HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-04-2006
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
April 4. 2006
The regular meeting of the Auburn Planning Commission was held on April 4, 2006 at
7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Auburn City Hall. The regular meeting was
preceded by a work study session that began at 6:30 p.m.
Those in attendance were as follows:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Judi Roland, Kevin Chapman, Dave Peace, Renee Larsen,
and Joan Mason.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Darci Bidman (Excused)
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Paul Krauss, Development Services Coordinator
Steve Pilcher, Senior Planner Elizabeth Chamberlain, Community Development
Administrator David Osaki, Planner Stacey Borland, and Assistant Planning Secretary
Laura Pierce.
6:30 PM Work Session
Proposed Amendment to Fence Heiqht Requlations
Mr. Pilcher provided an overview of the proposed amendment that is being considered
due to some recent issues with fence heights. The City is looking to amend the current
code due to some inequities that have been found as a result of recent annexations.
Individuals with homes situated on arterial streets would prefer to have higher fences
for increased privacy and security.
One of the issues that needs to be addressed in the ordinance is the definition of the
front lot line for corner lots. The front lot line will also need to be addressed for through
lots. Presently, both street lot lines are considered front lot lines and residents are
prohibited from fencing off their front yards with six foot tall fences.
The proposed amendment would retain the forty-two inch height restriction for front
yard fences that are "solid"; however, the proposed amendment would exclude open
fences such as open chain link or wrought iron fences from the forty-two inch height
limitation. The open fences could h'ave a maximum height of six feet.
The proposed amendment would also allow an extension of the maximum height, for
side and rear yards, from three and a half feet to six feet. The amendment will still
require compliance with public safety standards; the fence cannot create a site
obstruction. Additionally, the amendment will prohibit the use of barbed wire in
residential zones unless the property is part of legally established pasture. If the fence
includes locking front gates, the owner of the property must provide some sort of
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
April 4. 2006
access device for emergency calls such as police and fire. There have already been
three fence height variance requests this year. The main goal of the proposed
amendment is to achieve greater privacy on corner lots without compromising safety.
A public hearing is anticipated at next month's Planning Commission meeting.
Chair Roland requested that diagrams along with examples of fences and lot
configurations be provided at the public hearing. Ms. Larsen inquired about the reason
for the six (6) foot limit because people and cars are getting taller and she doesn't think
that a six (6) foot fence provides adequate privacy. Mr. Pilcher explained that a fence
over six (6) feet requires building permits and inspections. Chair Roland asked if there
would be any authority to grant an exception to the fence height restrictions based on
unique circumstances. Mr. Pilcher advised that individuals with unique circumstances
could apply for a variance as they do now.
REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chair
Roland at 7:00 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
It was concurred by the Planning Commission that the minutes of the March 7, 2006
meeting be approved with the following change:
Chair Roland requested that page four (4), paragraph six (6) be omitted as she did not
make such a statement. She stated that she did not make a request for sample
ordinances from surrounding cities because the committee already had such items.
Chair Roland requested that in the future, the minutes be emailed in draft format to the
committee members prior to mailing. Mr. Krauss advised that this is possible as long as
any comments or revisions are returned by a specified date. Ms. Larsen requested that
when the minutes are emailed they be sent without the City of Auburn logo as the logo
takes too long to open the document.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
Mr. Osaki discussed several items:
1) Introduction of Elizabeth Chamberlain, a new Planner in the department.
-2-
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
April 4. 2006
2) Announcement of the resignation of Ronald Douglass from the Commission and
advised that with the addition of Darci Bidman, this leaves one (1) vacancy.
3) Project Ace has begun demolition I development.
4) The Puget Sound Regional Council is embarking on a project called Vision 2020
+ 20. This is an update of the regional growth strategy. Puget Sound
Regional Council staff will be giving a presentation on the regional planning
process at the April 17, 2006 City Council meeting and they have requested
that the Planning Commissioners be invited to attend this presentation.
Mr. Krauss advised that a week from this Friday, City Council will be having a two day
retreat. This retreat is typically a budget retreat, but will be much more involved this
year. Council members will be discussing major development over the next 10 years.
They will be covering three (3) different growth scenarios: 1) No growth - the current
population of 50,000 remains almost the same with a slight increase to 55,000. 2)
Some annexations and some economic successes - bringing the population to
approximately 80,000.3) Annexation including the North Lake Tapps area - bringing
the population to about 116,000. All population estimates to the year 2016. Staff will
spend some time at a future meeting discussing the outcome of the retreat and
implications for how it might affect issues the Planning Commission will work on in the
future.
