HomeMy WebLinkAboutITEM II-A-C MINUTES
AC, TF~~~~~w~
PLANNING COMMISSION
W~~~~ ~ ~GTON March 3, 2009
MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Judi Roland called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers located
on the first floor of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA. Commission
Members present were: Chair Judi Roland, Vice Chair Kevin Chapman, Dave Peace, Ron
Copple, Peter DiTuri, Michael Hamilton, Robert Baggett and Joan Mason. Also present,
were Principal Planner Elizabeth Chamberlain, Principal Planner Jeff Dixon, Environmental
Protection Manager Kelly McLain Aardal, Director Planning, Building and Community Cindy
Baker, and Planning Assistant Secretary Carolyn Brown.
Branka Vukshich was a member of the audience.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Commissioners reviewed the minutes from the February 3, 2009 meeting.
~ Commissioner Mason moved to approve the minutes from February 3, 2009 meeting as
corrected; seconded by Commissioner Baggett.
Under the heading Planning Department Report, paragraph,1 line 4 change the wording
from "At this time staff is probably wait until the March regular meeting" to read "At this time
staff is waiting until the March regular meeting".
The motion passed unanimously 7-0.
I11. PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment.
IV. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
Principal Planner Chamberlain provided a color architectural rendering of the new City Hall
annex building: Auburn Professional Plaza. The ground floor business will be Key Bank
located on the SE corner of the block; and other retail will be on the ground floor along Main
' Street, with some offices on first floor. The City's Permit Center will be on the second floor.
' Also, some city offices will be on the 3rd floor along with private business.
Principal Planner Dixon spoke briefly on the situation with the Howard Hanson dam and the
Green River. The Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE) is asking jurisdictions downstream from
~ the dam to be prepared. Different jurisdictions are developing and sharing response plans.
The CitY of Auburn is bein9 proactive re9ardin9 some of th
e low sPots on the levees. The
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 3, 2009
City of Auburn also has had community meetings to advise the residents of plans they ~
should make. At this time ACOE does not have a time line on the repair.
Environmental Protection Manager Kelly McLain Aardal provided an update on the bird
viewing tower located near Highway 167 and West Main. On December 15, there was a
ground breaking ceremony for the birding tower and staff is looking at early March as a
completion date. There have been no negative comments regarding the building of the
tower.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Item 1. Case Number ZOA09-0001: Amendment to Auburn City Code Chapters 18.22,
18.50, and 18.52 related to residential conversions within the Residential Office (RO) zone.
The amendments propose changes related to development standards, landscaping, and
parking.
Chair Roland opened the Public Hearing.
Branka Vukshich who resides at 11 F Street NW spoke regarding the ability of a small
business to use off street parking. In the case where her residential office is located, there
is trouble with a small alley. The City is requiring that the alley be repaved. She and her
husband would like to see some help from the City for a small business. Mrs. Vukshich said
in her opinion an alley is public property and should be paved by the City.
As there were no other audience members to speak, Chair Roland closed the Public ~
Hearing.
Chair Roland asked staff to provide information on the proposed amendments. Ms.
Chamberlain stated that several residential conversions have come to City staff for review.
The City is looking for a way to streamline the process as it can be challenging to small
business owners. Small business owners may not have the experience in converting an
existing single family structure to a small office.
Ms. Chamberlain addressed the statement by Mrs. Vukshich regarding the unpaved alley.
An additional section has been added, which will address the use of a structure as both a
residence and business, and the parking could be addressed through a special exception for
review by the Planning Director. The requirements to pave the alley come from the Public
Works design standards. Each applicatian will be case by case and a parking plan will need
to be submitted, in order to address the concerns.
Ms. Chamberlain noted that Mr. Morchin had provided new additional information by mail
and each Planning Commissioner was given a copy. Ms. Chamberlain noted that staff
incorporated some of Mr. Morchin's comments were appropriate but other suggestions could
not such as the traffic impact fee could not be waived. Ms. Chamberlain concluded that staff
is recommending approval of the amendment.
