Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-27-2000MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 27. 2000 The regular meeting, of the Planning and Community Development Committee was held November 27, 2000 in the Council Work Area. Those members in attendance were as follows: MEMBERS PRESENT: Trish Borden, Sue Singer, and Fred Poe STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Lynn Rued, David Osaki, Shirley Aird, Dick Deal, Susan Sagawa, and Patti Zook 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. WSC00-0012- Vintage Hills, LLC Planner I Aird distributed a drawing for Vintage Hills Division 6 and explained the water/sewer certificate process. She outlined City standards and described the temporary access. The applicant is requesting private access tracts also. Staff recommends approval, with conditions, of providing the watedsewer certificate. Staff recommends that the requested deviation from City standards to allow access tracts be denied. She pointed out location of the temporary access and access tracts. Chairman Borden wanted to know why staff thinks the access tract land does not meet warrant an exception. Planner I Aird read the requirement for deviation from the application. Their main argument is because this was allowed elsewhere in Vintage Hills, but applicant needed to show the need was based on unique charactistics of the site. Chairman Borden referred to "distinct discontinuity" language in the City policy and wanted clarification of what this means. Assistant Planning Director Rued mentioned that this standard was put in because, using as an example, a neighborhood plat might have different'width of streets, and the need to get proposed development standards close to adjacent development standards. Councilmember Poe wanted to know what portion of the tract is developed. Planner I Aird pointed out that further to the south it is developed. Councilmember Poe asked if Duberry Hill is being developed, and if Ridge of Willow Park is built. Planner I Aird replied yes. Councilmember Singer asked for the reason that City does not allow access tracts. Lynn pointed out that the Land Division Ordinance clearly says each lot in a subdivision has to have frontage on public streets. Chairman Borden opened the public hearing. Paul Britton, representative for Vintage Hills, said that when he requested modification to City standards for access tracts, he did not submit a drawing. The current request is the same situation as in early division of Vintage Hills. He spoke of the trouble with trying to satisfy two different reviewing agencies. Access tracts are consistent with what is being developed in the Lea Hill area and are preferred by King County. They have received good acceptance from the public and he likes access tracts. He asked for a continuance to work with staff on the access tract issue. Chairman Borden thinks that the applicant should work with staff regarding this. There was no public testimony. Chairman Borden wondered if public hearing should be kept open until the next meeting. Councilmember Poe said yes; leave meeting open to see what staff and the applicant come up with. Other developments also had issues with access tracts. Councilmember Singer PAGE 1 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 27, 2000 made a motion seconded by Councilmember Poe, to table this item until the next meeting. Chairman Borden concurred. 2. WSC00-0013 - D&E Investments Planner I Aird presented the staff report. Peasely Ridge 1 was approved by the City. This is technically only a four lot short plat. Staff recommends approval with four conditions that were reviewed. Councilmember Singer wondered if the parking prohibition includes the cul de sac. Planner I Aird replied yes. Chairman Borden opened the public hearing. Ken Watanabi, representative for D&E Investments, read the staff report and is available to answer questions. There was no public testimony and public hearing was closed. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Poe to recommend approval. Chairman Borden concurred. The meeting was recessed briefly and reconvened in the Council Work Area. ACTION ITEM': 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment #25 Chairman Borden mentioned that questions were raised at the last Council meeting and this was referred back to the Committee. Principal Planner Osaki showed an aerial photo and pointed out highlighted area and then distributed a page size map showing structures in the area. He talked about the City of Pacific's zoning and comprehensive plan map. Pacific has unusual land use designations and their residential designations do not break down into different land uses for multi .family or single family. The.Homes by Judi project is partially in Pacific. He spoke about the area's topography. Councilmember Poe wanted to know why time is being spent on this when Council approved deleting Comprehensive Plan designations for areas outside Auburn's PAA elsewhere. Principal Planner Osaki acknowledged that showing land use designations outside Auburn gave a misleading idea of the PAA. This change is proposed because of discussions between Auburn and Pacific about annexing this area. Councilmember Poe said the annexation would eliminate problems for both communities. Planning Director Krauss commented that it does not make sense for area to remain Pacific. Pacific's new mayor apparently now believes that Auburn should provide Pacific with uninterruptable water. Councilmember Poe expressed concern about additional multi family areas and a number of residents in Lakeland are concerned about City's past actions. Councilmember Singer pointed out a "kidney bean" shaped parcel that she believes is inappropriate for single family development because it is on an arterial. Planning Director Krauss acknowledged there are problems with developing parcels at this location, so moderate density