Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Stuckey Farms topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves Stuckey Farms site agreement addendum after split vote; developers to follow up with detailed plans
Summary
After discussion and amendments to clarify density and water conditions, the council approved a modified site-plan agreement addendum for the Stuckey Farms PCD in a 3–2 vote and later approved a related setback zone change 4–1.
Washington City Council approved a modified site-plan agreement addendum for the Stuckey Farms planned-community development (PCD) on Wednesday and later approved a separate zone change to amend medium-density setbacks for a portion of the development.
Overview and changes City attorney Thad Sigmiller reviewed edits made to the earlier site-plan agreement, including numeric clarifications of acreage by land-use category, removal of prior references to property‑assessment districts (PIDs) and additional language clarifying how units in a proposed “hospitality village” are counted toward density. The latest addendum also reiterates an 18‑month time limit for deferred conceptual plans; applicants who defer full project plans must return with detailed submittals for public hearings within that period, staff said.
Council action and votes - The site-plan agreement addendum (discussion and addendum edits) was approved in a 3–2 roll-call vote. Yes: Councilmembers Henderson, Ivy and Caspersen. No: Councilmembers Coates and Belliston. - A related ordinance to amend medium-density residential PCD setbacks (zone change Z-25-09) passed 4–1. Yes: Coates, Ivy, Caspersen and Henderson. No: Belliston.
Density and water treatment language The council and staff debated density metrics for a hospitality village included in the plan: the addendum sets a per-acre cap (40 units per acre) as a maximum for any given acre while also capping total hospitality‑village units and clarifying that units run and managed by a hotel or hospitality operator may be counted differently for density calculations. In addition, the agreement clarifies that reverse-osmosis or other water-treatment discharges are subject to the same restrictions the council requested; any brackish or treated-water system would need to comply with city codes and could not be discharged into the city sanitary system, council staff said.
Next steps Developers must return with detailed project and design plans for each pod or phase; staff noted that a deferred conceptual plan has an 18‑month time limit under city code. The council also requested clearer deed/transfer restrictions be explored for any water shares or rights that the developer pledges to the city as part of future secondary-water arrangements.
