HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-25-1999MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
OCTOBER 25, 1999
The regular meeting of the Planning and Community Development Committee was held October 25, 1999
in the Council Work Area. Those members in attendance were as follows:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Trish Borden, Sue Singer, and Pete Lewis
STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Dick Deal, Steve Mullen, and Patti Zook
ALSO PRESENT: Mayor Booth
The meeting was called to order by Committee Chair Borden at 6:50 p.m.
ACTION ITEMS:
1. Ordinance No. 5304 - Park Impact Fees
Chairman Borden informed those present that this was being pulled from the agenda.
2. Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Planning Director Krauss indicated that there were two questions remaining from the last meeting.
The first question concerned the Mill Pond apartments (referred to in CPM #4) and which
properties are vested south of the White River. He pointed out a parcel not vested, but which is
the site of Homes by Judi for townhouse development located in Auburn and Pacific. He showed
where access for this Parcel is located. Staff had a number of preapplication meetings on this
project. He then pointed out the parcel for the Mill Pond Apartments which is a vested
development. The property behind it is not vested. Staff and the Planning Commission
recommended that this site retain its High Density designation. He then pointed out a tract which
is not vested and is the one rezoned to R-4 after the Council initially turned it down about one year
ago. To change the designation, Council would have to make a persuasive case that the situation
has changed. The City would have to show a chain of thinking. Planning Director Krauss
indicated the parcel has been guided for multi family for 12 years and was rezoned accordingly.
The Council would have to come up with legitimate reasons why the change is needed. The City
could expect a challenge from the property owner. He then pointed out another parcel
immediately to the west of parcel 3, which is not vested. The Planning Commission wanted to
change this to Low Density residential because of its exposure to other, Iow density guided
property. He then pointed out the corner property adjacent to parcel 3 which is not vested and is
zoned R-4.
Chairman Borden wondered about the impact of Unclassified versus R-1. Planning Director
Krauss acknowledged that the Unclassified district is a holding district that could be R-1. He
cautioned that there is not a lot of opportunity for change in this area.
Councilmember Lewis asked if there was any further study of what the City of Kent is doing on
their multi family. The Committee had heard that Kent had an ordinance that required owner
occupancy for multi family development. Planning Director Krauss remarked that he called the
City, but has not received a return call. Chairman Borden referred to an article she read
pertaining to contract rezone. Planning Director Krauss explained that a contract rezone is
different. There is a question of fairness about this which is different than mandating something.
Councilmember Lewis would like to know more about the City of Kent's policy/discussion about it.
The Lakeland residents are looking at this map and are saying this is owner occupied versus
rental. They assume all multi family is rental. He mentioned what he believes to be the
misunderstanding of the residents. Planning Director Krauss remarked that the residents have a
PAGE 1
MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
OCTOBER 25, 1999
selective memory. Parts of the referred to area was rezoned a minimL~m of 12 years ago - long
before Henderson was planning to build in Pierce County.
Councilmember Singer wondered about the Planning Commission's argument, planning Director
Krauss indicated that there was not a strong argument to lower the density. The Planning
Commission madea case about traffic. The residents' case that they stated repeatedly that
apartments have more students than single family homes and generate more demand for
services. However, Bob Poldevart, Auburn School District and Fred High, Kent School District,
said that this is not the case. Both school representatives refuted the residents' opinions.
Another issue brought up by the residents was related to traffic. They said the traffic is bad and
getting worse and the City is handling traffic badly. The City cannot handle the multi family traffic
the project would generate.
Traffic Engineer Mullen stressed that the proposed apartment project can indeed be
accommodated at this density without impacting the LOS at any intersection. The residents'
argument is without merit. The intersection involved will not come near capacity. This is not an
LOS issue.
Councilmember Singer referred to the GMA and its mandated requirements for multi family
housing. The City could have a problem if the high density areas are removed. Mayor pointed
out that the City is doing well in its compliance with the GMA. Planning Director Krauss offered
that the senior housing project near Fred Meyer helped the City to meet its GMA requirement.
The City is left with a situation that you "shall" and no resources for the City to accomplish.
Builders will build what they can make money on.
