Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-22-2000MIb2UTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MAY 22, 2000 The regular meeting of the Planning and Community Development Committee was held May 22, 2000 in the COuncil Work Area. ThoSe members in attendance were as follows: MEMBERS PRESENT: Trish Borden, Sue Singer, and Fred Poe STAFF PRESENT: Pau Krauss, Lynn Rued David Osak,Be~, Sanders DJ-" and Patti ZOOK m, , ALSO PRESENT: Mayor Booth The meeting was called to order by Committee Chair Borden at 6:30 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS (in Council Chambers): 1. WSC00-0002 - D& E Investments LLO,, Planner I Sanders presented the staff report. The applicant is only requesting a seweb availability certificate. She provided information on the process. The City needs to ensure that potential development meets City standards. City only has power to say their water and/or sewer is available. All building and construction permits go through King County. The project is for four single fam~Y homes to be located at the northeast corner of 51't Avenue South and South 3.18t~ Street. A I5_rivate drive off of South 3180' Street will provide access. This is a straightforward request and no modifications from City standards are needed. Jeff Roscoe, Sewer Utility Engineer, provided brief information on Peasley Ridge, a 54 lot subdivision located on the south side of South 318t~ Street. Peaseley Ridge will build the pump station. In the future when Auburn extends the new lines into the region, the pump station will be removed and a gravity line installed. The pump station has been in the works for two years. Other property adjacent to Peaseley Ridge is also developing now because of the pump station. Chairman Borden inquired if the City limits are one-quarter mile away, how far does it take to drive from City limits to this development. Planner I Sanders believes it is about one mile or 1.5 miles. Dennis Riebe, 32003 54t" Court South, lives in the area. He does not have any specific pros or cons about the request, just lots of questions. He asked if any other subdivision action was filed with King County. In the event the pump station does not go through, what will the applicant have to do. Planning Director Krauss advised the applicant has not yet applied to King County. King County requires provision of water and/or sewer availability certificates for development to be granted by the City before developer can submit application to County. King County accepts water/sewer availability from Auburn. Roscoe commented that if Peasley Ridge does not go in and if the pump station is not built, then this developer would have to build something similar in this location. This could be a condition to the certificate. Judy Hastings, 31810 56th South, spoke of a water line put in to serve a very large home and i's concerned about water pressure which she maintained is Iow for the area. She wanted to know if there is enough water pressure in the area to accommodate additional homes. She is concerned about assessment fee because of the sewer line. Sewer Utility Engineer said the City is not the water purveyor for the area. They should relay concerns about water pressure to Lakehaven Utility District. Planning Director Krauss said that Lakehaven goes through the same process as Auburn and has to provide water availability certificate to King County. Sewer Utility Engineer explained that only a developer sewer extension is occurring here. No assessments will be made to individual properties. He spoke of the developer payback process. King County Health Department will require homes to hook up to sewer if septic fails. If this occurs, the homeowner would then have to pay the assessment to the City. PAGE 1 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MAY 22, 2000 Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poe to close the public hearing. Chairman Borden concurred. Councilmember Poe suggested that a condition regarding the pump station be added to the certificate and agreement. Sewer Utility Engineer said this can be added to the documents. Chairman Borden informed the audience that this is the first step in the process. The developer needs to know he can get service from the City before going forward with the project and submitting plans to King County. Councilmember Poe made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Singer to recommend approval with the addition of a condition regarding the pump station. Chairman Borden concurred. Mayor Booth suggested that people get in touch with Sewer Utility Engineer regarding where the water and sewer lines are going. Councilmember Poe reiterated that the City is only approving the water and/or sewer certificate for the project, not the actual project development. WSC00-0003 - Bella Homes Planner I Sanders presented the staff report, This proposed project is on Lea Hill. She described access on the cul de sac. The applicant is requesting three modifications to City standards. Chairman Borden wanted to know how to get to lots 13 an 14. Using the site plan, PlannerJ Sanders pb_inted out how to get to lots 13 and 14. Planner I Sanders read the criteria to be met relating to sidewalks and read the modification. The modification for lots 13 and 14 was read. She reviewed the criteria and then reviewed the conclusions on page 4. Staff is recommending approval with two conditions. Regarding the first condition, Councilmember Singer asked what is meant by "substantial buildings". Planner I Sanders said the wording refers to several houses which she pointed out on the site plan. Ken Williams, land use consultant and representative for the applicant, spoke regarding the modification requests. The sidewalk issue was explained well by staff. Regarding the cul de sac, with additional condition of 14"~ Street road stub, it renders