Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-28-2000MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 28, 2000 The regular meeting of the Planning and Community Development Committee was held February 28, 2000 in the Council Work-Area. Those members in attendance were as follows: MEMBERS PRESENT: STAFF PRESENT: ALSO PRESENT: Trish Borden, Sue Singer, and Fred Poe Lynn Rued, Betty Sanders, Dick Deal, and Patti Zook Mayor Booth The meeting was called to order by Committee Chair Borden at 6:30 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Chairman Borden introduced the Committee to those present and the public hearing was opened. 1. WSC0026-99 - David Millard Planner I Sanders presented the staff report. Equity Management is proposing to develop a senior manufactured home park. The King County zoning is R4, residential, with four dwelling units per acre. The proposal is just under King County's requirement. The applicant is also proposing a short plat with three lots. One of the lots will remain undeveloped, one is for the existing home, and one will be for the entire park. Water and sewer are available to the site. The main entrance will be from 112th Avenue. She reviewed the one condition. The project's layout meets City standards. There are substantial wetlands op the site which were identified and will have buffers. The water and sewer certificate request can be approved for the reasons outlined in the staff report. The applicant is present to answer questions. She then reminded those in the audience that Auburn only has jurisdiction over water and sewer availability. The City does not permit the project which is the jurisdiction of King County. No land use approvals from Auburn are necessary for the project. Councilmember Poe asked if proposed streets will be private. Assistant Planning Director Rued replied yes as in the City's manufactured home parks. Councilmember Poe asked if the zoning of R4 is equivalent to the City's R4. Assistant Planning Director Rued replied no. The King County zoning allows four dwelling units per acre, which is gross acre, whether or not all of the site is buildable. Chairman Borden opened the public hearing. David Millard, Equity Management, proposes to develop Cambridge Pointe, an affordable manufactured housing project for seniors. The 34 units will have two car garages. He then showed photographs to the Committee of their other projects, Lake Wilderness Villa and Water Gardens. They own the first project and the second project they planned and designed. One of them won an award from the manufactured housing institute. A couple other projects also won outstanding awards. The houses will be on cdncrete runners. He then showed construction photographs. The construction is similar to site built houses. He is excited about the project because it is 8.5 acres in size which is sufficient for a manufactured home community. The existing house is to be segregated off. He described the park's amenities. It will be a gated community to enhance the seniors' security. The are just beginning the development process and have not gone through King County yet. They worked with City staff who reviewed the development. The City and King County codes are different. They now have a site plan that meets City code. They will have a pre-application meeting with King County soon. Their expertise is in quality manufactured housing. He invited the Committee and audience to visit their other projects in Maple Valley. Councilmember Singer asked the applicant if he intends to have walkways around the wetlands. Mr. Millard replied yes, but he is unsure what King County will allow. The required buffers are already in place. They will know more when project is in King County design stage. PAGE 1 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 28, 2000 David Baker, 11112 SE 304th Street, owner of property west of the development asked what interest the City has in a drainage line for surface water that extends on the south side of 304th Street and crosses over and picks up the water that comes north from east side of 112th down to that crossover point. He has seen City inspectors here. Assistant Planning Director Rued said in regards to storm drainage in Lea Hill, most of the systems on site are private. Whatever lines may exist in the public right of way belong to King County. The City has jurisdiction and owns the sewer lines and water lines, but not the storm drainage lines. Wendy Hendrickson, 10611 SE 293r~ Street, does not feet that a senior manufactured home park fits in with the area. There has been a lot of nice development on the hill. This is an inappropriate type of neighborhood to come to the hill. Sandy Voca, 30024 113~h Place SE, objects to the housing. Single family homes in the same property value range are more appropriate. She asked what type of traffic light will be placed at the corner. She asked about sidewalk access for kids going to school. Assistant Planning Director Rued said in regards to street improvements, this site is not in Auburn. As part of the process, the applicant must meet City standards and will have to provide half street improvements such as curb, gutter, and sidewalks for the portion of property that abuts the two streets. Carol Scofield, 29912 114th Way SE, spoke of concerns about the project being contingent upon a conditional use permit from King County. She is concerned about the conditional use permit being compatible or consistent with current planning for Lea Hill within the Growth Management Act. The area will eventually be annexed to Auburn. Joan Evans, 108012 SE 