HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-19-2021 Planning Commission AgendaPlanning Commission Meeting
October 19, 2021 - 7:00 P M
Virtual
A GE NDA
I .V I RT UAL PART IC I PAT I O N
A .Virtual Participation I nformation
The City of A uburn S pecial Planning Commission Meeting scheduled for Tuesday,
October 19, 2021 at 7:00 p.m. will be held virtually and telephonically. To attend the
meeting virtually please click one of the below links, enter the meeting I D into the Zoom
app, or call into the meeting at the phone number listed below.
P er Governor I nslee's Emergency P roclamation 20-05 and 20-28 et. seq. and City of
A uburn Resolution No. 5581, City of A uburn has designated meeting locations as
“virtual” for all Regular, S pecial and Study Session Meetings of the City Council and for
the Committees, Boards and Commissions of the City.
The link to the Virtual Meeting or phone number to listen to the P lanning Commission
Meeting is:
J oin Z oom Meeting:
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/86961327974
Meeting I D: 869 6132 7974
One tap mobile
(253) 215-8782
I I .C AL L T O O RD E R
B .RO L L C AL L/E S TAB L I S HM E NT O F Q UO RUM
C.P L E D G E O F AL L E G I ANC E
I I I .AP P RO VAL O F M INUT E S
A .October 5, 2021 Draft Minutes from the Regular P lanning Commission Meeting
I V.P UB L I C HE ARI NG S
A .2021 A nnual Comprehensive Plan Text A mendments City F ile No. C PA 21-0001
P/T #1 - Capital F acilities Plan (C F P ) Update for Auburn School District
Page 1 of 37
P/T #2 - Capital F acilities Plan (C F P ) Update for Dieringer School District
P/T #3 - Capital F acilities Plan (C F P ) Update for Federal Way P ublic S chools
P/T #4 - Capital F acilities Plan (C F P ) Update for K ent School District
P/T #5 - City of A uburn Capital Facilities P lan Update
P/T #6-9, C PM #1 - City-Initiated Text and Map Amendments
V.O T HE R B US I NE S S
A .P resentation by S enior T raffic E ngineer, J ames Webb on City T raffic Impact
Analysis.
I n the past, Planning Commission has expressed interest in knowing more about how
the City evaluates traffic impacts of developments.
V I .C O M M UNIT Y D E V E L O P M E NT RE P O RT
Update on Community Development Services activities.
V I I .AD J O URNM E NT
The City of Auburn Planning Commission is a seven member advisory body that provides
recommendations to the Auburn City Council on the preparation of and amendments to land
use plans and related codes such as zoning. Planning Commissioners are appointed by the
Mayor and confirmed by the City Council.
Actions taken by the Planning Commission, other than approvals or amendments to the
Planning Commission Rules of Procedure, are not final decisions; they are in the form of
recommendations to the city council which must ultimately make the final decision.
Page 2 of 37
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
October 5, 2021 Draft Minutes from the Regular Planning
Commission Meeting
Date:
October 11, 2021
Department:
Community Development
Attachments:
October 5, 2021 Draft Minutes for Regular
Planning Commission Meeting
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrativ e Recommendation:
Background for Motion:
Background Summary:
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:
Meeting Date:October 19, 2021 Item Number:
Page 4 of 37
PLANNING COMMISSION
October 5, 2021
DRAFT MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Judi Roland called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. via Virtual Zoom Meeting.
Per Governor Inslee's Emergency Proclamation 20-05 and 20-28 et. seq. and City of
Auburn Resolution No. 5581, City of Auburn has designated meeting locations as
“virtual” for all Regular, Special and Study Session Meetings of the City Council and for
the Committees, Boards and Commissions of the City.
a.) ROLL CALL/ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
Commissioners present: Chair Roland, Vice-Chair Lee, Commissioner Mason,
Commissioner Moutzouris, Commissioner Stephens.
Staff present: Planning Services Manager Jeff Dixon; Assistant City Attorney, Doug
Ruth; Senior Planner, Josh Steiner; Planner II, Alexandria Teague; Administrative
Assistant Jennifer Oliver.
Members of the public present: James Mays; Sandra Fuller; Nolan Zaroff
b.) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. September 8, 2021 – Regular Meeting Minutes
Vice Chair Lee moved, and Commissioner Stephens seconded to approve the
minutes from the September 8, 2021, meeting as written.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5-0
III. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Airport Code Update
City File No. ZOA20-0002: Public Hearing for Airport Zoning Code Update
(amend Chpt 18.38 + Chpt 18.04 ACC + zoning map).
Chair Roland opened the public hearing on October 5, 2021, at 7:02 p.m. and invited
Staff to come forward to provide the staff report.
Senior Planner, Alexandria Teague provided a Staff report and PowerPoint
presentation to the Planning Commission to discuss a text amendment to the airport
related zoning regulations and map amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Zoning
Map.