cul de sac situation temporary. As extended south to Carrington Meadow, it will not exceed City standard for maximum length. The site is constrained because part of the area is taken up by power lines. Regarding the third modification request relating to access length, they do meet the criteria to grant the modification. He spoke of topography constraints on the site. Regarding the third modification to driveway length to lot 13 and 14, could have kept isolated lots and extended road, but not justified for two lots because of impervious road and would create drainage impacts. Placing the two lots at the other end of cul de sac would require extra fill material. Applicant believes they meet criteria one because of constraints on the property and power lines. Assistant Planning Director Rued referred to lots 13 and 14 and said the issue is two-fold. One standard is that each lot must have 25 feet of frontage on street. Panhandle lots are allowed, but limitation is 100 feet. The larger issue is allowing access to lots 13 and 14 under the power lines. This is a significant power distribution corridor and could make access impossible in the event of an accident. Staff recommends not providing sewer to lots 13 or 14 unless access is from the north. Chairman Borden inquired about fire protection on lots 13 and 14. Assistant Planning Director Rued pointed out there is one way in and increased risk of the access being interrupted. Mr. Williams, referred to the two lots and said applicant can still provide 12 lots. They could live without the two lots. He spoke of the Growth Management Act and inflll development. Councilmember Poe asked what direction the sanitary sewer goes. Mr. Williams said south up 112th which is a requirement from City staff. He then gave the location and route of the sewer. PAGE 2 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MAY 22, 2000 Referring to the site plan, Councilmember Poe inquired about the area next to lot 12 not being used. Mr. Williams said the road goes downhill in an easterly direction. He spoke of the topography in the area. Councilmember Poe asked about the possibility of 116th Street right of way dedicated. Mr. Williams said this is related to availability certificate to dedicate 116th Street right of way. Assistant Planning Director Rued advised that the drawings do not show what is happening under the power lines. It is not clear if this is open space or part of Tract A. Councilmember Poe wanted to know what designation the area would have. Mr. Williams said it is open area and will be maintained by property owners. Regarding the potential for any future lots, they cannot do more than 14 lots because of the King County zoning and Comprehensive Plan. They need a certain amount of undeveloped/open space. Robert Legrand, 29706 112th Avenue, is on a community well and is concerned about wells during construction. He is concerned about future drainage problems. Four families are on wells at this location. He is concerned about the roadstub that is projected to be located across private property. Planning Director Krauss advised that when working with plats, streets and utilities need to be able to be_extended. He spoke of the need to lay out a street pattern that makes sense and there is the requirement that streets be stubbed. The street system needs to connect up. If the area to the south Aoes not develop, it is never extended. There are a number of stub streets around town. Environmental issues could be raised about development under power lines. Development is often plotted up to the lines. It is private property and available for development. Linda Graham lives on this private road. She wants a fence along the entire property to protect their property from the development. They do not want to be liable for accidents on their property. They do not want their private road to be used by people who do not maintain the road. They want their private road to stay a private road. Councilmember Singer asked if fences are automatically built to prevent aCcess to stub streets. Planning Director Krauss replied the City could add a condition regarding a barricade. Ms. Graham reiterated that she wants a fence'to be constructed to keep people, vehicles and animals out. Planning Director Krauss stressed that the City is not in a position to require fences at this location. The issue should be raised with King County staff. The City is trying to make future provisions for the road. Councilmember Poe advised that if the property is private, the residents can sign and install the fence themselves. He suggested the residents contact King County staff and make a request to them when King County reviews the development aspect of the plat. He further stated that it is their property and they can keep people off. Lona Chin spoke to the realignment of the road and the fact that no other streets are to the south. She wanted to know if they have any say about the realignment. Assistant Planning Director Rued cautioned that there are limited choices to be made due to curvature of the road and to the plat. They are limited by City standards. The road would stay a stub street until the property to the south is developed. Ms. Chin believes the stub should be removed because it is not now necessary. Planning Director Krauss pointed out that if the stub is unpaved, and remains unpaved, it eventually becomes someone's "yard" and creates problems later on. Ms. Chin then spoke of concerns about the creek and drainage to her property. Planning Director Krauss advised that the City does not have detailed wetland information on site plans provided by the applicant. This concern should be related to King County staff. Barbara Kayland, asked about disturbance of vegetation and the effect on septic systems. Assistant Planning Director Rued said that the applicant will prepare an environmental