OLD BUSINESS
· Deliberation: Commercial vehicle parkinq in residential zones (Public Hearinqs held
on February 7.2006 and March 7. 2006).
Ms. Borland provided a brief overview of the public hearings that were held on February
7, 2006 and March 7, 2006 regarding commercial vehicle parking in residential zones.
At the last public hearing, the Planning Commission requested additional information
related to sizes and classes of commercial vehicles. Ms. Borland advised that the
information has been researched and is contained in tonight's packet. The classification
system is included and outlines what each class includes. Also provided in the packet
are the proposed amendments reviewed during the previous meetings. The Planning
Department had obtained feedback from City Transportation staff and the Auburn
Police Department which includes the recommendation to remove the provision for
screening as well as the vehicle classes due to enforcement issues. The latest version
of the proposed ordinance includes semi-truck tractors as well as semi-truck trailers.
Chair Roland asked to clarify that the recommendation is not to include weight in the
ordinance. Ms. Borland advised that this was correct.
Mr. Peace made a motion to recommend approval of the ordinance to City Council. Mr.
Chapman seconded the motion, but with the addition of a gross weight of 26,001
pounds to include other large commercial vehicles. Mr. Peace asked for clarification of
the desired result by adding the weight limit. Would it include other vehicles or would it
- 3 -
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
April 4. 2006
define how large the vehicles have to be to be defined as a tractor trailer. Mr. Chapman
stated that by adding the weight limit, it takes away the question of what is being
addressed in the code and adds other types of large commercial vehicles that don't
have a place in residential zones. Ms. Larsen expressed a concern that if other vehicles
are being addressed, proper notification has not been sent. Chair Roland clarified that
the vehicles being addressed have been defined and now a weight limit is being added
to it. Mr. Peace added that 26,000 pounds usually covers tractor trailers, the weight limit
just puts a more stringent definition to it. This satisfied the concerns Ms. Larsen had
about proper notification.
There was no further discussion. All were in favor of the motion. The motion passes.
Commissioner Roland thanked staff for the work it had done and information provided
tonight. It was what the Planning Commission needed to make its recommendation.
Mr. Krauss advised the public in attendance that the next step of the process is to take
the code amendment ordinance before City Council with the recommendation of the
Planning Commission.
PUBLIC HEARING
· Amendment to Auburn City Code Title 18, Zoning, related to homeless
encampments. Two chapters of the Auburn City Code (ACC) are proposed for
amendment including ACC Chapter 18.04 (Definitions) and ACC Chapter 18.46
(Temporary Uses).
Mr. Osaki explained that jurisdictions in which "tent cities" have come have had a
difficult time confronting this type of land use. Other cities that have not dealt with this
issue are adding language to their codes in case these encampments attempt to locate
within their jurisdiction. The City of Auburn is looking to do this as well.
In January of 2005, there was a one-year moratorium put into effect for permits for
these encampments. An additional six months was added to the moratorium in January
2006 to allow additional time to conduct research on the impacts of these
encampments on the City.
The amendment deals with two chapters of the zoning code: 1) Chapter 18.04-
Definitions; and, 2) Chapter 18.46 - Temporary Uses. The amendment includes the
addition of a provision in the temporary uses chapter to deal specifically with homeless
encampments.
Definitions that will be added include: 1) Homeless Encampments, 2) Host Agency and
3) Sponsoring Agency.
Among the changes to the temporary uses chapter include: 1) a requirement for early
notification of an incoming encampment, 2) a requirement for the sponsoring agency to
- 4 -
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
April 4. 2006
hold a public meeting two weeks prior to the submittal of the encampment temporary
use permit, and 3) a requirement for the sponsoring agency to provide notice to
residents in the surrounding neighborhoods.
Among the items that will be addressed during the temporary use permit approval
process include: adequacy of facilities, a limit of 100 people, public transportation
proximity standards, code of conduct, and a log of occupants. There will be a time limit
for the encampment of 90 days, not to exceed 180 days in any two-year period. Health
and safety must be maintained. The City would be able to revoke approval if the
sponsor agency fails to take action for any violations in the encampment.
Chair Roland questioned why we are stating that the encampment cannot exceed 180
days in any two-year period, why not state that it cannot exceed 90 days in any one-
year period? Why is it worded this way? Mr. Krauss explained that the goal is to ensure
that no single neighborhood is overburdened. The encampment would be permitted to
use the full 180 days in one year (providing it is 90 days at a time with down time in
between) and would not be permitted to do anything the following year. Ms. Mason
asked if it was just a limit of 90 days at one location; could the encampment move to
another location for another 90 days? Mr. Krauss advised that the encampment may
only exist for 90 days at a time and that if they move, they would need a different host
agency.
