boo introduced Thomas Swan, 16605 60th Place N, commented that this development would add an additional 22 homes with traffic going past his home. He noted the high number of young children in this area. He stated his family sometimes park on the road and expressed concern with construction traffic past his home. 8 Approved Minutes February 21, 2024 Chair Boo introduced Keith Ylinen, 16610 61st Avenue N, expressed concern with the lack of access point for this development. He believed there would most likely not be objection to this development if it included that access. He commented that this is a winding road with decreased visibility and a lot of activity from children. He was unsure that the comparison to other neighborhoods was accurate because of the road conditions. He asked if there would be concern for emergency vehicle access as people often park on the street. Chair Boo introduced Kevin McDonald, 16610 60th Place N, commented that he previously shared his comments via email and echo the concerns of the previous speakers related to traffic and the number of children that play outside. He also desired a second connection for the proposed development. Chair Boo introduced Andrew Averbeck, 16615 61st Avenue N, agreed with the previous speakers about the winding road. He stated that his backyard is basically all woods, and he often experiences wet conditions after rain events. He had concern that he could experience more issues with water if the neighboring property is graded towards his home. Chair Boo introduced David Dunn, 17030 60th Avenue, stated that his largest concern is related to the proposed access. He believed that access from Chankahda would be much more desired. Chair Boo introduced Andy Augustine, 6115 Garland Lane N, commented that while this proposal would meet the requirements of the city code, that does not mean it is the best option. He agreed with previous speakers that access should be provided from Chankahda Trail. He recognized that access was recently approved to Chankahda for Eagle Brook Church and therefore connections can be made to that roadway. Chair Boo introduced Amy Sundet, 6090 Comstock Lane N, commented that she does not believe that the Johnson property is viable to have full build out. She stated that the majority of all traffic will come through Archer Lane, which is narrow and winding. She stated that if there are vehicles parked on the road, large trucks have trouble moving past. She stated that a cul-de- sac over 500 feet requires a second access point and does not believe that requirement should be waived. She believed that this request would place people in jeopardy because of the young children in the area and emergency response time. She asked the commission to recommend denial as this would depend on a vague future state for the required secondary access. She requested that an access be required on to Chankahda Trail. Chair Boo introduced Maria Batool, 16625 60th Place N, echoed similar concerns related to the single access proposed. She noted that the property currently has an existing access from Chankahda that has been used for over five years and therefore that could continue to be used. She also commented on the large number of children in the area and the difficulty for vehicles to navigate when cars are parked on the road. She also provided input from her neighbor at 16620 60th Place N, who requested protected status of trees near his property line and increased wetland buffers to allow natural screening between the neighborhoods. She noted a mature oak tree on her neighbor’s property, four feet from the property line, and stated that there is concern that the tree could become damaged during construction. Chair Boo introduced Scott Shifflett, 16500 61st Avenue N, reiterated the comments that others have made. He asked if the rezoning is contingent upon the adjacent property approving the 9 Approved Minutes February 21, 2024 easement. He would like to see the approval require that the earthwork, environmental remediation, and grading vehicles all use the Chankahda access on at least a temporary measure. He stated that Steeple Hill already provides maintenance of the emergency access through dues charged to its residents and asked how this new development would become responsible for that. He supported a second access for the development. Chair Boo introduced Son Stegmaier, 6045 Comstock Lane N, stated that he echoes the concerns of those that have spoken before him. He expressed concern with the emergency access lane to Chankahda. He stated that he has seen many trucks use that access lane, just taking the chains down to get through. He asked what would be done to prevent other vehicles from using that access. Chair Boo closed the public hearing. Senior Planner Berglund referenced the tables listed in the packet with comparisons to other developments and provided additional details. He noted that one example included Steeple Hill and Silver Buckle while the other included what could be anticipated if the Johnson property were to fully develop. He provided details on the language within the city code related to cul-de- sacs and single access. He stated that ultimately there would be a through street if/when the neighboring property develops and explained how the cul-de-sac distance is measured. He stated that both of the cul-de-sacs may slightly exceed 500 feet (around 510 and 520 feet long), and if the requirement for a second access were not waived, the applicant could redesign to decrease the cul-de-sac lengths to 500 feet. Engineering Services Manager McKenzie stated that this site generally has a lot of fall from east to west and therefore staff has been working with the applicant and engineer to manage drainage throughout the site to the wetland. He stated that the grading impacts are confined to the subject property. Senior Planner Berglund commented that if this moves forward, construction access would be allowed temporarily from Chankahda for activity until the lots are ready to build upon. He stated that he cannot give legal advice but there could be language written into the HOA documents stating the shared maintenance obligation between developments. He noted that the shared maintenance was requested by the HOA. He confirmed that document would need to be provided to the city as a condition of approval. He provided details on the emergency access and how that could be improved to prevent other vehicles from using that if