Page 5 of 37
Page 2
Planner Teague reminded the Commission that the proposed zoning code
amendment has been discussed with the Planning Commission previously at two
regular meetings on August 3rd and September 8th.
The City also completed formal consultation via a public meeting with the aviation
community and WSDOT Aviation Division on August 23, 2021. A SEPA
Determination of Non-Significance (DNS), City File No. SEP21-0019, was issued on
September 1, 2021, and the City observed a fourteen-day public comment period,
which expired on September 15, 2021. No comments were received. A Notice of
Public Hearing (NOH) was issued on September 23, 2021. In addition to the notice
methods required per Chapter 18.68 ACC, the NOH was also mailed to property
owners within Compatibility Zones 1 – 5, and property owners within Compatibility
Zone 6 whose property is 1,000 feet of the LF Airport Landing Field District zone.
Per Chapter 18.68 the following methods of noticing for the Planning Commission
public hearing are required for an area-wide text and map amendment: The NOH
was published in the Seattle Times on September 23, 2021.The NOH was posted in
three public locations (City Hall, City Annex, the Airport Office, and the City’s Public
Land Use Notice webpage).
Ms. Teague recounted some of the airport history and background as follows:
• The Auburn Municipal Airport (also known as Dick Scobee Field was built in
1969.
• The airport runway has been extended over the years to increase operational
safety.
• It is classified as a Public-Use, General Aviation Regional-Reliever Airport
within the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS).
• The airport is a base for 330 aircraft, and averages approx. 450 flights a day.
• Auburn’s airport is self-funded and no local tax monies are used at the
airport.
Ms. Teague continued that according to a 2019 Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT) Aviation Economic Impact Study, the economic impact of
the Auburn Municipal Airport creates the following:
• 232 jobs (direct jobs, construction, General Aviation visitors)
• $14.2 million labor income
• $24 million value added
• $43.1 million business revenues (also known as total economic impact).
The airport receives FAA and WSDOT Aviation Division grants and is contractually
bound to "grant assurances “.
The Airport Master Plan (AMP) is a comprehensive document that guides
development on an airport and the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) is a map and depicts
current and proposed airport features and infrastructure.
To maintain eligibility for FAA funding, airports are required to periodically update
their master plan and in order to be listed in the NPIAS and to be eligible for FAA
funding an airport must have a current ALP approved by the FAA.
Staff explained the FAA’s role. The FAA does not have the authority to regulate off
airport land use. Land use regulation is the responsibility of the local jurisdiction. The
FAA does, however, have a role in regulating on-airport land use through approval of
the ALP and through the grant assurances. Under the Federal Air Regulation (FAR)
Part 77, the FAA has the authority to review proposed construction on and off the
Page 6 of 37
Page 3
airport for “hazards to air navigation” associated with obstructions and penetration to
the airspace.
Chapter 18.38 ACC contains sections of code related to the (FAR) Part 77 Surfaces
– sections that define these surfaces and their respective height limitations. Ms.
Teague mentioned, staff is proposing new code section related to the FAR Part 77
Surfaces related to compliance and mitigation.
Planner Teague gave a description of the WSDOT’s role. Similar to the FAA, the
WSDOT Aviation Division does not have regulatory authority over local land use
decisions. WSDOT does, however, have a role in promoting land use compatibility of
off airport land uses and activities. WSDOT promotes land use compatibility through
grants and the review of local Comprehensive Plans and regulations. Under the
PLANNING ENABLING ACT RCW cities, town, and counties where a general
aviation airport is located and operated for the benefit of the general public, are
required to discourage the siting of incompatible uses adjacent to such general
aviation airport through the Comprehensive Plan and regulations. The WSDOT’s
“Airports and Compatible Land Use Guidebook” shown on the slide presentation,
contains guidance to help local jurisdictions create airport overlays. Airport Overlays
that are intended to help airports and communities proactively prevent incompatible
development (land use) around airports. This guidebook provides best practices and
steps to create regulations designed to prevent and deter incompatible uses. This is
the document that staff used as guidance to create Auburn’s proposed Airport
Overlay.
Staff continued the presentation, indicating that the City of Auburn has regulatory
authority over how development occurs within the community (and around the
airport). The City’s regulatory authority is implemented through the City’ Municipal
Code. The majority of the airport-related zoning code regulations are contained in
Chapter 18.38, the “LF Airport Landing Field District” of the Auburn City Code (ACC).
Staff commented that the initial regulations for the LF Airport Landing Field District
Chapter date back to 1964, five years prior to the construction of the Auburn
Municipal Airport. The most recent updates to the LF District regulations occurred in
1997.