checklist for King County review. Impacts on the adjacent property will be addressed. He then explained the checklist application process to the audience and provided information on the comment PAGE 3 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MAY 22, 2000 periods. King County is required to post notices and mail notices to the adjacent property owners. King County will also ensure that the large public notice signs are erected. Kurt Larsen asked about future development of 112th Avenue including potential widening. Planning Director Krauss explained that King County has allowed a tremendous amount of development on Lea Hill and has collected great amounts of money from developers. However, this has not translated to improved roads, parks or utilities in the area. Eventually, the area will be annexed to Auburn and this needs to be planned for. City Council is concerned about a number of issues that Auburn will inherit from King County because King County never upgraded. He is unsure about future widening of 112th. Very few roads go through east/west or north/south in this area. There are not a lot of alternatives. This is the possibility that 112"' will one day have to be four lanes whether King County or Auburn does the improvement. Mr. Larsen wanted to know how the cost per foot is decided for water/sewer. Planning Director Krauss explained that when the City accepts the improvements, the developer has to verify cost to City satisfaction. The City wants to insure the cost is consistent with known prices in the market. The facility then becomes Auburn's. At such time as people want to hook up, the City establishes the fair share cost which is paid to the City and back to the developer. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poe, to close the public hearing. Chairman Borden concurred. Chairman Borden mentioned that comments relating to well caPacity, private road, wetlands and drainage will be forwarded to King County staff. Councilmember Poe advised the audience to contact King County with their concerns. Chairman Borden is concerned about panhandle lots and access under power lines and not meeting current City development standards. Assistant Planning Director Rued remarked that the issue is not the length. The only access to the two lots is under the power lines corridor. Staff's recommend might be different if this was not in the equation. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poe, to recommend approval with conditions as outlined and forwarding a letter to King County expressing concerns. Chairman Borden concurred. WSCO0-O004 - Harbour Homes Planner I Sanders presented the staff report: The applicant is only requesting a sewer availability certificate for 18 single family homes. No modifications were requested. The same language regarding the pump station can be added to the certificate and agreement. Bill Shoyer,-received maps, but did not show lot sizes and he is concerned about density and size of lots. Planner I Sanders said the project will meet all applicable King County codes. Mr. Shoyer wanted to confirm that he will have opportunity to comment when the project is before King County. Planning Director Krauss advised that adjacent property owners will receive a notice of application regarding the plat. There will also be on site positing using large signs. He stressed that Auburn is not the land use authority - King County is the land use authority. King County review could be up to a year depending on their backlog. Wayne Carlson, the engineering firm's representative, gave information on public input process for the audience. The Growth Management Act requires them to receive a certificate from the provider city. He then gave information on the process. They need the certificates before submitting appropriate applications to King County for review. Complete design is not done until after the availability stage is done. After receive the availability certificate, the environmental checklist and plat application are submitted to King County. He described again the public notification process. The agreement is between the City and the applicant. They are required to PAGE 4 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MAY 22, 2000 build streets, etc., to Auburn standards because Auburn is willing to provide the utilities. There is plenty of opportunity for public input. Ms. Hastings said there are no direct sewer lines that connect to this parcel, so where are the lines coming from. There are no lines to the property at this time. She is concerned about frontage on her property. There are too many developments proposed for this area. She wanted to know the cost to absorb the values of new homes. Chairman Borden informed audience that it will not cost anybody anything because the developer pays for the line. Mr. Riebe said his property abuts to the south. His property fronts along route of gravity line to Peaseley Ridge pump station. Applicant is agreeing to a no protest agreement. He asked about the annexation time line. Planning Director Krauss advised there is no set time line for annexation. The City has historically been willing to wait for the residents to petition for annexation. No annexations are pending on the West Hill. Mr. Riebe then spoke of concerns about an increase in property tax rate because of sewers. Councilmember Poe suggested that Mr. Riebe contact the Assessor's Office for this information. Mr. Riebe then wanted to know who establishes the cost of adjacent properties hooking up. Sewer Utility Engineer said each developer can extend lines to serve a large region or a small region depending on what he needs. One pump station is being put in to serve the region. The City asks for costs associated in permits an_d engineering work.and staff determines benefit to region. Costs for hooking up are associated-with pump