HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-08-2022 AgendaPlanning Commission Meeting
March 8, 2022 - 7:00 PM
AGENDA
I.Virtual Participation
A.Virtual Participation Information
The City of Auburn Planning Commission Meeting scheduled for Tuesday, March 8,
2022 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 ID into the Zoom App, or call into
the meeting at the phone number listed below.
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.
The link to the Virtual Meeting or phone number to listen to the Planning Commission
Meeting is:
Join Zoom Meeting
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/83423743831
Meeting ID: 834 2374 3831
One tap mobile
1-(253) 215-8782
II.CALL TO ORDER
B.ROLL CALL/ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
C.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III.APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A.October 19, 2021 Draft Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting
IV.OTHER BUSINESS
A.PSRC Presentation on Vision 2050 and Local Planning
PSRC Staff will provide an introduction to Comprehensive Planning topics in the
context of Vision 2050, in advance of the Periodic Comprehensive Planning process
beginning in 2022.
B.Review of Planning Commission Rules of Procedures
Page 1 of 85
C.Annual Election of Officers
E ach year the Planning Commission elects a Chair and Vice Chair to preside.
V.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 .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 85
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
October 19, 2021 Draft Minutes from the Regular Planning
Commission Meeting
Date:
February 17, 2022
Department:
Community Development
Attachments:
October 19, 2021 Draft Minutes from the
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:Dixon
Meeting Date:March 8, 2022 Item Number:
Page 4 of 85
SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION
October 19, 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 Moutzouris,
Commissioner Stephens.
Commissioner Mason is excused.
Staff present: Planning Services Manager Jeff Dixon, Senior Planner Josh Steiner;
Senior Assistant City Attorney, Doug Ruth; Senior Traffic Engineer, James Webb; Senior
Transportation Planner , Cecile Malik; Administrative Assistant Jennifer Oliver.
Members of the public present: Ashley Murphy; Dave B; Bob Kenworthy, Auburn School
District; Cindi Blansfield, Auburn School District; Michael Swartz, Federal Way School
District; Michael Farmer, Dieringer School District, David Bussard, Kent School District.
b.) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. October 5, 2021 – Regular Meeting Minutes
Vice Chair Lee moved, and Commissioner Stephens seconded to approve the
minutes from the October 5, 2021, meeting as written.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4-0
Page 5 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 2
III. PUBLIC HEARING
A. CPA21-0001 - 2021 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Conduct public hearing on the 2021 Annual Comprehensive Plan
Amendments.
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 and 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.
The Policy/Text Amendments are as follows:
• 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.
• P/T #7 –Volume 5, Transportation Element
• P/T #8 – Volume 2, Housing Element.
• P/T #9 – Volume 1, Land Use Element
City-Initiated Map Amendments (CPA21-0002):
• CPM #1 – Volume 5: Transportation Element. Several maps found
throughout Volume 5 have been updated to reflect current
conditions, to address formatting and combine redundant maps.
Senior Planner, Josh Steiner presented to the Planning Commission a Power
Point Presentation of the 2021 Comprehensive Plan Amendments: beginning
with the School Districts Capital Facilities Plans .
Page 6 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 3
P/T #1 Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan
Chair Roland opened the public hearing for P/T #1 Auburn School District Capital
Facilities Plan on October 19, 2021, at 7: 11 p.m.
Cindi Blansfield, Assistant Superintendent spoke on behalf of the Auburn School
District and updated the Commission on the progress of the new and ongoing
construction of elementary schools.
Ms. Blansfield stated that the Auburn School District is in the middle of
constructing their bond-approved projects. In June, Chinook Elementary moved
out of their building and moved to what was known as old Olympic which is
located off of K St SE. That is the interim school for the year. Lea Hill Elementary
moved to new Elementary 16 as their interim site for this school year. Ms.
Blansfield commented that the sites are moving quickly with construction. The
new Pioneer Elementary opened up on October 6 with a ribbon cutting ceremony
attended by Mayor Backus who was also an alumnus of the school. Bowman
Creek and Dick Scobee Elementary Schools officially opened this time last year
however, due to the pandemic, the new schools welcomed the entire school body
into the buildings with a ribbon cutting ceremony. Design is well under way for
Terminal Park Elementary which is the last elementary to be rebuilt. Ms.
Blansfield remarked how exciting it is to have kids back in school this time of
year, considering how much they were missed while online schooling took place
during the height of the pandemic.
Ms. Blansfield noted that while student population moving was happening this
summer, 19 portable classrooms were relocated from elementaries to middle and
high schools. The reason for this move was to prepare the elementary school
sites for construction but also to help with the tremendous growth that’s
happening in middle school and high school. The portables will accommodate
growth for now. Ms. Blansfield final comments stated that the school board will
soon be considering next steps in future facility planning in the Auburn School
District and that the Auburn School District appreciates the great relationship that
has been established with the City of Auburn.
Bob Kenworthy, Auburn School District Capital Projects Assistant Director,
presented the Capital Facilities Plan to the Commission.
The Auburn School District has provided the city with its annually updated Capital
Facilities Plan (CFP) covering from 2021-2027. The CFP was prepared by the
district staff and adopted by the Auburn School District School Board of Directors
on June 14, 2021 and has been subject to separate SEPA review and a
Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) prepared by the District. Information
contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of
school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission
action is to incorporate the Auburn School District Capital Facilities Plan into the
City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference.
Page 7 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 4
The CFP includes the following:
• six–year enrollment projections
• Auburn school district level of service standards
• An inventory of existing facilities
• The district’s overall capacity of the 6-year period
• District capital construction Plan
• Impact fee calculations
A review of the Auburn School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan
indicates the district is requesting a decrease in the fee obligations. The
net fee obligation for single-family dwellings is proposed to be
$3,652.19, a decrease of $2,804.12 and the fee for multiple-family
dwellings is proposed to be $8,928.32, a decrease of $7,387.57.
In 2019 and 2020 the King County formula resulted in very high multiple
-family impact fees. Over $14,000 in 2019 and over $16,000 in 2021.
The school district and the city worked together to create what was
thought to be an equitable balance between the costs impact on
multiple-family development and the cost impact of the students coming
from the multi- family development on Auburn School District. What was
set up was a staggered fee schedule and offered discounts between
$2,000 and $10,000 depending on the number of bedrooms in a unit.
The $10,000 fee discount was applicable for a studio unit. The full
calculated impact fee applied to 4- and 5-bedrooms units. This year’s
calculated impact fee is only $600 higher than last year’s discounted
impact fee for one-bedroom units and about $7,400 less than last year’s
full calculated fee for 4- and 5-bedroom units. The Auburn School
District is asking that the multi-family impact fee be returned to a
calculated impact fee based on the formula. Mr. Kenworthy stated that
returning to the calculated fee results in an impact fee increase for the
studios and one bedroom units and decreases for the 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-
bedroom units.
The Commission and staff discussed.
The Planning Commission asked Mr. Kenworthy to confirm information on the
schools that construction had taken place on and whether there was no new
construction since the last time the school district and the Commission had met.
In the packet it states 5 elementary schools were being replaced. Mr. Kenworthy
confirmed that 1 middle school was replaced, 5 existing elementary schools have
been replaced with new buildings and two additional elementary schools were
added.
The Commission ask for clarification on the impact fees and the reason for
returning to the calculated formula that is not staggered based on the number of
bedrooms in the dwelling unit. The school district is requesting for it to go back to
Page 8 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 5
the a uniform calculated formula because they cannot increase the fee above the
calculated amount but can discount it to zero if they choose to. In the last year,
the school district has received an influx of new students from multi-family
developments and needed to allow the fee to go up but at the same time it wasn’t
equitable to charge a $16,000 impact fee on a studio apartment that was likely
going to be occupied by one or two adults. Working with the City, the school
district came up with staggered fee approach. The impact fee was based on l the
calculated amount, but the school district offered discounts for the smaller sized
units.
The Commission asked what was happening as far as construction at the high
school level. Ms. Blansfield responded that the school board will be meeting soon
and considering next steps in future facility planning in the Auburn School
District. The school district is growing rapidly, and the board will be looking at the
capacity at the middle schools and high schools and discussing future
construction for both.
The Commission asked if the capacity was affected by the 19 portables that were
moved to the middle and high schools. The Commission commented that with
those portables that were moved to the middle schools, would that alleviate that
need for building a new middle school. Ms. Blansfield stated that the middle
schools are keeping “their heads above water” for the time being. The schools
were built with higher capacities. Mr. Kenworthy added that 25 students can be
accommodated in a portable classroom at the high school and middle school
levels. Currently at the middle schools, the four middle schools combined there
are 35 portables and at the 3 high schools there are 25 portables. This gives an
idea of how the school district is accommodating all of overflow.
With no other public testimony, Chair Roland closed the public hearing at 7:25
PM.
With no other questions from the Commission, the Commission deliberated.
Commissioner Stephens moved and Commissioner Moutzouris seconded to
recommend P/T #1 - Capital Facilities Plan Update for Auburn School District be
forwarded on to City Council for approval.
