No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-08-2005 ~- WASHINGTON MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 8. 2005 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held on March 8, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Auburn City Hall. Those in attendance were as follows: MEMBERS: Dave Peace, Renee Larsen, Yvonne Ward, Kevin Chapman, Joan Mason and Judi Roland. Ronald Douglass was absent. STAFF: Paul Krauss, Director of Planning and Community Development, David Osaki, Community Development Administrator, Tim Carlaw, Storm Drainage Engineer and Patricia Zook, Planning Secretary The meeting was called to order by Chair Peace. . Approval of Minutes Commissioner Mason referred to the last page, second paragraph and said the phrase should be 'sign consistency not only in the downtown area'. Commissioner Ward made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Roland, to approve the minutes as amended. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT Mr. Osaki referred to the matrix showing what Council's action was related to the 2004 Comprehensive Plan amendments. The amendments were appealed by 1000 Friends of Washington, now called Futurewise. They are challenging the plan on not satisfying urban density requirements based on four units per acre. Mr. Krauss commented that the group is relying upon a decision made by the Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB) that was unclear and defined urban density as more than four units per acre. Futurewise is saying that any jurisdiction with less than four units per acre is in violation. They have sued other jurisdictions also. The cities of Des Moines, Kent and Issaquah have also had their plans appealed. Bellevue settled on its appeal, but has to accept another 600 units because of the lower density of the Bridle Trails development. City Council is aware of the appeal and Auburn believes the Comprehensive Plan is consistent and defendable. Mr. Osaki provided an update on the Critical Areas Ordinance which has been in Council committee the last couple months. There has been a fair amount of additional testimony since the Commission's public hearing. The CAO must be adopted in order to be eligible for certain grants. PUBLIC HEARING . ZOA04-0003 - Proposed text amendment to Auburn City Code (ACC) Section 18.52.060 related to the regulation of surfacing for off-street parking areas associated with single family and duplex residential uses. Mr. Osaki remarked that these are code amendments to the parking section of the Zoning Ordinance. He showed photographs representing the problems seen around the City. He distributed copies of the PowerPoint presentation. ACC 18.52.120 limits where 'required' parking can be provided in residential zones. ACC 18.52.060 provides development standards for 'required' off-street parking spaces for single family dwellings. For off-street parking - surfacing, he read the proposed language and the current language. He evaluated the five issues that are addressed by the amendment. He reviewed the paving coverage of the entire lot, front yard paving coverage, front yard coverage (multiple street frontages), and front yard landscaping. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 8. 2005 Mr. Osaki pointed out the Commission issues raised during a prior work session including: consider applying to uses other than single family (duplexes); consider alternative to surfacing (gravel); consider alternative landscaping; what regulatory requirements apply; how does this affect irregular shaped lots. Commissioner Roland wanted to know how the City mandates a parking code for homes on R Street when the City hasn't provided on street parking for them. How do you mandate a percentage of front yard when there is no on street parking or a very short driveway? How is the City going to deal with in older sections of town? The City will need to provide exceptions otherwise all will have gravel in the front yard. Chair Peace pointed out the portion related to landscaping and that the City is now saying outside of parking areas, that the rest of the front yard has to be landscaped? Where else in codes does say front yard must be landscaped? Mr. Osaki said there are landscape requirements for all but single family and duplex uses. It doesn't specify the number of trees or shrubs, but the proposal is new language. The language came from the City of SeaTac because they were concerned about aesthetic issues. The Planning Commission must decide whether or not this is right for Auburn. Commissioner Ward read Mr. Carlaw's memorandum, but was not sure she understood. If someone wanted to pave up to 800 square feet or 1,200 square feet, this would need to be evaluated for storm water issues? Mr. Carlaw replied yes; you need to review the entire parcel and structures because you are talking about adding 800 square feet on top of what is already there. Mr. Carlaw said that an impervious surface is asphalt, paving, or similar high runoff surface and the City doesn't consider gravel under that category. If considering gravel, it would come under the scrutiny of Public Works design standards. Chair Peace opened the public hearing. Dee Sanders, 3011 M Drive NE, has concerns about the requirement for landscaping. The car dealerships don't provide landscaping. How can you enforce residential landscaping when you can't enforce landscaping on the auto dealerships and others? Chair Peace closed the public hearing. Mr. Osaki advised that new commercial businesses will have landscape requirements except in downtown buildings where no setbacks apply. Downtown parking area