that were an issue. He commented that there is not a requirement to provide a buffer between residential developments, although it is encouraged for a developer to maintain buffering to the extent possible. He referenced the area mentioned by a resident and was unsure how close the grading operations would go towards that property line. Chair Boo commented that given the fall of the property from east to west, he would guess that there would be some type of buffer in that area. He asked the minimum setback in that area. Senior Planner Berglund replied that the structure setback from the property line is 25 feet. 10 Approved Minutes February 21, 2024 Mr. Molstad commented that their grading limits would be within their site, and he would review the placement of that tree when reviewing the grading plan to determine what could be done to minimize grading near the property line to the extent possible. Senior Planner Berglund referenced the statement related to emergency response times and provided details on the review that is done by staff, including public safety and the fire department. He noted that development as proposed with the current access point and emergency access is adequate from the standpoint of those departments. Chair Boo asked if this road is more narrow than other residential roads, or just more winding. Engineering Services Manager McKenzie replied that the road is standard width for a local street, but is very curvy. He stated that the curves benefit the neighborhood from the point of traffic calming. He stated that more complaints on traffic and speed are generated from roads with large straightaway segments as traffic can reach higher speeds. Senior Planner Berglund commented that the rezoning of the property is not contingent upon the easement, but prior to final plat the applicant would need to provide a recorded easement to allow placement of the utilities. Commissioner Anderson stated that one of the stated reasons not to have access on Chankahda is that the comprehensive plan does not allow that and asked if that is correct. Senior Planner Berglund commented that it is not disallowed but the CR 47 corridor study was based on not having access from Chankahda. Engineering Services Manager McKenzie provided additional details on the CR 47 corridor study, which did not include this access, and stated that there would be challenges to providing access and the other elements that would also be required. Commissioner Anderson referenced the comment that the Silver Buckle driveway would be used for temporary construction access but that the access would be closed prior to the time homes are built. He asked how the materials would then be brought onsite to build the homes. Senior Planner Berglund stated that if approved, the applicant would be required to enter into a development contract which would establish access to the property throughout the construction process. He stated that staff agrees that access from Chankahda could continue to be used for a certain time. He stated that once the cul-de-sac is completed, there would no longer be access through Chankahda and therefore the home building materials would come through the neighborhood to the east. Commissioner Anderson commented that he had the unfortunate experience of living next door to the Hollydale development. He stated that he could not imagine all the construction trucks and materials being delivered for these homes through the existing neighborhood to the east. He recommended a requirement that a temporary connection be added to the southern cul-de-sac with the homes on the southern cul-de-sac to be the last constructed as that would allow the materials to continue to come from Chankahda. 11 Approved Minutes February 21, 2024 Commissioner Olson understood the work the city has put into the road plan, but because of all the neighbors present tonight providing input, she would like to see an access considered from Chankahda. Chair Boo commented that there is nothing that would prohibit the commission from making that amendment but stated that it would be the judgement of the commission as to whether that would ultimately be a good idea. Planning and Development Manager McGuire commented that the commission could direct staff to investigate an additional access point. She stated that there are quite a few different challenges with providing access at that location. She stated that there are right-of-way challenges which would require a taking of property from a private resident. She stated that there is also a crosswalk there that is needed for pedestrian safety. She stated that the city does not have the mechanism to require an access there. Engineering Services Manager McKenzie provided additional details on the challenges that exist and the impacts that would occur to private property. He stated that turn lanes would also be required which would have impacts to the trail and road which were just constructed four months ago. He noted that adding a turn lane would also increase the length of the pedestrian crossing that was recently improved and would also decrease pedestrian safety. Commissioner Markanda asked if this would preclude the option to build 60th Avenue N as a through street as well. Engineering Services Manager McKenzie replied that would not preclude that from occurring. He stated that one requirement is that the sewer needs to work and that needs to go to the west because of the gravity system. He stated that roadway access can be provided as proposed and the existing roads have the capacity to handle the proposed traffic. He provided more details on the proposed average daily trips, peak traffic times, and other details related to traffic. Planning and Development Manager McGuire explained that the commission is requested to consider the draft resolutions for rezoning, findings of fact, and preliminary plat. She stated that Eagle Brook Church was a conditional use permit (CUP) and therefore additional conditions can be placed upon that review and approval. She stated that a preliminary plat is based on the city code requirements and there is not a mechanism to add certain conditions, however that could be done through a request that staff and the applicant have discussions on the topic of a second access. Commissioner Jerulle recognized that it does not seem feasible to add the second access. She asked if there would be a way to make an emergency access from the south cul-de-sac. Engineering Services Manager McKenzie stated that staff can work with the applicant to discuss when, how and for how long the temporary access is used in order to place as much of the truck activity upon that entrance. Chair Boo asked if the emergency access to Comstock would be needed once the road to the west is developed. 