Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-26-2001MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 26, 2001 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held on March 6, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Auburn City Hall. Those in attendance were as follows: MEMBERS: Garna Jones, Dave Peace, Bill Taylor, Peter DiTuri, Dan Rollins STAFF ' Lynn Rued, David Osaki, Betty Sanders and Patti Zook The following members were absent: Karen Ekrem and Fred Helser The meeting was called to order by Chairman Dave Peace. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was concurred by the Planning Commission that the minutes of the February 13, 2001 meeting be approved as mailed. PUBLIC HEARING: · ZOA01-0001 - Amendments to Chapters 18.04, 18.28 and 18.52 of the Zoning Ordinance; and In addition, the following two Comprehensive Zoning Map amendments are proposed: Zoning Map Amendment #1: Amend the Comprehensive Zoning Map from C-3, Heavy Commercial District/Interim C-2, Central Business District to permanent C-2, Central Business District for properties generally located in an area north of Highway 18, east of D Street Safeway, south of West/East Main Street and west of D Street SE (approximately 55 acres). Zoning Map Amendment #2: Amend the Comprehensive Zoning Map from C-1 ,Light Commercial District to C-2, Central Business District for properties generally located on the north and south sides of West Main Street between D streets NW/SW and H Street NW (excepting West Auburn High School). Assistant Planning Director Rued provided a general overview of the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments. A minor change to the Chapter 18.04, Definitions, regarding churches which now defines church-related activities. Referencing Chapter 18.28, there are significant changes. For an apartment building front on Main Street, the first floor is to be retail. A large change to the C-2 district relates to auto uses. There are significant zoning changes from C-3 to C-2. The C-3 zone allows auto as a permitted use, but the C-2 as written does not allow auto uses. Another significant change is item H on page 5 regarding gasoline dispensing. The use would be allowed only through the conditional use permit process. He reviewed the 11 criteria for the gasoline station. Gas service must clearly be an incidental or accessory use. Safeway was given the provisions and has issues to what staff recommending. A letter was received today from Safeway and given to Planning Commission. Staff does not have specific response to the Safeway letter. He reviewed item E on page 7 relating to building height. Assistant Planning Director Rued referred to item G on page 8 relating to fences and reviewed the new fencing requirements. Regarding item 10, for auto repair business, for those that have significant outdoor storage they will have one year to do fence and restrict the outdoor storage of their sites. On page 10, item F, the building orientation requirements were reviewed. In Chapter 18.52, the parking requirements are being changed by proposing reductions in requirements which were reviewed. Also proposed to.night are two zoning map amendments. Patrick Mullaney, Foster Pepper Shefelman, and Safeway attorney, distributed sheet called Safeway's Suggested Revisions to the Draft Development Regulations for Accessory Use Gasoline Dispensing Facilities and introduced other representatives present tonight to'answer'questions. For the most part, Safeway agrees with regulations as proposed by staff, but he reviewed places where Safeway wants the language clarified or modified, and then explained why he believes the modifications are appropriate. Safeway is concerned about the regulations that are written in mandatory language. They have not -1- MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 26, 2001 participated in drafting the language and are concerned about adhering to regulations becauSe they have not checked the regulations against their design plan. He spoke about the "catch all" phrase that they want to see in the regulations. Safeway is concerned about pedestrian amenities conflicting with required landscaping and wants some to ensure they do not get hang up building the facility because of a conflict with the language. He then reviewed the draft paragraphs and Safeway's suggested revisions. He thanked Planning Commission for considering their changes. Safeway has been at this location for 20 years and is spending several million dollars to expand the store. ,.Safeway is an anchor in downtown. He urged Planning Commission to approve their gas facility in order for Safeway to remain competitive. Alan Keimig, architect, was a member of the downtown task force, and he reminded Planning Commission that the downtown plan is to serve citizens not businesses. He urged the Planning Commission to be careful about making granting