Motion Passed 4-0
P/T #2 Dieringer School District
Chair Roland opened the public hearing for P/T #2 Dieringer School District
Capital Facilities Plan Update on October 19, 2021, at 7:26 PM.
Michael Farmer, Superintendent of the Dieringer School District spoke on behalf
of the Dieringer School District.
Page 9 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 6
Mr. Farmer stated that pre Covid 19 Pandemic, the district commissioned a
company to do a 10-year enrollment forecast and 10-year facilities plan for the
district and started to do a high school feasibility study to determine if a new high
school would be needed in the near future. The Dieringer School District is the
biggest K-8 district in the state. Unfortunately, the pandemic hit, and the school
district lost about 200 students. Mr. Farmer stated it had looked like there was a
potential need for classroom space or an early learning center, but that has been
put on hold as the district waits to see if the enrollment will recover.
The Commission asked that as students finish up their 8th grade year, do they
have the choice of going to Sumner or Auburn high school. Mr. Farmer
commented that the Dieringer students can go to any district in the state. There
are 550 high school aged students, approximately 225 at Sumner High School
with a less amount attending Auburn Riverside High School, as well as a smaller
amount at Bonney Lake High School. There is also about 40 kids that attend
White River high school.
The Commission asked if there was any construction currently taking place within
the school district. Mr. Farmer stated that prior to the pandemic, there was
growth expected about 10 years out but again that was pre pandemic. The
School District hoped to acquire land that is next to Lake Tapps Elementary
school and build an early learning center such as preschool, kindergarten, and 1st
grade. But the district is still in the process of trying to acquire that land.
The Dieringer School District provided the city with its annually updated
Capital Facilities Plan 2021 - 2027. The CFP was adopted by the Dieringer
School District Board of Directors in June 2021. The CFP has been subject
to separate SEPA review, and a DNS prepared by the district. Information
contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the City’s
collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The
Planning Commission action is to incorporate the School District Capital
Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference.
The CFP includes the following:
• Overview
• An inventory of existing facilities
• Six–year enrollment projections
• Standard of service
• Capacity projects
• Finance plan
• Impact fee calculations
A review of the Dieringer School District’s updated Capital Facilities
Plan indicates the district has calculated an increase in fees compared
to those currently adopted. The net fee obligation for single-family
dwellings is $6,247, an increase of $2,071; and the fee for multiple
family dwellings is $1,903, an increase of $1,114. However, as noted in
an impact fee letter provided by the District, they are requesting to
Page 10 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 7
maintain impact fees consistent with those currently adopted (no
increase). By ordinance No. 2018-88s, Pierce County Council has
“capped” a “Maximum Fee Obligation” (MFO) which changes annually
based on the Construction Cost Index published by the Engineering
News Record. The previous year’s MFO for single family development
was $3,890 and the MFO for multi-family development was $789. The
actual impact fees are established by ordinance through subsequent
City Council action and have maintained consistency with the fee
amount adopted by Pierce County.
With no other public testimony, Chair Roland closed the public hearing at 7:31
PM.
With no other questions from the Commission, the Commission deliberated.
Commissioner Stephens moved and Commissioner Moutzouris seconded to
recommend P/T #2 - Capital Facilities Plan for Dieringer School District be
forwarded on to City Council for approval.
Motion Passed 4-0
P/T #3 Federal Way Public Schools Capital Facilities Plan
Chair Roland opened the public hearing for P/T #3 Federal Way Public Schools
Capital Facilities Plan on October 19, 2021, at 7:32 PM.
Ashley Murphy, Chief Financial Officer and Michael Swartz, Executive Director of
Capital Projects spoke on behalf of the Federal Way Public School District.
Mr. Swartz presented the Capital Facilities Plan Update to the Commission.
The Federal Way School District has provided the city with its annually
updated Capital Facilities Plan 2022. The CFP was adopted by the Federal
Way School District School Board June 29, 2021. The CFP has been
subject to separate SEPA review, and a DNS prepared by the district.
Information contained in the School District CFP serves as the basis for the
City’s collection of school impact fees on behalf of the school district. The
Planning Commission action is to incorporate the School District Capital
Facilities Plan into the City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference.
The CFP includes the following:
• Introduction
• Inventory of educational facilities & non-instructional facilities
• Needs forecast, existing & new facilities
• Six–year finance plan
• Maps of district boundaries
• Building capacities & portable locations
Page 11 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 8
• Student forecast
• Capacity summaries
• Student forecasts
• Impact fee calculations
• Summary of changes from the year 2021 plan
A review of the Federal Way School District’s updated Capital
Facilities Plan indicates the district is requesting a change in the fee
obligations. The net fee obligation for single-family dwellings is
proposed to be $1,845, representing a decrease of $1,398 and the
requested fee for multi-family dwellings is $15,073, a decrease of
$930. The actual impact fees are established by ordinance through
subsequent City Council action.
The Planning Commission asked how many schools are in the Auburn City limits.
There is one elementary school located in the City. No plans for remodeling at
this time. The Commission inquired if there will be anymore schools being built in
the Auburn City limits in the future. Mr. Swartz commented that not at this time.
With no other public testimony, Chair Roland closed the public hearing at 7:39
PM.
The Commission and staff discussed.
With no other questions from the Commission, the Commission deliberated.
Vice Chair Lee moved, and Commissioner Stephens seconded to recommend
P/T #3 - Capital Facilities Plan Update for Federal Way Public School District be
forwarded on to City Council for approval.
Motion Passed 4-0
P/T #4 Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan
Chair Roland opened the public hearing for P/T #4 Kent School District Capital
Facilities Plan on October 19, 2021, at 7:40 PM.
David Bussard, Director of Capital Planning spoke on behalf of the Kent School
District.
P/T #4 – Kent School District Capital Facilities Plan Update
The Kent School District provided its annually updated 2020-2021 to 2026-
2027 Capital Facilities Plan. The CFP was adopted by the Kent School
District School Board in June 2021 and has been subject to separate SEPA
review and a DNS prepared by the district. Information contained in the
School District CFP serves as the basis for the City’s collection of school
impact fees on behalf of the school district. The Planning Commission
Page 12 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 9
action is to incorporate the School District Capital Facilities Plan into the
City’s Comprehensive Plan by reference.
The CFP includes the following:
• Executive Summary
• Six-year enrollment projection & history
• District standard of service
• Inventory, capacity & maps of existing schools
• Six-year planning & construction plan
• Portable classrooms
• Projected classroom capacity
• Finance Plan, cost basis and impact fee schedules
• Summary of changes to previous plan
A review of the Kent School District’s updated Capital Facilities Plan indicates the
district is requesting a change in the fee obligations. The net fee obligation for
single-family dwellings is proposed to be $5,818.09, representing an increase of
$125.24 and the requested fee for multi-family dwellings is $2,457.53, an
increase of $53.90. Both increases are tied to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) of
2.2% for the Seattle Metropolitan Area in 2021. The actual impact fees are
established by ordinance through subsequent City Council action.
The Planning Commission inquired if there were any Kent Schools in the Auburn
City limits. Mr. Bussard commented that there are currently no schools in the
Auburn City limits. However, there are students from Kent that are in the Auburn
School District which is why Kent School District participates in the Auburn Comp
Plan Update. Mr. Bussard stated that Kent School growth has declined. Between
2016 and 2021, the district lost 2,800 students. Mr. Bussard commented that the
district is aggressively trying to figure out where those students went but also
realizing that the pandemic has also played a role in reducing those numbers.
With no other public testimony, Chair Roland closed the public hearing at 7:51
PM.
The Commission and staff discussed.
With no other questions from the Commission, the Commission deliberated.
Vice Chair Lee moved, and Commissioner Moutzouris seconded to recommend
P/T #4 - Capital Facilities Plan Update for Kent School District be forwarded on to
City Council for approval.
Motion Passed 4-0
Page 13 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 10
P/T #5 City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Update
Chair Roland opened the public hearing for P/T #5 City of Auburn Capital
Facilities Plan Update on October 19, 2021, at 7:53 PM.
Senior Planner Josh Steiner presented to the Planning Commission regarding
the City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan.
P/T #5 – City of Auburn Capital Facilities Plan Update
A Capital Facilities Plan is one of the comprehensive plan elements
required by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) (RCW
36.70A). The GMA requires that a capital facilities plan include an inventory
of existing capital facilities (showing locations and capacities), a forecast of
future needs for such capital facilities, proposed locations and capacities of
new or expanded capital facilities, and a minimum of a six-year plan to
finance capital facilities with identified sources of funding. The proposed
City of Auburn 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2022-2027 satisfies the GMA
requirements for a capital facilities element as part of the Comprehensive
Plan.
Each comprehensive plan prepared under the GMA must include a capital
facilities plan element. More specifically, RCW 36.70A.070(3) of the GMA
requires the following:
“A capital facilities plan element consisting of:
(a) An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities,
showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities.
(b) a forecast of the future needs of such capital facilities.
