Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutITEM VII-AAgenda SubjectDate: : PUD04-0001 November 2, 2005 The City has received written confirmation from the applicant that exceeding the 120-day permit processing timeframe is acceptable. 1. A plan to provide more definite information on a second general access for the proposed access that complies with Comprehensive Plan Policy TR-13. The plan should be more certain than the plan presently submitted by the Applicant. 2. A traffic impact analysis that addresses the binding site plan (PUD Exhibit 11), and addresses the different access scenarios that could occur. 3. Current traffic level of service information to ensure the proposed project complies with Comprehensive Plan Policies TR-17 and TR-18. 4. A reconfiguration of dedicated park land such that Tracts A through G are not considered dedicated park land. The Hearing Examiner decision also states that if the information is submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, the Hearing Examiner will re-hear those portions of the application. If the Applicant is unable to submit the information to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, the Hearing Examiner recommends that the requests for plat and PUD be denied. The City Council may now, either affirm the Examiner’s decision, remand to the Examiner or schedule a closed record hearing. The Council can only modify or disaffirm the Examiner’s decision after conducting their own closed record hearing. Staff is recommending that the City Council schedule a closed record hearing. Staff believes that the specific information requested by the Hearing Examiner is adequately addressed in the existing record of the hearing examiner’s proceedings. The items raised by the Hearing Examiner are itemized below followed by a staff response. 1. A plan to provide more definite information on a second general access for the proposed access that complies with Comprehensive Plan Policy TR-13. The plan should be more certain than the plan presently submitted by the Applicant. The staff report transmitted to the Hearing Examiner indicates the site is bordered to the north by South th 277 Street, a principal arterial that is at that location under the jurisdiction of the City of Kent. Both Auburn and Kent have a history of restricting access to this roadway to ensure the capacity to convey regional traffic is not compromised. The undeveloped north-south oriented right-of-way (ROW) of I Street NE lies approximately 20 feet off-site to the west. The Port of Seattle (Port) owns the intervening property. The applicant previously contacted the Port regarding permission to cross the Port ‘s property to access the I Street NE ROW. The Port by letter indicated that it would not grant access over this intervening strip of property. The City has extensively studied the future road network in the vicinity of the drive in theater and the River Sands project through the Northeast Auburn Robertson Properties Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) issued February 2004 and the Northeast Auburn Robertson Properties Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) issued July 2004. A final schematic design for the arterial road system, which was reviewed and accepted as part of that EIS, resulted in a road network which limited th direct access to South 277 Street in the final build out condition of the area to one signalized access at a new “I” Street NE location considerably west of the existing “I” Street NE right-of- way. Additionally, the th final area road network plan envisioned an extension of 49 Street NE to provide an east - west arterial connection between B Street NE on the west, Auburn Way North, the new I Street NE, the Port property thst and the River Sands property (a.k.a. 49/51 Street NE). This network is to be developed over a series of years as the Robertson Properties Group (RPG) development, the Port of Seattle (Port) property and River Sands are constructed. The timing of the River Sands development, occurring years before RPG or the Port property, presented access challenges. Page 2 of 5 Agenda SubjectDate: : PUD04-0001 November 2, 2005 th Limited to one general access to South 277 Street as a result of government concerns about limiting th direct access to South 277Street, the developers of River Sands saw value in the future east - west connection. An agreement was reached in which the applicant would be financially responsible for the thst 49/51 Street (east-west) connection through a financial contribution to the City of Auburn. In exchange, th the applicant would be allowed to construct a signalized general access from their property to South 277 th Street. At the time that the future road network in the area was perfected and access to South 277 thst Street is available via the extended 49/51 Street NE and the future “I” Street NE signal, the applicant’s th temporary signalized full access to South 277 Street would be eliminated in favor of a right in, right out access at that location. The financial contribution was made a project mitigation measure and is Condition No. 14 of the Final Mitigation Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS). To address concerns about the need for two general accesses required by Comprehensive Plan Policy TR13 for a development of this number of dwelling units, the City required that the applicant’s current th proposed access to South 277 Street consist of a boulevard type design with a central landscape median. The intention of the median design, which divides two 20-foot minimum access lanes was to th ensure that, essentially, two access corridors would be available to South 277 Street in the unlikely event one of the lanes became blocked. As insurance, a second emergency vehicle only access located th to the east, is also provided to South 277 Street from the development. The proposed interim access design was reviewed by both City of Auburn and City of Kent technical staff. It was determined that adequate stopping and vehicle storage distance existed to allow the th development’s traffic to safely use the proposed interim access to South 277 Street. Due to the existing th speeds on South 277 Street, the Auburn Traffic Engineer determined that a traffic signal would be required to provide full access to the location. 