the requested gas station. Commissioner Peace asked Mr. Mullaney to speak about the number of fuel pumps and number of vehicles to be fueled. A Safeway representative showed a diagram to Planning Commission of the layout of pumps and aisles. The canopy will be 40 feet x 80 feet. Commissioner DiTuri. stressed that sees a big difference between staff language and Safeway language. He wants to make sure that pedestrian traffic is not impeded. It is important to look at downtown plan's intent and possibility of losing an area that will not be pedestrian friendly because of the fuel facility. The City would be losing potential development pattern for pedestrian traffic because south of Safeway pedestrian access will be limited. Commissioner Peace referred to draft paragraph 2 and the word "least" which Planning Commission may want to minimum, but may not make sense in this instance. Commissioner Taylor believes the word "must" is more demanding than the word "should". Assistant Planning Director Rued clarified the difference between the two words. Commissioner DiTuri wondered on the south side of the block what pedestrian access would be available. Commissioner Peace said that he did not like the word "have", and thinks the word "must" is a concern. He suggested, "The facility must be located on the property in a way that minimizes the amount of conflict to pedestrian traffic". Commissioner Rollins said that he likes Commissioner Peace's rewording. Assistant Planning Director Rued looked at other gas stations in Auburn and Federal Way to see their number of pumps. He noticed that 26 different stations that had more than four pumps and eight vehicles; 19 had four pumps and eight vehicles. The standard appeared to be four pumps and eight vehicles. He then mentioned the number of pumps at certain stations in Auburn. Commissioner Taylor wondered about the disadvantage is of having 10 pumps compared to eight pumps. Assistant Planning Director Rued replied that this is hard to quantify because more pumps mean more cars and quicker service. Commissioner Rollins thinks that Safeway may have a valid point because adding one additional pump will not have much of an impact, but no more than five pumps should be allowed. A discussion occurred relating to location of pumps and pay island on the site plan as presented by Commissioner Peace referred to draft paragraph 6 and suggested leaving this paragraph as is unless Planning Commission has an issue with the height. Assistant Planning Director Rued gave an example and pointed out that the 20 feet allows for 16 feet of clearance and 4 extra feet of clearance. Commissioner Taylor asked Safeway why extra height is needed. Mr. Mullaney said 17 feet for clearance and 5 feet for canopy structure and fascia. Commissioner Peace referred to draft paragraph 7. Commissioner Rollins is not sure of the difference in meaning between staff wording and Safeway wording for the paragraph. Assistant Planning Director Rued referred to page 121 of the downtown plan and reviewed the policies. -2- MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 26, 2001_ Commissioner Peace is concerned about the proposed wording which is a requirement that would apply to anyone. Commissioner Rollins expressed concern that the landscaping might conceal signage. Safeway needs to have a way to advertise their prices, said Commissioner Taylor. Mr. Mullaney said that if the wall included the canopy face this should work. Commissioner Rollins referred to the definition of religious institutions and thinks staff is treading a fine line regarding facilities for training of religious orders and there is a broad interpretation of what training is. Commissioner Peace suggested softening this phrase a bit. Commissioner Peace inquired about Safeway being confused about definitions of wall signs. Assistant Planning Director Rued referred to definition of marquee sign and definition of wall sign. "Permanent wall sign attached to face of canopy" is the revised language. Assistant Planning Director Rued cautioned that the "catch all" provision is not something available to any other developer in town. If something will not work, there is always the option of the variance process that can be applied for. Options are available if something absolutely will not work. Mr. Mullaney spoke again regarding the "catch all" phrase that Safeway would like to see added Commissioner Peace wanted to confirm that Planning Commission had consensus that they did not want the catch all phrase. Planning Commission concurred. Commissioner Peace referred to paragraph 2 that had revised language relating that facility must be located on property that minimizes conflicts with pedestrian traffic. Assistant Planning Director Rued said that language staff proposed for facility be located on property that minimizes conflict to pedestrian traffic. Planning Commission consensus was "to