(c) the proposed locations and capacities of expanded or
new capital facilities.
(d) at least a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within
projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public
money for such purposes; and
(e) a requirement to reassess the land use element if probable
funding falls short of meeting existing needs and to ensure that the
land use element, capital facilities plan element, and financing plan
within the capital facilities plan element are coordinated and
consistent. Park and recreation facilities shall be included in the
capital facilities plan element.”
A capital facility is defined as a structure, street, or utility system
improvement, or other long- lasting major asset, including land. Capital
facilities are provided for public purposes. Capital facilities include, but are
not limited to, the following: streets, roads, highways, sidewalks, street and
road lighting systems, traffic signals, domestic water systems, storm and
sanitary sewer systems, parks and recreation facilities, and police and fire
Page 14 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 11
protection facilities. These capital facilities include necessary ancillary and
support facilities.
The City of Auburn 6-year Capital Facilities Plan 2022-2027 is proposed to
be incorporated by reference in the Comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities
Element (Volume No. 3).
The Planning Commission asked if grants play into these projects. Does the
City budget for these projects and then go seek out the grants or does the
city look at grants and then set the budgets and then pre plan as to how
many grants the city can expect to receive? City of Auburn Senior Traffic
Engineer, James Webb commented that the city is familiar with the regular
re-occurring grant opportunities and the city has a good idea of what types
of projects we think that will be successful. When staff puts together the 6-
year transportation improvement program (TIP) which feeds into the Capital
Facilities Plan for transportation, staff identifies projects where they think we
will be successful getting grants and anticipates receiving those grants. At
times it is successful and other times it is not. But staff anticipates some
grant funding over that 6-year period.
The Commission inquired on how many of the projects are traffic mitigation
programs. Is the City investing in traffic management. Staff confirmed that
the city is indeed investing in traffic management. Staff commented that it
may not be mentioned in the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) because the CFP
only includes the subset of all of the transportation plan projects in the 6-
year transportation plan. Staff stated there are funds every year that is used
to upgrade traffic cameras, and signal infrastructure. There is also individual
Capital Projects that build out missing or old infrastructure.
With no other public testimony, Chair Roland closed the public hearing at 7:59
PM.
The Commission and staff discussed.
With no other questions from the Commission, the Commission deliberated.
Commissioner Stephens moved and Vice Chair Lee seconded to recommend
P/T #5 - Capital Facilities Plan Update for the City of Auburn be forwarded on to
City Council for approval.
Motion Passed 4-0
Chair Roland opened the public hearing for P/T #6 Volume #3 Capital Facilities
Plan, P/T #7 –Volume # 5, Transportation Element Plan Update, P/T #8 –
Volume # 2, Housing Element Plan Update, P/T #9 – Volume #1, Land Use
Element Plan Update, and City Initiated Map Amendments (CPA21-0002) CPM
#1 on October 19, 2021, at 8:02 PM.
Page 15 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 12
Senior Planner Josh Steiner presented to the Planning Commission.
P/T #6 – Volume # 3 Capital Facilities Element Plan Update
• Water Services is requesting a 4-year extension of the Comprehensive Water
Plan (CWP), which is scheduled to be updated in 2022, through the WA State
Department of Health.
• The 4-year extension would allow for a full update in 2024 on same timeline
as Periodic Update.
• The current plan analysis period is through 2026.
• Capital projects, water demand, and growth projections are still valid and
accurate.
P/T #7 –Volume # 5, Transportation Element Plan Update
• Update Comprehensive Plan to remove one project that is transferred to TIP
and add the Main Street Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Projects.
• Update Maps to reflect current conditions.
The Commission asked how the traffic accident data is used in determining our
policies and what improvements the city chooses to fund.. Senior Traffic
Engineer, James Webb commented that we definitely look at the crash data to
look for locations that we have higher than anticipated crash rates and the
severity of those crashes. Staff puts together a Local Road Safety Plan every two
years. This is used as a tool to identify locations that have risk factors that may
be contributing to crashes. Staff uses this data to identify improvement projects
and to use as a tool to seek grant funding for those projects.
P/T #8 – Volume # 2, Housing Element Plan Update
• Staff recommends starting to incorporate Housing Action Plan guidance into
the Comprehensive Plan
• Add language recognizing the preparation and adoption of the Housing
Action Plan (HAP).
• Using Recommendations from the HAP, one policy statement is proposed to
be updated.
• Updated Policy H-24 to reflect the HAP recommendation of minimizing
displacement impacts, which is also consistent with the Puget Sound
Regional Council (PSRC) Vision 2050, Policy (MPP-H-11) supporting
identifying potential physical, economic, and cultural displacement and
mitigating to the extent feasible.
The Commission inquired on what “Cultural Displacement” was defined as,
as it is referenced under the Housing Element Plan Update. Staff responded
Page 16 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 13
that it means any identity that is longer in a neighborhood; or losing some of
the character of a physical place. The Commissioners commented that in
communities, as residents age or move on, and new people come in that
displacement seems to be a natural process. The Commission and Staff
discussed whether there was a specific example here in Auburn or, rather,
was this policy something to lay groundwork for the future. Staff further
commented that this policy is intended for the future. The Comprehensive
Plan is a 20-year plan with a vision and its trying to lay the foundation for the
future and how we plan for measures to avoid cultural displacement. The
Commission asked if this would affect anything on city land that is on the
Muckleshoot Indian reservation. Planning Services Manager Jeff Dixon
commented that he couldn’t recall a specific cultural displacement example
appropriate to Auburn but did remind the Commission that when staff was
reviewing the Housing Action Plan, the background report that was a part of
that document had information on displacement susceptibility by income.
More specifically, staff and the consultant presented back in February of 2021
to the Commission a map that viewed census data tracts in the city that could
be most subject to displacement impacts. Planning Services Manager Dixon
commented that there are historic Indian reservation boundaries that overlap
into the city, but much of the land within these historic reservation boundaries
is owned by non-tribal people and would be regulated by the city.
P/T #9 – Volume #1, Land Use Element Plan 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 bonuses in height, density, or intensity
limitations.
City Initiated Map Amendments (CPA21-0002) CPM #1
• Several maps found throughout Volume 5 (Transportation Element) have
been updated to reflect current conditions, address formatting, and combine
redundant maps.
Chair Roland inquired about the label on the west side of the Green River
being as “John Reddington Road NE”. She asked if this was a mistake.
Senior Transportation Engineer, James Webb clarified that Green River Road
was on the map on the east side. The label shown is associated with the
levee on the west side. The Green River Road is not labeled on the east
side of the river on the maps shown in the packet. Chair Roland asked if that
was something that could be updated, and staff confirmed that it was an easy
fix and would take care of that.
With no other public testimony, Chair Roland closed the public hearing at 8:21
PM.
Page 17 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 14
The Commission and staff discussed.
With no other questions from the Commission, the Commission deliberated.
Commissioner Moutzouris moved, and Commissioner Stephens seconded to
recommend:
P/T #6 – Volume # 3 Capital Facilities Element Plan Update
P/T #7 –Volume # 5, Transportation Element Plan Update
P/T #8 – Volume # 2, Housing Element Plan Update
P/T #9 – Volume #1, Land Use Element Plan Update
City Initiated Map Amendments Plan Update be forwarded on to City Council for
approval.
Motion Passed 4-0
IV. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Presentation by Senior Traffic Engineer, James Webb on the City Traffic
Impact Analysis.
In the past, Planning Commission has expressed interest in knowing more about
how the city evaluates traffic impacts of developments. As a result, staff has asked
the City’s Transportation division to make a presentation.
Senior Traffic Engineer, James Webb introduced himself and presented to the
Commission.
Mr. Webb explained that a traffic impact analysis (TIA) is a study which assesses the
adequacy of the planned transportation system to accommodate new vehicle trips
generated by a proposed development, redevelopment, or land rezoning. These
studies vary in range of detail and complexity depending on the type, size, and
location of the development.
Mr. Webb explained to the Commission when a traffic impact analysis is needed:
• The development could potentially affect an intersection or corridor where an
existing level of service is at or below standard.
• The development generates more than 30 PM or AM peak hour trips on a
corridor or intersection.
• The development may potentially affect the implementation of the street
system as outlines in the Comprehensive Transportation Plan and Six-Year
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) or of any other documented
transportation project.
Page 18 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 15
• The development proposes a rezone of the subject property.
• The original Traffic Impact Analysis for a future development is outdated due
to changes in traffic volumes in the vicinity of the proposed project or
approved pipeline projects or a change in the proposed land use’s trip
generation and/or distribution.
• The development could potentially affect safety or requires an analysis to
assist in designing appropriate access.
The City has prescriptive elements required in TIAs, but then flexibility depending
on project location and size, and considers the trigger(s) for the TIA to be
required.
