Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-09-2006 PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE JANUARY 9, 2006 MINUTES I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Lynn Norman called the regular meeting of the Planning and Community Development Committee to order at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers located on the first floor of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA. Committee members present were: Member Gene Cerino, Member Nancy Backus; Also present were Planning and Community Development Director Paul Krauss, Community Development Administrator David Osaki, Development Services Coordinator Steve Pilcher, City Attorney Dan Heid, Environmental Protection Manager Aaron Nix, Planner Bill Mandeville, and Planning Secretary Carolyn Brown. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. December 12, 2005 Meeting Mr. Cerino moved to accept the minutes as presented. Ms. Backus seconded. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3-0 III. ACTION A. Ordinance No. 5986 ANX05-0003 for Community of Christ Church. Mr. Mandeville provided a brief background on the annexation of the Community of Christ Church. A February 1, 2006 effective date for the annexation is proposed to allow the property to be on the City's tax rolls for 2006. Page 1 Plannina and Community Development Committee Aaenda January 9. 2006 Mr. Cerino moved to approve Ordinance 5986 and forward to City Council. Ms. Backus seconded. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3-0 B. Ordinance No. 5987 ANX05-0002 for the Stipp Annexation The PCD Committee asked if there had been an update in the proposed number of lots or on the road access for the Stipp or Nichols annexations. Chair Norman wanted to be certain that the information the City has is the most current. Mayor Lewis stated he had received one email about the gate on the road. Mr. Mandeville and Mr. Osaki said to their knowledge there have been no changes but that this is because the City does not have a specific development application to process and review and would not have one until the property is annexed into the City. Mr. Mandeville will follow up with Mr. Coppler and let him know about the annexation process and when the Stipp and Nichols annexations would be considered by the City Council and also to make certain Mr. Coppler is clear about the process by which subdivision applications are reviewed and opportunities to comment. Mr. Cerino moved to approve Ordinance 5987 and forward to City Council. Ms. Backus seconded. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3-0 C. Ordinance No. 5988 for ANX05-0004 the Nichols Annexation Mr. Cerino moved to approve Ordinance 5988 and forward to City Council. Ms. Backus seconded. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3-0 D. Ordinance No. 5979 - Annexation of an existing City owned storm drainage facility on A Street SE at 358th SE. E. Ordinance No. 5980 - Annexation of City owned parcels located south of the BPA power lines between 116th and 118th Avenues SE. F. Ordinance No. 5981 - Annexation of a City owned parcel located on the south side of the Mountain View Cemetery. Page 2 Plannina and Community Development Committee Aaenda January 9. 2006 G. Ordinance No. 5982 - Annexation of a City owned parcel on the west side of 132nd Avenue SE in the 29400 block (the Jacobsen Tree Farm) H. Ordinance No. 5983 - Annexation of a City owned park at the intersection of SE 320th Street and 124th Avenue SE. There was a brief discussion on the annexations. Mr. Osaki stated that these are all for city owned parcels. Mr. Cerino moved to approve Ordinance 5979 through 5983 and forward to City Council. Ms. Backus seconded. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3-0 I. Resolution No. XXXX for the East of SE Main Street Action Plan. Mr. Mandeville said the action plan was developed by staff based on feedback from the neighborhood meetings. No action is necessary tonight so it can be a discussion item. Amended sections of the action plan include comments on sidewalks, historic preservation, and playgrounds just to name a few. For the most part, the problems that were discussed are items the City could resolve. Mr. Krauss added that the process worked well and was gratifying. Mr. Mandeville said at this time the main question for the Planning and Community Development Committee is if it would like to schedule a public hearing on the plan or whether individuals should comment under audience participation at a future meeting. The Committee noted that it wants the public to have an opportunity to comment and ensure everyone has a chance to see the plan and make comments. It has taken staff and the community a lot of time and effort to get to this point. Citizens should specifically be invited to attend the Council meeting both to provide comment and to accept the thanks of the City Council for the work they put into the document. Page 3 Plannina and Community Development Committee Aaenda January 9. 