station. He then mentioned the latecomers agreement process. Mr. Riebe realizes thff certificate is the first step in the process. Auburn needs to protect citizens frorr~ people out to make a profit and leave the area. The City should impose conditions on granting water/sewer certificates. It is Auburn's obligation and duty to take citizens concerns into consideration. A time line should be put down for installation of the pump station. No latecomers/hookup agreements for those having the line across their property. Councilmember Singer suggested that since the audience actually resides in King County, they should contact King County now because the County is looking at revising their Comprehensive Plan. If the residents want their Comprehensive Plan designation changed, they need to contact King County. Councilmember Singer then asked Planning Director Krauss how much leeway Auburn has. Planning Director Krauss spoke of the State law requirements. The utility has an obligation to serve the area and if it fails to do so the franchise can be lifted. Auburn does not control the land use density in this area. If sewer were unavailablel the project could not go forward. If there is capacity, the City has an obligation to serve. The City does have the capacity to provide the service here. The City has gone further by requiring developers to adhere to the City's more stringent standards. Using the water/sewer certificate process to control King County land use is inappropriate and ineffective. Councilmember Poe referred to Peaseley Ridge which received certificate availability about one year ago and asked about the time frame. Sewer Utility Engineer told of the time frame for doing improvements. Applicant can request a renewal after one year. If the certificate lapses, applicant would have to reapply. Councilmember Poe wondered about a certificate linked to another certificate. Sewer Utility Engineer said the certificates can be conditioned. If developer does not put in pump station, then these developers would need to put in. Councilmember Poe believes this needs to be done since these projects appear to be dependent. Sewer Utility Engineer said the condition can be stated in the preannexation agreement. Councilmember Poe told the audience that regarding cost, the City is not in a position to tell them what it costs to connect. They do not have the design cost. Sewer Utility Engineer said the actual cost is based on the construction cost. Chairman Borden again told the audience the certificate process and meeting procedures. The project must be able to meet City standards, The City is only deciding on water and/or sewer availability and the project able to meet City standards. The City is not providing any land use PAGE 5 MINUTES OF PL'ANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MAY 22, 2000 approvals for the projects. Councilmember Poe stressed that the City has a franchise to serve the area and needs to serve the area. The City has an obligation to serve. Mr. Carlson believes there will be a connection between this subdivision and Peaseley Ridge. He understands that construction drawings were approved for the pump station. Councilmember Poe reiterated again that the City does not have land use control in this area. The City is only providing sewer to the project. Chairman Borden stressed again that the City does not have control over the underlying zoning in King County. Councilmember Singer stressed that tonight's decision tonight is a only small portion of the project. Tonight's hearing is not to decide land use or approval of the project. Planning Director Krauss suggested that audience contact their King County Councilmember or contact the DDES offices in Renton. The developer is required to attest that he meets City standards. The developer must say where the project deviates from City standards. They must meet City standards regarding street width and storm drainage. King County has zoning and land use controls for the area. He then spoke of some proposed changes King County is considering for the area. He again stressed that Auburn is not the land use authority. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poe, to close the public hearing. Chairman Borden concurred. Councilmember Poe made a motion, seconded by Councilmei'nber Singer, to recommend approval with a condition relating to the pump station. Chairman ~orden concurred. - Chairman Borden called for a 10 minute recess at 9:10 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9:20 p.m. ACTION ITEMS: Case No. ZOA0002-00 -Amendments to the City of Auburn Zoninq Code Section 18.04.018 and 18.48.120 to allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) Chairman Borden remarked that this was referred back to the Committee from the May 1't City Council meeting. Assistant Planning Director Rued commented that he is available to answer questions from the Committee. Councilmember Poe read the sited RCW section and recommendations of changes to the Zoning Ordinance. He referred to the phrase, "cannot be a separate freestanding structure ..... "In the Zoning Ordinance, under residential classifications it refers to "guest cottages" as a permitted use in the R-1 zone. He asked the difference between guest cottage and an ADU. Assistant Planning Director Rued explained that when the ordinance was proposed, staff took a conservative approach, lfthe Planning Commission and City Council wanted to make the ordinance more liberal, they can. The intent is to limit to one dwelling unit on the property. The purpose is so that someone cannot bring a mobile home onto the property. Regarding guest cottage, it is not a. separate living unit because it does not contain all the elements of a dwelling unit. Guest cottages usually do not have a kitchen and is not a separate living unit by itself. A guest cottage is detached guest