No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-04-2002 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 4, 2009 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held on June 4, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Auburn City Hall. Those in attendance were as follows: MEMBERS: Garna Jones, Dave Peace, Karen Ekrem, Peter DiTuri, Ronald Douglass, Renee Larsen and Yvonne Ward STAFF: David Osaki, Sean Martin, Shirley Aird, Tim Carlaw, and Patti Zook The meeting was called to order by Chairman Karen Ekrem. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was concurred by the Planning Commission that the minutes of the May 7, 2002 meeting be approved as mailed. I;)UBLIC HEARING · ZOA02-0001 - 2002 Comprehensive Zoning Map Amendments Chairman Ekrem opened the ph on the four proposed rnap amendments and explained the process to the audience. Planning Commission decided to hear the four zoning map changes one at a time. Planner Martin mentioned that City is initiating four zoning map amendments and the goal of the public hearing is for Planning Commission to make a recommendation to City Council. Council could hear the amendments at their June 17 meeting. Exhibit I is 67.01 acre Port of Seattle wetland mitigation site. The amendment would rezone the area from R2 to Pl. The rezone is to align the zoning district with the Comprehensive Plan designation established in 2000 Commissioner DiTuri. Commissioner Douglass inquired about the date of the odginal agreement between the City and the Port and Planner Martin believes the agreement occurred a couple years ago. The rezone is to provide consistency between the Comprehensive Plan update of 2000 and the zoning map. There was no public testimony on Exhibit 1. Planner Martin reviewed Exhibit 2 which represents two islands of R1 zoned property. The rezone would change the zoning fi`om R1 to R2. The zoning change poses no significant alteration in density to the area. City Council directed this amendment be made. There was no public testimony on Exhibit 2. Planner Martin described Exhibit 3 which is to align the zoning district with the Comprehensive Plan designation established in 2001 update. The subdivision was developed under the R4 zoning. The single family residential Comprehensive Plan designation supports three zoning designations: R1, R2 and RS. He explained the difference between the three zoning districts and why the R2 zoning designation is the most appropriate zoning for the area. If the area was zoned R 1, 18 of the lots would become nonconforming. He explained the impact of the lots becoming nonconforming. He explained the requirements in the R1 zoning designation. He showed copy of the assessor's map for the area and pointed out that lot 5 will not meet R2 standards. Regarding landscaping, the Code does not differentiate between R1 and R2 zoning. He also spoke about the other two lots that could potentially be nonconforming. Commissioner Peace asked for claritication and reasons besides lot width that the lots would not be conforming. Planner Martin replied that staff looked at the development standards for the three districts and pointed out a comparison chart. The lots were developed under the R4 standards. -1- MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 4, 20{~/ In response to questions from Commissioner Larsen, Planner Martin was that house on lot 5 would become nonconforming and this means the homecwner would have potential limitations on the lot. If property owner wanted to add garage or addition to the house, or shed, the minimum lot size requirements in R1 would already be exceeded. It is not known if the house would be harder to sell if on a nonconforming lot. The City exempts single family homes from the nonconforming chapter of the Zoning Ordinance. If the house is destroyed, City would Iow the house to be reestablished under the same footprint. Planner Martin advised that the zoning change is coming from direction of City Council. Commissioner Douglass wanted to know what kind of paperwork is recorded for the nonconforming lot owner's benefit, and what is the procedure to place an exemption on record. Planner Martin said the reference is within the nonconforming chapter of the Zoning Ordinance. The City would not record this on the title to the property. He just wanted to let Planning Commission know if zoning is changed to R2, lot 5 becomes nonconforming. R2 is the most liberal and generous of single family residential districts. The R2 zoning will allow the majority of the homes to conform to single family district. Commissioner Ward asked why change from R4 to R2 and potentially have three nonconforming lots. Why does Council want to change the zoning? Planner Martin briefly spoke about the redevelopment of the bowling alley site. The residents required a number of elements from the City and wanted single family zoning on the subdivision. Itwas identified as high density residential development. Developer wanted single family homes which are permitted in the R4 district. The City cannot deny a use if it is permitted outright in zoning district. Residents wanted underlying Comprehensive Plan amendment from high density residential to single family residential and Comprehensive Plan was changed in 2001. The City could not rezone to single family until Comprehensive Plan was changed. Now it is time for the zoning to be changed. This directive comes form City Council. Commissioner Larsen inquired if the zoning change protects residents from someone coming in and wanting to put in apartments and Planner Martin replied that assumption could be made. Joanne Fonda. 