Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-24-2003MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 24, 2003 The regular meeting of the Planning and Community Development Committee was held February 24, 2003 in the Council Work Area. Those members in attendance were as follows: MEMBERS PRESENT: Trish Borden, Sue Singer and Stacey Brothers STAFF PRESENT: Sell, and Patti Zook Paul Krauss, David Osaki, Shirley Aird, Aaron Nix, Dan Scamporlina, Dennis The meeting was called to order by Committee Chair Borden at 5:00 p.m. ACTION: PUBLIC HEARING: 1. WSC03-0001 - Ric Banchero Planner Aird presented the staff report. The applicant is requesting a water availability certificate for a single lot to be used for growing of landscaping plants for sale. She gave a brief description of the water/sewer process to those in the audience. She explained that the public hearing is for the purpose of providing water/sewer to the proposal. All land use questions should be addressed to King County. City does not have any concerns with the proposal and the one condition was reviewed. Councilmember Singer asked why the City would need to issue a new watedsewer certificate if there is a change in use. She confirmed that Auburn does not have any say in the King County zoning. Planner Aird said that a single family dwelling does not use as much water as this proposal and if land use is converted from the landscape business to another business there could be an impact on water availability. Michael Lane, 111021 SE 295th Street, spoke with the property owner a couple days ago who said that he would be building in five to seven years when sewers come through the area. Mr. Lane wants a single family home not a duplex or apartments and requested that this be incorporated into the approval process. Chairman Borden advised Mr. Lane that the zoning is the purview of King County, not Auburn. Auburn does not have the authority to tell the County how to zone the property. Ric Banchero, property owner, spoke regarding the proposal. He noted that if the agricultural use changes, then they must come back for revised water/sewer certificate. The business will be their retirement business and the use will not change. Comment made by Mr. Lane is incorrect. The property does not perc and there are restrictions due to Bonneville power lines. Jude Lim, 101126 29th; understands that applicant plans to sell commercial trees and he does not want this in his neighborhood. He does not want a nursery business in the neighborhood because of traffic and children at play. The proposal will not improve the neighborhood and several neighbors are against the proposal. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Brothers, to close the public hearing. Chairman Borden concurred. Councilmember Singer said this is another case of neighbors misunderstanding Auburn's authority of providing water/sewer certificates. In the past, Auburn has written a letter to King County conveying the neighbors' concerns, but this is the most we are able to do. Chairman Borden said this proposal meets the requirement for providing water/sewer certificate. King County is responsible for the zoning of the property. The Committee does recognize neighbors' PAGE 1 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 24, 2003 concerns. Councilmember Singer offered that the district is within King County Councilmember Pullen's district and they should contact him with their concerns. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Brothers, to recommend approval. Chairman Borden concurred.. A letter summarizing concerns will be forwarded to King County. 2 WSC03-0002 - Joe Singh Planner Aird presented the staff report. She provided a brief description of the water/sewer process to those in the audience. The public hearing is for the purpose of providing water/sewer certificate to the proposal. All land use questions should be addressed b King County, not Auburn. The applicant is requesting water and sewer availability certificates for a preliminary plat of 83 single family lots. She talked with the applicant and the engineer about the recommendation and conditions. As the project goes through the King County process, it may change. If applicant cannot meet original watedsewer certificate, he will have to resubmit. Chairman Borden asked what process the project will take with King County. Planner Aird said the project is very preliminary. The development must have water/sewer certificates before going to King County with the preliminary plat. King County will hold public hearings and King County will provide the posting notices. Neighbors can also look at the County's website for information. The City will ask King County to be placed on the notification lists for comments and review of the SEPA. Art Thorardson, 30706 306th Avenue SE, is concerned about being adjacent to 83 houses. It is hard now to get out of his driveway. The road also needs to be improved before adding 83 new homes. He wanted to know how to keep abreast of how the County will handle the project. Planner Aird spoke about the public land use posting board that King County uses and information is also on their website. Neighbors can also contact King County to