Chairman Borden inquired about offering an incentive to build medium density rental and high
density single family. Planning Director Krauss indicated this would be a modification to the
Zoning Ordinance. He is not sure you can do this. The high density designation is less of an
incentive because the size is 18 units per acre and a lot of the projects do not achieve this.
Medium density is 10 to 12 units per acre. Councilmember Lewis asked if there is a solution.
Planning Director Krauss said that the City will need to provide reasons to make the change.
Chairman Borden suggested using the poor condition of Oravetz Road as a reason for the
change.
Planning Director Krauss asked why is it less dangerous to have single family homes versus multi
family. Councilmember Lewis wondered if the circumstances of the area count. Residents say it
is a blind corner and they cannot see oncoming traffic. Planning Director Krauss pointed out that
when a site is developed, grading is done which would help the site distances. Councilmember
Singer wondered if the change would be more of a buffer between the high density and single
family designations.
When the Comprehensive Plan was created, there was no school or park there, remarked
Chairman Borden. Planning Director Krauss remarked this is correct, but the multi family
designation was there. Mayor offered that multi family was all around Kersey Way and up on the
hill as well as on what is now the Auburn Riverside High School site. Henderson bought part of it
for Lakeland.
Chairman Borden wondered about a reason to justify single family or medium density at this
location. Councilmember Singer indicated that she would prefer to see it all single family, but does
not see how this would be a defensible reason for a change. Planning Director Krauss pointed
out the parcel whose property owner has already threatened to sue the City. The developer could
make a case that potential development of the site has been in process for a period of time with a
rezone history and now the City changes the designation. Planning Director Krauss then
explained vesting of property. The court could extend vesting to this property.
PAGE 2
MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
OCTOBER 25, 1999,
Chairman Borden wanted to confirm that the middle property, parcel 3, is the one in question.
Councilmember Lewis suggested the City try to change back to R-1. Chairman Borden likes R-1
for middle piece, parcel 3, and the little parcel loCated immediately to the west. Planning Director
Krauss advised that the owner of the small parcel was not notified of the public hearing and he
has to check with the City Attorney regarding notification to the owner.
Chairman Borden remarked that there are enough apartments in the south end of town and no
more apartments should be located south of the river. Councilmember Singer offered that the City
has to allow apartments because of the cost of housing and because of the GMA mandates.
Councilmember Lewis asked if there are any incentives for condominium development for people
who are empty nesters. This is needed and he would like to see it occur. Councilmember Singer
advised that if the City does not approve apartments, then the City will only have junky apartments
in 20 years. She asked what other areas will have apartments. Chairman Borden said that all the
apartments will impact the corner of 41't/Ellingson, and East Valley Highway and Lakeland Hills
Way.
Traffic Engineer Mullen said that on 41St/Ellingson, the LOS was dropped to F. VVhen the Lake
Tapps Corridor project is open and A Street is improved, these may relieve some stress on 41st
Street.
Chairman Borden asked if apartments contribute to park fees. Parks & Recreation Director Deal
said that Mill Pond project will not because it is on property originally part of Lakeland which put in
the park at the top of the hill and at Mill Pond. Therefore, the park contribution requirement is
satisfied.
Councilmember Singer wondered if this was a strong enough argument to support the change.
Chairman Borden believes this is an opportunity to do something that Council wanted to do one
year ago. Planning Director Krauss spoke about the notification requirements to the property
owners. Two parcels were notified prior to the Planning Commission meeting. The Planning
Commission recommended single family on parcel 3 because of its exposure to lower density
residential. The other parcel kept its designation.
Councilmember Lewis said that he could not argue with this either. He has more concern about
market forces directly affecting the change. He cannot argue about changing the vesting.
Mayor asked what type of constraints can be placed on development and on the quality of the
development. Planning Director Krauss said this is the dichotomy about the issue raised with
Council. Council says the City needs high quality executive housing, but puts efforts into keeping
costs down and the question is which do they want. In terms of quality of development, the
projects have to meet the building code. Better standards such more landscaping, architectural
design or recreation facilities could be added; however, these all increase costs.