Chair Roland asked for discussion. The Planning Commissioners discussed Chapter 18.22.
Commissioner DiTuri discussed Chapter 18.52 off-street parking, especially the parking for a ~
conversion to a business on a narrow street. Off-street parking could impact other residents
Page 3
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 3, 2009
~ and users of the street. Ms. Chamberlain responded that one on street parking spot, if
allowed, would count toward the off-street parking. If a business is required to have 4
parking spots, the on-street parking spot could count as one. Ms. Chamberlain stated on-
street parking is not guaranteed to be available. The Commissioners asked if the City has
seen a greater desire to add RO zoning in some locations.
Ms. Chamberlain stated this is not a City wide zoning amendment. The only areas that have
the RO zone are north of the hospital, along M Street, parts of Auburn Way S, around 12tn
Street SE, and East Main. Ms. Chamberlain also stated that the proposed amendments
would permit tandem parking for employees only and will free up parking for clients. In the
comments submitted by Mr. Morchin, he stated he would like to have additional on-street
parking spaces for a conversion; however staff is not in favor of permitting more than one on
street parking space to count towards the off street parking requirement. There needs to be
a balance between residences that convert to commercial and the residences that remain.
Chair Roland added the fact that converted residences could go back to being a regular
residence.
The Commissioners discussed the difference in sizes for a compact parking space and a
standard parking space. Staff is recommending allowing all the required parking to be
compact spaces. Ms. Chamberlain said the width is reduced by a foot, and the length by 3
feet from full size parking spaces to compact. Staff feels using all compact spaces will be
the best option as most in home businesses do not have multiple clients at one time.
The Commissioners questioned the landscaping requirement. Ms. Chamberlain said each
~ conversion will be done on a case-by-case basis, but the Planning Director can also make
the decision. If an exiting structure were to be torn down, the brand new building would
have to comply with the 10 foot wide landscape strip. A landscape plan would have to be
submitted for review. If landscaping was not sufficient to meet the intent of the code, then
City could ask to have landscaping added and want to blend with character of the
neighborhood.
Commissioner Peace moved to recommend ZOA-90001 move forward to City Council.
Commissioner Hamilton seconded. Vice Chair Chapman added he would like to make sure
the City ensures that the neighborhood stays residential and a new residential office won't
impact the neighborhood.
The Planning Commission voted and the motion passed, 7-0.
Item 2 Case Number ZOA09-0002: Amendment to Auburn City Code Chapter 18.29
related to exemptions for existing structures within the Downtown Urban Center (DUC) zone.
Chair Roland opened the public hearing.
There was no one from the audience that wished to speak. Chair Roland closed the Public
Hearing.
Chair Roland asked staff to provide information on the proposed amendments.
~ Ms. Chamberlain stated there have been no changes to the proposed amendments since
the Planning Commission originally reviewed the information at their February meeting. If a
Page 4
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 3, 2009
property faces a pedestrian street any exterior changes or remodels will require a review for ~
consistency with the Downtown Urban Center design standards. The second level of
changes would be for a property that faces a non-pedestrian street. If the value of a
remodel is less than 10% of the assessed value it would not require the design review
process. Chair Roland asked how the value is determined. Ms. Chamberlain stated the
assessed value is obtained from King County records and based on both land and building
value. The review is based on job value as determined by permits and not an actual cost of
the improvements.
The Commissioners discussed high valuations and possible appraisals.
The Commissioners discussed a single family residence in the Downtown Urban Center
(DUC) being exempt from a design review. For example if someone wanted to paint a wild
color in the DUC zone, the City would review. Director Baker added it is hard to regulate
aesthetics and would have to discuss with legal. City may have to incorporate usage of
certain hues.
