PL PACKET 06172025 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 15, 2025 Page 2 1 parking supply. The applicant is Able View/David TeBrake o/b/o Nou Vang Owner Sheldon 2 Mortenson. 3 4 At the March 18, 2025, Planning Commission Meeting, the applicant brought a request for a 5 Conditional Use Permit to develop a new 2-story, 34-unit Assisted Living Facility on a 0.86-acre 6 parcel at 0 Foss Road. The parcel is vacant with the exception of a garage building in the southeast 7 corner of the site. The building would be removed as a condition of approval of the project. The 8 applicant has indicated that the building may be removed without impacting other property rights on 9 the neighboring land. 10 11 The project requires a Conditional Use Permit for a senior residential building of between 20 and 40 12 units per acre. With the CUP, the applicant has prepared a plan that requires approval of a variance to 13 the south (side yard) setback (reducing the setback from 20 feet to 10.5 feet), and a variance to 14 parking requirements, reducing the parking supply from 37 to 11 parking spaces and waiving the 15 requirement for underground parking on the site. 16 17 At the public hearing in March, the Planning Commission heard testimony from the applicant related 18 to the project, as well as from neighbors of the property in question. Neighbor testimony raised a 19 number of concerns, including the following: 1.20 Parking supply on the site and whether parking demand would flow onto Foss Road – a 21 particular concern due to its already congested on-street parking conditions. 2.22 Proximity of the trash enclosure to neighboring townhouse units to the north of the property. 3.23 Visibility of the parking area to townhouse units to the north, and options for screening. 4.24 Other comments related to development of the site within an already heavily developed area./ 25 26 Several neighbors also expressed support for the land use generally, in the context of those particular 27 concerns expressed above. 28 29 After significant discussion, the Planning Commission voted to recommend either of two optional 30 paths for the developer. The first was to table action on the application and provide the applicant the 31 opportunity to modify the plan to increase off-street parking supply for the facility, and address any 32 impervious surface issues that such a modification would create, in addition to those other aspects of 33 the Commission’s discussion. This option would be returned to the Planning Commission for further 34 review. The second alternative offered to the applicant was to treat the Commission’s action as a 35 recommendation for denial if they wished to proceed to the City Council without making the 36 suggested changes. 37 38 The applicant has since provided updated plans and applied for a third variance, this one to the 39 standard maximum impervious surface based on an expansion of the parking lot. Other site plan 40 amendments have been added. 41 42 The applicant has revised the application following the Initial Planning Commission public hearing 43 with a series of modifications to the plans, one of which has resulted in a request for a third variance 44 to accommodate an expansion of the allowable impervious surface on the site to approximately 45 54.3% beyond the standard allowance of 50% in the R-4, Multi-family Residential zoning district. 46 Plan modifications include: