Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers pitch Far West PD overlay emphasizing parks; commissioners raise density, ordinance concerns
Summary
A developer presentation of a proposed PD overlay on Slater family land promised multiple parks and a mix of single‑family and townhomes but prompted commissioners to question density, zoning conflicts with R‑1‑15 standards and stormwater/sensitive‑lands constraints. Commissioners recommended public outreach before decisions.
A developer representative presented a concept for a Far West PD (planned development) overlay that would add a mix of single‑family homes and townhomes on the Slater family property while delivering a 10‑acre regional park and several neighborhood parks.
The presenter said the plan was grounded in the city’s general plan goals — a park within a half‑mile of every resident and roughly 10 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents — and described Marion Park (10 acres), Bell Rose Park (about 3 acres) and two parks inside townhouse blocks. He said the proposal targets roughly 5.5–5.74 units per acre based on a provisional survey and that open space in the plan totals about 27%, above the municipal 20% requirement.
Commissioners focused on the density and ordinance constraints. One commissioner warned, “This represents a radical change from that in terms of packing lots of houses in a lot smaller space,” and argued that much of the city’s R‑1‑15 language would be inconsistent with the proposed overlay. Staff and other commissioners flagged specific ordinance sections (including references to single‑family buffers in 17.32.0.30 and sensitive‑lands rules in 17.70020) and noted wetlands and detention‑basin siting remain unresolved; Speaker 8 cautioned that wetlands often can’t be counted as usable park area.
Several commissioners urged broader public outreach before advancing the overlay. One recommended a joint work session with the city council plus an open house where residents could view concept plans and hear outside professionals explain PD and townhouse examples. Multiple commissioners said the PD overlay had been intended for smaller infill parcels rather than the scale shown in this concept and suggested testing how currently approved townhouse projects perform before permitting a larger development.
The presenter acknowledged the feedback and said utilities and detailed stormwater design would be resolved in later engineering and design stages; he agreed to follow up with commissioners by email and to consider an open house. No formal action was taken; commissioners directed staff and the applicant to pursue additional public engagement and to review applicable ordinance constraints and sensitive‑lands requirements before the item returns.
Next steps: applicant to coordinate community outreach (open house/public hearing), refine surveys and utility/stormwater plans, and return to the planning commission with updates and any required ordinance‑compliance changes.