The Commissioners discussed interior alterations, which are permitted. Certain
modifications on the inside could impact the outside street because of large open windows,
especially very bright lighting treatments that could alter an area. Ms. Chamberlain stated
staff will try to develop a definition of existing site conditions and the 10% rule could trigger
discussion on any extreme changes.
Commissioner Copple moved to recommend ZOA-90002 move forward to City Council.
Commissioner DiTuri seconded. No further discussion. ~
The Planning Commission voted and the motion passed, 7-0.
VI. OTHER BUSINESS
Shoreline Master Proqram
Environmental Protection Manager Kelly McLain Aardal, provided an update on the
Shoreline Master Program (SMP). Ms. Aardal stated the City Council adopted the program
last year on the premise that the Department of Ecology would also adopt at the same time.
However, Ecology and City of Auburn have different definitions and Ecology would like the
City to strengthen the Program. On February 4, 2009, Ecology opened a comment period on
the SMP. One resident, who lives along the Green River, was concerned that customary
access to the river not be eliminated.
Ms. McLain Aardal said the City is still using the plan adopted in 1973. Definitions from the
Auburn City Code have been changed by Ecology because of State language. Director
Baker stated the City Council adopted the Program provisionally and if Ecology had
accepted the City would not have to go back through the process.
Ms. McLain Aardal discussed the agriculture along the rivers, forest practices and flood
plain. Levee maintenance is under the Army Corp of Engineers. Any continued agriculture
use can continue but no new permitted use will be allowed. The Muckleshoot Tribe has
considerable interest and will comment. The City will receive comments after the comment ~
period is over since it is thru Dept of Ecology. The parks and city golf course along the river
are being managed as to fertilizer use.
Page 5
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 3, 2009
~ Ms. McLain Aardal stated she will come back to the April Planning Commission meeting for
a public hearing regarding the SMP before it goes to the City Council for approval of the
amended document. The goal of staff is to complete the document by the end of March, so
there can be a 60 day comment period.
The Commissioners discussed pesticide use. Ecology had requested this be added
because the use on City property (golf course, parks) normally applies to commercial use of
pesticides and fertilizers. This particular request from Ecology does not impact individual
homeowners. Pesticides are covered under storm water permits and critical area
disturbance will limit the type of use of fertilizers.
Commissioner Peace asked to see any major changes at the April meeting. Ms. McLain
Aardal stated she will have the comments by the middle of March and she will plan a public
hearing in April and send out notices. If there are no significant changes the public hearing
will be canceled. Ecology either wants the City to allow or not allow to build in the 200 foot
set back buffer back from the river. Also no Conditional Use Permits would be allowed. The
Commissioners would like to get an early final draft of the SMP to review before a hearing.
If 5 or more of the Commissioners agree on a public hearing the hearing will be held.
Code Update Status
Commissioner DiTuri asked if any other study sessions are scheduled on the code update.
The next special Planning and Community Development Committee meeting is this
~ Thursday, March 5, 2009. Staff is trying to make a six month deadline. No special Planning
Commission meeting is scheduled at this time.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 8:35 p.m.
~
Page 6
A T Y C7F~~~~~~.~~ D~:~"APLANNING COMMISSION
~
VVASN INGTON May 5, 2009
MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Judi Roland called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. in the Council Chambers located
on the first floor of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA. Commission
Members present were: Chair Judi Roland, Bob Baggett, Ron Copple, Peter Di Turi,
Michael Hamilton, and Joan Mason. Vice Chair Kevin Chapman and Commissioner Dave
Peace were excused.
Staff present: Assistant Planning Director Kevin Snyder, Senior Planner Chris Andersen,
Assistant City Attorney Steve King and Planning Secretary Renee Tobias.
Also present: Gil Cerise, Project Consultant with ICF Jones & Stokes, Garrett Huffman,
Master Builders Association, Jeffrey D. Mann, Apex Engineering, Jeff Johnston and
Bernard Johnston.