1210 N Court SE, came tonight fully expecting to do baffle, but Planner Martin has answered her questions and explained the rezone. She undemtands now why R2 zoning is more appropriate than R1 zoning, which was the designation she wanted for Velvet Square. She wants to make sure the area stays single family residential. She does not want someone to pumhase a couple lots and put in apartments. Mrs. Fonda does not want to be railroaded by having R4 zoning. She thanked Planning Commission for consideration of the zoning change from R4 which is not appropriate. She wondered if someone can build duplexes in R2 zone. Planner Martin replied that R2 zone allows duplexes and multi-family, however, the minimum lot size and density requirements on property in Velvet Square are short of the requirements. A duplex needs 12,000 square feet of land and peraon would have to acquire two lots, consolidate through lot line adjustment, apply for a conditional use permit, have public hearing with Hearing Examiner and be approved by City Council. The City has the ability to deny conditional use permit based on certain criteria. He anticipates that Council would determine duplexes as not appropriate for the area. In response to questions from Commissioner Jones, Planner Martin explained access to the subdivision. Planner Martin reviewed Exhibit 4 which is along the Auburn Way North corridor and used by Valley Pontiac for retail sales. The change to C3 allows retail sales of automobiles. The Comprehensive Plan offers moderate support in this transition area. Chairman Ekrem closed'the public headng on the four zoning map amendments. Commissioner Ward made a motion, seconded by GJ to recommend approval of the four zoning map amendments as presented by staff. The motion passed. -2- MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 4, 2009 CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING Community Development Administrator Osaki advised that both of these (CPA02-0002 and CPA02-0003) are Comprehensive Plan amendments and both are considered to be emergency amendments. The Comprehensive Plan is amended annually, but under certain circumstances, emergency amendments can be made. Tim Carlaw will do a presentation on the emergency amendments to the 1990 Comprehensive Plan. Planner Aird will do a presentation on siting the Secure Community Transition Facilities (SCTF). It is anticipated that both Comprehensive Plan amendments will be public hearings at the July 2 Planning Commission meeting. The SCTF will also require a Zoning Ordinance amendment. · CPA02-2 -Amendment to 1990 Comprehensive Drainage Plan Storm Dreinage Engineer Carlaw preposed amendments would replace the existing chapter and text for P Basin. The amendments identify improvements that will allow for new chapter and text. The amendments will allow the lifting of a development moretorium that has been in effect in P Basin since February, 2001, He described boundaries ofthe moretoriumarea. Recently the City achieved flood elevation on Mill Creek in excess of the FEMA 100 year floodplain and Council passed the moratorium on any further development in order to study and determine the extent of flooding in the area. The City has done elaborate studies and the consultant is an expert in hydrology. Three (3) thousand acres contribute to Mill Creek in addition to Auburn. The study looked at where the water is coming from and how did it get in this situation. There has been considereble development in the tributary basin. He spoke of Mill Creek's configuration and the lack of maintenance along the creek which has contributed to the reduced conveyance capacity on the creek. There has been an increase of one to two feet of additional water in the moratorium area. He spoke about an event in 2001 where several inches of rain were received. He explained difference between 100 year, 25 year and 10 year event. Commissioner Larsen asked about 1997 which was a very wet year and its cumulative effect and asked if that makes more difference than a freak event. Storm Drainage Engineer Carlaw replied that the modeling takes this into consideration and takes into account the worst rainfall. It proved conclusively that there is additional water a,nd the study produced documentation to revise flood maps and submit to FEMA. Storm Drainage Engineer Carlaw showed a series of maps and pointed out areas needing drainage imprevements and the four projects which are proposed. He pointed out the drainage improvements along Clay Street and Western Avenue. He pointed out areas that do not have drainage pipes. He pointed out where water quality facility would be constructed. The improvements should help businesses because currently there is lack of intrastructure to convey water. The Public Works Committee endorses these projects. Chairman Ekrem wanted to confirm that if the Planning Commission makes a recommendation to approve the amendment that this does not actually fund