residential may be appropriate. Assistant Planning Director Rued commented the site is not large enough for a PUD which requires 10 acres. Moderate density residential is R-3, duplex. Chairman Borden wondered if duPlexes are preferable to multi family. She wondered why Auburn should get involved in this discussion especially if Auburn is not going to annex. Assistant Planning Director Rued advised that Pacific could agree next month that they want this portion to be part of Auburn and it would be advisable to have a process in place. Churches are permitted outright in the C-1 zone. It is proposed as light commercial for professional office and retail, but does not allow auto repair. Chairman Borden suggested going with moderate density residential PAGE 2 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 27, 2000 for the whole area because it is important to encourage less density, but would this encourage townhomes and duplexes. There was brief discussion about Homes by Judi development that is located partially in Pacific. That project will be vested with Pacific's approvals. The Committee consensus was to go forward with the change from high to moderate density residential designation. DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1. Code Enforcement Assistant Planning Director Rued informed Committee that the City's Code Enforcement Officer is retiring this February and that position is currently under management of the Building Official. The Planning Department has volunteered to take over this function beginning next year. The Planning Department would take over land use code enforcement and nuisance issues. All construction and building code issues will stay with the Building Official. Planning staff are currently looking at some ordinances for enforcement process and nuisance laws. Staff would like to be more proactive in enforcement of code issues. Very few cases have been taken to Hearing Examiner for resolution. Staff wants to have code enforcement chapter more streamlined and stiffer penalties for those who do not want to conform. The intent is to get people to comply, with fines to persuade compliance. The nuisance laws are from 1957. He wanted to.get the Committee's direction on the matter. Councilmember Singer likes the idea as posed by Assistant Planning Director Rued. Councilmember Poe asked for information about typical land use and nuisance. Assistant Planning Director Rued said that land use issue is property not in conformance with the Zoning Ordinance. Nuisance is tall grass, junk, abandoned cars, campers on front lawn, sight distance issues because of trees, etc. Councilmember Poe agreed that the nuisance issues need to be addressed. Chairman Borden thanked staff for keeping Committee informed. Councilmember Singer asked if something could be written that states car repair businesses cannot work on cars in the streets. Assistant Planning Director Rued said this is in the Zoning Ordinance itself. Councilmember Singer wondered who will handle building code violations. Planning Director Krauss this function will still remain under the Building Official's jurisdiction. Planning Director Krauss commented that the revised code enforcement process will not result in any new FTEs. Legal assistance is being used to get the revised process up and running and make sure there is legal backup. Councilmember Singer referred to property on 9t" and I Streets and asked if it was City-owned. Councilmember Poe said the site looks like a garbage pit. Planning Director Krauss agreed that there is not a good inventory of all City-owned land, or the purpose of City-owned land. There have been discussions about how to resolve this. Parks and Recreation Director Deal offered that open spaces need to signed, inventoried and inspected. He said that access to the property on 9th is via private property. Assistant Planning Director Rued said this parcel is leftover from years ago when 10th Street was proposed as a through street. Councilmember Poe commented that it is a good idea to split the code enforcement duties because the Planning Department is better equipped to handle land use issues. 2. Desiqn Review Criteria Chairman Borden had requested that this matter be on agenda for initial discussion. She was horrified to see the "plans" of the proposed Mill Pond Apartments at Lakeland. She believes having design review criteria would help avoid problems. Planning Director Krauss reminded PAGE 3 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 27, 2000 Committee this idea was posed before and staff talked about site plan review years ago, but there was not a lot of support then. He does strongly support the site plan review process. Other jurisdictions have a site plan review process to maintain their community design standards. The process does provide more flexibility for landscape and screening issues above what is in the code. The process would be done administratively because this is quicker and works for other cities. A design board often has architects and artists and consensus is seldom reached. New development would be representative of the City and sensitive to adjacent uses. The process would allow a better job of getting a development that looks attractive. He then mentioned the North Auburn Business District design criteria that has helped to get attractive buildings such as the Valley Bank, day care and doctors' offices. There would be a certain amount of work entailed to implement the program. He wanted to get input from the Committee to see if they now support the idea of design review. Chairman Borden wondered about the process to review a project. Assistant Planning Director Rued said that most projects require SEPA review and a site plan now. The process would require more information on the site plan and some architectural information also. It would be reviewed concurrent with SEPA review of the project. It would be