~ I1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
No meeting minutes for approval.
I11. PUBLIC COMMENT
No comments
IV. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
Assistant Planning Director Kevin Snyder presented the background and four key
objectives of the code updates.
• Respond to the change in the City Council's role in the quasi judicial decision-making
process for land use and development review process by updating regulations and
standards to insure that community goals and expectations are addressed.
• Improve the readability of the development regulations and design standards to make
them easier for property owners, developers, and City residents to use.
• Update the development regulations and design standards technical content to address
known issue areas and better support the City's development review and quasi-judicial
decision process.
• Ensure that the development regulations and design standards are coordinated and
consistent with Auburn's Comprehensive Plan and other state land use and
environmental requirements.
Senior Planner Chris Andersen briefly reviewed the exhibit list and noted that no SEPA
~ comments were received during the public notice period. Exhibit 11, which contains a
summary table of the latest revisions to Title 17, was distributed to the Commissioners. Mr.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 5, 2009
Andersen reviewed the staff recommendations from Exhibit 11 and answered ~
Commissioners' questions. Other than scrivener errors, the following changes were noted:
Chapter 17.04 - Definitions
• 17.04.025 - Alley will be added to the chapter Table of Contents.
Chapter 17.04.400
• Staff will confirm whether United States Geological Service (USGS) or National
Geodetic Survey (NGS) should be used.
Chapter 17.12.080 - Release of improvement guarantee
• Staff will insert cross reference to Title 13 at the end of subpart B.
Chair Rowland recessed the meeting at 8:14 p.m. for approximately 5 minutes. The meeting
reconvened at 8:18 p.m.
Chair Rowland opened the Public Hearing at 8:18 p.m.
V. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Amendments to Title 17 (Subdivisions) of the Auburn City Code
Jeff Mann, Apex Engineering, 2601 S. 35th St, Suite 200, Tacoma, WA stated he has ~
had the privilege to serve on the Code Working Group and applauds the work that staff
have done. Mr. Mann offered the following comments and suggestions.
17.06.010.F - Boundarv Line Adjustments. Mr. Mann suggested changing the wording
from "becomes conforming" to "more confirming".
17.12.010(6) - Final (Plats) Subdivisions. This section requires that a certificate of
improvement or bond be in place before the final plat can be filed. Mr. Mann suggested
allowing the applicant to file the final plat while completing improvements. City would
still have the leverage, but it would allow developers to start the review process. Mr.
Mann suggested striking this entire item from the requirement for application of final
plat.
17.14.080. - Minimum Imqrovement Requirements for Recordinq of Subdivisions and
Short Subdivisions. The City has added a minimum number of improvements so
basically the City is requiring that everything be installed except for the last lift of asphalt
and sidewalks.
17.26.040 - Clusterinq in residential zones outside urban separators. Mr. Mann
presented two plat drawings. The first drawing shows that with current R-5 zoning, 43
lots were achieved at an average of 8,549 square feet per lot. The second drawing
shows that with the proposed clustering RS-5, 55 lots would be achieved. However, the
second drawing does not show the required 25% open space in addition to the critical
areas and associated buffers. If the required 25% open space of the non-constraining ~
land was shown, he would lose all the lots he gained. Mr. Mann believes the open
space requirement takes away the amount of developable land. Mr. Mann envisioned
Page 3
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 5, 2009
~ clustering as allowing units in constrained lands to be moved into unconstrained lands
to obtain an increase in units.
Chair Roland asked staff to provide information on the items that Mr. Mann brought up;
Mr. Andersen responded with the following.
17.06.0101 - Boundary Line Adjustments. Staff would be supportive of amending the
language to read "more conforming" as proposed by Mr. Mann.