bedroom and bathroom. Councilmember Poe asked if the ADU has to be part of the main residence. Assistant Planning Director Rued replied that the ADU must either be part of the home itself or if large enough a detached garage. Councilmember Poe wondered if the garage would be remodeled. Assistant Planning Director Rued said yes. Regarding parking, the parking for the existing single family home has to meet the existing criteria for single family home. The ADU has to have additional paring space. PAGE 6 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MAY 22, 2000 Chairman Borden referred to parking, and asked why the detached garage. Assistant Planning Director Rued reiterated that staff is proposing a conservative approach to ADUs. A person can build a good sized detached garage and convert it to an apartment. Chairman Borden wanted to confirm that people could build a detached garage and convert it. Assistant Planning Director Rued responded this is possible; however, the ADU ordinance limits the size of the structure. Councilmember Singer wanted to confirm that staff wants to be as conservative as possible since the City has to have an ADU ordinance. Chairman Borden believes the ADU ordinance is a good idea. Councilmember Singer thinks that some people will not get the required permit. Chairman Borden thinks the proposal is great and the City is getting something on the books. She suggested in the future to look at relaxing some of the requirements. However, the relaxing of requirements would not include allowing trailers on property. Assistant Planning Director Rued commented that staff has received requests from someone who has a large enough lot to bring in a single wide mobile home for an in-law. Councilmember Poe asked if staff is trying to permit ADU for family members or for Iow cost housing. If the ADU is for Iow cost housing, the City is already providing its fair share of this type of housing. He objects to the Iow cost housing aspect of the ADU ordinance. He does not want to create any additional Iow income housing in Auburn. He expressed concerns about the effects this would have on neighborhgods. He does not read the RCW was a mandate. Councilme-_mber Poe inquired what other cities have an ADU ordinance. Assistant Planning- Director Rued remarked that most cities have some type of an ADU ordinance. Councilmember Poe again asked what staff is trying to create. Planning Director Krauss replied that ADU would reduce the cost of housing and provide alternatives that do not currently exist. ADU ordinance provides options for the care of family members, and provides options for people to stay in their homes longer. For example, an older person might have trouble maintaining their home, and an ADU could allow a caretaker for the older person. Most cities established ADU ordinances in the mid-90s. He admitted there are probably illegal ADUs in town. The ADU ordinance gives the City a mechanism to make sure that the ADUs meet City Code related to egress, electrical code, etc. King County's intent was to offer flexibility through increased densities in order to maximize use of property. Chairman Borden believes that the ADU ordinance is for older people who may need live-in help or who cannot afford their property taxes. Councilmember Poe suggested that the wording specify the ADU is for a relative. However, Planning Director Krauss said there is no way to prove who is related to whom. Chairman Borden likes the requirement that one of the occupants must be the homeowner. This would prevent having two living units that are not owner-occupied. The City could keep record of the number of ADUs since these require a permit. The City can also monitor for any changes. Councilmember Poe referred to the phrase, "home must be the principal place of residence f(~r the homeowner" and asked for clarification. Assistant Planning Director Rued explained that the homeowner has to live either in the main home or the ADU. Chairman Borden likes the idea of the homeowner being allowed to live in either structure because an older person might want to live in the smaller unit. Assistant Planning Director Rued indicated that he will clarify item A under 18.48.120. Councilmember Poe wondered if the setbacks remain the same. Assistant Planning Director Rued explained that the setbacks will be a little more. He described the exterior entrance requirements. Assistant Planning Director Rued said that the ADU will be returned to Council with the change in 18.48.120 as discussed. PAGE 7 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MAY 22, 2000 With no Case No. ANX0002-00 - Municipal Annexation of P-4 Park in Lakeland in Pierce County Assistant Planning Director Rued presented the staff report. Chairman Borden wondered how you get to this park, and Parks and Recreation Director Deal explained. The park is a passive recreation area. Chairman Borden wondered how far the park is from City limits. Assistant Planning Director Rued replied the park is approximately one-quarter mile from City limits. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poe, to recommend approval of the annexation. Chairman Borden concurred. Resolution 3222 - Agreement for Artwork Parks and Recreation Director Deal presented the staff report. This is a banner project in which kids will be involved in designing banners for Les Gove Park. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poe, to recommend approval. Chairman Borden concurred. Resolution 3223 - Aqreement for Artwork Parks and Recreation Director Deal presented the staff report. An art element will be integrated into the building of the Senior Center. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilme_mber Poe, to recommend approval. Chairman Borden concurred. further iter~s to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. - PCDC~vllN\05B-2000 PAGE 8