HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-22-2007~ ~*
CLTY OF
UBUR.N
WASHINGTON
PLANNING & COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE
October 22, 2007
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER - 5:00 PM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Chair Lynn Norman called the meeting 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: Chair Lynn Norman, Member. Backus and Member Wagner. Also present were
Planning, Building and Community Department Director Cindy Baker, Community
Development Administrator David Osaki, Development Services Coordinator Steve Pitcher,
Senior Planner Chris Hankins, Senior Planner Elizabeth Chamberlain, Assistant City Engineer
Ingrid Gaub, Parks, Arts & Recreation Director Daryl Faber, Senior Planner AI Hicks,
Environmental Protection Manager Aaron Nix, Economic Development Manager Dave Baron,
Mayor Pete Lewis and Planning Secretary Kirsten Reynolds.
Audience Members included: Joyce Hardiman, Benita Horn and Jim Blanchard.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
October 8, .20.07
Member Backus moved to approve the minutes from the October 8, 2007 meeting
as submitted, seconded by Member Wagner.
Minutes approved unanimously 3-0.
ACTION
A. Resolution No. 4245 -Development Code Update Contract
Senior Planner Chris Hankins presented a proposed contract. with BHC Consultants.
This consultant has many years of experience in writing development codes. BHC will
review current development regulations including, but not limited to, Zoning Code,
Subdivision Code and Engineering Design Standards. The consultant will identify areas
in need of update and recommend specific new regulatory language.
Staff identified clarifications made by Public Works Committee to some language in the
contract. Under Exhibit A, staff does not intend to open the critical areas code
as part of the revisions except to review for consistency with other sections of the code.
Copies of BHC's project experience were handed out. Staff will be very clear with the
consultant about other separate development code amendments going on so there
are not duplications.
The PCD Committee relayed that any focus groups that take place should be limited,
and staff should use discretion on whether to include the BHC consultants.
Page 1
Planning and Community Development Committee Minutes
October 22, 2007
The language should be changed to say BHC will support focus groups as required by
the City.
Member Backus moved to forward Resolution No. 4245 to Full Council for
consideration; seconded by Member,Wagner
Motion was approved unanimously 3-0.
B. Resolution No. 4244 - 2008 Action Plan
Human Services Planner Michael Hursh presented the draft 2008 Action Plan. The
public hearing was completed and there were no comments received. The draft Action
Plan will be presented to the Finance Committee on November 5, 2007. After Finance
Committee review it will move on to the City Council that evening. Member Backus
asked about a comparison of distribution of funds in 2007. Mr. Hursh will be including
a new draft version regarding distribution of funds and how they have
increased/decreased in the Finance Committee packets for members to review.
The Committee reviewed and discussed several points and made recommendations to
staff for some changes throughout the Plan. One item discussed was tracking results
for the next three years. United Way will be at the next Human Services Committee
meeting to discuss what Auburn would like to track. Another point of discussion was
providing decent housing, specifically, the housing repair program. Mr. Hursh reported
that funding was increased to get through the applications that have built up. The
Human Services Committee plans to recommend $150,000 for 2009, after all the
applications have been taken care of. Discussion took place about the type of
applications received. Mr. Hursh has been trying to get a local crew together that can
do small jobs in a quick manner. There are regulations that staff needs to research.
Mr. Hursh will check with Legal on volunteers and coverage.
The Committee discussed funding for Mobile Homes that are in disrepair. Previous
discussion on this topic concluded the Committee agreed that applications would be
considered case by case but leaned towards not repairing dilapidated properties.
Another topic of discussion took place around other sources, general funds. The
language states that 1 % of the general fund is dedicated to Human Services programs.
This is not a correct statement; the language should state up to 1 % of general fund
expenditures.
Member Backus moved to forward Resolution No. 4244 with recommendations
and additions on to Full Council for consideration; seconded by Member Wagner.
Motion was approved unanimously 3-0.