He explained that the applicant's transportation consultant is required to work
with City staff to determine the scope of the study. This scoping addresses:
Trip generation for the proposed land-uses
Time periods required to be evaluated (typically weekday AM and PM
peaks when traffic volumes on the street system are highest)
Study intersections
Horizon year (when is the development anticipated to be complete and
open)
Growth rate and pipeline projects
Signal timing and crash data
Planned projects identified in the City’s TIP
Mr. Webb described the TIA Study Elements:
1. Document Existing Conditions within the study area (a TIA being prepared
now would evaluate 2021 conditions).
1. Existing traffic volumes
2. Street system and intersection control
3. Non-motorized facilities
4. Crash history
5. Levels of service
6. Transit service
2. Identify “Background” Traffic (for the anticipated year of opening for the
development project)
1. Estimates traffic volumes (includes background growth rate and traffic
generated by approved development projects)
2. Identifies improvements to the transportation system anticipated to be
completed
3. Evaluates levels of service without the proposed development
4. With project conditions
5. Estimates trip generation for the development including credit for
existing uses which would be replaced (typically based on industry
standards published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers)
(pass-by and internal trips)
6. Documents how these trips will be distributed and assigned to the
street system (based on site access and existing travel patterns)
Page 19 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 16
7. Evaluates levels of service with the proposed development
8. Will the project traffic impact non-motorized/transit/or safety?
9. Analysis of parking demand and supply to show adequacy
3. Assess the Impacts – comparison of with project conditions to baseline
conditions.
4. Determine Mitigation – to improve traffic operations to baseline conditions or
better.
Mr. Webb discussed the TIA requirements specific to rezone applications
submitted to the city. Specific rezone requirements do not evaluate a specific
development proposal, and instead evaluate the range of impacts of potential
development allowed by the land uses of the proposed zoning change relative to
existing zoning., Rezone does not always trigger mitigation, and a separate TIA
could be required at the time of a subsequent development project.
Staff displayed a graph and spoke about Level of Service or LOS. LOS is a
performance measure of traffic operations by letter grade at an intersection or
along a corridor that was established by the Highway Capacity Manual. The city
has LOS standards adopted in the Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
Generally, the city has adopted a LOS standard of “D” for arterial and collector
roadways, signalized intersections, stop-controlled intersections and
roundabouts. LOS “E” is acceptable at the intersection of two principal arterial
streets (for example Auburn Way N with S 277th Street). LOS standards are
established to balance between infrastructure needs and ease of mobility. Project
impacts are determined against these standards. Higher LOS standards by letter
grade are associated with a greater level of road improvements by the city or a
developer.
Mr. Webb explained the traffic impact fee is not mitigation for a project impact,
but a fee assessed to all development projects based on proposed land uses.
The fee is used by the city to fund capacity improvement projects identified in the
transportation improvement program. TIA will identify an improvement to improve
traffic operations to baseline conditions or better such as:
• signal timing changes/phasing
• Widening a roadway
• Signalization of an intersection
• Roundabout
Specific Examples:
• signal at S 287th Street and WVH (North Auburn Logistics warehouse project)
• Widening and re-channelization on S 316th Street (Canyon Creek residential
plat)
• Kersey Way and 50th Street – re-channelization to create refuge/merge lane
(Bowman Creek Elementary School)
The Planning Commission commented that there are challenges in Auburn since
our blocks are very short and results in a tremendous number of entrances or
exits very near the intersection which in turn generates a large number of
Page 20 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 17
accidents. The Commission asked if that fits into this TIA analysis presented or is
a more subjective measure. Staff commented that the circumstance cited really
fits into neither. It is something that is addressed by a different authority; the
city’s public works engineering design standards. While staff doesn’t disagree
with the Commission’s comments and concerns about driveways, for new
developments there are standards that dictate how many access points they can
have and where those driveways are placed. New development is subject to new
standards that existing developments didn’t have to achieve.
Mr. Webb concluded his presentation with future changes. Staff is developing
multi-model level of service standards which will allow evaluation of impacts to
non-motorized facilities (pedestrian and bike facilities) to be identified, how LOS
is evaluated and what the standards will be revised and traffic impact fees will be
revised to include non-motorized projects. Annual updates to the Transportation
Improvement Program will take place as well, as updated traffic impact fees,
based on the 2022-2027 TIP that go into effect on January 1, 2022, and
upcoming Comprehensive Plan Update for 2024.
V. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT
Planning Services Manager, Jeff Dixon reported that The Max House building (formerly
containing Nelson’s Jewelry) that was located on Main Street that was lost in a fire, now
has demolition permits submitted for the teardown of the building. The application is not
complete yet, and staff is waiting on the owner to respond. Once the demolition permit is
issued Main Street will be closed for a week so the demolition crews can get access with
machinery to complete the teardown. This will happen after the Veteran’s Day parade.
The Commission asked about the strip commercial center that had contained Athens
Pizza mand also had fire damage. Athens Pizza is in progress of being rebuilt with
permits and inspections. Staff was not sure of an exact re-open date, but the owners are
in process to complete the repairs that were caused by the fire.
The Copper Gate project is working to get their final certificate of Occupancy (COO) for
all of the units at the site in November. They are actively working on marketing the
North undeveloped part of the Auburn Gateway site to be developed as commercial
space. The developer will be developing a park that is a privately owned park but
available for the public to use. It will consist of a stage and an lawn seating area for
outdoor movies or small concerts, as well as space for picnic benches and small parking
area for standing space for food trucks to visit.
The Commission asked if Sound Transit was still considering various locations for the
siting of an Electric bus Base station and if it included Auburn. Staff commented that the
pandemic has delayed the project as of right now.
The next regularly-scheduled Planning Commission Meeting would meet in November
but at this time it looks as if the November and December meetings will not be needed.
Emails will be sent out to confirm.
Page 21 of 85
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 19, 2021
Page 18
VI. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chair Roland
adjourned the meeting at 9:11 PM.
Page 22 of 85
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
PSRC Presentation on Vision 2050 and Local Planning
Date:
February 28, 2022
Department:
Community Development
Attachments:
PC Memo Upcoming Projects
Auburn PC
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:March 8, 2022 Item Number:
Page 23 of 85
Memorandum
To: Judi Roland, Chair, Planning Commission
Planning Commission Members
From: Josh Steiner, Senior Long-Range Planner, Comm. Dev. Dept.
Jeff Dixon, Planning Services Manager, Comm. Dev. Dept.
Date: February 23, 2022
Re: Long-Range Planning Projects Getting Started in 2022
The Planning Services division of the Department of Community Development is anticipating
three noteworthy long-range projects that will begin in early 2022. While this is not an agenda
item for the March 8th meeting, staff wanted to provide this memo to inform the Planning
Commission about these projects and their timelines. Each of these projects has the potential
to result in analysis and work products that will eventually be presented by staff to the Planning
Commission for consideration, public hearing, and a recommendation to the city council.
Auburn Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update
Each city and county in Washington state is required to conduct a periodic update of its
comprehensive plan and development regulations per RCW 36.70A.130 (The Growth
Management Act, or GMA). In general, the purpose is to ensure consistency with the Puget
Sound Regional Council Vision 2050, the County-wide Planning Policies (for Auburn this means
both Pierce and King County), any changes in state laws over the intervening time, and to
respond to changing conditions within the local community. Under the GMA, all King County
cities, including Auburn are on an 8-year update cycle, with the next comprehensive plan due to
be adopted by June 2024. The GMA also defines the “elements” that make up a comprehensive
plan. Elements are similar to chapters. Mandatory elements include Land Use, Housing,
Capital Facilities, Transportation, Economic Development, Parks and Recreation, and Private
Utilities. Each of these elements is required to be fully updated during the 8-year update
process. Coordination of this update will be led by Planning Services staff, with assistance from
a selected consultant. However, other departments will be serving in a lead role for the specific
elements that they oversee (e.g. Parks to oversee Park and Recreation element, Public Works
to oversee Transportation element). Because each element relies upon zoning and land use
assumptions such as densities and allowable uses, there is a need to closely coordinate the
Land Use element update with all of the other elements. To assist in the update process,
Planning Services issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) in December 2021 that requested
consultant assistance in developing a framework for developing the comprehensive plan update
process and for assistance in analysis for specific comprehensive plan elements. The consulting
firm of SCJ Alliance was selected, and Planning Services is currently coordinating with the
consultant on the schedule and scope of work. The periodic comprehensive plan update
process is expected to begin in March 2022.
Page 24 of 85
The Planning Commission will be kept informed of status and progress at regular intervals
leading to a public hearing and a development of a recommendation to the City Council. The
document will also consider updates to the individual subject-specific comprehensive plans,
such as transportation, water, sewer, and stormwater comprehensive plans.
Auburn Downtown Sub-Area Plan & Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement
Planning Services was awarded a grant of up to $250,000 through the Washington State
Department of Commerce to update the Auburn Downtown Plan & Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS), last adopted in 2001. The last plan had reached the end of its forecasted 20-
year planning period. The scope for this work includes a new, supplemental document that
builds from the success of the prior plan while preparing for development over the next 20
years, in addition to a Planned Action EIS. Planning Services staff issued a Request for
Proposal in December 2022 requesting consultant assistance in developing the Plan. Two
consultants were interviewed, and the consulting firm of MAKERS was selected, with the project
anticipated to begin in March 2022, to be completed by June 2023.