17.12.010(6) - Final (Plats) Subdivisions. Staff have been in consultation with Public
Works staff who have crafted proposed language in regards to Certification
requirements. The intent was that the project would either be substantially completed to
the point, if not certified, prior to being allowed to apply for final approval. With regard
to where that level might occur, staff will continue to work with Public Works who are the
staff experts on infrastructure and other required improvements. Intent was to provide a
more flexible approach with regard to what improvements needed to be complete so as
not to unduly constrain the application for final approval.
Mr. Mann clarified for the Commissioners that he was asking that Item 6.6 be deleted.
He suggested that an applicant be allowed to apply for final plat, with both the City and
developer knowing that there were items in the process of completion. Staff will consult
with the City Engineer and Mr. Mann to develop other options for consideration and
bring back to the public hearing on May 7, 2009
~ 17.26.040 - Clusterinq in residential zones outside urban separators. Staff will look to
re-evaluate open space and critical area buffers requirements. Staff will consult with
the City Engineer and Mr. Mann to develop other options for consideration at the May 7,
2009 public hearing continuance.
Garrett Huffman, Master Builders Association (MBA), 335 116th Ave SE, Bellevue, WA
98004 stated that he has been a part of the Code Working Group from the beginning.
Mr. Huffman commented that he does not think that any developer would use
clustering, that there is no value to it. He suggested putting open space requirements
into the critical area buffers. Unless this is done, Mr. Huffman stated that developers
would not be able to obtain the number of units to make clustering worthwhile. The
point of clustering is to get the lot yield and still have the critical areas on site so in the
end, everyone has the environmental value from the wetlands and the builders gets the
units out of there and the costs are affordable. Otherwise the builder has to absorb the
costs for those units they can't build on.
Chair Rowland closed the public hearing at 8:47 p.m.
Due to further editing needs on the Title 17 and staff review, it was a consensus of the
Commission to postpone voting on Title 17 until Thursday, May 7, 2009.
Commissioner DiTuri moved and Commissioner Copple seconded to continue the
meeting to Thursday, May 7, 2009.
~ MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 6-0.
Page 4
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 5, 2009
VI. OTHER BUSINESS ~
None
VII. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chair Roland
adjourned the meeting at 8:50p.m.
~
~
Page 5
NING COMMISSION
TY FACIljBURN PLAN
WAS(-iINGTC)N May 7, 2009
MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Judi Roland called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. in the Council Chambers
located on the first floor of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA. Chair
Roland stated that this meeting is a continuation of the Planning Commission meeting
held on May 5, 2009, where the Commissioners reviewed Title 17, Subdivisions. The
Commissioners had additional questions after the public hearing was closed on Title 17,
Subdivision, and asked staff to return with this additional information.
Commission Members present were: Chair Judi Roland, Bob Baggett, Ron Copple,
Peter Di Turi, and Joan Mason. Vice Chair Kevin Chapman and Commission Michael
Hamilton were excused.
Staff present: Assistant Planning Director Kevin Snyder, Senior Planner Chris
Andersen, Assistant City Attorney Steve King and Planning Secretary Renee Tobias.
~ Also present: Gil Cerise, Project Consultant with ICF Jones & Stokes, Garrett Huffman,
Master Builders Association, Jeffrey D. Mann, Apex Engineering, Jeff Johnston and
Bernard Johnston.
Commissioner DiTuri moved and Commissioner Mason seconded to re-open the
public hearing for Title 17, Subdivisions
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 6-0.
II. PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT
Staff distributed a memo, marked as Exhibit 12, with recommended modifications to title
17 (Subdivisions). Staff noted that the plat data drawings distributed by Jeff Mann of
Apex Engineering on Tuesday, May 5, 2009, are marked as Exhibit 13A and 13B.
Senior Planner Chris Andersen reviewed Exhibit 12 with the Commissioners. Staff
revised the recommendation for Chapter 17.26.030, stating that critical areas and buffers
would count towards the 50% open space requirement in urban separators. Chapter
17.26.040, relating to Cluster Subdivisions, the buffers would count towards the 25%
open space requirement; the critical areas would not. At the Commissioners' request,
staff will clarify the wording in the amendment that the critical areas are not included.