2006 Rather than hold a public hearing, the PCD Committee noted that the next step would be to invite people to the City' Council meeting to speak under audience participation if they wished. Ms. Norman stated it would be a good idea to let people know how the City plans to prioritize the action plan. Mr. Mandeville added that the City of Vancouver has a similar matrix and once a year updates presents the matrix to the City Council. Mr. Mandeville said also the matrix would be published on the City's web site. Mr. Mandeville said the format was developed for that site. There will also be copies available at the Senior Center and City Hall. The Committee liked the format as it was concise and readable. Committee member Backus asked about the phrase "encourage retention of office zones". Mr. Mandeville said this was inresponse to a comment from one of the meetings. It appears that the neighborhood doesn't want a change in the current "residential office" zoning. Ms. Backus asked about "open spaces and recreation" and what the City's involvement might be. Mr. Krauss said that this could be something for the parks board to research. The PCD Committee discussed a setting like Evergreen Heights Elementary School which a.cts as a park in a neighborhood setting. Mr. Krauss stated that once the plan is adopted then staff can work on the specific direction implementing the plan should take. Mr. Mandeville will bring the resolution back to the 2nd PCD meeting in February so that it can be placed on a City Council agenda in March. The draft plan will also be presented to the Public Works Committee at a future meeting. Mr. Heid noted that the City might wish to consider whether or not approval by ordinance is more appropriate.. He explained that an ordinance addresses items that are more permanent in nature. The PCD Committee agreed that it would be acceptable if it comes back in the form of an ordinance rather than as a resolution. IV. DISCUSSION A. Rental Housing New Section 5.22.055 was presented by Mr. Krauss and Mr. Heid. Mr. Heid stated that this proposal was Page 4 Plannina and Community Development Committee Aaenda January 9. 2006 developed in response to a recent court case that upheld an inspection scheme. The case was approved by the Court of Appeals, but the Supreme Court has been asked to review the case. At this time this is an approach that the law will uphold. The City can tie it into the rental business license and will be more assured that inspections will be a tool to use. Chair Norman asked if not having something before, gives the City more access if there are legal concerns. Mr. Heid answered that Code Enforcement can be called in if illegal activity is suspected. This increases the City's ability to secure civil warrants for access. The City can also require the landlord to address problems on rental property. Mr. Heid said, also the landlord can use whatever tools or devices necessary to enter the property. The City can notify the landlord that there is a problem and the property needs to be inspected. This will be the landlord's inspection, and not the City's. The City can use this process to revoke the rental business license. Mr. Heid stated this ties into the original ordinance that set up the business license process. Mr. Heid added that he has not heard from the Rental Housing Association. The PCD Committee indicated that it would like more time to review the draft ordinance. B. Sign Code Update was provided by Mr. Osaki. He stated the Planning Commission public hearing on the sign code was held January 4, 2006 . Mr. Osaki has provided the Committee with the strike out and underline version of the sign code. He has attached a memo that identifies four additional changes that came from the public hearing. The Planning Commission was not comfortable making the recommendations on Real Estate signs. The City received a significant number of similar comment letters from realtors before the public hearing and these were reviewed by the Planning Commission. After the public hearing the Planning Commission decided to keep the real estate sign regulations the same as the regulations in effect right now. This would therefore maintain the status quo with respect to real estate signs. Page 5 Plannina and Community Development Committee Aaenda January 9. 2006 The PCD Committee discussed the Master Sign Plan provision on page 10 of the draft code. Also, discussion occurred regarding the Ad Hoc Sign Committee's recommendation of a 25% administrative deviation on of the size or height of a sign rather than requiring the Hearing Examiner process. Chair Norman said there were some concerns expressed by another council member regarding the size of signs addressed on pages 13 and 16 of the sign code. Mr. Osaki said he will reformat the sign code and return to PCD Committee. Mr. Cerino asked why the special off-premise real estate sign has to go thru Hearing Examiner process (page 6 #F). Mr. Osaki replied that this is existing code language. The PCD Committee discussed the downtown core area and Main Street area. Mr. Pilcher, added this area is being reviewed through the Downtown Design Guidelines process with Mark Hinshaw and that changes to the sign code relative to the downtown area might best await the outcome of that process. Chair Norman asked Mr. Osaki to make the changes and return the sign code to the PCD Committee. Mr. Osaki stated it may be ready to come back to the next meeting in January. C. An update on the Auburn Environmental Park was presented