This work will take the form of a revision of the Special Area Plan, or sub-area plan that applies
to the more specific geographic area of downtown auburn and will coordinate with transit
facilities.
Housing Action Plan Implementation Project
As members of the Planning Commission may recall, the City adopted a Housing Action Plan
(HAP) in July 2021 that provided preliminary recommendations of goals and strategies to
encourage construction of additional affordable and market rate housing in a greater variety of
housing types and at prices that are accessible to a greater variety of incomes. To build upon
this past work, Planning Services was awarded a $100,000 grant through the Washington State
Department of Commerce to further analyze specific recommendations for potential adoption.
ECONorthwest was selected as the consultant to assist staff with this effort, who also assisted
in the previous development of the Housing Action Plan.
$20,000 of the total grant award has been allocated to South King Housing and Homelessness
Partners (SKHHP) to develop a database of regulated and unregulated affordable housing in
coordination with four other South King County cities. This separate effort is also a Preliminary
Recommendation found in the Housing Action Plan. The Housing Action Plan Implementation
Project is anticipated to begin in March 2022, to be completed by July 2023.
Feel free to contact either Josh Steiner, Senior Long-Range Planner at jsteiner@auburnwa.gov
or 253-804-5064 or Jeff Dixon, Planning Services Manager, at jdixon@auburnwa.gov or 253-
804-5033, with any questions.
Page 25 of 85
VISION 2050 and Local Planning
City of Auburn Planning Commission
March 8, 2022
Page 26 of 85
Overview
•VISION 2050
•Regional Implementation
•Housing and Transit-Oriented Development
•Q & A
2
2 Page 27 of 85
Central Puget Sound Region
•4 million people
•4 counties: King, Pierce,
Snohomish, and Kitsap
•82 cities and towns
•Urban and rural
•6,300 square miles
•1,000 square miles in urban
growth areas3 Page 28 of 85
Planning Framework
PSRC as the
regional planning
organization
Counties and cities work
together to set
population & employment
growth targets and
policies to guide growth
Local jurisdictions
prepare plans that must
be consistent with
multicounty & countywide
policies
PSRC certifies countywide
planning policies and local
plans
4
4 Page 29 of 85
5 Page 30 of 85
•The region is projected to
grow by about 1.6 million
people by 2050
•The region is projected to
add about 1.1 million jobs
by 2050
Regional 2050 Growth Forecast
Source: PSRC, 2018 Regional Macroeconomic Forecast
6 Page 31 of 85
7
Leveraging the Region’s Investments
Nearly 30 new miles of light rail in the next 4.5
years
•2021 -Northgate, Roosevelt and the U
District.
•2023 -the Blue Line to the Redmond
Technology Center, 10 new stations
•2024 another 9 stations:Federal
Way,Shoreline,Redmond, Mountlake Terrace,
Lynnwood, and Kent/Des Moines
Plus regional BRT systems, freeway expansions,
fast ferries & 60+ more miles of light rail
7 Page 32 of 85
Key Policy Themes
Increase housing choices and affordability
Provide opportunities for all
Sustain a strong economy
Significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions
Keep the region moving
Restore the health of Puget Sound
Protect a network of open space
Growth in centers and near transit
Act collaboratively and support local efforts
88Page 33 of 85
What’s different from VISION 2040?
•Extends planning horizon to 2050
•Updated growth strategy and aims for more
growth near transit
•Advocates for sustainable funding sources
•Increases recognition of Native Tribes and
military installations
•New chapter on climate change
•Directs regional work on housing and equity
9 Page 34 of 85
Policy Sections
•Regional Collaboration
•Regional Growth Strategy
•Environment
•Climate Change
•Development Patterns
•Housing
•Economy
•Transportation
•Public Services
Goals: Overarching plan objectives
Policies: Multicounty principles for regional
and local planning
Actions: Step to implement policies
Regional Growth Strategy: numeric strategy
to plan for new growth
Document Guide
10 Page 35 of 85
•Most growth in Metro, Core, and High-
Capacity Transit (HCT) Communities
•65%of region’s population growth and 75% of
employment growth in regional growth centers
& near HCT
•Lower growth allocations in urban
unincorporated and rural compared with long-
term trends
•Better jobs-housing balance by shifting
employment allocation from King County
Regional Growth Strategy
11 Page 36 of 85
Transit ridership
Land Development
Greenhouse gas emissions
Average daily drive time
Compared to VISION 2040
Less land converted -Amount of land converted
to new development is substantially less than
other alternatives
Greater transit ridership -Transit ridership
increases compared to alternatives
Greenhouse gas emissions reduced –
Emissions, compared to 2014 baseline, decrease
more than alternatives
Better drive times –Average drive time,
compared to 2014 baseline, is a greater
reduction than alternatives
*Full analysis provided in Draft SEIS and Final SEIS
Performance of VISION 2050
12 Page 37 of 85
Adopted October 29, 2020
13 Page 38 of 85
VISION 2050 Implementation
14 Page 39 of 85
Regional Centers Framework
Key part of VISION 2050 & the Regional
Growth Strategy
29 Regional Growth
Centers
10 Manufacturing/
Industrial Centers
Guide regional growth allocations
Inform transit service planning
Advance local planning
Priority areas for PSRC’s federal
transportation funding
Protects rural and natural resource areas
15 Page 40 of 85
Centers & TOD Regional Growth Centers and HCT Station Areas
Regional Growth Centers
by Transit Service
65% of population
growth and 75% of
employment growth
goal for RGCs and
HCT station areas
16 Page 41 of 85
Growing in Centers
-8%
4%
6%
7%
8%
10%
11%
12%
13%
15%
19%
19%
21%
21%
23%
23%
24%
24%
25%
28%
29%
29%
35%
38%
39%
43%
46%
49%
229%
Silverdale
Everett
Lakewood
Auburn
Puyallup South Hill
Seattle Northgate
Kent
Tukwila
University Place
Tacoma Downtown
Kirkland Totem Lake
SeaTac
Puyallup Downtown
Seattle University Community
Bothell Canyon Park
Redmond-Overlake
Tacoma Mall
Lynnwood
Seattle Uptown
Seattle First Hill/Capitol Hill
Bremerton
Issaquah
Redmond Downtown
Renton
Burien
Seattle Downtown
Bellevue
Seattle South Lake Union
Federal Way
687,000 workers267,000 residents
In 2019, regional growth centers had …
RGCs comprise 3%
of the region’s total
urbanized area
2010-2019 Center Growth Rates
17 Page 42 of 85
2018 Regional Centers Framework Update
•New classifications for regional centers
•RGCs –Urban and Metro
•MICs –Employment and Growth
•Clearer center planning requirements
•Minimum criteria for countywide
centers
•Application window for new
designations
18 Page 43 of 85
Center Typologies
Planned
Activity
units per
acre
50 75 10025
45
Urban RGCs
85
Metro RGCs
21Lynnwood 60Redmond Overlake 108Seattle
First Hill/Capitol Hill
Activity Unit =
Person or Job
19 Page 44 of 85
Work Plan Items
•Administrative procedures
•Market study guidance
•Updating resources for setting
mode-split goals and center
targets
•Updating the Centers Plan
Review Checklist
•Equity, housing, & displacement
work
•Projects Supporting
Centers guidance
•Transit-supportive
densities guidance
•2025 Centers Monitoring
20 Page 45 of 85
Four Categories:
•Capacity building for staff and boards
•Data and research to support PSRC work
and members
•Community engagement to inform decision
making
•Best practices and other tools
Some components completed in 2022
Regional Equity Strategy
21 Page 46 of 85
Regional Economic Strategy
✓A 5-year strategic blueprint for regional
collaboration around economic
development
✓Builds on other regional planning efforts
✓Implemented by many partners, including
the Economic Development District
✓Adopted in December 2021
22 Page 47 of 85
2022 Regional Transportation Plan
Objectives:
•Make progress on existing
challenges, address current and
future needs of the transportation
system
•Provide better data and analysis to
support local planning
•Plan for long-term system investments
to accommodate future growth
Out for public comment now
23 Page 48 of 85
PSRC distributes ~$270M in
transportation funding annually
•Regional FHWA and FTA Project
Selection
•Rural Town Centers and Corridors
•Special Needs
Transportation Funding
24 Page 49 of 85
Local Planning
25
Current work:
•Countywide planning policies and growth
targets
•Resources for local jurisdictions
•Ongoing availability to work with cities on
local planning
To support 2024 local comprehensive plans
Page 50 of 85
Regional Housing Strategy
Three Key Components:
•What are the gaps between current and
projected housing needs and housing
supply?
•How can the region address current and
projected gaps in housing and supply
through coordinated action?
•How do we measure success?
26 Page 51 of 85
•Regional Housing Policy
•Data
•People
•Folks impacted by housing access and affordability
•Folks we usually talk to
•Folks who work in the housing sector
What’s Informing the Draft Strategy?