project. Storm Drainage Engineer Carlaw: moratorium ensures that City has viable solutions to address drainage and accommodate floodplain issue and provides a vision because City does not have a workable vision now. Planning Commission's endorsement of the amendment is to recommend these projects be completed and the replacement chapter incorporated. The existing Comprehensive Plan policies require if someone wants to develop that they refer to drainage improvements to serve their development and the developer is obligated to construct the improvements. It lets the developer know what they need to construct for their development to occur. Commissioner Jones spoke about more development on the West Hill that will add more problems. Storm Drainage Engineer Carlaw spoke about finding out where the water is coming from. The City Council and Mayor will make decision about cumulative impacts from other jurisdictions. The development regulations have gotten tighter and new developments are punished for lack of drainage contrel dudng past 30 years. -3- MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 4, 200? Commissioner Ward asked if the City is looking at these proposals to be implemented by developers. Storm Drainage Engineer Carlaw spoke about reviewing the entire Capital Facilities Plan and how these projects fit into the priority ranking, then propose f~nding for construction. Some of the projects will have more requirements than others due to their location in the basin. Commissioner DiTuri wondered how long it takes a project from design stage to completion. Storm Drainage Engineer Carlaw said timing of environmental review is three to six months, pre-design in one year, construction another year; however, some projects will be more complicated. This of course depends on City's budget constraints and if City constructs. It could be done in two phases in two construction periods. Community Development Administrator Osaki mentioned that after Planning Commission public hearing, the amendment goos to Council committees and the Council could approve at their first meeting in August. In response to Commissioner Ward's questions, only one project, a preliminary plat of 10 lots had been discussed in this area, but this was closed and fee refunded to the applicant. Commissioner Ward expressed reservation about cramming four projects through that might not get funded, and wondered if there would be political upheaval if the moratorium is extended. Storm Drainage Engineer Carlaw stressed that they received direction from Council not to extend the moratorium and Council wants the moratorium to go away. In response to Commissioner Jones's questions, Storm Drainage Engineer Carlaw said the majority of Mill Creek is on private property without any drainage easement and City cannot go in and perform maintenance. Chairman Ekrem thanked Storm Drainage Engineer Carlaw for his presentation. The public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan amendment will be held July 2, 2002. · CPA02-0003 and ZOA02-0002 - Siting of Secure Community Transition Facilities (SCTF) Community Development Administrator Osaki wanted Planning Commission to have a briefing on this subject which will be a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance amendment and two public hearings are needed. Planner Aird distributed three sheets from Department of Social and Health Services that attempt to provide information on the issue of SCTFs. She provided a short history on the issue of $CTFs. The state has equated SCTFs as 'essential public facilities' which means that local jurisdictions cannot preclude siting; therefore, the City must come up with siting criteria for these facilities. The State law says that the City's regulations cannot be more restrictive than State law. The facility will need to be located away from potential risk sites such as schools, parks, day cares, chumhes, schools, bus stops, etc. There will be two public hearings; one for the Comprehensive Plan amendment and one for the Zoning Ordinance amendment. She is unsure what the public reaction to this mandate will be. In response to questions from Commissioner Ward, Planner Aird mentioned that some County governments said they still are not going to do the regional planning. If jurisdictions have not adopted by September 1, they can be automatically preempted which means that DSHS does not have to comply with local regulations. If a jurisdiction does adopt siting criteria which is then deemed too restrictive, it can still be preempted by DSHS. Commissioner Ward said it is crazy for DSHS to do the environmental determination. She also foresees the probability of the facility locating in South King County because it will not be placed in a more affluent area. Offenders will be coming to the facility from all over. She spoke of the need for legal analysis of the matter. -4- MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 4~,~2007 Commissioner Jones inquired if residents would be drug and alcohol offenders also and Planner Aird said the residents would be level 3 sex offenders, labeled by the State as 'highest likelihood to reoffend'. They could have drug and alcohol problems in addition to being sex offenders. Commissioner Douglass referred to the phrase 'site within