be placed on the contact lists. Jim Hornsby, 130107 312th, wondered about the direction of water/sewer to the project, the flow of the water, gallons per minute and the impact to his existing service and his rates. Using the overhead map, Planner Aird showed the two alternatives to the water/sewer lines, mentioned that developer might have to build another pump station for one of the alternatives. The City Water Engineer said there will be no change to the rate of flow and there is enough flow to serve the project and not impact any neighboring property. The developer is responsible for extending all lines. Ron Buckholtz, 13227 312th Court, lives on the north side of the project and lives in a landslide area and is concerned about the addition of 83 houses on the landslide area. He is also concerned about traffic impacts. He expressed concern about storm water runoff coming onto his property because the subject property is higher than his property. He wondered about the impact of water/sewer installation. Hans Korve, DMP Engineering, said he is available to answer questions about storm water. He pointed out the steep slopes and pointed out areas that are not being developed. Their development follows King County zoning lines. King County has restrictions on development on steep slopes. He pointed out location of the stormwater detention pond. Jim Hornsby spoke again and asked about the size and capacity of the culvert under Highway 18. Mr. Korve said the culvert can handle the additional capacity. If not, the developer will be required to replace it and this is under King County review. Chairman Borden informed the audience that King County will have public hearings on the project and will address zoning density. Planner Aird offered that Auburn will submit letter to King County that will include comments related to discussions with the applicants and the neighbors' concerns. PAGE 2 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 24, 2003 An unidentified individual spoke of concerns about access to the project and the existing road curve is dangerous. There are a number of accidents along this curve and improvements to the road need to be addressed. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Brothers, to close the public hearing. Chairman Borden concurred. Planning Director Krauss said that Auburn does not have jurisdiction over zoning, but with the granting of water/sewer certificates, the City tries to ensure to the best of its ability that the proposal meets all City development standards. The area is supposed to be annexed to Auburn one day and this is the long term plan. King County has done a less than stellar job of developing infrastructure and Auburn is left holding the bag when the areas are annexed and Auburn must then fix the problems. The City wants to ensure that new development meets City standards related to arterial streets and drainage. City will forward letter of concerns to King County. Councilmember Singer wanted to point out Auburn's ongoing issue with park mitigation fees and the fact that King County has collected fees from Lea Hill area residents, but used the money elsewhere. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Brothers, to recommend approval. Chairman Borden concurred. A letter summarizing concerns will be forwarded to King County. ACTION: 1. Approval of Minutes of February 10, 2003 Meeting Councilmember Brothers made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Singer, to approve the minutes. Chairman Borden concurred. 2. Resolution 3574 - SSS/KC Meals on Wheels Aqreement Councilmember Brothers made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Singer, to approve the agreement. Chairman Borden concurred. 3. Resolution 3575 - SSS/KC Nutrition Project Agreement Councilmember Brothers made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Singer, to approve the agreement. Chairman Borden concurred. 4. Resolution 3577 - Naminq of 15 Acre Park at Lakeland Parks Manager Scamporlina provided a background on the park naming process to include an expanded committee at the request of the Mayor. He described the meetings and reviewed the suggested park names. He described the amenities at the park. Councilmember Singer likes the name Sunset Park, but believes that people will still call it Lakeland Park. Councilmember Brothers does not see people coming to the park from other parts of the City. Chairman Borden likes the park's name which describes the natural beauty of park and the fact that the park name came from the community. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Brothers, to recommend approval of the park name as Sunset Park. Chairman Borden concurred. She thanked staff for going through the public process, but too bad there was not a larger response from the newspaper article. PAGE 3 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 24, 2003 DISCUSSION: 1. Sidewalks Chairman Borden mentioned that sidewalks were briefly discussed at a previous Committee meeting and the issue was discussed about one year ago when the Committee was approached by Dick Scobee Elementary School regarding incomplete sidewalks near the school. Planning Director Krauss said the issue goes back to Frank Currie's tenure as Public Works Director. The map provided in the packet does not show some of the constructed sidewalks. The City had allocated CDBG funds for sidewalk projects in lower income neighborhoods, but the money just accumulated and was not spent, and the funds were then moved to the housing repair fund. He mentioned instances where the City Engineer proposed potential LIDs for neighborhoods which were rejected by the residents. The neighborhood wanted sidewalks, but did not want to pay for the sidewalks. Public Works staff felt they spent a lot of effort without any results and that it was better to expend efforts somewhere else and the sidewalk program was dropped. Only a couple neighborhoods came in and requested sidewalks. Councilmember Brothers would like to have renewed examples of sidewalk as City standard for housing. He wants to see staff come to the Committee and recommend where there is need for sidewalks such as around schools, areas where complaints are received, prioritize the sidewalk program and get idea of the costs based on the priority list. Chairman Borden would like staff to explain how sidewalks are paid for and the approximate cost of sidewalks. Sidewalks should be provided in areas that are major walking corridors. Discussion occurred about areas in the City where sidewalks stop and start. Councilmember Singer suggested an article be placed in the Auburn Reporter asking if the community is interested in forming an LID for sidewalks and see if there is any response. Chairman Borden wondered if it is legal for the City to pay for sidewalks in front of personal house. Planning Director Krauss said if the City is doing major public improvement it could be part of street project and portion is picked up as part of the LID or development cost. Sidewalks are public improvement and may be across property and of benefit to the property and could argue that it is of public benefit. There was a State safety program to install sidewalks around schools, but the State stopped funding the program. Councilmember Brothers commented that in the past Auburn took the position that if there are sidewalks in front of a house the property owner pays, but if infirm, disabled, or Iow income, use CDBG funds. There was a position too that City would subsidize the cost of sidewalks to a greater or lesser extent. He suspects that all neighborhoods will want their sidewalks subsidized and there is the danger of putting City money in something that could be paid for by an LID. Councilmember Singer wondered if the Mayor envisions sidewalks as part of the street utility fund. Mayor said this is a good point. There are three bills in front of the Legislature addressing street utilities. The street utility is primarily for the maintenance and repair to existing facilities. Discussion occurred regarding areas where sidewalks have been impacted due to inappropriate tree selection and tree planting. Councilmember Singer commented that the City needs to do something about dangerous sidewalks. Chairman Borden spoke of areas such as portions of M Street, West Main, Auburn Way South and Auburn Way North that have lots of car traffic and lots of pedestrians, but incomplete sidewalks. The City should be concerned about other areas where there are major corridors for walking and situations where there are no sidewalks. PAGE 4 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 24, 2003 Chairman Borden and Councilmember Singer want to see how improvements could be funded to provide sidewalks around schools. Councilmember Brothers commented that the map shows areas where sidewalks are constructed, but in fact, some of these areas do not have sidewalks. Councilmember Singer suggested involving the PTA and need for coalition if the City is serious about providing sidewalks adjacent to schools. Councilmember Brothers remarked that, based on Committee concerns, there are major arterials that do not have sidewalks, schools that want sidewalks, and determining the cost to remedy these situations. He suggested diving into school groups and major arterial groups and see what the costs are. Assistant Engineer Selle spoke about aerial flyover maps completed two years ago which provide information of where sidewalks are constructed. He said the questions is whether areas with existing curb/gutter have enough right of way and areas where no curb/gutter and what to do and to figure what the standard will be. The City could build on some of the work done in the past. The City has not done much on sidewalks the last couple of years. There was an aggressive LID program in the past. Chairman Borden relayed that the Committee wants to know what are the needs along major corridors and needs around elementary schools beginning with schools that have complained about no sidewalks, and how to determine the costs, and if CDBG funds or LID would be used. The Committee needs better idea of the needs and costs in providing sidewalks. Planning Director Krauss will talk with Mike Fuess, Transportation Engineer, who will come to the next Committee meeting with some answers. ADJOURNMENT: With no further items to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 6:15 p.m. PCDC\MIN\02B-2003 PAGE 5