Page 52 of 85
The region is two years behind in housing production
Source: OFM
Annual Population & Housing Unit Trends
28 Page 53 of 85
Between 2020 and 2050 the region needs 810,000 additional housing
units to accommodate future growth
King County –418,000 units
Kitsap County –43,000 units
Pierce County –161,000 units
Snohomish County –187,000 Units
29 Page 54 of 85
Over one -third of new units should be affordable to moderate -and
lower-income households to meet future affordability needs
0-30% AMI 51-80% AMI 81-120% AMI Above 120% AMI31-50% AMI
89,000
11%
73,000
9%186,000
23%
113,000
14%
349,000
43%
34%
Households by Income Level, 2050
Source: PSRC30 Page 55 of 85
There are substantial disparities in housing access between white
and person of color households
Home Ownership By Race and Income
Source: CHAS31 Page 56 of 85
One in two lower to moderate -income households spend the
majority of their income on housing
Source: ACS
Cost Burdened Households
32 Page 57 of 85
More diverse housing is needed for residents in all phases of life
Owner Occupied Housing by Units in Structure
Source: ACS33 Page 58 of 85
Focus Areas for Actions and Tools
Supply SubsidyStability
34 Page 59 of 85
•Allow for more multi-family housing choices near transit
•Allow for more middle density housing
•Allow for more housing choices within single-family zones
•Reduce the costs to build housing
Supply: Build more housing of different types Supply
35 Page 60 of 85
Stability: Provide opportunities for residents to live in
housing that meets their needs
•Strengthen tenant assistance and protections to provide opportunities for residents to
continue to live in their communities
•Increase access to home ownership
•Increase services and amenities to provide access to opportunity in low opportunity
•Incentivize and/or require the creation and preservation of long-term affordable housing
Stability
36 Page 61 of 85
Subsidy: Create and sustain long-term funding sources to
create and preserve housing for very low -income
households and unhoused residents
•Identify public, private, and philanthropic funding to increase affordable housing and
access to housing for lower -income families
o Advocate for substantial federal and state funding to address affordability for very
low -income households
o Encourage major employers to finance affordable housing construction and
preservation to provide opportunities for employees to live closer to where they work
o Expand local funding options and how they are used across the region
Subsidy
37 Page 62 of 85
Implementation –Regional
Capacity Resources Funding
PSRC
Support state and local
efforts to advocate for
funding reforms
Convene stakeholders to
increase collaboration,
resource sharing, and
public-private partnerships
Provide technical
assistance to support
local work, including
guidance on engaging
community members,
and model codes and
ordinances
Provide data and
research including
ongoing monitoring of
implementation efforts,
and exploring the
feasibility of potential
new tools and resources
Explore financial
incentives for housing
actions
38 Page 63 of 85
Implementation –Subregional & Local
Capacity Resources Funding
Sub-
Regional
Agencies
Support state and local efforts
to advocate for funding
reforms
Convene stakeholders to
increase collaboration,
resource sharing, and public-
private partnerships
Support local audits of
existing development
regulations and revise as
needed
Increase consistency in
development regulations
Establish and/or expand a
capital fund
Explore establishing a
housing benefit district, if
enabled
Local
Jurisdictions
Join a multi-jurisdictional
agency, if applicable
Rezone/upzone
Establish/expand tenant
and landlord programs
Audit existing development
regulations and revise as
needed
Contribute to multi-
jurisdictional agency
capital funds, if applicable
Audit existing and potential
local revenue sources and
adopt new sources as
needed 39 Page 64 of 85
Resources
VISION 2050 –https://www.psrc.org/vision
Plan Review –https://www.psrc.org/our-work/plan-review
Centers –https://www.psrc.org/centers
Regional Housing Strategy –https://www.psrc.org/regional-housing-strategy
4040Page 65 of 85
Thank You
41
Laura Benjamin, AICP
Senior Planner
LBenjamin@psrc.org
Maggie Moore
Senior Planner
MMoore@psrc.org
Page 66 of 85
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Review of Planning Commission Rules of Procedures
Date:
February 28, 2022
Department:
Community Development
Attachments:
PC Election and Rules of Procedure Memo
COA PC 2022 Revised Rules of Procedure
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:March 8, 2022 Item Number:
Page 67 of 85
MEMORANDUM
TO: Judi Roland, Chair, Planning Commission
Planning Commission Members
FROM: Jeff Dixon, Planning Services Manager
DATE: February 16, 2022
RE: For March 8, 2022, Planning Commission Agenda Topics:
• Annual Review of PC Rules of Procedure
• Election of Officers
Distribution of Rules and Procedures
The Planning Commission’s (PC) Rules of Procedure were last amended on June 8,
2021. Annually, the Planning Commission reviews the Planning Commission Rules of
Procedure document as a content reminder and to consider any modifications.
Election of Officers for 2022 – Section III
Pursuant to the Planning Commission’s adopted Rules of Procedure (provided as
Attachment A), Subsection III.2 states that the Planning Commission shall elect officers
at the first regular meeting of each calendar year, or as soon thereafter, as possible.
Since the Planning Commission did not meet in January and February of 2022, staff
requests that before the close of the March 8, 2022, meeting, officers should be elected
for year 2022. The results of the election will take effect at the following meeting so that
new appointees are prepared to serve in their new capacity. The term of office of each
officer shall run until the subsequent election.
Modifications to PC Rules of Procedures – Section XIII
Staff Recommendation:
Planning and Legal Dept. staff reviewed the latest adopted Rules of Procedure
document and noted a minor addition that is recommended and that is attached and
shown in strike-through (deletions) and underline (additions).
As you may recall, last year during the Commission’s consideration of code changes to
the City’s regulations for Wireless Communication Facilities (Cell Towers), there was
some confusion about submitting information for the record of the hearing. Changes
are proposed to clarify procedures. These are additions shown under a new
subsection; “Hearing Record” starting on Page 11.
Page 68 of 85
If after reviewing the document, the Planning Commission has additional changes,
these can be discussed, captured by staff, and then these changes can be presented
in writing and provided at the next regular meeting as provided in Section XIII,
Amendment.
Attachment A – Planning Commission Rules of Procedure as amended June 8, 2021 &
with staff recommended changes shown in strike-through (deletions) & underline
(additions).
Page 69 of 85
CITY OF AUBURN
PLANNING COMMISSION
RULES OF PROCEDURE
ADOPTED NOVEMBER, 1983
REVISED NOVEMBER, 1988
UPDATED APRIL, 2000
REVISED FEBRUARY, 2007
REVISED APRIL 2, 2013
REVISED MARCH 8, 2016
REVISED May 2, 2017
REVISED February 6, 2018
REVISED , 2018
REVISED June 5, 2018
REVISED March 5, 2019
REVISED March 3, 2020
REVISED June 8, 2021
Page 70 of 85
Page 2
PLANNING COMMISSION - RULES OF PROCEDURE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION SUBJECT PAGE
I. NAME .............................................................. 4
II. MEETINGS................................................... 4-5
III. ELECTION OF OFFICERS ............................. 5
IV. CHAIR ............................................................. 5
V. SECRETARY .................................................. 6
VI. QUORUM ........................................................ 6
VII. ABSENCE OF MEMBERS .............................. 6
VIII. ACTIONS DEFINED ........................................ 7
IX. AGENDA ...................................................... 7-8
X. PUBLIC HEARINGS ................................... 8-10
XI. CONDUCT ............................................... 11 13
XII. CONFLICT OF INTEREST ............. 11-13 13-15
XIII. AMENDMENT .......................................... 13 15
Page 71 of 85
Page 3
(This page is intentionally blank)
Page 72 of 85
Page 4
CITY OF AUBURN PLANNING COMMISSION
RULES OF PROCEDURE
We, the members of the Planning Commission of the City of Auburn, do hereby
adopt, publish, and declare the following Rules of Procedure:
I. NAME:
The official name of the City of Auburn advisory planning agency shall be "The
City of Auburn Planning Commission." The membership and terms of office of
the members of the Planning Commission shall be as provided in Chapter
2.45 of the Auburn City Code (ACC).
II. MEETINGS:
1. All meetings will be held at the Auburn City Hall, Auburn, Washington ,
unless otherwise directed by the Secretary or Chair of the Planning
Commission.
2. Regular meetings shall be held on the Tuesday following the first
Monday of each month, and shall be open to the public. The meeting
shall convene at 7:00 P.M. unless otherwise directed by the Secretary
or the Chair.
3. If the first Monday of the month is a legal holiday, the regular meeting
shall be held on the following Wednesday. If a regular meeting day
(Tuesday) falls on a legal holiday or on the November General Election,
the Commission will convene on the following Wednesday.
4. Special meetings of the Planning Commission may be called by the
Chair. Special meetings of the Planning Commission may also be
called by any three members of the Commission. A minimum notice of
24 hours shall be provided for special meetings in accordance with
State law.
5. If no matters over which the Planning Commission has jurisdiction are
pending upon its calendar, a meeting may be canceled at the notice of
the Secretary or Chair provided at least 24 hours in advance.