2. A traffic impact analysis that addresses the binding site plan (PUD Exhibit 11), and addresses the different access scenarios that could occur. The traffic study submitted as part of this project, (Traffic Impact Analysis River Sands PUD, Transportation Consulting Northwest, revised July 27, 2004 and supplemented on September 7, 2004) analyzed the year 2020 traffic conditions and studied the impact of more units of development from River Sands than the development will actually create. As a result, the study represented, in effect, a worse th case analysis of the development’s impact on South 277 Street. The study found that with or without the th project, South 277 Street corridor level of Service would be LOS “E”. A separate Northeast Auburn Area EIS traffic study analyzed the impacts of the entire revised final road network discussed in response to point 1 above. This analysis included the expected traffic from the River Sands development. The only item that the RPG EIS or the River Sands traffic studies lacked was an analysis of the interim full th access at the River Sands signalized intersection entrance at South 277 Street. This analysis was conducted by City staff as described above in response to point 1 and found that adequate stopping and vehicle storage existed. 3. Current traffic level of service information to ensure the proposed project complies with Comprehensive Plan Policies TR-17 and TR-18. The traffic study submitted as part of this project (Traffic Impact Analysis River Sands PUD, Transportation Consulting Northwest, revised July 27, 2004 and supplemented on September 7, 2004) th analyzed the year 2020 traffic conditions. The study found that with or without the project, South 277 Street corridor level of Service would be LOS “E”. th Currently, the level of service standard for the South 277 Street corridor is LOS “D”. While new development in the immediate area has not occurred, regional traffic demands have resulted in the Page 3 of 5 Agenda SubjectDate: : PUD04-0001 November 2, 2005 current actual Level of Service (LOS) of the corridor being LOS “E”. It is currently proposed that Intelligent Transportation System upgrades to signalization, and long-term capacity additions to South thth 277 Street be created. Some additional road capacity on South 277 Street will also be created by the River Sands development. Nevertheless it is expected that the long term LOS of the corridor will likely remain at LOS “E”, hence the City has proposed as part of this year’s Comprehensive Plan amendments th that the LOS of the South 277 Street corridor be changed to LOS E. 4. A reconfiguration of dedicated park land such that Tracts A through G are not considered dedicated park land. Auburn City Code (ACC) section 17.12.260 requires the dedication of undeveloped park land when the subdivision will result in 50 or more dwelling units. This code section states: “The council shall be guided by the policies and recommended standards of the Auburn park and recreation plan.” and “The acceptability of the size, configuration and location of land proposed for park dedication shall be determined by the city.” The plat is proposed to contain 287 dwelling units (172 single family and 115 multi-family) and an anticipated population of 803.6 residents (287 x 2.8= 803.6 or 804). Based on the standard of 6.03 acres per 1,000 population as specified in the 1997 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan, the project requires the dedication of 4.85 acres of undeveloped park land (804/1000 x 6.03 = 4.85 acres). (Parks Plan Chapter 3; page 3-21, Table 3-14) Based on discussions with the City Parks, Arts and Recreation Department, the applicant has proposed dedicating nine tracts totaling 4 acres. The proposed dedication consists of the public linear park, Tracts A through G, a public park adjacent to the Green River, as Tracts O & P. In accordance with ACC section 17.18.010, the preliminary plat proposal also includes a “Plat Modification” request from the subdivision code in order to dedicate less than the required amount of park land. Plat Modification requests are processed simultaneously with the preliminary plat request. Specifically, the applicant proposes to dedicate 4.0 acres of the approximately 4.85 acres required by City code. The applicant seeks to compensate for the reduction in undeveloped park area by a combination of fees- in-lieu and/or improvements. A typical plat or PUD does not require park improvements, only the dedication of park land. The improvements or fees-in-lieu, provides an opportunity for immediate development of park amenities such as landscaping, play equipment and basketball court area. The provision of improvements either directly or through fees-in-lieu is supported by the PUD regulations (ACC 18.69.080(A)(2)) which state: “If determined by the City that the PUD does not contain an acceptable area for public parks, a smaller park may be accepted if developed to City standards.” Specifically, the Hearing Examiner did not consider Tracts A through G as suitable for public park land. The proposed Tracts A through G total 1.23 acres and are 20-foot wide linear tracts bordering the north and south sides of the internal, east-west roadway(51st Street NE). The seven tracts would contain landscaping and a meandering sidewalk completed by the developer during the corresponding phase. These tracts meet the dual objectives of providing park land while also enhancing the pedestrian orientation that is a stated design objective of the PUD regulations. The Tracts are proposed to be maintained by the Home Owners Association. These proposed linear tracts are supported by the following goals and objectives of the 1997 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan. Chapter 4; Page 4-8, Goal 7 “Objective 7.1 A network of trails shall be created or extended to provide coverage adequate for both commuting and recreational cyclists. Locations for east/west trails shall be identified and developed. Acquisition of land for the proposed Green River Trail shall continue to be a priority.” Page 4 of 5 Agenda SubjectDate: : PUD04-0001 November 2, 2005 Chapter 4; Page 4-9, Goal 8 “Objective 8.1 Priority shall be given to the development of community parks and linear parks with trail systems.” Through the development approval process, the City has accepted other examples of linear parks containing sidewalks and smaller parks serving the neighborhood. Tracts A through G will serve as a lineal park, one of the park types specified in the Plan. When considering Tracts A through G, the Parks Department reviewed the developer’s approach of using the proposed sidewalk as a trail connection from the west side of the plat to the east side of the plat and the future connection to the Green River Trail. The proposed sidewalk along Tracts A through G is in the front of the residences but is separated from the street. No vehicle accesses cross the sidewalk thus providing a safer connection for city residents proceeding east / west along this route as compared to walking along 277th Street or a standard sidewalk that is adjacent to the proposed street. With the development of the future Green River trail this neighborhood park would be visible to other Auburn citizens. Parks signage would identify it as a Auburn park open to the public as is typical for all city parks. L1107-6 Page 5 of 5