one more approval of the project before issuance of building permit. Chairman Borden wondered about types of design review. Assistant Planning Director Rued used overheads and pointed out design review guidelines to improve visual quality and integration of site construction through the use of fences, buildings, and landscaping. Every project would have site plan review, but some exceptions were mentioned. This would be an additional regulation, but would not lessen the other standards. The intent is to get guidelines down on paper to give architects and developers an idea of what is allowed for standards for building orientation, building facades and rooflines to make compatible with adjacent neighborhoods, colors and materials, signage, screening, landscaping, architectural compatibility, site lighting, parking design/site access, pedestrian circulation, site grading and drainage. Currently, detention ponds are not an attractive amenity, but could be integrated into development as an amenity. Planning Director Krauss mentioned that the SEPA review process does not have site plan review process built in. Councilmember Poe supports the idea and believes that commercial projects and apartment projects should be targeted. Assistant Planning Director Rued will continue to fine tune the criteria and presents drafts to the Committee. Councilmember Poe requested the Committee to review again the information on panhandle lots. He spoke of the need to look at ability to be more flexible and there were discussions regarding some unique parcels of land versus new development. Single family development should be encouraged. There should be help for single home development versus some other projects. He spoke of the need for more quality in multi-family projects that are developed. Chairman Borden inquired about the time frame for enacting the process. Planning Director Krauss said that code enforcement is a Council priority that needs to be up and running. Assistant Planning Director Rued commented that site design is part of the Zoning Ordinance and has to go through the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission is backlogged with review of the Downtown Plan and Sensitive Areas Ordinance. Councilmember Singer inquired about resurrecting impact fees. Planning Director Krauss reminded the Committee that traffic impact fees go through the Public Works Department and parks impact fees through Parks and Recreation. Councilmember Singer wondered about reviewing them at the same time. Chairman Borden remembers the parks fees as being Iow and the traffic fees were based on corridor and LOS. PAGE 4 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 27, 2000 Chairman Borden reiterated that staff has received encourages from the Committee for the revised code enforcement process and design review criteria. Committee also encourages the review of impact fees again. Discussion occurred of where parks impact fees was tabled and what materials reviewed by City Council previously. INFORMATION ITEM: 1. Artwork at Transit Station Parks and Recreation Director Deal mentioned that an artist is working with the team and Susan Sagawa is available to give more information. Ms. Sugawa gave background information and said the project is not ready for Committee review. Sound Transit has fast track for completion of the project. She wanted to give Committee an idea of what is being planned for the area. The design work must be finished by December 19. She described the concept and distributed drawings of various concepts. There will be 100 trees in plaza so it will look like an orchard, colored tile with concrete layering. Councilmember Singer wanted to know who made the decision to turn plaza into an orchard and now the plaza cannot be used for public gatherings. Ms. Sagawa said the plaza is large and there will be enough room for activities. The artist will come back December 11 with a tighter design concept. Focus will also be put on planter design. Planning Director Krauss said the plaza will have overstory trees and there was discussion with team about what the space should be because the site will be noisy and site will not be conducive to music. Possibly, a farmers market will be there on the weekends. He was not involved in the art issues. The pavement treatment, whatever it is, will be brought into the parking garage building. Parks and Recreation Director Deal said there is $100,000 budget for artwork design from Sound Transit and do art integrated into site now as much as possible so it can be integrated into the hard surface now. Planning Director Krauss said no City funds are involved in the artwork. Chairman Borden said it is hard to conceptualize the design and is concerned that the design not be gaudy. She is concerned about the intense colors that might be used. Ms. Sagawa said the concrete colors will be subtle. Councilmember Poe generally likes the concept idea, but is concerned about the atmosphere in the area on dark rainy nights. Parks and Recreation Director Deal said the trees will be uplighted. Councilmember Singer again inquired whose idea for the plaza concept. Planning Director Krauss said that Vickie Scurry works on Sound Transit contract and worked with Arts Commission on the design. Councilmember Singer referred to the tile and asked if the Art budget is paying for this. Parks and Recreation Director Deal said the paving is brick pavers and as of now the Art budget is not paying. If something different is done, the budget is soft and no decision made yet on tree variety. Councilmember Singer wondered if Sound Transit will maintain the trees and plants. Planning Director Krauss replied that the City is responsible for the retail space and shared responsibility of parking spaces. Sound Transit is responsible for everything else. With no further items to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m. PCDC\MIN\I 1B-2000 PAGE 5