Staff displayed a map that depicts the airport influence area. Per WSDOT, the airport
influence area is the area that has a direct effect on the airport and that the airport
affects. The Airport Influence Area for Auburn Municipal Airport was defined through
the evaluation of several key factors:
• Airport Traffic Pattern;
• Airport Noise Contours;
• FAR Part 77 Surfaces; and
• Generic Accident Distribution Data (WSDOT Guidebook Appendix E)
Staff displayed slides showing a 1990 Google Earth image around the airport, as well
as one from 2002 and another from 2018 to show changes in the amount of
development around the airport. In relation to these historical images,
Planner Teague commented that it is important to remember that the initial
regulations for the LF Airport Landing Field District Chapter date back to 1964 (under
Chapter 18.40 ACC, Ordinance No. 1702) five years prior to the construction of the
Auburn Municipal Airport. The more recent updates to the LF District code section
occurred in 1997 (under Ordinance No. 5026). Also, staff strengthened the
protection of the airport and its operations in changes to the policy statements of
Page 7 of 37
Page 4
Comprehensive Plan during the 2020 annual amendment cycle, So staff is now
implementing this guidance through changes in the zoning regulations.
Staff walked through some of the proposed key changes to the airport related zoning
regulations.
• A new airport overlay mapped designation.
The airport overlay will be the mechanism in which regulations,
designed to prevent and deter incompatible uses around the
airport – without changing the underlying land use designation and
zoning district.
The document titled “Airport Overlay Map Amendment” from the
public land use notice webpage depicts the proposed airport
overlay as a map. The airport overlay will be added to the City’s
Comprehensive Zoning Map as a zoning overlay.
The original shape and extent of the six-compatibility zones were
created using the nationwide database of general aviation aircraft
accidents and adjusted to be specific circumstances for the
Auburn Airport.
• The NEW Airport overlay restrictions and standards.
Staff explained that this section does two things: prohibits certain
uses in Compatibility Zones 1, 2 and 3 and provides specific
standards, designed to mitigate potential adverse impacts when
siting land uses in proximity to the airport.
Planner Teague pointed out on the map being displayed where Compatibility zones
1, 2, and 3 are. Zone 1 is the runway overlay zone and is purple. Zone 2 is the inner
safety zone and is green. And Zone 3 is the inner turning zone and is the pie-shaped
blue. Zones 1 and 2 of the airport overlay represent the areas where the risk of
aircraft accidents is the greatest. Zone 3 represents the area in which departing
aircraft may begin turning over this area to fly toward their destination or to remain in
the traffic pattern.
When assessing whether a land use is compatible around the airport, the WSDOT
Guidebook provides four basic compatibility criteria, including: noise, affects within
the airport influence area, airspace protection, and safety. These four criteria
represent the most common effects that an airport can have on the surrounding area,
and the effects that the surrounding area can have on an airport. Staff has taken this
the information from the airport influence area map and applied it to the overlay. The
criteria are included in the memo glossary under “Basic Compatibility Criteria.”
Also, Staff inventoried uses that currently exist within the compatibility zones to
evaluate potential effects, particularly, in zones 1-5. The criteria were used to assess
whether these uses are compatible with the airport and airport operations and
whether these uses could occur in the future based on the zoning districts that are
contained within each Compatibility Zone.
To that end, staff is proposing to prohibit new single-family residences, high density
residential development (apartments and mixed-use land uses), daycare centers,
and special function uses such as hospitals, nursing homes, K-12 schools, and
senior housing within Compatibility Zones 1, 2, and 3 only based on safety and
Page 8 of 37
Page 5
noise. Most of the uses that are proposed to be prohibited do not currently exist
within Zones 1, 2, or 3. One mixed use project exists (The Villas) lies within
southwestern Compatibility Zone 3. One daycare center was identified within the
southern Compatibility Zone 2 at this time. These uses will be grandfathered to the
current code. We are specifically designing the regulations to not make these two
uses or any other existing use “nonconforming” to current regulations. The proposed
prohibition would only apply to new uses after the effective date in which council
adopts the code.
The Planning Commission asked in the past about accident data. Staff doesn’t have
specific accident data for Auburn Airport, but it is acceptable to use comparable
national standards accident distribution data. WSDOT Guidance (Appendix E) has
two figures that depict the concentrations and distribution of accidents upon arrival
and departure.. The concentration is at the ends of the runway. This information
coincides with Zones 1 and 2 having the greatest risk of safety.
Planner Teague highlighted another particular standard. Specifically, future
stormwater facilities within Compatibility Zones 1, 2, and 5 will be required to meet or
exceed recommendations in City’s Surface Water Management Manual (or SWMM).
The City Utilities Division will add a standard to the City's Surface Water Manual (or
SWMM) requiring the use of underground vaults, underground detention/infiltration
facilities, or low impact development facilities that drain completely within 48 hours.