reasonable commute distance' and wondered how this is defined and Planner Aird said the phrase refers to the entire metro area. In response to Commissioner Larsen's questions about zoning for such a facility, Planner Aird since it is considered a regional facility, according to the Comprehensive Plan, it could be confined to the M1 area. State understands this will take extra time for processing. King County is supposed to be the responsible entity who decides where the SCTF goes. There will be hearings either under Comprehensive Plan or preemption process. Commissioner DiTuri wanted to know how other cities are handling SCTFs. Planner Aird stated that many cities are not addressing the issue, and believes it may be 50-50. Some cities are saying to the State 'go ahead and preempt us' and then they will deal with SCTFs. Other cities say amend Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance to address $CTFs and work with the State. If Auburn does not comply, the City could get preempted, and Commissioner Ward asked if State can dictate where the facility goes. If Aubure complies and has the facility in its Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and if half the cities do not comply, will this make Auburn more vulnerable? Planner Aird said the facility would have to meet building codes, but not local development regulations. DSHS said Auburn would not be more vulnerable, but they are looking at availability of property as appropriate. DSHS has mapped where the at-risk facilities (chumhes, schools, day cares, etc.) are located. Commissioner D~ud asked if the City will be using GIS to find an optimum site for the facility. Planner Aird replied yes; the City will draw 'bubbles' around the dsk areas and try to determine where a facility could go. Planner Aird advised that someone from the Police Department will be available at the public hearing. A representative from King County Sexual Resource Center will also be at the public hearing. It is unknown if DSHS will have a representative at the public headng. Commissioner Ward stressed the importance of doing an extensive public notification in order to give the .public full chance to come and speak about the issue. Chairman Ekrem suggested having the City Attorney or his representative who can relate what law is and so that people understand the issues. She wants people to have a clear definition that this is a State law and how Auburn can proceed to accommodate this mandated regulation. Commissioner Ward spoke about potential litigation and the need to have a clear written outline and control of the public headng by the Chairman. The City Attorney should not address legal issues. Commissioner Peace said the issue is that the cities have been directed to site these facilities and staff needs to state exactly what options are available. Planner Aird advised that if the City does not adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code the State will not pull GMA funding, no sanctions will be made against Auburn, but City regulations could be preempted, if that happens, Auburn's input will be less than ideal. On the issue of preemption, Commissioner DiTud wondered if at the public hearing staff will make a proposal of where an SCTF facility could be sited. Commissioner Larsen believes it is important for Auburn to state where this kind a facility could be placed in the City. Commissioner Ward suggested receiving a opinion from the City Attorney on the matter. Community Development Administrator Osaki cautioned that Planning Commission is obligated to make a recommendation to City Council; part of that recommendation could be that Planning Commission recommends not to approve the amendments and go with possible preemption. -5- MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COM/vlISSION MEETING JUNE 4, 200/ Commissioner Jones suggested that the facility be limited in size to perhaps three beds. The City could say it would accept or willing to accept if site is limited to only three beds. Planner Aird thinks the State is looking at 3 to 12 beds. Planning Commission was encouraged to contact staff with questions that they might have. The public hearing on Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance amendments related to SCTF will be held July 2, 2002. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT Community Development Administrator Osaki notified Planning Commission that City Council adopted the C-1 Zoning Code amendments. Community Development Administrator Osaki informed Planning Commission that Planner Dixon has completed the Sensitive Areas Ordinance and incorporated Planning Commission changes. Staff hopes to have open house before the Planning Commission hearings. Community Development Administrator Osaki asked Planning Commission to think about any Comprehensive Plan map or text changes they would like to initiate. INFORMATION · Work Plan for June. 2002 through December, 2002 The work program will be updated every couple months. Thera may be work sessions on the Storm Drainage Plan and work sessions on adult uses. · Terminal Park Neighborhood Plan Meeting Notice & Summary No discussion. ADJOURNMENT: W~th no further items to come before the Commission the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. PC~AGND'd~IIN06-2002 -6-