293rd; said that King County does not have a growth plan for south King County. She has been a realtor for 24 years. It is apparent that the south King County has been the County's zoning dump grounds. There is no planning for this area. She has seen both of the applicant's developed parks which are a cut above. King County will have meetings downtown so residents cannot attend. The neighbors can petition King County to come to Lea Hill and speak to the residents. The neighbors won a partial victory because there are 20 fewer homes in Carrington Bluff. Precedent has been set to the west and south with two mobile home parks already in the area. The traffic will be awful with the additional cars getting onto 112th. She spoke about major traffic problems on the hill. Erin Scott, 30037 112th Avenue SE, is concerned about drainage issues. She has two french drains on her property. King County acts like it is going to take of, but the County does not care. Her property cannot ~absorb more water. She spoke about traffic on 112th Avenue. Carrington Meadows will have 500 additional trips on their road. Councilmember Singer asked about the number of trips that trip the need for a traffic light. Assistant Planning Director Rued said this is based on warrants, number of accidents, etc. This is a multi step process. If the City issues water and sewer for this project, it allows the applicant to go to King Ci~unty. They will also have to submit an environmental checklist to the County. The County reviews the traffic and environmental issues. If there are adverse impacts, the County can place conditions. King County will determine ifa traffic light is needed. The public can comment on the environmental review and can appeal the decision. If there is a conditional use permit (CUP) proposed, this is a County public hearing process. The CUP probably has criteria to be met. The neighbors will have two more opportunities to speak to the County about the project. Catherine Sutterfield, 11348 SE 305% viewed the photographs and the project looks nice. However, it appears the two projects involve more land than this site. The project is going to look like a manufactured home park, will not have lush surroundings like in the photographs, and the project will depreciate homes in the area. PAGE 2 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 28, 2000 Nicholas Black, 30112 113th Court SE, is concerned about traffic and proximity to existing development. There-should be harmony of use between the developments. The property lines are too close. He does not want to see his values go down. He stated concerns about the timing of the project because one of the applicant's projects took forever to construct. Increased traffic on 112th was mentioned especially with the opening of 277% Karen Manns, 11221 SE 301st, concerned about property values and traffic on the corner. The public notice posting for the meeting was 8 ½ x 11 paper and asked about sign regulations. Assistant Planning Director Rued said for this hearing the posting was 8 ½ x 11 notices. King County will notify neighbors about the environmental review and for the CUP. Pat Gleason, 30119 112th Place SE, is lot 1 on the map and is concerned about the 10 foot setback and two of the houses being adjacent to his. He is concerned about traffic. He suggested a mitigating condition of not permitting the four houses adjacent to Carrington not put in at all. Jo Linger, 30121 112th Avenue SE, lives across from this project. She spoke about drainage problems. King County was involved, but there is still significant runoff. She spoke about deterioration of property values. Nick Sardowsy, 30010 113th Place SE, wanted to confirm that the Committee only does water and sewer. If the development stalls in the next two years, what happens. Is the City concerned about the lost income from water and sewer. Will the City be concerned about the value of manufactured homes and the tax base these. If the project does not work and the property is later annexed, it will be the City's problem to fix it. Assistant Planning Director Rued responded by saying if the project does not go through, is immaterial to the City. The City does not extend the utilities for developments - developers do this. Nothing is invested by the City. The City makes sure the project is providing the proper site utilities as well as requiring them to meet other City infrastructure requirements such as streets. So when the property is annexed, the City will know that this project will provide correct street standards. In order to receive City water and sewer, the property owner must sign an annexation agreement. Linda Erwin, 11224 SE 306® Place, said it appears the area for water quality control is small. She asked how runoff from the concrete areas will be controlled. Mr. Millard responded by saying that the storm drainage is in the preapplication stages only. There is ½ acre in corner for the detention facility. If more is needed the area will have to expand. At Lake Wilderness the homes sold for $130,000 and these will sell for about $160,000 to $230,000. Susan Johnson, 11107 S 290th , is concerned about infrastructure issue. The traffic is bad and it is dangerous to walk, jog, or bike along 112th. She spoke about the lack of Metro buses for the senior housing. She wanted to know ifCCRs will be in place for the park, and requested to see the CCRs. She asked about the landscaping. Mr. Millard said the photographs show the type of landscaping that will be providedl The CCRs will run with the land and will be submitted to King County. Whether or nol the CCRs become part of the public forum, they will be submitted to King County. Nancy Ells, 29024 111th SE, expressed concerns about education and a large pocket of seniors who will not vote for school levies. This will have an impact on schools. Chairman Borden closed the public hearing. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poe, to close the public hearing. Chairman Borden concurred. Councilmember Poe asked about the 10 foot setback from the rear yard is normal. Assistant Planning Director Rued replied that in King County the rear yard setback is 5 feet. Councilmember Poe remarked that the citizens' comments need to be addressed to King County. In looking at 304th Street, it seems the road will be a residential collector road. It is premature for the City to address the comments. It is PAGE 3 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 28, 2000 premature for the large on-site sign until the project is submitted to the County for review. The City provides water and sewer to the site and the City has a say on street standards. Councilmember Singer wondered about transmitting comments to the County even though these comments are outside Auburn's parameters for resolving. Assistant Planning Director Rued affirmed that comments can be transmitted to the County. Mayor said it may be a possibility to forward a copy of the record to the County. He cautioned, however, that the minutes ate not verbatim - only in summary. He advised the citizens that they need to comment directly to King County. Chairman Borden suggested a letter be forward to King County. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poe, to recommend approval. Chairman Borden concurred. 2. WSC0001-00 - Dennis Johnson Planner I Sanders advised that at the applicant's request, this is being deferred until the next meeting. ACTION ITEMS: These items were acted on as one. 1. Resolution 3182 2. Resolution 3183 3. Resolution 3184 4. Resolution 3185 5. Resolution 3186 6. Resolution 3187 - Auburn Food Bank - King County Sexual Assault Resource Center - Valley Cities Counseling & Consultation - Washington Women's Employment & Education - Emergency Feeding Program - Senior Services Volunteer Transportation Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poe, to recommend approval. Chairman Borden concurred. Councilmember Singer was curious about how similar the services are between KCSARC and VCCC. Chairman Borden thinks the agreements are quite different. KCSARC deals directly with victims of sexual assault, while VCCC deals with clients for various needs. DISCUSSION ITEM: 1. Downtown Plan Update Planner I Sanders wanted to provide a short update. The City has received the third draft of the plan and first draft of the EIS. The documents were received at the same time the Tribe amphitheater documents, so the plan took a while to be reviewed. The Tribe documents were contained in two huge volumes. Councilmember Singer wanted to know who reviews the plan documents. Planner I Sanders said that Planning and Public Works review the document. Approximately 12 people are reviewing different portions of the documents. JeffDixon is the lead person on the EIS review. Planner I Sanders met with the plan's consultant a couple times to review the plan and ElS. There are significant gaps in both. Staff met with the consultant on Friday. Staff needs to see what kind of review will be allowed by the remaining funds in the budget. Chairman Borden wondered if the consultant is saying there is much work to be done yet and not enough funds in the budget to accomplish the work. Planner I Sanders acknowledged that the consultant did not stick directly within the scope of work because some of the work was not in writing. There is the question PAGE 4 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 28, 2000 of going back to the original scope of work. She then mentioned the historic resources which appears to have been forgotten by the consultant. Councilmember Singer inquired if it was a part of the contract, why did the consultant not do it. Planner I Sanders remarked that staff is doing a bit of negotiating now with the consultant. Consultant is working with King County historic landmarks to write a segment because King County has the expertise. Regarding the envirOnmental aspect, staff was expecting a bigger product than the consultant produced. Staff will sit down and determine the alternatives. Councilmember Singer asked if Planner I Sanders believes the market studies are still viable. Planner I Sanders believes the market studies are still viable; however, the numbers will be different. She will confirm with the consultant. Mayor affirmed that the data is still valid because of the way it was gathered. Councilmember Poe asked when Planner I Sanders predicts the plan will be completed. Time has passed without much information or appearance of any progress being done, There needs to be a schedule of when the plan is going to be done. He is on the economic restructuring committee and the members have a sense that nothing much is occurring. The plan needs to get momentum again. Mayor expects the first copy of the report of the economic development restructuring committee to be received in the next two weeks. Planner 1 Sanders agrees with Councilmember Poe's comments and staff did not expect delay to be this long. She acknowledged that the process definitely needs to get going. Councilmember Poe wanted to make it clear that professionals should review the proposed standards and offer comments for consideration prior to adoption of the plan. Councilmembers agreed that the proposed standards should