12 Approved Minutes February 21, 2024 Engineering Services Manager McKenzie replied that emergency access would not be needed at that time. Commissioner Fowler asked if the property to the west could be developed without providing the road. Senior Planner Berglund replied that the property to the west currently has temporary access from the west and the applicant would be required to build a segment of road to the west. Commissioner Fowler asked and received confirmation that any type of development would require that road connection. Planning and Development Manager McGuire commented that there is currently on home on that property that can maintain its access onto Chankahda. She stated that any further development would require the east/west road extension. Chair Boo noted that there seems to be interest in additional conditions that access from Chankahda be allowed through a significant portion of construction, noting that staff could develop that specific language, and modest improvements could be made to the emergency access to prevent non-emergency vehicles from using that access. Commissioner Anderson commented that the comprehensive plan guides development and often there is little input from residents, with more comments coming forward when development is proposed that follows the guide of that plan. He stated that he would like to see as much of the housing materials delivered from Chankahda as possible. He referenced the possible addition of bollards being added on someone else’s property and did not believe that is something the commission could require and is instead something that neighborhood would need to work with the city on. Commissioner Markanda commented that this is a great plan from the builder and developer. She stated that when thinking of the additional traffic flow she understands that the access from Chankahda cannot be required but perhaps there could be additional exploration of the connection through the property to the west. Motion was made by Boo, and seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to recommend approval of the draft ordinance for rezoning, findings of fact and preliminary plat associated with the request for 22 single-family lots on 10.64 acres located at 16700 Chankahda Trail, subject to the conditions within the draft resolutions and that staff and the applicant discuss prolonged temporary construction access from Chankahda Trail and recommendation that the applicant work with the neighboring development and city to enhance controls on the emergency vehicle access on Comstock. A roll call vote was performed: Commissioner Olson nay Commissioner Markanda nay Commissioner Anderson aye Commissioner Fowler aye 13 Approved Minutes February 21, 2024 Commissioner Jerulle aye Chair Boo aye Motion carried. The Commission took a brief recess. The Commission reconvened. (5.3) Review annual city code and zoning ordinance amendments Planning and Development Manager McGuire presented the staff report. Chair Boo noted a sentence that should be cleaned up relating to body art establishments. He referenced home occupation permits and asked if an applicant could request more than five clients per day. Planning and Development Manager McGuire confirmed that a request could be made for more than five, but that would need to be considered by the city council. Chair Boo referenced the allowance for Ev charging stations in all districts and suggested that there would be staff developed criteria on what EV charging would mean as there are different levels of charging. Commissioner Fowler referenced the exterior building finishes and asked if the intention would be to remove metal sheds. He recommended wording that in a way that would allow architecturally finished metal products. He stated that perhaps this section should be reviewed in more detail as it is currently confusing as many common materials are not listed. He stated that many cities classify the materials into different categories and then allow a percentage of materials from each category. Planning and Development Manager McGuire acknowledged that the city currently has very little architectural control. She suggested removing that section from this item and noted that staff could bring that back on its own for continued discussion and review. Commissioner Anderson Planning and Development Manager McGuire Motion was made by Boo, and seconded by Commissioner Olson, to recommend approval of the recommended changes for the city code and zoning ordinance, removing the section on architectural materials and as discussed, subject to the conditions within the draft resolution. Further discussion: Commissioner Jerulle asked why a letter of credit would be removed as a requirement, which is listed on page four of the packet. 14 Approved Minutes February 21, 2024 Planning and Development Manager McGuire clarified that entire section was proposed for removal which related to administrative approval. She stated that the requirement for the letter of credit would remain in general as this would remove the administrative approval process. Commissioner Jerulle referenced the proposed removal for retail within public institutional district. Planning and Development Manager McGuire replied that standalone retail is not a desired use within the public institutional district. Commissioner Jerulle referenced section 15, PUD planned unit development and the proposed addition related to public benefit, asking for more information. Planning and Development Manager McGuire commented that the public benefit component is not currently included but is listed in state statute. She stated that the PUD policy would define the public benefit via that policy. She stated that this would address the public benefit while the policy is being developed. Commissioner Jerulle requested to strike that until the policy is completed. Chair Boo and Commissioner Olson accepted that friendly amendment. Chair Boo opened the public hearing. No comments. Chair Boo closed the public hearing. Upon a roll call vote, with all Commissioners voting in favor, the motion carried. New Business Adjournment Chair Boo adjourned the meeting at 9:54 p.m.