~
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes May 7, 2009
II1. PUBLIC HEARING - Title 17 Subdivisions ~
Chair Roland opened the Public Hearing at 7:15 p.m. related to Title 17
(Subdivisions) amendment of the Auburn City Code.
Jeff Mann, Apex Engineering, 2601 S. 35`h St, Suite 200, Tacoma, WA appreciated
Commissioners' and staff time in looking at the comments he made at the previous
hearing on May 5, 2009. The comment on open space and clustering (above) will go a
long way to gain back some of the lots that would be lost if the buffer was not allowed in
the calculation.
Garrett Huffman, Master Builders Association (MBA), 335 116th Ave SE, Bellevue, WA
98004 stated concern with the critical areas not being allowed in the open space 25%
requirement proposed in Chapter 17.26.040.E.9. The way the amendment is currently
written, developers will not be able to attain four units per acre. Mr. Huffman
recommends pulling the entire section.
Chair Roland asked staff how other jurisdictions are regulating cluster subdivisions.
Senior Planner Chris Andersen stated that via lCF Jones & Stoke consultant, other
jurisdictions were reviewed in respect to what they were counting towards land that
could be credited for density. There was a variety of regulations and calculations.
Consultant Gil Cerise, ICF Jones & Stoke, stated that this proposed language is similar
to the City of Kent, who has both urban and non-urban separators.
Chair Roland asked Mr. Huffman if he had any further comments. Mr. Huffman ~
suggested that all critical areas and buffers be part of the calculation for required open
space in the non-urban separators. Mr. Huffman further suggested allowing developers
to pay into a park impact fund. Rather than having a small open space on site, thus
making the lot closest to the space less valuable, put the money towards a larger park.
This would allow the builder to use clustering and the City gets density.
Chair Roland closed the public hearing at 7:26 p.m. related to amendments to Title
17 (Subdivisions) of the Auburn City Code.
Commissioner DiTuri moved and Commissioner Copple seconded to recommend
approval of amendments to Title 17 Subdivisions of the Auburn City Code with the
following modifications:
1. Revise the Table of Contents in Chapter 17.04 (Definitions) to add Alley and Area of
Special Flood Hazard and delete One Percent Flood Hazard Area and Responsible
Official;
2. Revise Section 17.04.400 USGS to read: "USGS" means United States Geological
Survey;
3. Revise Section 17.12.080 to remove the staff comment and replace with the
following: "This shall be consistent with the facility extension provisions of Title 13 ~
(Water, Sewers and Public Utilities);
Page 2
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes May 7, 2009
~ 4. Revise ChaPter 17.14 (ImProvement ReQuirements - Subdivisions) to sPecifY the
chapter title at the beginning of the Chapter;
5. Revise the Table of Contents for Chapter 17.14 (Improvement Requirements -
Subdivisions) to strike to be deleted Section 17.14.030 (Drainage Plans) and
renumber the table of contents accordingly;
6. Revise Section 17.24.010.A to specify the deletion of the word "for" in front of the
word "lease";
7. Revise Section 17.06.010 per the staff recommendation contained in the May 7,
2009 staff memorandum to the Planning Commission;
8. Revise Section 17.12.010 per the staff recommendation contained in the May 7,
2009 staff memorandum to the Planning Commission;
9. Revise Section 17.14.015 per the staff recommendation contained in the May 7,
2009 staff memorandum to the Planning Commission
10. Revise Section 17.14.080 per the staff recommendation contained in the May 7,
2009 staff memorandum to the Planning Commission;
11. Revise Section 17.26.030 per the staff recommendation contained in the May 7,
2009 staff memorandum to the Planning Commission;
~ 12. Revise Section 17.26.040 per the staff recommendation contained in the May 7,
2009 staff memorandum to the Planning Commission; and,
13. Proposed wording to Section 17.26.030.D.8(a), last sentence will read, "For
purposes of this section, critical areas shall not be included as part of the required
open space. However, on-site critical area buffers shall be permitted to be
calculated as part of the required open space."