This will apply to new and redeveloped parcels. This standard is intended deter the
attraction and congregation of wildlife in to surface storm ponds and help address the
incidence of wildlife strikes.
Staff is proposing a new maintenance and mitigation standards for development
around the airport. The purpose of this section is two-fold: when the height of any
new structure or tree, exceeds the FAR Part 77 surfaces and penetrates the
airspace, an applicant:
o May be required to install and maintain markers and lights.
o Must maintain their trees such that they do not grow to penetrate the
airspace.
o Applicants (not the city) will be required to install and maintain new
markers and lights as part of their development proposal.
It is a cost burden to the city to pay for installation of markers and lights, on an object
associated with an applicant’s proposal, as part of their private development.
Beyond this initial installation, the city will, however, require a public maintenance
easement to allow City access to inspect and maintain the markers and lights as
needed. This is similar to other easements granted to the city, such as over private
tracts within subdivision for the city to access and maintain a storm pond or other
utilities.
The Planning Commission at the last meeting asked about the nature of the
maintenance easement. Staff stated the easement typically allows access over
existing paved surfaces (or access to a building if it’s on the roof) to get to the
location of the marker light so there is not typically a width or specific path. A
property owner could request that the easement be more specific, but staff would
start with a general statement allowing access onto the property to access the marker
light.
Page 9 of 37
Page 6
Planner Teague described the revised height compliance section. The purpose of this
section is that, where an object might have a height greater than an established
surface, applicants must demonstrate compliance with the height limitations. The
revision to this section lists the acceptable demonstration methods. Current code
states, “Each application for a permit shall indicate the purpose for which the permit
is desired, with sufficient information to permit it to be determined whether the
resulting use, structure or tree would conform to the regulations therein prescribed.”
It doesn’t specify how, so staff is trying to make it more clear how an applicant
demonstrates compliance. The methods, shown on the slide to the Commission, are
already required now, so in effect the methods are being codified. Staff concluded
this will help catch potential future obstructions during the development review
process - such as when HVAC units are placed on top of buildings or during the
review of landscape plans. It will also provide predictability and consistency for
property owners and developers.
Staff discussed the revision on the nonconforming section. Staff kept the provision
that structures and trees that existed prior to March 22, 1969, are not
“nonconforming”. Senior Planner Teague has stated earlier that the airport was
constructed in 1969. After this date, structures and trees had to comply with the city
standards – including the FAR Part 77 Surfaces. Trees in particular, create a unique
challenge to airports, as they generally do not start off as something that affects
airport operations or penetrating the airspace but do so over time. Nonconforming
trees are those that have existed prior to the 1969 date. Staff presented an aerial
photo of what was existing around the airport when it first opened. Most trees around
the airport are nonconforming. Most were planted after the existing airport regulations
came into effect and are still required to be maintained so that they don’t penetrate
the airspace.
Staff reiterated that uses included in the overlay, that existed prior to the future
adoption of this code are not considered “nonconforming”. This is by design – the
intent is to not make any pre-existing use nonconforming. So, they will remain vested
as an outright permitted use in their respective zoning districts. Lastly, Staff
emphasized that tying the nonconforming sections within Chapter 18.38 ACC (the
airport code) back to the Chapter 18.54 ACC, the "Nonconforming Structures, Land
and Uses" chapter of the Zoning Code, will help create consistency / predictability of
application of nonconforming standards. The goal is consistency and predictability for
staff and for property owners and developers.
Planner Teague presented the revised variance section. The most significant change
proposed to the variance section of Chapter 18.38 ACC involves tying it to the City’s
existing chapter related to variances (Chapter 18.70 ACC). A variance is the
mechanism in which relief from zoning development standards in the City Code is
granted. Chapter 18.70 ACC contains the criteria in which a variance must be
evaluated, processed, and decided by the Hearing Examiner. Staff commented that
while there have been very few variances requested for the airport regulations (i.e.,
the development standards), The airport-related Chapter 18.38 ACC does not
provide the aforementioned level of specificity. Therefore, staff is using this
opportunity to improve upon the variance sections of Chapter 18.38 ACC.
Concluding the presentation, staff provided a slide of the code update schedule. If
Planning Commission forwards a recommendation to City Council at tonight’s
Page 10 of 37
Page 7
meeting, staff will take the proposed text and map amendment to Study Session on
November 8th and then onto the City Council Meeting for action on November 15th.
The floor was opened up for questions or comments from the Planning Commission
and Public.
Commissioner Mason inquired if there was any public input that has come into the
Planning Department regarding the code changes. Staff respond that there were no
formal comments. There have been a few emails requesting additional information
along with a couple of phone calls asking for clarification on any effects on
businesses. One was from a business located Northwest of the airport. Ms. Teague
stated she clarified to the local business that there would be no affect to them with
the code changes from what they currently have.