6. Except as modified by these Rules of Procedure, Robert's Rules of
Order, Newly Revised, most current version, shall govern the conduct
of the meetings.
Page 73 of 85
Page 5
7. Meetings of the Planning Commission shall be conducted in conformity
with the requirements of the Washington State Open Public Meetings
Act, Chapter 42.30 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW).
Executive sessions can only be held in accordance with the provisions
of Section 42.30.110 RCW.
8. The Planning Commission may conduct business in closed session as
allowed in conformity with Section 42.30.140 RCW.
9. An agenda shall be prepared in advance of every regular and special
meeting of the Planning Commission. Meeting agendas and materials
on items on an agenda for a regular meeting shall be provided to
members of the Planning Commission not less than five (5) days in
advance of the regular meeting. Meeting agendas and materials on
items on an agenda for a special meeting shall be provided to members
of the Planning Commission as promptly in advance of the meeting as
can reasonably be accomplished.
III. ELECTION OF OFFICERS:
1. The officers of the Commission shall consist of a Chair and Vice Chair
elected from the appointed members of the Commission and such other
officers as the Commission may, by the majority vote, approve and
appoint.
2. The election of officers shall take place once each year at the
Commission’s first regular meeting of each calendar year, or as soon
thereafter as possible. The term of office of each officer shall run until
the subsequent election.
3. If the Chair or Vice-Chair vacates their position mid-term, the Planning
Commission will re-elect officers at their next scheduled meeting and as
their first order of business. If it is the Chair position that has been
vacated, the Vice-Chair will administer the election proceedings.
IV. CHAIR:
1. The Chair shall preside over the meetings of the Commission and may
exercise all the powers usually incident of the office. The Chair shall be
considered as a member of the Commission and have the full right to
have his/her own vote recorded in all deliberations of the Commission.
Page 74 of 85
Page 6
2. The Chair shall have power to create temporary committees of one or
more members. Standing committees of the Commission shall be
created at the direction of the Commission and appointed by the Chair.
Standing or temporary committees may be charged with such duties,
examinations, investigations, and inquiries relative to one or more
subjects of interest to the Commission. No standing or temporary
committee shall have the power to commit the Commission to the
endorsement of any plan or program without the approval at the regular
or special meeting of the Commission.
3. The Vice Chair shall in the absence of the Chair, perform all the duties
incumbent upon the Chair.
4. In the event of the absence of the Chair and Vice Chair, the senior
member of the Commission present shall act as Chair for that meeting
or may delegate the responsibility to another member.
V. SECRETARY:
The Community Development Director (“Director”), or his/her appointee, shall
act as the Secretary for the Planning Commission and shall keep a record of
all meetings of the Commission and its committees. These records shall be
retained at the Community Development Department.
All public hearings shall be electronically recorded verbatim and may be
transcribed upon request of the Director, City Attorney, the majority of the
Commission, or City Council. Transcriptions may be requested by other
parties, in which case, the costs of transcription shall be borne by the
requesting party.
VI. QUORUM:
A simple majority of the appointed members shall constitute a quorum for the
transaction of business. A simple majority vote of the quorum present shall be
sufficient to take action on the matters before the Commission; provided that if
at any time during the meeting, a quorum is no longer present, the meeting
may only continue for the time and duration necessary to fix a time for
adjournment, adjourn, recess or take measures to obtain a quorum .
VII. ABSENCE OF MEMBERS:
Participation in Planning Commission responsibilities is essential; not only so
that a quorum can be established, but to also ensure that discussions and
decision making are as representative of the community as possible.
Recurring absence also diminishes a member’s ability to vote on matters
discussed during prior meetings. It is therefore important for all appointed
members to participate to the maximum extent possible . If a member is
Page 75 of 85
Page 7
unable to participate on a regular basis, it may be appropriate for a member to
be replaced. This section of the rules is intended to provide standards that
ensure that the regular absence of one member does not become disruptive
to, or impede the work of, the full Commission.
In the event of a member being absent for two (2) consecutive regular
meetings, or being absent from 25% of the regular meetings during any
calendar year, without being excused by the Chair, the Chair may request that
the Mayor ask for his or her resignation. To be excused, members must inform
the planning commission’s secretary in advance if they cannot attend a
scheduled meeting.
VIII. ACTIONS DEFINED:
The rules of the Commission impose different requirements according to the
type of action before the Commission.
1. Legislative actions are those which affect broad classes of people of the
whole City. These actions include adopting, amending, or revising
comprehensive, community, or neighborhood plans, or other land use
planning documents or the adoption of area wide zoning ordinances or
the adoption of a zoning ordinance amendment that is area wide in
significance.
2. Quasi-judicial actions of the Planning Commission are those actions
which determine the legal rights, duties, or privileges of specific parties
in a hearing or other contested case proceeding. Quasi-judicial actions
include actions that would otherwise be administrative or legislative if
applied more widely or city-wide, rather than affecting one or a small
number of persons or properties. Quasi-judicial actions do not include
the legislative actions adopting, amending, or revising comprehensive,
community, or neighborhood plans or other land use planning
documents or the adoption of area-wide zoning ordinances or the
adoption of a zoning amendment that is of general or area-wide
significance.
3. Organizational actions are those actions related to the organization and
operation of the Commission. Such actions include adoption of rules,
directions to staff, approval of reports, election of officers, etc.
IX. AGENDA:
An agenda shall be prepared for each meeting consisting of the following
order of business:
1. CALL TO ORDER
a) Roll Call/Establishment of Quorum
Page 76 of 85
Page 8
b) Pledge of Allegiance
2. Approval of Minutes
3. Public Hearings
4. Other Business Items as Appropriate
5. Community Development Report
6. Adjournment
Additional items may be added to the agenda by the Planning Commission.
The Chair shall have the discretion to amend the order of business.
X. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
The procedure for conducting all public hearings will be as follows:
1. Chair opens the public hearing and establishes whether the proponent,
if applicable, is in attendance.
2. Staff Report.
3. Testimony of Proponent, if applicable. Persons addressing the
Commission, who are not specifically scheduled on the agenda, will be
requested to step up to the podium, give their name and address for the
record, and limit their remarks to three (3) minutes, in addition to filling
out the speaker sign in sheet available at the Secretary’s desk. All
remarks will be addressed to the Commission as a whole. The
Secretary shall serve as timekeeper. The Presiding Officer may make
exceptions to the time restrictions of persons addressing the
Commission when warranted, at the discretion of the Presiding Officer.
4. Chair calls for other testimony, either for or against. Testimony must be
called for three times. The Chair shall have the discretion to set time
limits on individual public testimony.
5. All testimony and comments by persons addressing the Commission
shall be relevant and pertinent to issues before the Commission’s public
hearing. The Chair shall have the discretion to rule on the relevance of
individual public testimony.
6. Questions of staff or persons presenting testimony. Questions by
Planning Commissioners that are intended for persons who have
provided testimony shall be directed through the Chair. Questions to
persons who have provided testimony shall be relevant to the testimony
that was provided.
7. Chair closes public hearing.
Page 77 of 85
Page 9
8. A public hearing may be reopened by motion duly seconded and
approved by a majority vote to accept additional testimony.
9. Deliberation.
10. Voting:
A. The Chair shall call for a vote.
B. Members shall vote by voice, unless a member is unable to do
so or a member requests a vote by show of hands. If unable to
vote by voice, a member shall make a clear expression of the
member’s vote through raising a hand, sending an electronic
message or electronic signal that can be seen by all other
commissioners simultaneous with the vote, or other similarly
clear and timely action Any member, including the Chair, not
voting or submitting an unclear vote shall be recorded as voting
in the negative.
C. The Chair or a Commission member may request that the
Secretary take a roll call vote or a vote by show of hands. Also,
to ensure an accurate record of voting, the Secretary may take
either on his/her own initiative.
D. A member may abstain from discussion and voting on a question
because of a stated conflict of interest or appearance of fairness.
If any member of the Planning Commission wishes to abstain, or
has disclosed a conflict of interest and must abstain from a vote,
that member shall so advise the Commission, shall remove and
absent himself/herself from the deliberations, and considerations
of the matter, and shall have no further participation in the
matter. The member should make this determination prior to any
discussion or participation on the subject matter or as soon
thereafter as the member perceives a need to abstain. A
member may confer with the City Attorney to determine if the
member is required to abstain.
If the intended abstention can be anticipated in advance, any
conference with the City Attorney should occur prior to the
meeting at which the subject matter would be coming before the
Planning Commission. If that cannot be done, the member
should advise the Chair that he/she has an "abstention question"
that he/she wants to review with the City Attorney, in which case,
the Chair shall call a brief recess for that purpose before
proceeding further.
Page 78 of 85
Page 10
E. If a tie vote exists, after recording the Chair's vote, the motion
fails. However, a motion for denial that fails on a tie vote shall
not be considered an approval.
F. No member may participate in any decision if the member had
not reviewed the staff reports and testimony presented at the
hearing on the matter. Such member may, however, listen to the
recording of the hearing in order to satisfy this requirement.