Councilmember Lewis asked if there is a quality standard for the Lakeland master plan. Planning
Director Krauss does not believe there is. This was mentioned/discussed in the Pierce County
area and the City adopted County's standards for the Lakeland Hills south. He believes this is
contained in the legal documents relating to Lakeland South.
Chairman Borden asked if there is a consensus to go along with the Planning Commission's
recommendation. Councilmember Singer said yes, if it is reviewed by the City Attorney. Planning
Director Krauss will present the information to the City Attorney to see if the small parcel west of
parcel 3 can be added.
PAGE 3
MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
OCTOBER 25, 1999
Chairman Borden reported that the other issue is transportation (referred to in PfT #11) and the
choice between the two types of LOS. The question asked, said Planning Director Krauss, is if it
is possible to adopt the corridor LOS without impact fees. He thought there might be a problem
inherent with this and asked Traffic Engineer Mullen to discuss at the meeting.
Traffic Engineer Mullen said it is possible, but is not recommended. If the City goes to corridor
LOS it is highly likely that development seen so far will eventually drop the corridor LOS. it will
take several developments over.a period of time. The last guy in will have to fix the entire corridor
and the cost is far out of proportion to their incremental impact to the corridor. It is impossible for
that person to fix. Other developments are contributors to problem, but have not contributed to fix
the problem. The LOS will continue to deteriorate and staff gave the Committee a revenue stream
on this. The City does not have financial wherewithal to maintain.
Councilmember Singer wondered why this is an issue since the impact fees have not been
passed yet. Councilmember Lewis is under the impression that the City is now acting on a semi-
corridor LOS set up. The City had projects lately located on the south end that were discussed as
having negative impacts. Traffic Engineer Mullen indicated that the corridor LOS system/standard
is not new. The City has a corridor system now which is not the controliing standard now.
Councilmember Lewis said there is somewhat of a corridor system now. The City can collect
mitigation fees now for the immediate area. is staff talking about a further change of the corridor.
He wondered where the threshold is being surpassed.
Planning Director Krauss remarked that the City is not using the corridor LOS now; it is not used
for developers because the City uses the intersection now. Some developments impact a series
of intersections. This may appear to be a corridor, but is not. Traffic Engineer Mullen indicated
that a series of individual intersections are impacted in the corridor, not the corridor itself.
Councilmember Lewis wanted to clarify that currently the City is not using the full corridor system,
but using intersection system along the corridor. Except for enticing large developments, why
should the City go to the corridor LOS. If the impact fees do not trip the threshold, then it would
not matter.
Traffic Engineer Mullen announced that realistically it is a better way to manage through the
corridor of different lengths. The City has chosen to manage traffic as a corridor. The City use
now is isolated intersection LOS and the level is dropped at critical intersections. The City should
not abandon the isolated intersection LOS. The corridor LOS is not the controlling factor. With
impact fees, you do not have to look at isolated intersections. Staff is proposing both options
because staff does not know if Council will pass the traffic impact fees. This way, staff has an
alternative option to address Council's action.
Councilmember Lewis noted that he is still looking for more information relating to traffic impact
fees because he is uncomfortable with information received. Planning Director Krauss
commented that the two options can still be passed and forwarded to Council. Staff prepared the
options predicated on the knowledge that Council was due to act on traffic impact fees, but this
has not happened.
Councilmember Lewis wondered if it is written that the City can do either. Planning Director
Krauss said the City could implement the two options in the Comprehensive Plan and use one
option now and second option later when and if impact fees are enacted. This can be checked
with the City Attorney.
Chairman Borden indicated that she does not support lowing the LOS at intersections. She would
support other options. Without the impact fee option, the City is lowing LOS at intersections.
PAGE 4
MINUTES Of PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
OCTOBER 25, 1999
Traffic Engineer Mullen remarked that the LOS recommendations are slightly lower than what the
City has today.
Councilmember Singer asked Chairman Borden if the City should deny development because
roads are at capacity. Chairman Borden said that some intersections can be improved, but
someone has to pay for the improvements. Councilmember Lewis reported that if a project comes
up and the intersection can be improved, then the development has to make the improvements.