Ms. Larsen asked if the proposed homeless encampment ordinance creates problems if
the City falls victim to a natural disaster and many Auburn residents become homeless.
Mr. Krauss clarified that changes may be made when the City is operating under a
disaster declaration.
Mr. Peace asked if residents of the encampments would be permitted to use any safe
heating appliances within tents. Mr. Krauss advised that in order to be used, they would
have to be approved. If they are designed and licensed for that purpose, they might be
allowable.
Mr. Peace also addressed the issue of cooking appliances. At this time, the only
permitted appliance is a microwave; would barbeque grills be allowed as many
churches hold occasional barbeques? Mr. Krauss answered that if the church is holding
a barbeque, that it would be no different in this instance. It is expected that the
churches have appropriate accommodations for feeding the residents of the
encampments.
Mr. Chapman addressed the issue of safety and security and wanted to know who
would conduct background checks on these individuals. Mr. Krauss answered that the
sponsor agency would be responsible for the residents. It would not be feasible to
conduct an investigation on each person to determine criminal and mental
backgrounds. Thus far, there is only one known incidence where a felon was found in
an encampment. The sponsor agency was very cooperative as the agency and the
residents do not want felons in the encampments either. Mr. Krauss added that these
- 5 -
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
April 4. 2006
individuals are not the people that you typically find on the streets; they are often
"borderline homeless" families with children. If any problems arise due to criminals or
individuals with mental health problems, there are mechanisms in place for the police to
become involved.
Mr. Chapman also wanted to know if there is a square foot limit per person requirement.
Mr. Krauss advised that determining a minimum size per person is very difficult due to
the variety of housing options. Some people will be living in tents, some in RVs, and
some in basement of churches depending on accommodation at the site of the
encampment. Rather than determining the size per person, we are focusing on
ensuring healthy and sanitary conditions. Chair Roland asked if the agencies would be
providing a plan of the area that would show the size and dimensions for the
encampment. Mr. Krauss answered that when the agency meets with the City under
these proposed provisions, that they will be asked to show that the site is appropriate in
size and how the encampment will work. The City will ensure that the plan has been
thought out.
Chair Roland expressed a concern over the amount of time needed prior to
establishment of the encampment due to all of the required actions. Mr. Krauss advised
that the actions may take place concurrently.
Chair Roland inquired as to the notification process for tonight's hearing. Mr. Osaki
advised that churches within the City of Auburn have been notified along with
SHAREIWHEEL, the standard list of stakeholders, a posting in public places, a
publication in the newspaper, and a posting on the City's website.
Public Comment:
Lynn Ward - (Indicated that she is homeless and has no address)
Ms. Ward advised the Commission that she knows many people who sleep in vehicles
wherever they can. She wanted to know where a homeless person can go in Auburn to
take a shower and wash clothes. Homeless people need a place to go to clean up.
They are very glad that there are places to go for meals, but would like to have a place
to go for showers and washing clothes so they can be presentable in public.
Chair Roland advised Ms. Ward that the topics she is covering don't really address the
issue of the tonight's hearing, but that her concerns will be forwarded to staff to work
on. Mr. Krauss advised Ms. Ward of the City's desire to establish a one-stop-center that
would provide intake and services for everybody. He added that he could recommend
putting in such facilities for showering and washing clothes.
Ms. Ward also expressed her concerns about places for homeless people to put their
trash. She suggested that the City of Auburn establish places where they could go to
dump their trash.
- 6 -
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
April 4. 2006
Chair Roland thanked Ms. Ward for coming in to talk to the Commission and for
bringing these issues to their attention.
Ms. Ward advised that she is a client of Seattle Mental Health and that they are always
taking new clients. This is a place where people with mental disabilities can go for
assistance. .
There being no additional comments, the public hearing was closed.
Planninq Commission I Staff Discussion:
Mr. Peace stated that the issues that seemed to be raised tonight include clarifying the
90 day time limit to make it clear that it applies to one location as well as clarifying
language regarding the use of heating appliances within tents. Other than that,
everything looks good.
Mr. Peace motioned to recommend approval to City Council with the revisions he noted.
Ms. Mason seconded the motion.
All were in favor. Motion passed.
ADJOURNMENT
With no further items to come before the Commission the meeting was adjourned at
8:04 p.m.
- 7 -