Page 2
Planning and Community Development Committee Minutes
October 22, 2007
IV. DISCUSSION
A. Community Building -Diversity Consultant Update
The Diversity Consultants Joyce Hardiman and Benita Horn handed out a draft
of the Community Engagement Process and Interview Summaries, Lessons and
Recommendations. The interviewees represented across-section of the community.
The interviews will be completed by the end of the month.
Goals included engaging participation of all stakeholders (both internal and external),
conducting a series of focus groups, reaching an agreement on an infrastructure
design between the stakeholders and offering technical assistance throughout the
whole process.
There were a series of five questions asked as part of the interview process.
The responses were reviewed.
Question one: How would you define the community (ies) you feel connected to in
Auburn? Responses received included, but were not limited to, where activities on
the welfare and well-being of community members are located. Most people desired
to make their "community" more inter-generational or more culturally diverse to ensure
sustainability. Most engaged with "communities" in which there are shared values,
a shared common purpose and are action-oriented. Some recommendations were to
build on" best practices" to create bridges between the diverse communities of Auburn.
Also, emphasize the "we" versus the "we/they".
Question two: What do you value most about living in Auburn? Responses received
included, but not limited to, feeling connected to the town and a great sense of
community, a history and tradition of people working together to get things done, a
small town feel, being a friendly and laid back community with good social programs,
appreciation for the intergenerational aspect, consistent City Hall leadership, concern
that the "people on the hill" (Lakeland area) may not share the same attachment to
Auburn and diversity is a strength and a challenge. Some recommendations were to
build on the positive feelings, support events and activities that embrace communities
less attached, find new ways to attract immigrants, youth, the Muckleshoot, working
class and people on the hill.
Question three: Describe a time when you were part of or observed an extraordinary
display of cooperation between all communities in Auburn? What made this
cooperation possible? Responses received included, but were not limited to, Clean
Sweep,. Good OI' Days, Project Thank You through Grace Community Church,
Auburn Days, various community parades, Uniquely Auburn, and high school band
competitions. Also mentioned were community collaboration projects such as the
library project and bringing defibrillators to Auburn, and the building of the new YMCA.
Question four: What do you think are the most important issues that Auburn needs
to address today? What makes these issues so important? What do you see as
challenges in addressing these issues? Responses received included, but were not
Page 3
Planning and Community Development Committee Minutes
October 22. 2007
limited to, getting a handle on diversity and identifying leadership in the community
to help get past bigotry, stereotypes and racial tension. Families and youth need
resources such as education, mentoring and tools to eliminate discrimination, name
calling and bullying. Some findings include the need to eradicate negative images,
stereotypes, and bigotry that communities direct toward each other. The key to
maximum involvement is done by going to the community as opposed to community
members coming to City Hall.
There was discussion around how the City can get the community involved. One
suggestion was to have some meetings where people are involved with planning
for parks youth programs. Programs to enhance were the Youth Council and the
downtown. planning process. Planning, Building and Community~Director Cindy Baker
suggested the idea of having a "translation square" i.e. to build something as a
community from different cultures using different languages. Another suggestion
#rom the consultants was to take group meetings out into the community by invitation,
having a community group host an event.
Question five: In which of these issues are you willing to be personally involved in the
solution? The response reported was that most participants expressed a desire to be
involved in a community-wide engagement process.
The next steps will be to finish the interviews. An updated draft report would then be
sent to staff and PCD Committee members. The focus groups would then start to
brainstorm ideas and expand the dialog by having hosted events/meetings. The end
goal would be to have the community develop their own group for future journeys.
B. Access Tracts Design Standards
Assistant City Engineer Ingrid Gaub reviewed previous adjustments recommended by
PCD and PW Committees. The Committee reviewed .several visualizations of what the
requirements for access tracts may look like under the proposed standards and how
they may vary depending on the length of the access tract, type of turn around required,
and whether parking is allowed. In all cases, in order to enforce no parking within a
private tract, the tract would have to be marked as a fire lane per code requirements.
Two 3-D visualizations were also discussed: the first was related to a 151-600 foot
length access tract with a cul de sac turn around with access to the public street via a
public cul-de-sac. The second was a medium length tract, 75-150 feet in length, that
does not require a turn around. The details of the driveway connections to the public
street were discussed and the Committee concurred that the configurations presented
were acceptable.