Chair Roland asked if the last time this code was updated was in 1997, and staff
confirmed this was correct. Chair Roland inquired if structures were built after that
time were they considered under the plans that were in effect. She stated there
subsequently has been a lot of building. . Staff confirmed that even since 1997,
development around the airport has been subject to the FAR part 77 surfaces in
place since the airport started in 1969. These were part of the existing airport
regulations. However, the airport overlay didn’t exist, and we also didn’t have those
type of land use controls back then.
The Commission mentioned that on one of the slides it showed the hospital on the
edge of the redline on the map. The Commission inquired if it was non-conforming or
if it is located just outside. Staff commented that the Hospital is not located in
Compatibility Zones 1, 2 or 3. The hospital is specifically noted on the map because
the airport traffic pattern does go close to the hospital, but it is requested that
airplanes do not fly over the hospital. That is part of the airport traffic pattern. Staff
pulled up the slide to show the air traffic pattern.
Auburn resident, James Mays asked if the code changes for the airport impacted the
King County’s proposed use of the Clarion Hotel that is being converted into housing
to help the homeless population. Staff responded that it does not. The Clarion hotel
is outside of Compatibility Zones 1, 2 and 3. The slide was brought up by staff to
show the zoning map where the hotel is located.
There was a gentleman that participated in the Public Hearing and asked questions.
As the conversation and questions continued, the questions asked, and comments
made became inappropriate and off topic. A Commissioner stated that the individual
appeared to be participating for the wrong reasons and not representing valid hearing
testimony. It was suggested that the Commission move on to the next person that
may have questions or comments for the public hearing.
Auburn resident Sandra Fuller stated that in the presentation, the lines of the flight
paths were shown to the west of the airport coming in. She continued that there are
several planes that come in daily over Fred Meyers store and a the warehouse
located to the south. She asked if the flight paths that were shown are just a
suggested flight path or are pilots restricted to the flight path to the west of the
runway. There are two landing approaches one to the North and one to the south.
Page 11 of 37
Page 8
Staff commented that the flight turning pattern is supposed to be the left side of the
runway. The green lines on the slide provide an approximate location of this
maneuvering. The pilots use visual landmarks to assist with the approach into the
airport. The final approach is in Compatibility Zones 4, 2, and then 5. It is a published
traffic pattern for pilots to use. The green lines on the slide, show what is to be
avoided such as Emerald Downs Thoroughbred horse racetrack and the hospital.
Staff brought up the zoning map where Compatibility Zone 2 is located so Ms. Fuller
could see closer where the flight pattern is. She wanted to focus on proximity of the
flight pattern as it is very low near her home and place of business and is cause for
concern. Staff encouraged Ms. Fuller to reach out the City of Auburn Airport Manager
as he can show in greater detail the airport flight path and could address her
concerns directly. Ms. Fuller asked if Auburn airport would be putting in an air traffic
control tower in the future. Staff responded that most likely not, as the airport is small
and cannot accommodate larger aircraft.
Chair Roland asked three times for the public to come forth with any further
questions.
With no other public testimony, Chair Roland closed the public hearing at 7:54 p.m.
With no other questions from the Commission, the Commission deliberated.
Vice Chair Lee moved, and Commissioner Stephens seconded to recommend the
Airport Zoning Code Update be moved forward to City Council for approval.
Motion Passed (5-0)
B. OTHER BUSINESS
Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Review of proposed changes to the Comprehensive Plan as part of the
2021 Annual Update process.
As part of the 2021 Comprehensive Plan Amendment process, staff prepared a
working binder that was distributed in advance for use by the Planning
Commissioners during their consideration of the proposed annual comprehensive
plan amendments.
Josh Steiner, Senior Planner, prepared the 2021 Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Working Binder with the following information. He started the staff presentation by
briefly reviewing the binder contents:
• Introductory/Front Section:
o Index to binder contents,
o Proposed Updated Schedule, &
o Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket
Page 12 of 37
Page 9
• Tab 1: Staff Reports and presentations– the staff report that is provided will be
used for the upcoming public hearing. Presentation materials for the September
8th, 2021, Planning Commission meeting are also provided.
• Tab 2: Environmental Review – the environmental checklists and SEPA
determinations for the proposed amendments.
• Tab 3: General Info. and Correspondence – correspondence related to the
amendment process and public notices.
• Tab 4: Comprehensive Plan Policy/Text Amendments – includes the 4 school
district Capital Facilities Plans, the City’s Capital Facilities Plan, and policy/text
amendments to individual comprehensive plan elements
• Tab 5: Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments – includes city-initiated map
amendments.
