HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-03-2001MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
JULY 3, 2001
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held on July 3, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of
the Auburn City Hall. Those in attendance were as follows:
MEMBERS: Dave Peace, Bill Taylor, Peter DiTuri, Ronald Douglas
STAFF: David Osaki, Jeff DiXon, and Patti Zook
The following members were absent:
Karen Ekerm, Garna Jones
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 June 5, 2001 meeting be approved as mailed.
DISCUSSION:
Principal Planner Osaki presented a work plan for the rest of the year and then reviewed the plan schedule for each
month. He spoke about the annual Comprehensive Plan amendment cycle. PC may also be acting on the Sensitive
Areas Ordinance. Public Works Department is working on the Comprehensive Sewer Plan, Water Plan and Storm
Drainage Plan and a PC worksession may be needed again on these. He has a meeting with the City Attorney and
Public Works staff next week regarding processing the Comprehensive Water Plan and Storm Drainage Plan
amendments. He then spoke about the neighborhood plan and the request of the PCDC for a neighborhood plan for
A Street SE.
PC did not have questions on the work plan.
Downtown Plan Implementation
Principal Planner Osaki spoke of implementation measures and he is waiting for the final document from the
consUltant. City Council had a few changes which he mentioned. He asked PC to think about items they want
pursued first.
Commissioner Peace asked about identifying a couple priorities in each category. Commissioner Douglass
pointed out that a number of the items require stafftime and this will limit the number of items that can actually
be funded or staffed. He asked if any staffwill be added. Principal Planner Osaki replied that consultants
could be brought on board to help, but no new staff is likely. The Plan is based on 15-20 year period.
· Commission-initiated 2001 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Principal Planner Osaki reminded PC that it is approaching the time for the yearly amendments and he is
seeking PC's comments and input on amendments that PC might want to initiate. The Capital Facilities Plans
from Kent and Auburn School Districts was received. City has received a request from Fred Meyer to amend
the North Auburn Special Plan Area to remove the limitation on service stations. Staff will have text
amendments for review.
· Sections 8-10 of the SensitiVe Areas Ordinance (SAO)
Planner Dixon commented that PC was given.descriptions for Sections 8-10, not the actual draft sections.
Sections 8-10 and 11-13 are substantive portions of the SAO. He then reviewed what is envisioned in these
sections. The regulations are to be appropriately designed. He reviewed Section 8 and the four different
categories of wetlands and said that most of Auburn's wetlands are in category IV. The stream classification
also has four categories which were reviewed.
-1-
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
JULY 3, 2001
Commissioner Douglass inquired about different entities (the Army Corps for example) choosing different
categories. Planner Dixon mentioned that the City of Bellevue had developed its own classification system.
The state model ordinances are well established. The reason behind this classification was because it is well
supported.
Commissioner Peace wondered about the State requiring a rating system. Planner Dixon replied no. Regarding
wildlife classification, the 'critical habitat designation is very important and he explained what constitutes a
'critical habitat'. Commissioner Peace wondered about the City's intent to retain areas that contain wild
animals such as deer. Planner Dixon confirmed that through development some deer will be displaced. The
categories will be defined. What is meant by 'ancillary habitat' was explained. Mobile species such as deer
can be more easily displaced.
Planner Dixon explained acquifer recharge area and said that information came from studies conducted over the
last several years. Historically, most of the valley floor is considered an aquifer recharge area. Frequently
flooded areas classification is established by FEMA. He explained what is meant by floodway and flood fringe.
Referring to frequently flooded areas, Commissioner DiTuri asked if the FEMA delineations will remain intact
or change if FEMA reassesses. He wondered what happens when Auburn changes storm sewer, and who is
responsible to say an area is considered frequently flooded. Planner Dixon explained that FEMA puts out
floodplain maps based on FEMA studies and the Public Works Department has these maps. Auburn has to do a
formal process through FEMA to amend the maps when storm drainage affects a floodplain.
Commissioner DiTuri wondered if Public Works Department proceeds on the Sewer Plan, will the FEMA maps
have to be changed. Planner Dixon said that Public works is working on the sanitary sewer plan and storm
plan. The storm plan is to address runoff from development and how to manage it so flood problems are not
increased. The plan would not have large impacts on floodplain. They are trying to manage each development
to manage its own waters. Floodways identified by FEMA are associated with Mill Creek, Green River, etc.,
from high water conditions after storm events.
Planner Dixon explained the classification for different geologic hazard areas and that this information is based
on Soil Conservation Services studies. In Section 9, he explained the purposes of buffers and setbacks. Buffer
standards are in four categories. Washington does have a model ordinance, but most jurisdictions have done
less than Washington DOE model. Flexibility is built in by buffer averaging. Commissioner DiTuri wanted to
know who benefits from larger buffers versus smaller buffers and how to determine. Planner Dixon said to
allow averaging, but minimum distance to be maintained and take into account the intensity of the adjacent land
use. He explained flexibility mechanisms and long term preservation measures.
Planner Dixon referred to Section 10 and explained what is meant by mitigation and what is meant by
sequenced. Commissioner Peace asked who determines what is reasonable for a developer to do. Planner
Dixon said that staff makes the determination and gave an example. Staff explains to the developer what is
required and how to do.
Commissioner Taylor inquired about the appeal process. Planner Dixon spoke about Variances from buffer
standards, appeals of SAO determinations. Artificially created wetlands are not ones created for compensation
and these will not be regulated. If they are created as part of mitigation, they are regulated.
Planner Dixon then recapped the presentation and said that staff is working toward firming the regulations and
hope to bring the draft code language for PC review in August.
ADJOURNMENT:
With no further items to come before the Commission the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
PC~GND\MIN07-2001
-2-