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