Mr. Steiner proceeded to review the subjects for the annual comprehensive plan
amendments. He described each item.Group #1 - City Initiated Comprehensive
Plan Text Amendments (CPA21-0001) (each capital facilities plan is to be
adopted and incorporated by reference)
• P/T #1 – Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan
• P/T #2 – Dieringer School District Capital Facilities Plan
• P/T #3 – Federal Way School District Capital Facilities Plan
• P/T #4 – Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan
• P/T #5 – City of Auburn (COA) Capital Facilities Plan
• P/T #6 – Volume 3, Capital Facilities Element. Water is in the process of
applying for an extension of their Comprehensive Water Plan (separate
document incorporated by reference) effective to 2026 through the
Washington State Department of Health, at which time a full update will be
completed. Water believes this request is valid because the capital projects,
water demands, and population growth projections presented in the current
Water System Plan are still accurate projections of the City’s current planning
efforts.
No text changes to the Capital Facilities Element are
needed, although the referenced Comprehensive
Water Plan in Policy CF-13 is expected to be updated
by 2024 with current data as part of the Periodic
Update.
• P/T #7 –Volume 5, Transportation Element (Separate document incorporated
by reference). Changes in the Transportation Element consist of the
following:
Page 13 of 37
Page 10
Update Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
information/project list.
Re-designate one project from Comprehensive Plan list
to the (TIP) list to maintain continuity in the future
transportation network conditions.
Update maps as needed to reflect current data and
conditions (addressed by CMP #1, below).
Additional minor changes will relate to grammar,
punctuation, choice of words, references, etc.
• P/T #8 – Volume 2, Housing Element. The city adopted a Housing Action
Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the Planning
Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP provides
recommendations on policies and code changes to implement HAP
strategies. The proposed policy revision allows for better alignment with
PSRC Vision 2050 policy MPP-H-11 which addresses supporting
identification of potential physical, economic, and cultural displacement, and
mitigating to the extent feasible.
• Include reference and brief description of Housing Action Plan in
Conditions and Trends section beginning on page H-1 of the Housing
Element.
• Revise Policy H-24(f) to include text regarding minimizing
displacement impacts. The revision of this policy will better align with
PSRC Vision 2050’s recognition of displacement risk. Revising this
policy allows for alignment with PSRC requirements in advance of the
2024 Periodic Update.
• Address text formatting for Policy H-24 sub-policies
• P/T #9 – Volume 1, Land Use Element and Volume 5. The city adopted a
Housing Action Plan (HAP) in July 2021, which was also presented to the
Planning Commission in February and June 2021 by City staff. The HAP
provides recommendations on policies and code changes to implement HAP
strategies. One such policy is located in the Land Use Element (additional
detail below).
• Revise Policy LU-39 to include affordable housing and mixed-income
development. In addition to allowing additional height or density in
exchange for supplemental amenities identified in this policy, this
revision would include affordable housing development as eligible
uses for deviations in height, density, or intensity.
City-Initiated Map Amendments (CPA21-0002):
• CPM #1 – Volume 5: Transportation Element (Separate document
incorporated by reference): Several maps found throughout Volume 5
Page 14 of 37
Page 11
have been updated to reflect current conditions and to address
formatting.
Staff concluded the staff report and invited questions and comments from the
Planning Commission.
Chair Roland asked if the Transportation Element Map Amendments were just
updates or new maps for the future. Senior Planner Steiner responded the
changes are those maps in the binder that show the edits that will be made and
the as-revised maps, and this is what the Commission would be approving. Staff
mentioned the maps are found at the end in Part B in the binder for reference.
Staff mentioned the Public Hearing during the Planning Commission meeting will
be October 19th, 2021, for the Comprehensive Plan Amendments. Staff and
representatives from the School District have been invited to attend for any
questions that arise.
The Commission wanted to clarify that the school impact fees are listed in the
Comprehensive Plan Binder. Staff confirmed that the Staff report in the front of
the binder steps through the changes and details to the School Districts fees.
The Commission asked if the School Districts will be attending the Public Hearing
on October 19, 2021. Senior Planner Steiner said that Auburn has confirmed
they would be in attendance. Kent Schools has a prior engagement but will try
and phone in and he had not heard back yet from Federal Way or Dieringer
school districts yet.
Chair Roland asked if the Commission has additional questions, can they ask
questions to staff or the school representatives at the time of the Public Hearing
on October 19, 2021. Staff confirmed that if there were any questions from the
Commission there will be opportunities for the Commission to ask those
questions at the hearing. If the Commission has questions that they can think of
ahead of the meeting, it is encouraged to send an email to staff prior to the Public
Hearing and that will help staff to be prepared for the meeting and able to bring
an answer. This will also help with the timeline of acting upon each subject of the
Comprehensive Plan.
C. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT
Planning Services Manager, Jeff Dixon reported that the building that was
subject to a recent fire on Main Street known as The Max House is being
demolished on November 17. The owner intends to sell the property when the
demolition is complete. Staging for that demolition process is under discussion
now.
The old Nelson Jewelry clock has been removed and is being held in storage at
the City of Auburn M&O facility.