Commissioner Copple questioned if the definition for USGS, in item 2, was corrected at
Commissioner DiTuri's previous request. Staff understood the question to be whether
USGS stood for US Geodetic Survey and not regarding National Geodetic Survey
(NGS); staff will research which is the correct agency.
Commissioner DiTuri moved and Commissioner Mason seconded to amend the motion
to revise the wording, based upon the staff clarification of the National Geodetic Survey
reference, to Title 17.
MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 6-0.
MOTION ON FULL MOTION, WITH AMENDMENT, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
6-0.
~
Page 3
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes May 7, 2009
IV. PUBLIC HEARING - Title 18 Zoning (Residential) ~
Senior Planner Chris Andersen presented the background and four key objectives of the
code updates. He noted that the Title 18 amendments before the Commissioners are
related to residential zoning. The remaining chapters would be revised as part of Phase
II of the Code Update project.
• Respond to the change in the City Council's role in the quasi-judicial decision-making
process for land use and development review process by updating regulations and
standards to insure that community goals and expectations are addressed.
• Improve the readability of the development regulations and design standards to
make them easier for property owners, developers, and City residents to use.
• Update the development regulations and design standards technical content to
address known issue areas and better support the City's development review and
quasi judicial decision process.
• Ensure that the development regulations and design standards are coordinated and
consistent with Auburn's Comprehensive Plan and other state land use and
environmental requirements.
Senior Planner Chris Andersen briefly reviewed the exhibit list. Exhibit 11, which
contains a summary table of the latest revisions to Title 18, was distributed to the
Commissioners, along with revised Title 18 Zoning revisions. Mr. Andersen reviewed the
staff recommendations from Exhibit 11 and answered Commissioners' questions. Other
than scrivener errors, the following changes were noted: ~
Chapter 18.02.090 - Zone Boundary Interpretation
• Item G- Staff will add the word "property" to first sentence; "When the city
vacates a street or alley, the vacated property will be zoned consistent with the
adjacent property it is being vacated to."
Chapter 18.04 - Definitions
• Staff will add a definition for condominium
Chapter 18.04.110 - Apartment (definition)
• Staff will add to definition that apartments may be used for rental purposes.
Chapter 18.04.497 - Impervious surface
• Staff will delete the last two sentences; not part of a definition.
Chair Roland adjourned the meeting for approximately 5 minutes at 8:38 p.m.
Meeting was reconvened 8:45 pm
Staff continued the review the staff recommendations from Exhibit 11 and answered
Commissioners' questions.
Staff reviewed Chapter 18.49 - Flexible Development Alternatives and answered
Commissioners' questions.
Chair Roland opened the Public Hearing at 9:11 p.m. related to amendments to ~
Title 18 (Zoning) of the Auburn City Code.
Page 4
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes May 7, 2009
~ Jeff Mann, Apex Engineering, 2601 S. 35th St, Suite 200, Tacoma, WA applauds staff on
the incredible work that has been done. A lot of ideas from the Code Working Group,
such as the tables and development standards, have been reflected in the amendments.
Mr. Mann is looking forward to seeing how the tables and development standards will
work "on the ground".
Mr. Mann indicated that Chapter 18.06.030, Residential Zone Development Standards,
ties into the Exhibits 13A and 13B that he submitted on March 4, 2009 to the
Commissioners. Specifically addressed are R-5 and R-7 zones and the issue of
minimum density. Using R-5 standards, the net acreage of 16 acres (Example 13A)
yielded 43 lots which are a gross density of 2 units per acre and a net density of 2.6.
The proposed minimum net density of 4 units is not achieved. To achieve 4 units, it
would require approximately 65 units on site.
