Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Victoria Condos topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council grants preliminary approval for Victoria Condos, allows 96% impervious variance and requires city retain development rights
Summary
Council approved the Victoria Condos preliminary plat, a shoreland variance to allow up to 96% impervious coverage, zoning text amendments for angled parking and site plan matters, and required a condition that the city retain ownership or equivalent development‑rights control over the city parcel used for parking.
The Victoria City Council granted preliminary approval for the Victoria Condos mixed‑use project on Dec. 8, approving the preliminary plat, site plan, conditional uses and a shoreland variance to allow as much as 96% impervious coverage subject to conditions including a requirement that the city retain development rights or equivalent control over the parcel it currently owns.
City Planner Brian McCann (S9) described the project as a 10‑unit condominium building with two ground‑floor commercial units and a showroom on a roughly 0.63‑acre downtown site. He said the applicant proposes 82 total parking stalls (21 serving the project, leaving a net increase of one public stall compared with current conditions) and requested several entitlements including a zoning text amendment to permit angled parking and a shoreland variance to exceed the 80% impervious limit.
During council discussion, project engineer Mark Anderson (S13) explained the engineering tradeoffs: expanding sidewalks and widening Randy’s Way increased impervious area from about 82% today to as much as 96% for the proposed design, but the project adds stormwater treatment for both the parking lot and the building roof. Anderson said the net hydraulic effect is small — "the difference between today and the proposed project is literally 0.2 CFS," and described that increase as "nominal" relative to downstream pipe capacity.
Council members raised questions about future conversion of the showroom to retail (which staff said would require two additional parking stalls beyond those already planned), whether parking should be held as city‑owned land rather than granted as an easement, and how property‑line and window requirements would be resolved at final plat. Council directed conditions addressing staging, final property‑line review at final plat approval and minimum parking requirements if future use changes.
Gregory Vanskeek (S5) moved the primary resolution approving the preliminary plat and related entitlements subject to the conditions discussed that evening — notably approval of up to 96% impervious coverage and a twelfth condition requiring the city to retain development rights, ownership, or substantially similar control over the parcel the city currently owns. The motion was seconded by Council member (S7) and passed by voice vote; the council then adopted a zoning‑code amendment (ordinance 486) and authorized summary publication.
Engineer Mark Anderson noted the project will treat stormwater and that the change from 82% to 96% impervious equates to a small increase in peak runoff, while staff emphasized staging and final plat requirements to protect downtown access during construction.
What happens next: Final plat and building permit reviews will follow, with final property‑line and title review required before final plat approval as directed by staff.
