Ordinance 1436-88 - Laserfiche WebLink

• Planning Commission Minutes July 7, 1987 Page 4 No problem on page 9 or page 10. On page 11, paragraph 5, Height Limitations on buildings, "I recommend what was originally approved, a 30-foot building height for the first 300 feet and a 50-foot height in the next 300 to 600 feet. The 1,000 foot cuts very deeply into the area that was already rezoned with the idea that it would have light manufacturing in that portion and other uses that were not permitted in the first 600 feet. A 26-foot high building limitation eliminates warehouse storage wherein the building minimums are 30 feet." On page 12 or 13, "I have no problems with these." On page 14, on the added conditions, no problem although some of them refer to Seaway Center, I assume that is a typo. On page 14, paragraph 19, "I object to the 5-acre lot size, would like to see that changed back to a two-acre minimum site". Chuck Moser stated that he objected to creating comprehensive plan designations for specific uses. This should reviewed at the time of the proposed use. Chuck Moser stated that we need to deal with the issue of 5-acres at this time with the citizens of the area present. Don Bocek then stated that on page 15, paragraph 20, he did not have an objection to dedicating the property to the City but as long as they were meeting all the setback requirements that they should be able to use the acreage in Powder Mill Gulch dedication for the setbacks and landscaped areas. Don Bocek stated that paragraph 21 on page 15 basically increases the buffer strip from 150 feet to 200 feet by not allowing any buildings within the 200 foot strip. Don Bocek stated that on page 14, paragraph 14 through 18 raises enough restrictions and with the 150-foot buffer strip in there, I feel the neighborhood should not be overly concerned with going to business-light industrial park. Jim Allendoerfer, 5301 Ocean Avenue, Everett, WA then addressed the Planning Commission. "The Neighborhood Action Group wanted a chance to respond to Mr. Bocek's comments. The proposal that the group has come is a major compromise toward an agreed settlement that we never thought we would take. When I talked with you a year ago, I told you that my neighborhood was not going to make another compromise in a long series which started in 1978. We have compromised from residential to business park. We have compromised by saying you can draft these performance standards into a contract which may or may not be enforceable instead of placing them into your zoning code and comprehensive plan which we would far prefer. We would prefer to put this whole process off until you do a City-wide legislative action writing a business park code and comprehensive plan. We compromised because of Mr. Bocek's time pressures."