by Aaron Nix. Mr. Nix said the City is getting very close to actual construction. He said he has spent time with the consultant and an interesting preliminary design has been selected. It will include birding towers, a trail system and other items that were desirable. It has been suggested to process the park through a Master Plan and have it connect with the Green Zone. The design is moving forward and staff is now just waiting for construction plans. Mr. Nix stated he is working with the group at Green River Community College. A section will probably be set aside just for the students to work in. They are working on innovative new ways to deal with wetlands enhancement. Mr. Nix also discussed the drainage issues. One problem is that there is a blockage of Mill Creek at 15th Street NW. Mr. Krauss said Page 6 Plannina and Community Development Committee Aaenda January 9. 2006 staff conducted a flow test and there is no flow in Mill Creek, because Mill Creek can't establish a creek corridor. Mr. Nix related that the oxygen levels and temperatures are not what they should be. If it were opened up it would allow the creek to function as it should. Chair Norman asked about the timing. Mr. Nix answered that the Federal Government would like to have something done as soon as possible. The City has applied for a grant to change the area and enhance the wetlands. Ecology is also considering putting money into the parks. Another group that has contacted the City is the Eagle Scouts. Mr. Nix said he hopes meet in two months with the engineers for a preliminary site plan. The project will also include all the wish list. Chair Norman asked about the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). Mr. Nix said when the City contracted with Landau and Associates, they met in mid- November with the ACOE and agreed with the City on the wetland delineation map. The City has also contacted the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe and they have planted a lot of coho fry in the creek. The Committee discussed various issues. Mr. Nix said the consultant will provide maps in layers for the next meeting. D. Steve Pilcher said staff has been looking at ways to address the City Council concerns regarding the PUD Ordinance and have been discussing opportunities to establish a better process. The thought is to abolish the PUD process and replace it with the opportunity for a developer to enter into a development agreement with the City. The PCD Committee discussed the PUD and what it allows in a development. Mr. Pilcher said that process-wise, staff is looking at the broad aspect. There would be negotiations with the applicant rather then certain standards. Mr. Pilcher said the proposal will be taken to the Public Works Committee next for input and then will still need to go to the Planning Commission since it involves a zoning code amendment. Page 7 Plannina and Community Development Committee Aaenda January 9. 2006 E. Sex Offender Town Hall Meeting Update was provided by Steve Pilcher. Mr. Pilcher stated that he attended the January 5, 2006 Town Hall meeting on sex offenders and provided PCD Committee members with a State joint task force report. He said about 30-35 people were in attendance at the town hall meeting. Also present was Jim Hine, a citizen advocate for tougher laws against sex offenders. The meeting discussed community protection zones. If the City is going to do this, it would be good to do this uniformly state wide. The major concern is that registered sex offenders live close to schools. Now, sex offenders can be homeless and not be registered. It would be best to find out what direction the legislature is taking before the City acts or puts together an ordinance. The PCD Committee discussed the difference in the sex offender designations. Chair Norman stated the City needs to be very clear on definitions. There needs to be some balance, but would rather err on the side of caution. Mr. Krauss said that by the time an ordinance could be crafted and put in the process, the state could come down with its own version so waiting would be appropriate. F. PAA Pilot Program - Update Mr. Krauss said before Christmas that he, Mr. Osaki and others went to Seattle and had a wrap up meeting with King County and Federal Way. Karen Reed, with King County, said this agreement would likely only good for 18 months and if the City hasn't annexed the PAA areas by that time, King County wants the agreement to expire. Mr. Krauss will write a letter as soon as he hears from the City of Federal Way about its reaction to the King County timeline on the agreement, to County Executive Sims. He will propose a 5-year renewable agreement instead. v. INFORMATION A. PCDC Status Matrix Page 8 Plannina and Community Development Committee Aaenda January 9. 2006 SE Main Street neighborhood plan would be brought back sometime in February. Jan 23 - Downtown design standards - update. Jan 23. - Home occupations Jan 23 - Game Farm Park tree trimming. Jan 23 - Meeting with the Tree Board VI. OLD BUSINESS None. VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Planning and Community Development Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m. 11 ;) 3 r5 DAY OF ~"lA.U-+Ij d66 b ~~~ Carolyn Bro , Secretary APPROVED THE Page 9