On Exhibit 13B where clustering in R-5 is used with smaller lots of 6,000, even going
down to 4,500 sq. ft. lots, the yield is only 55 lots, which is only 3.43 units per acre. Mr.
Mann stated that to reach the minimum density that is proposed, narrower and smaller
lots need to be allowed. Another alternative is to eliminate the minimum lot requirement.
In response to Commissioners' question, Mr. Mann indicated that the same issues with
R-5 would occur in the R-7 zone. As shown in Exhibit B, by using 4,500 - 6,000 sq. ft.
lots, the yield is 55 units with 3.34 units per acre.
~ Chair Roland asked staff to provide information on the items that Mr. Mann brought up;
Mr. Andersen responded with the following.
Staff reviewed the sites exampled in Exhibit 13A and 1313; it does appear that the buffer
areas are larger than the sensitive areas that they are protecting. Staff is proposing the
buffers would not be used to calculate minimum density, but would be used only for the
maximum density. An amendment would be needed for Chapter 18.02.65 to remove
buffers from minimum density calculations.
Mr. Mann said the developer would only yield so many units on net area, without some
relaxation of lot area and lot width. It would be difficult to achieve the density that the
proposed code is setting.
Legal advised that the Commissioners can recommend that Council look further into this
issue rather than recommendation to approve proposed amendments.
With regards to density and lot yield issue, staff stated that the tool kit approach allows
developers to select the tools that would work for their property. Mr. Mann had
presented exhibits with two scenarios - a base zoning with a particular yield and one with
a clustering scenario with a higher yield. Staff felt that even higher yields could be
achieved with a flexible development alternatives approach that could allow 135% to
150% depending on the total number of points.
Chair Roland offered Jeff Mann the opportunity to respond. Mr. Mann asked if it was the
~ City's intent that any development should use the flexible development standards to
meet density. Staff responded that for minimum density, the flexible development
Page 5
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes May 7, 2009
alternatives would not. Staff recommends not countin9 buffer areas for the calculation of ~
minimum densities. Staff could refine and would be happy to work further with Mr.
Mann.
Garrett Huffman, Master Builders Association (MBA), 335 116th Ave SE, Bellevue, WA
98004 stated that the proposed code provides a recommendation to achieve basic
density but does not provide the tools to get there. Mr. Huffman suggested that the
recommendation to Council be that both sides should have an acceptable outcome. He
noted that growth targets are being updated and urban centers will be required to take
on more density than those cities not considered urban or suburban. Mr. Huffman
encourages Commissioners to provide options to the City Council that will allow a
minimum of four units to the acre and allow other considerations; preference being for
smaller lot sizes and narrower lot widths to achieve density.
Regarding Chapter 18.31.2001. - Director Authority and Findings, Mr. Huffman
proposed changing "all of the following conditions exisY" (line 6) to read "all applicable
conditions exisY". This gives the Director discretion to waive any conditions that do not
apply to the specific property. Staff concurred with the recommendation.
Chair Roland closed the Public Hearing at 9:43 p.m. related to amendments to
Title 17 (Subdivisions) of the Auburn City Code.
Commissioner Peace moved and Commissioner Copple seconded to recommend
approval of Title 18 as revised in Exhibit 11 with the following additional revisions. ~
1. Chapter 18.02.090 (page 7) add word "property" be added to Section G;
2. Chapter 18.02.65 add amendment to remove buffers from minimum density
calculations;
3. Chapter 18.04 - add definition for condo;
4. Chapter 18.04.110 identify that apartment may be a rental; and
5. Chapter 18.31.2001. - changing "all of the following conditions exist" (line 6) to read
"all applicable conditions exist".
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 6-0.
V. OTHER BUSINESS
Staff noted that Phase II of the code update will begin in June 2009 and scheduled for
completion in September 2009.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chair Roland
adjourned the meeting at 9:52 p.m.
~
Page 6