minimize conflict". Commissioner Rollins indicated that he did not want to see five gas pumps. Commissioner DiTuri expressed concern about gas station in C2, and wants to see a minimum queuing of cars waiting for gas because he does not want idling engines by pedestrian traffic. Commissioner Peace referred to paragraph 6 and Planning Commission reached consensus for 20 feet height limitation. Commissioner Peace referred to paragraph 7, and referring to particular policy in downtown plan here and Planning Commission reached consensus. Commissioner Peace referred to paragraph 10 with revised language here as proposed earlier and Planning Commission reached consensus. Commissioner Peace commented, in talking about off street parking and loading, in particular multi family use and parking spaces of one space per dwelling unit, and asked what is requirement elsewhere in Auburn. He wondered if single person living in an apartment and space requirement is fine, but what about two people in an apartment. Assistant Planning Director Rued spoke about minimum requirements for parking, but he is not sure what kind of apartments will be built, but probably not geared toward families. Commissioner Rollins believes the apartments would be attractive to folks taking the train and only one car would be needed. Commissioner Taylor does not have a problem with the minimum requirements. Commissioner DiTuri said the changes may be premature if Auburn does not have adequate parking requirements. He referred to the City of Olympia and gave an example about development in downtown area for former warehouses. Olympia held off on parking requirement changes until it saw what type of development was coming to downtown. He is concerned about putting in limitations for something that has not yet materialized yet - especially around the transit center. He suggested that no changes be made until Auburn sees what kind of development comes. -3- MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 26. 2001 Commissioner Peace said that staff is not limiting parking, just putting in minimum requirements. Commissioner Peace said that parking is being reducing by 33 percent, which is a large chunk, and the parking garage has not been built yet. He sees no justification to change yet. He does not think the change makes a difference or limits types of housing. Commissioner Jones believes people living downtown will use thetrains, and may be seniors, and the lifestyles will not fit with two cars. Commissioner Rollins made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Rollins, to recommend approval with revisions as proposed earlier. Planning Commission then acted on the individual draft paragraph revisions as proposed by Safeway in their document entitled Safeway's Su~tgested Revisions to the Draft Development Regulations for Accessory Use Gasoline Dispensing Facilities. Draft Paragraph 1: Planning Commission said no. Draft Paragraph 2: Planning Commission agreed to the revised language proposed earlier in the evening. Draft Paragraph 5: Planning Commission agreed to 5 pumps - no more than 10 vehicles. Draft Paragraph 6: Planning Commission said no. Draft Paragraph 7: Planning Commission said to refer to downtown design guidelines on page 111. Draft Paragraph 10: Planning Commission agreed to signs limited to permanent wall signs attached to the face of the canopy. CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING: Assistant Planning Director Rued advised that the Planning Commission needs to call for a public hearing to be held on April 3, 2001 to consider amendments to the Zoning Ordinance (Title 18) and Land Division Ordinance (Title 17) regarding panhandle lot length and private access tracts; and to Chapter 18.76, the Lakeland South PUD ordinance, to address RV parking. He explained panhandle and access lots to Planning Commission. The City does not allow private access tracts to be the primary access to tracts, however, King County does allow this. There are some such lots in the Lea Hill area. Staff is proposing standards for the access tracts and to allow flexibility in design of subdivisions. The current Lakeland South PUD ordinance needs to be revised because Lakeland will not allow any RV parking because of its covenants. OTHER BUSINESS: Assistant Planning Director Rued mentioned that staff has been discussing gated communities with the Planning and Community Development Committee. The City does not allow more than a four lot' subdivision to be gated. The question is how to allow subdivision of certain number of lots to be gated. This will be coming to the Planning Commission soon for discussion and public hearing. Commissioner Rollins wondered if a developer is proposing. Assistant Planning Director Rued replied yes. ADJOURNMENT: With no further items to come before the Commission the meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. PC~G\MIN03-2001 44-