situations would have to have five feet of landscaping. On Auburn Way North, there are landscape requirements for new commercial developments. Commissioner Ward suggested that staff look at developing a definition of 'boat'. In response to Commissioner Ward inquiry, Mr. Osaki said that the City of SeaTac developed their code about two years ago and he is unaware of any issues. He has spoken with SeaTac's code enforcement. Commissioner Chapman mentioned that for some houses in older neighborhoods, no on street parking is available. A person is required to have two off street parking spaces, but when the house was built it only had one single driveway. What are people supposed to do? Mr. Krauss advised that when you design an ordinance, you design that ordinance for 90 percent of the situations. In looking at SeaTac's ordinance, Chair Peace said that they allow gravel. The cost of paving is expensive. For a boat that is used a few times a year, gravel is appropriate. Some people do brick or pavers spaced with grass between the pavers. You don't get runoff like with paved surfaces. The issue with gravel is that it is tracked out onto the street and onto the grass. Commissioner Roland said that if gravel is permitted, the City needs to require that the gravel must be maintained. Commissioner Ward likes the idea of gravel as an option. -2- MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 8. 2005 Commissioner Mason doesn't think the City should require asphalt or concrete. Commissioner Roland suggested that the ordinance say gravel or similar surface. Mr. Carlaw suggested that it say 'permeable surface'. Commissioner Ward suggested revised wording of 'parking is separate from or in addition to the required parking'. Planning Commission seems to have a consensus for allowing the additional parking. Commissioner Larsen thinks there is a difference between cars and RV parking. If you have a small boat, you shouldn't have to have a driveway to store your boat in the back yard. Commissioner Roland talked about whatever is parked in front yard, whatever parking is allowed, the area should be gravel and not talk about what is parked in the back yard. if an RV is parked behind a fence or gate it doesn't matter. If you move a boat/trailer in back it would be okay. In talking about parking on the front yard grass stick to the front yard and not worry about the back yard. Commissioner Roland said that the back yards should be left out of the amendment. The City shouldn't regulate back yard parking at this time. The problem is with people parking in the front yard. The City should also stay away from the landscape issue. Chair Peace likes what Commissioner Roland is saying. The emphasis should be on the front yard; however, he doesn't want 10 cars parked in the back yard. If this happens, it can be dealt with later. Commissioner Roland cautioned about mandating something that requires homeowners to spend lots of money. Chair Peace believes there are requirements for placing gravel such as a certain amount, spread to a certain depth, etc. You can't go out there and just throw down some gravel. Commissioner Ward suggested that Planning Commission not address landscaping at this time. The alternative of pervious surface was brought up earlier. Planning Commission agreed. Commissioner Roland said that the City also needs to come up with something about how to deal with areas that don't have on street parking and smaller lots. If they can only use square foot of land what do they do? Discussion occurred related to the front yard parking diagram from SeaTac that is in the agenda packet. Commissioner Larsen said that the City needs to consider houses built much earlier because most of them don't meet code. Lots of houses don't meet the proposed specifications. Commissioner Roland spoke of the need to have exceptions. Mr. Osaki wanted to summarize the Planning Commission ideas: separate out the required and non- required parking, definition of what constitutes a 'boat', allow fresh gravel, pavers or other permeable surface, do not require specific surfacing for driveway areas for additional parking areas, and eliminate landscape and focus on front and side yards. Commissioner Ward made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Mason, to continue the public hearing to the April 5, 2005 meeting. DISCUSSION . Sign Code Mr. Osaki mentioned that at the last Commission meeting, they met with the ad hoc sign code committee. A memorandum was sent to the City Attorney asking for research on certain issues. Two other issues were garage sale signs and signs for real estate rentals of multi-family units. Commissioner Ward said that the message she received from the Chamber of Commerce was that the code should have flexibility. Commissioner Mason heard the issue of flexibility, but not continuity or consistency in signage. - 3 - MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 8. 2005 INFORMATION · White Paper Prepared for the City of Auburn by the Seattle-King County Association of Realtors Regarding Off-Site Open House Signs - Real Estate Signs: Constitutional Issues and Legal Considerations · White Paper Prepared for the City of Auburn by the Seattle-King County Association of Realtors Regarding Off-Site Open House Signs - Why Real Estate Off-Premises Open House A-Board Signs Are Critical No discussion occurred on these items. · Year 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Summary Matrix No discussion occurred on this item. ADJOURNMENT With no further items to come before the Commission the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 pm. PCIAGNDlMIN 03-2005 -4-