Also, Business License renewals notices will be going out to businesses starting
October 18. The BIA (Business Improvement Area) Fee is no longer a fee that
Page 15 of 37
Page 12
will be imposed to downtown businesses. Although the BIA still exists, the source
of funding for the BIA area (that improves areas of downtown and helps fund
activities) will now stem from the B&O tax (business and occupation tax).
Starting on October 25, King County Public Health is requiring restaurants and
bar owners to ask customers for proof of vaccination while dinning or drinking in
an establishment. This is not enforced by the city. As a King County
requirement, it will only apply in King County and King County Public Health will
monitor and enforce.
The Commission asked once again about the status of the Heritage Building
redevelopment and the vacant spot and what the update is. At the time, there is
no update from Staff.
The Commission asked if the Athens Pizza building that caught fire was close to
being finished and back open for business. Staff replied that he did not know the
answer at this time .
The Commission and Staff briefly went over the next Planning Commission
Meeting proposed for October 19, 2021, that will consist of the Public Hearing for
the 2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments as well as a presentation by
James Webb from the Transportation Department. There was some concern
from the Commission on whether the school districts representatives will be
present. Planning Services Manager, Jeff Dixon stated that City Staff reaches out
with plenty of advance notice regarding the meetings and encourages
representatives to attend. All of the schools submit written materials requested,
and that presence shouldn’t be a factor in the recommendation to move the text
amendment item to Council.
There was concern over whether or not Vice Chair Lee had to recuse himself on
future consideration of school district capital facility plans due to being an Auburn
School District teacher and if that would negatively affect the Commission
quorum at the meeting. After Vice Chair Lee described the circumstances,
Assistant Attorney Doug Ruth confirmed that he would be appropriate to
participate and vote.
D. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chair
Roland adjourned the meeting at 8:42 p.m.
Page 16 of 37
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments City File
No. CPA21-0001
Date:
October 11, 2021
Department:
Community Development
Attachments:
Comp Plan Binder Info
2021 Comp Plan Pres entation
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrativ e Recommendation:
Background for Motion:
Background Summary:
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:Dixon
Meeting Date:October 19, 2021 Item Number:PH.1
Page 17 of 37
For the Staff Report please see
“Working Binder” and “Staff Report/Presentations” tab.
Page 18 of 37
AUBURNVALUESS E R V I C EENVIRONMENTE C O N O M YC H A R A C T E RSUSTAINABILITYW E L L N E S SC E L E B R AT I O NCOMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2021 ANNUAL AMENDMENTSPLANNING COMMISSIONOCTOBER 19, 2021JOSH STEINER, AICPDepartment of Community DevelopmentPlanning Building Development Engineering Permit CenterSustainabilityCommunity Services ● Code EnforcementPage 19 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONSERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANNUAL AMENDMENTS Annually the City amends its Comprehensive Plan. These routine amendments are distinguished from the “periodic update” completed on 8-year cycles. There are two sources: “city “city “city “city –––– initiated amendments”initiated amendments”initiated amendments”initiated amendments” in response to items that are “docketed” (text or map).“private“private“private“private––––initiated amendmentsinitiated amendmentsinitiated amendmentsinitiated amendments” in response to applications that are submitted (text or map). Private-initiated Comprehensive Plan amendment applications (text or map) were publicly advertised in advance and accepted until Friday, June 7, 2021, this year. Page 20 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION The 2021 Comprehensive Plan amendment docket currently includes a total of 10 proposed amendments. Five updates are annually provided capital facilities plan updates for the city & school districts located within the City. Five updates to various elements (chapters) of the comprehensive plan including issues relating to Transportation; Housing; Land Use, and Capital Facilities.Four text amendments, one map amendmentPROPOSED 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT DOCKETPage 21 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION P/T #1 – Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Auburn School District P/T #2 – Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Dieringer School District P/T #3 – Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Federal Way Public Schools P/T #4 – Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Update for Kent School DistrictCITY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTSPage 22 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONSERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONSTAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission to recommend approval by City Council the following case numbers:CPA21-0001, P/T #1-4, School District Capital Facility PlansPage 23 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION P/T #5 – City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan UpdateCITY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS2020 CFP Total 2021 CFP Total+$8.67 million increase between 2021-2020Source: City of Auburn Financial AnalystPage 24 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONSERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONSTAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission to recommend approval by City Council the following case numbers:CPA21-0001, P/T #5, City of Auburn Capital Facility PlanPage 25 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION P/T #6 –Comprehensive Plan Volume 3, Capital Facilities Element, UpdateWater Services is requesting a 4-year extension of the Comprehensive Water Plan (CWP), due to be updated in 2022, through the Department