2012/07/25 Council Agenda Packet

zoning and Comprehensive Plan designation are nsistent with each other,and that the zone fits in with the current and anticipated use. Mr. Larse presented a graphic of the site. The City purchased the property on Smith Isla in 2000 and it is currently a mitigation area; however, the site is owned by the City but is currently i Snohomish County. The property is located on Smith Island, south of 12th Street,west of Union SI gh. The request is to amend the Comprehensive Plan map to show the City's Urban Growth Area verlaid on the subject 20 acre site. The objective is to eventually bring the subject area into the ity which according to the letter from Snohomish County should happen in 2015. The goal is to str amline permit review and provide police and fire protection to the area. Mr. Larsen presented a grap of the site. He asked Commissioners if there were any questions. 6:49:41 PM Chair Sosin asked if Commission had any questions regarding the docket items. 6:50:15 PM Commissioner Olivers asked if the City had any comments fr.'m the property owners regarding the two parcels located northwest of 23`d Drive. He wondered if the underlying Comprehensive Plan designation would be in their long term best interest. Mr. Larsen resp. ded that the City did receive a letter from the property owner regarding the property owner's positic n. The use of the property is single family residential and not commercial. Commissioner Olivers c• mented that rarely does a proposal come before Commission to fit something to the current use, e request is usually for the highest and best use of the property. Mr. Koenig responded that if thos: two parcels were part of the B-2 zone with contract and there was access from one parcel to the • her that would make sense; however,the access is from an R-1 residential street so the property does - of make sense as a commercial use. If the parcels took access off of 19th Avenue, a case could be made or the higher intensity use. 6:54:02 PM Chair Sosin mentioned that there was a predomin. ce of R-1 zoning west of 23rd and north of 116th. Mr. Koenig added that the unincorporated area i also single family. 6:54:31 PM Commissioner Sand asked if the Code allowed 'sr commercial access through a residential neighborhood. Mr. Koenig responded that th. re was no code requirement but something the City tries to avoid. 6:54:59 PM Chair Sosin asked why the parcel designa •d 1.6 south of the Scrupps property was not included in the Comprehensive Plan amendment and re one proposal. Mr. Koenig referred to the graphic to explain that both the Scrupps property and the •arcel to the south went through an earlier"Intent to Rezone" process. The parcel to the south is cur ently developed and is consistent with both the Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning so the property was included in the Evergreen Way area-wide rezone which was approved by Planning Commiss.a n in February. The Scrupps property was not developed under the "Intent to Rezone" process which c -ated the inconsistency between the Comprehensive Plan designation and the zoning. Both ,roperties are proposed to rezone to E-1 MUO as a result of the Evergreen Way Revitalization Pia efforts. Chair Sosin asked what type of development was located on the property to the North. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 4 March 6,2012