be adopted simultaneously with the plan. Councilmember Singer commented that the task force raised issues about working with the property owners to upgrade their property. She then referred to a letter from Alan Keimig about when SEPA is tripped. She asked if there was any discussion with staff or the consultant about this. Mayor commented that this was discussed frequently and there are a lot of opinions on this. One opinion is that if development triggers 20% it should require a complete evaluation. Chairman Borden mentioned Mr. Keimig's letter in which he suggests using 50% of replacement value instead of 50% of the assessor's value. Councilmember Poe commented that regarding standards, particularly in the right of way, there needs to be leeway for people to operate and code revisions may be necessary to allow updating of buildings. Mayor said there needs to be flexibility for the wise use of property for improvement of the area and development. Councilmember Singer agrees with Councilmember Poe's comments. She asked about design guidelines in the plan. Planner I Sanders stated there are four pages on design guidelines now which staff thinks is inadequate. Councilmember Poe mentioned that an addition to a building should have a requirement to maintain the landscaping. Councilmember Singer wondered if the Committee should look at design standards. 'She is concerned that the plan will be in place and the City will not have time to develop design standards. If this is looked into now, it would provide more time for review. Chairman Borden believes this is'a good idea. Councilmember Poe then suggested getting professional input from outside the City and solicit comments from people who will be working. Planner I Sanders remarked that she has heard architects say they like design standards because it gives them a clear idea of what a city is looking for. It is a good idea to have another pair of eyes see the document. Chairman Borden asked if there are design standards to look at now. Planner I Sanders replied yes and the ADA is seeing them now. However, they are not in draft proposal stage yet. Staff visited Redmond and spent time with their staff. Chairman Borden asked with the plan time line, what about zoning for downtown. Planner I Sanders affirmed there is the six month extension that was just approved. Assistant PAGE 5 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 28, 2000 Planning Director Rued remarked the interim zoning is in place until June because the plan is not done. The final zoning in place will take about six months additional. Planner I Sanders commented that stafftalked about doing design standards after adoption of the plan. Chairman Borden asked if the plan has to go through the Comprehensive Plan amendment process. Assistant Planning Director Rued remarked that the downtown plan would be considered a sub-area plan and can be done at any time. Councilmember Poe stressed the need to set a firm date for completion of the downtown plan. Assistant Planning Director Rued said that staffwill have a better idea of the time flame after they meet with the consultants. OTHER BUSINESS: 2. Correspondence from Al~Keimig Chairman Borden asked for staff's opinion of the 12,000 square foot threshold mentioned in Mr. Keimig's letter. Assistant Planning Director Rued commented that the State has a minimum threshold. Staff recommends no change at this time. Staff relies on the SEPA to mitigate any impacts of a project. He is drafting a letter to Mr. Keimig now. He cautioned that if the threshold is raised, the City cannot mitigate impacts of a project. If the City adopts impact fees, this would help to mitigate a project's effects. Staffis currently working on a sensitive areas ordinance that will have standards for mitigation for tree removal, etc. If the City has impact fees and a sensitive areas ordinance, it will have other options besides SEPA for mitigation of projects. Assistant Planning Director Rued remarked that in dealing with replacement cost, you have to establish a value of existing buildings. The assessed value could be quite Iow, but replacement is high. If you use the replacement cost, you will not get new standards in place because it will not be tripped. Chairman Borden asked about the affect of rehabilitation of downtown because the values may not be too much. Assistant Planning Director Rued confirmed that the replacement cost is huge. Chairman Borden asked if staff will use the square footage. Assistant Planning Director Rued said there are a number of ways to do and a determination of what side of line to fall on. Councilmember Singer wondered what are other communities are doing. Assistant Planning Director Rued advised that other communities are doing what Auburn is doing. Councilmember Poe referred to Mr. Keimig's letter in which he talked about a specific project (dental clinic) that was adding 1,500 square feet and not impacting impervious area. In these cases, maybe different criteria needs to be developed. Assistant Planning Director Rued said there are four areas that deal with assessed valuation: street improvements, zoning, sprinklers, and storm drainage. These are the four main areas that have the 50% rule. Councilmember Singer asked about other jurisdictions using replacement cost versus assessor's value. Mayor remarked that the assessor's value is less than the actual value of the property. Assistant Planning Director Rued confirmed that the assessor's valuation is the easiest way of doing. With no further items to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 8:10 pm PCDC\MIN\02B-2000 PAGE 6