of HealthAllows for a full update in 2024 on same timeline as Periodic UpdateThe current plan analysis period is through 2026.Capital projects, water demand, and growth projections are still valid and accurate.Element text remains the same, however the referenced CWPP/T #6 –COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VOLUME 3, CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENTPage 26 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION P/T #7 –Comprehensive Plan Volume 5, Transportation Element, UpdateUpdate Comprehensive Plan to remove one project transferred to TIP and add Main Street TOD projects.P/T #7 –COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VOLUME 5, TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT New Projects added:Main Street TODPage 27 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION P/T #8 –Comprehensive Plan Volume 2, Housing Element UpdateThe Team wants to start incorporating Housing Action Plan into Compressive PlanAdd language referencing Housing Action Plan (HAP) adoptionUsing Recommendations from HAP, one policy is proposed to be updated. Updated policy H-24 to reflect HAP recommendation of including minimizing displacement impacts, which is also consistent with PSRC Vision 2050 policy (MPP-H-11) supporting identifying potential physical, economic, and cultural displacement and mitigating to the extent feasible.P/T #8 –COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VOLUME 2, HOUSING ELEMENTPage 28 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONP/T #8 –COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VOLUME 2, HOUSING ELEMENTPage 29 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONP/T #8 –COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VOLUME 2, HOUSING ELEMENTPage 30 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION P/T #9 –Comprehensive Plan Volume 1, Land Use Element, Update This policy supports a Recommendation in the HAP.Update policy LU-39 to include affordable housing as an approved supplemental amenity that would allow deviations in height, density, or intensity limitations.P/T #9 –COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VOLUME 1, LAND USE ELEMENTPage 31 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONP/T #9 –COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VOLUME 1, LAND USE ELEMENTPage 32 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION CPM #1 – Several maps found throughout Volume 5 (Transportation Element) have been updated to reflect current conditions, address formatting, and combine redundant maps. These changes were discussed during the 9-8-21 Planning Commission meeting by TransportationCPM #1 – COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VOLUME 5, TRANSPORTATION ELEMENTPage 33 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONSERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATIONSTAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission to recommend approval by City Council the following case numbers:CPA21-0001, P/T #6-9, CPM #1, City-initiated comprehensive plan text and map amendments concerning capital facilities plan, transportation element, housing element, and land use element.Page 34 of 37
SERVICE ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY CHARACTER SUSTAINABILITY WELLNESS CELEBRATION Planning Commission Public Hearing October 19th (Extra Meeting) - Tonight City Council Study Session November 8th City Council Regular Meeting December 6thNEXT STEPSPage 35 of 37
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Presentation by Senior Traffic Engineer, James Webb on City
Traffic Impact Analysis.
Date:
October 11, 2021
Department:
Community Development
Attachments:
PC Memo TIA Presentation
Budget Impact:
Current Budget: $0
Proposed Revision: $0
Revised Budget: $0
Administrativ e Recommendation:
Background for Motion:
Background Summary:
Rev iewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember:Staff:Dixon
Meeting Date:October 19, 2021 Item Number:
Page 36 of 37
Page 1
MEMORANDUM
TO:Judi Roland, Chair, Planning Commission
Roger Lee, Vice-Chair, Planning Commission
Planning Commission Members
FROM:Jeff Dixon, Planning Services Manager
DATE:October 7, 2021
RE:October 19, 2021, Planning Commission Presentation on Traffic Impact Analysis
(TIA) for the City of Auburn.
At the Planning Commission’s special meeting on October 19, 2021, Community Development
Department has asked James Webb, Senior Traffic Engineer of the City’s Public Works
Department to provide a presentation on the adopted city standards for, and the process that is
followed by city staff for the conduct of traffic impact analysis (TIA).
The presentation is in response to the request made by the Planning Commission to have
additional information on how applicants prepare, submit, and the city reviews traffic impact
analysis.
It is a responsibility under state and city laws, for the Planning Commission to make
recommendations to the City Council on Comprehensive Plan land use map designation
changes and associated rezones (zoning map amendments). Generally, these come as private
applications submitted as part of the Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment process.
Sometimes, these applications for map changes are for the purpose of a specific development
proposal, such as an application by a school district requesting a map change for the site of a
new elementary school. However, sometimes the map changes are requested when there is
not a specific development proposal or a speculative development proposal. Frequently when
the Planning Commission is considering these map changes, Commission members have asked
staff about the number of vehicle trips that would be generated by the development proposal, or
by the range of land uses that could be allowed by the zoning map change and the sufficiency of
the traffic circulation system to safely and efficiently accommodate these additional vehicle trips.
The purpose of the presentation is to give the Planning Commission additional information on
the City’s written standards that are used and how these are applied by city staff in carrying out
the traffic impact analysis. Mr. Webb’s presentation can also address how the results of this
analysis are implemented by the City.
Page 37 of 37