11. Continuing an Item:
If the Commission wishes to continue a public hearing item, the Chair
should open the public hearing, solicit testimony, and request a motion
from the Commission to continue the public hearing item to a time,
place, and date certain. If any matter is tabled or postponed without
establishing a date, time, and place certain, the matter shall be
scheduled for a hearing pursuant to Auburn City Code (ACC) Section
18.68.040 before the matter may be considered again.
12. Findings of Fact:
The Commission should adopt findings of fact and conclusions for
actions taken involving public hearing items. The findings and
conclusions may be approved by any one of the following methods:
A. The Commission may adopt in whole, in part, or with
amendments, the written findings prepared by staff. Motions to
approve the staff recommendations shall be deemed to
incorporate such findings and conclusions unless otherwise
indicated. Such findings and conclusions do not have to be read
in order to be deemed a part of the record.
B. The motion to take action may adopt oral finding of fact
statements made by Commission members or staff during the
hearing or deliberation.
C. The motion to take an action may direct that additional written
findings and conclusion be developed based on the hearing and
deliberation of the Commission.
D. Findings and conclusions may be approved or amended at any
time by the Planning Commission, but all such actions shall be
based on the record of the matter at hand.
13. Order of Hearings:
Page 79 of 85
Page 11
Normally the order of hearings shall be as published in the agenda.
However, the Chair in order to avoid unnecessary inconvenience to
people wishing to testify, or the late arrival of a proponent, may change
the order as may be necessary to facilitate the meeting. If the
proponent does not appear at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission may continue the public hearing until the next meeting in
order to ensure adequate consideration of the proposal. However, in
such case the Chair shall take whatever testimony that may be given
before accepting a motion to continue pursuant to Section (8).
14. Hearing Record
A. The “record” for a public hearing shall consist of all testimony or
comments presented at the hearing and all documents or
exhibits that have been submitted, according to these rules, in
connection with the matter being considered. Specifically, the
record shall include, but not limited to the following:
• Recordings of a hearing, including all testimony presented at
a hearing;
• The hearing agenda, attendance sheet(s), and the
Secretary’s minutes;
• All final staff recorded testimony, presentations, documents,
maps, reports, memos, and other staff-produced evidence
submitted to the Commission to assist it make a decision or
recommendation regarding the agenda topic that is the
subject of the hearing;
• All submissions to the City by the proponent of the subject
matter of the hearing;
• The Planning Commission’s findings of fact and formal
recommendation, and record of any other action taken by the
Commission;
• Any document publicly cited by the Commission or a
Commission member in connection with a decision or
recommendation.
B. Anyone wanting to submit into the record physical evidence
(e.g., documents, letters, photographs, maps) shall provide the
evidence to the Secretary of the Planning Commission. Persons
may submit evidence by email or other electronic means to:
planning@auburnwa.gov
or by post mail to:
Secretary of the Planning Commission
Community Development Dept.
Page 80 of 85
Page 12
City of Auburn
25 West Main St
Auburn, WA 98001-4998
Additionally, a person may submit physical evidence into the
record at the public hearing. However, Commission members
may not be able to consider voluminous evidence that is
submitted at the time of the hearing. The Secretary will enter the
evidence into the record without the necessity of it being read
into the record and shall make note in the minutes that the
evidence was entered. Persons submitting physical evidence
are discouraged from reading verbatim the evidence at a
hearing; they are encouraged rather to summarize such
evidence during testimony. All material submitted to the record
by whatever means may be subject to disclosure to the public
under the Public Records Act, RCW 42.56.
C. The Planning Commission will accept physical evidence into the
record prior to the date and time of the close of the public
hearing. The Commission may close the record at an earlier
time upon approval by a majority of the Commission. If the
Commission reopens a hearing, the record shall also be
reopened to submission of evidence. The Commission may
accept evidence into the record after close of a hearing if it has
not already adopted a recommendation or decision on the matter
being considered and if a majority of the Commission finds that
the Commission would substantially benefit from the material
being submitted into the record.
D. All physical evidence shall be suitable for copying for distribution
(e.g. will be legible and on paper not exceeding 8-1/2 x 14 inches
in size) and shall identify at the top of the first page or on a cover
sheet the date(s) of the public hearing, the date the evidence
was submitted, and the submitter’s contact information. All
pages shall be consecutively numbered, regardless of the
number of different documents submitted. Any submitted
material proposing revisions to Auburn City Code shall show the
revisions by striking out the text proposed to be removed from
the code (e.g. for example) and underlining text proposed to be
added to the code (e.g. for example).
5. Submitted evidence must consist of less than 100 pages, unless
a majority of the Commission approves accepting submissions
exceeding that number. If the Commission does not so approve,
a person submitting evidence exceeding this page number shall
have 3 business days from the close of the hearing to comply
with the page limit.
Page 81 of 85
Page 13
XI. CONDUCT:
1. These rules are intended to promote an orderly system of holding public
meetings and public hearings.
2. Any person who causes a disruption by making personal, impertinent or
slanderous remarks or noises, by using speech intended to incite fear
of violence, by failing to comply with the allotted time established for the
individual speaker’s public comment, by yelling or screaming in a
manner that prevents the Commission from conducting the meeting, or
by other disruptive conduct while addressing the Commission at a
public hearing may be barred from further participation by the Presiding
Officer, unless permission to continue is granted by a majority vote of
the Commission.
3. No comments shall be made from any other location other than the
podium, lectern or table set up for people to address the Commission at
a public hearing, unless approved in advance by the Chair, and anyone
making irrelevant, distracting, or offensive comments or noises that are
disruptive may be subject to removal from the meeting.
4. Demonstrations, disruptive applause, other disruptive behavior, or
audience interruption during anyone’s presentation are prohibited. It is
distracting to the Commission, the audience, and persons testifying.
XII. CONFLICT OF INTEREST:
1. Any member of the Commission who in his or her opinion has an
interest in any matter before the Commission that would tend to
prejudice his or her actions shall publicly indicate, step down and leave
the meeting room until the matter is disposed. A member need only be
excused from legislative or organizational action if the potential conflict
of interest is direct and substantial.
A. No member of the Planning Commission may use his or her
position to secure special privileges or exemptions for himself,
herself, or others.
B. No member of the Planning Commission may, directly or
indirectly, give or receive or agree to receive any compensation,
gift, reward, or gratuity from a source except the employing
municipality, for a matter connected with or related to the
officer's services as such an officer unless otherwise provided for
by law.
Page 82 of 85
Page 14
C. No member of the Planning Commission may accept
employment or engage in business or professional activity that
the officer might reasonably expect would require or induce him
or her by reason of his or her official position to disclose
confidential information acquired by reason of his or her official
position.
D. No member of the Planning Commission may disclose
confidential information gained by reason of the officer's position,
nor may the officer otherwise use such information for his or her
personal gain or benefit.
E. No member of the Planning Commission may take any action
that is prohibited by Chapter 42.23 RCW or any other statutes
identifying conflicts of interest.
2. Appearance of Fairness:
Commission members shall strive to follow, in good faith, the
Appearance of Fairness Doctrine as established under Washington
State Law as it applies to quasi-judicial decisions (RCW 42.36) even for
legislative actions before the Commission. The doctrine includes but is
not limited to the following:
A. Members shall avoid communicating in respect to any proposal
with any interested parties, other than staff, outside of public
hearings. Written communication from an interested party to a
member may be permitted provided that such communication is
made part of the record.
B. Members shall avoid drawing conclusions regarding decisions
until after the public hearing is closed.
C. Members shall avoid participating in decisions which affect their
or any family member's property, personal or business interest,
or organization.
D. Members shall avoid participating in decisions in which a
preconceived bias or conclusion has been formed in the mind of
the member prior to the hearing.
E. If any concern relating to Items A through D- should arise, the
affected member shall declare at the start of the public hearing
on the matter, the extent of such concern and whether the
member's decision has been influenced. If the member has
been influenced, or if the extent of the concern is significant, the
Page 83 of 85
Page 15
member shall be excused by the Chair from the meeting room
and his vote recorded as an abstention.
If, under these rules, a quorum would be excused from the meeting, the
Chair in order to establish a quorum, shall under the rule of necessity,
permit sufficient members (beginning with those who are least affected
by these rules) to participate in the decision.
These rules are intended to be consistent with RCW 42.36. In the case
of any conflict, RCW 42.36 or applicable case law shall govern.
XIII. AMENDMENT:
The Rules of Procedure may be amended at any regular meeting of the
Commission by a majority vote of the entire membership. The proposed
amendment should be presented in writing at a preceding regular meeting. By
a two-thirds affirmative vote of the quorum present at a meeting, the
Commission may suspend the rules as authorized by Robert’s Rules of Order,
except when such suspension would conflict with state law or city ordinance.
Page 84 of 85
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Annual Election of Officers
Date:
February 28, 2022
Department:
Community Development
Attachments:
No Attachments Av ailable
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:March 8, 2022 Item Number:
Page 85 of 85