In most cases, the City is looking at what it has now. Chairman Borden remarked that currently
the only developer who pays is the developer who trips the standard LOS will continue to
deteriorate and have to lower the system. Councilmember Singer voiced that this is why impact
fees are necessary.
Councilmember Lewis referred to option A or option B as mentioned previously. Planning Director
Krauss this could be done on the Council floor. Chairman Borden remarked that she wants one
option because the other option includes lowering the LOS standards.
Councilmember Singer moved, and Councilmember Lewis seconded, to bring the
recommendation relating to LOS for both options forward to Council with corridor LOS based on
passage of impact fees. Councilmember Lewis moved, and Councilmember Singer seconded, to
recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendments and forward onto City Council.
Councilmember Lewis stated that he agreed with the Planning Commission on CPM #4 with the
additional parcel west of parcel 3, with the approval of the City Attorney.
Councilmember Singer asked Planning Director Krauss if there was any background information
relating to the other Comprehensive Plan amendments. Planning Director Krauss indicated that
the amendments are fairly minor in nature. The Planning Commission supported staff's
recommendation on these amendments. Testimony was received from Jeffrey Oliphant, Auburn
Marketplace, who was supportive of the changes/modifications to the ANBAP. Mr. Oliphant did
withdraw several of his amendment requests.
Recreation Class and Park Rental Facility Fees
Parks & Recreation Director Deal distributed a handout relating to these fees to the Committee.
The Legal Department is drafting an ordinance for Council's review. The fee increase would be
about five to seven percent. The reason for the increase is because instructors cost more and are
harder to find.
Chairman Borden and Councilmember Lewis both recommended that this be submitted to'a vote
of the people. Parks & Recreation Director Deal is concerned about what will happen if the fees
are taken to the people for a vote. They are struggling to keep the existing instructors. The
ordinance would give a "not to exceed" amount for the classes. He said that in the past they
could ~djust the rates via an ordinance. About five or six years ago an ordinance was crafted as a
template for the fees.
Chairman Borden expressed concerned about people learning of the fee increase and thereby
vote for 1-695. She referred to an article in the paper about the City of Renton passing increased
fees prior to 1-695. Parks & Recreation Director Deal remarked that fees are established for the
classes and they keep these fees. However, they may offer six classes instead of eight classes.
They would have to offer less classes.
Councilmember Singer offered that if 1-695 passes, the votes say that taxes should be cut.
Chairman Borden said that she did not mind voting for the fee increase, but was concerned about
the appearance of voting for an increase prior to 1-695. Parks & Recreation Director Deal said
that they could live without the fee increase and would become creative by reducing class length
PAGE 5
MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
OCTOBER 25, 1999
and number of classes. Councilmember Lewis added that 1-695 passes, make sure the Parks
and Recreation Department is responsible in reducing classes.
A discussion occurred relating to the cost of getting an item on the ballot for voters and the
process for this if 1-695 passes. Parks & Recreation Director Deal said the fee formula could be
taken to the people. Mayor mentioned that the super majority process may be required for this as
it is required for levies, bonds and special fees.'
Councilmember Lewis suggesting holding off on voting for the fee increase because of concern
about the appearance of approving this prior to the vote on 1-695.
CONSENT ITEM:
1. Liquor License Application for Special Occasion
The Committee consented to the request.
INFORMATION ITEM:
1. Hometown Heroes Program
Parks & Recreation Director Deal provided information on this program and then showed an
example of the plaque to be presented. Councilmember Lewis believes the program is an
excellent idea.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Councilmember Singer requested an update on the Downtown Master Plan. Planning Director Krauss
remarked that staff is trying to put this together. A draft plan was prepared, an ElS is being developed,
and comments are being compiled. Staff continues to work with the consultant on the plan.
Councilmember Singer asked Parks & Recreation Director Deal about the status of cleaning up the
medians on 15th Street NW. Parks & Recreation Director Deal said that the medians have cleaned. Their
seasonal staff is down now. They have projects to get take care of this winter. The weeds will be sprayed
so that the seeds do not germinate in the spring. Counciimember Singer asked that they be maintained.
With no further items to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m.
PCDC~V11N\10B-99
PAGE 6