Staff advised the Committee that once standards are changed, there may be some
concerns raised by developers regarding the new width required for the access tracts
related to the potential cost impact for smaller developments. Committee indicated they
Page 4
Planninct and Community Development Committee Minutes
October 22, 2007
were aware and would like to proceed with the revisions to standards as proposed.
C. Environmental DistrictlGreen Zone Mithun Report
Economic Development Manager Dave Baron and Environmental Protection Manager
Aaron Nix gave a brief preview of the Mithun report.
The full report will be presented at the Committee of the Whole on Monday, October 29,
2007. Out of the four options developed by the consultant, Option Four seemed to have
the best visual component. This option located the interpretive center in a location with
good exposure to the community and that could act as a catalyst for future
developments. Some properties in the area could potentially be regenerated in to
wetlands and used as mitigation sites. Mr. Nix talked about the ratios of enhancing
wetland ratios which is 4:1. Creating wetlands provides for a ratio of 1'/:1.
Mr. Nix commented on the market assessment piece that the GVA Kidder Mathews
study indicated regarding how to create a Green Zone. GVA found it would be hard to
attract businesses because of access and graffiti issues. GVA will be speaking more
in-depth on Monday, October 29, 2007.
Staff was asked to verify what the exact boundaries were for the Green Zone and
review what the contract indicated. This information will be given to-the Committee
as soon as possible.
Mr. Baron distributed one rendering that included a green build structure, a coffee
kiosk and a wetland demonstration/staging area.
D. Follow up on Lea HiII/VUest Hill Zoning Hearings
Senior Planner Elizabeth Chamberlain reviewed the annexation pre-zoning public
hearing dates. The first hearing was held on October 16, 2007, the second is
scheduled for November 20, 2007. Ms. Chamberlain asked the Committee if there
was any information staff could provide at the next public hearing that could help.
Member Wagner asked for more information on the limitations of six lots per an acre
and where the areas with these allowances would end. Member Backus was also
concerned with the six lots per an acre.
The Committee discussed the long term needs of the Lea Hill community to have land
designated for commercial uses.
Mayor Lewis commented on the people who are not attending the public hearings are
the people who find having commercial development in the Lea Hill annexation area
more acceptable. The .locations that staff has proposed are adjacent to the commercial
development being proposed by the City of Kent.. One triangular shaped area is located
near Hwy 18.
Page 5
Planning and Community Development Committee Minutes
October 22, 2007
Staff will put together a new map with separate layers that represents where new
developments are and/or will be in the future, i.e. the City of Kent's preliminary plat
and the two lots next to the Triangle. The layers will also identify other C-1 lots and
some aerial photos will be provided. PCD also asked for the traffic counts off Stn
Street, both current and projected data is desired. Staff will type up the process on
how property owners can change the urban separator designation.
V. INFORMATION
A. Club House Art Work
The artist chosen to do the artwork piece for the Club House has a lot of experience
doing outdoor artwork.
B. PCDC Status Matrix
At the Committee of the Whole (COW) on Monday, October 29, 2007 Council will be
discussing the idea of choosing the top tem items off the Vision 2016 list; if the Council
decides they would like to move forward, this it would be the focus of the Council
Retreat.
Items were reviewed and updated as follows: zoning Code on November 13. Senior
Housing off-Street Parking requirements in December. Memo for Human Services
Center on November 13. AEP, Shoreline Master Program and Environmental District /
Green Zone Consultant Plan =TBD. Downtown Plaza Design on November 13.
Theater Plan =January. Activity Center in November. Diversity Consultants =TBD.
C. Traffic Circles were not on the agenda but were discussed as something needing to
be followed up on. Chair Norman said there may need to be a public education class
on how to utilize them. Safety of the neighborhood is the number one priority.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Planning and Community Development
Committee, Chair Norman adjourned the meeting at 7:57 p.m.
ROVED THE I ~ DAY OF
l_ynn~man, Chair
a
S
Kirst Reynold , S~retary
Page 6