Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutITEM III-B * Can OF- * ~ * DRAFT PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE WASHINGTON September 27, 2010 MINUTES I. ' CALL TO ORDER . ChairLynn Norman called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. in Annex Conference-Room 1 located on the second flooc of One Main Building, 1 Easf Main Sfreet, Auburn, WA. Committee members present were: Chair Lynn Norman, Councilmember John Partridge, and Councilmember Rich Wagner. Committee members excused: Vice Chair Nancy Backus. Staff members present included: Mayor Pete Lewis, Director Kevin Snyder, Planning . Manager Elizabeth Chamberlain, Human Services Manager Michael Hursh, Development Services Manager Jeff Tate, Environmental Protection Manager Chris Andersen, Project Engineer, Ryan Vondrak, and Administrative Support Clerk Tina Kriss. Audience members included: Spencer Alpert of Alpert Capital; Mel Maertz of M2 Architects; Mike Homer and Steve Crantr of Pacific Real Estate Partners; Debbie Christian; Auburn Food Bank; Jim Blanchard, Aubum Youth Resources; Faith Richie, Valley Cities Counseling; Councilmember Bill Peloza; and Wayne Osbome. Human Services Committee Members included: Suzanne Limric, Bette Van Gasken, Barbara J.. - Derda, Mayor: Chuck Booth, and,Lela Brugger. II. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND AGENDA MODIFICATION3 Agenda Modification submitted and accepted 4o add Action Item C. Permission to award Contract 10-28 to the lowest bidder, Game Farm park Project No. CP1001. Councilmember Backus is excused for this meeting, Councilmember Partridge will be sitting in on her behalf. 111. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes - September 13, 2010 Member Vllagner moved, Councilmember Partridge seconded with Chair Norman concumng to approve the Consent Agenda as presented.. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 3-0 IV. HUMAN SERVICES UPDATE A. Joint Session with Human Services Committee Human Services Manager Michael Hursh and the Human Services Committee members provided an update on their work including the additional agencies that Planning and Community Development Committee Minutes September 27, 2010 were funded this year, which provide the community with services throughout Auburn. Human Services Committee stated the new approach of receiving results based updates from the agencies, especially the new agencies has been helpful to the Human Services Committee. The new electronic application submittal process for this year has been extremely helpfuL Seventeen cities share the joint application submittal process; this proVided additionaP .agencies the opportunity to apply which we would not have typically received. Evaluations were perFormed on 71 applications; representing both old and new programs. The ability to cover all the services has expanded with the assistance and support ofi Planning and Community Development Committee; showing concem for the needs of the Human Services Committee as welf providing support to the community of Auburn which enables the Human Services Committee in assisting satisfying needs. Although the Human Services Committee has made great strides forward they will continue to push for agencies to report on their eesulfs in the categories comm'ittee has prioritized with the agencies increasing their reporting. Human Services also stated they will be working towards bringing on addifional members of fhe Human Services Committee which can bring more diversity; it has been difficult due to the time commitment required. B. Collaboration Study Human Services Manager Michael Hursh discussed the decision months ago to ' create a one-stop centerfor human services to increase referrals.by multiple agencies. Mr. Hursh stated due to the working relat_ionships, information sharing , (sensitive to confidentiality), and a clearer understanding of local services available at sister agencies for referral, the City has been able to provide broader services to more clients in the community. The process is not as quantifiable as it will be in the future but the reports being received weekly by agencies supports an increase in referral and services. Representative Jim Blanchard from Aubum Youth'Resources (AYR); Debbie Christian of the Aubum Food Bank; and Faith Ricfiie of Valley Cities Counseling all shared encouraging examples of both their agencies and others providing an increase in community-based services and referrals due to their interagency coordination. Weekly coordination meetings with three agencies have provided a systematic approach to increase an inventory of homes for _the homeless community. The housing inyentory went from 15 homes to 30 and will shortly increase by 15. Each_agency provides a unique service which when combined will increase the abilify to provide services to our clients. Mr. Hursh feels with the infer-agency coordination and one-stop human services center they will continue to increase in services and an increase in reporting. ultimately meeting the goals outline by the Human Services Committee. Page 2 Planning and Communi4y Development Committee Minutes September 27, 2010 V. DISCUSSION and INFORMATION A. Ordinance No. 6328 \ Development Services Manager Jeff Tate briefed the Committee on the issues mounting due to the influx of abandoned and/or foreclosed properties. Mr. Tate stated the increase of unmaintained properties has also increased. ' Properties located within well maintained neighborhood have become eyesores due to lack of vegetation control, unmowed yards, broken and/or boarded up windows and graffti tagging which has caused a spike in code compliances cases filed under Chapter 8.12. On September 13, staff provided the Committee with the first iteration of this draft ordinance to this Committee. The draft ordinance provided a third option for how we pursue compliance. It is important to reemphasize our starting point is always with a Notice of Correction and to work with fhe properfy ownerto get a piece of property or violation rectified and into compliance. When the objective and policy is not able to , be remedied and challenges ezist in owner absence, where research indicates the inability to find a contacf person, this ordinance will assist us in moving past the Notice of CoRection in an initial effort to gain compliance through the one on one interaction. The third option for how we pursue compliance basically adds the ability to access a civil penalty to a piece of property'and have an ongoing daily accrual of penalty until a violation is remedied. In the last discussion PCDC provided direction to move forward with this ordinance but had a couple comments and suggestions. Staff has made changes in response to those comments. One additional change at the suggestion by the City.Attomey's office to add section four which cross references chapter 8.20. to include the vegetation section of City ordinance making it consistent when talking about properties that are unmaintained from a vegetation point of view. Member Wagner moved, Councilmember Partridge seconded the motion to forward Ordinance 6328 to full Council for approval; Chair Norman concurred. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 3-0 - B. Ordinance No. 4647, City of Auburn/Pierce County Puyallup/VUhite River Interlocal Agreement Environmental Protection Manager Chris Andersen briefed the Committee on Resolution No. 4647; United States Congress authorized a Corps of Engineers General Investigation New Start (GI) for the Puyallup/White watershed area dated 21 June 2000. Staff reviewed the sequence of events leading to the federal interest in pursing a feasibility phase study to plan for flood damage reduction and fish and wildlife habitat restoration of the Puyallup River Basin Page 3 Planning and Community Development Committee Minutes September 27, 2010 Pierce County has agreed to perform the role of "Local Sponsor" with support from the other participating agencies which will provide review of GI rriaterials and actively participate in the process through the Pierce County Rivers Execufive Task Force, in addition to providing financiaF support. The City of Auburn has determined that the potential for significant flooding associated with the' Lower Puyallup RiVer is a threat #o the City's regional economic interest. The City's participation is $25,000 over six years. Committee asked how we got a cost of $6M when exhibit shows a cost of around $4M. Mr. Andersen answered committed stating the cost of $6M is an updated, more recent estimate'performed by the Army Corps of Engineers. Committee asked if the City commits to this amount will we be required to financially commit in the next phase. Mr. Andersen stated the.agreement was specific to the feasibility study and a new agreement would then need fo be proposed and accepted. Member Wagner moved and Councilmember Partridge seconded the motion to forward Ordinance 4647 to full Council for approval; Chair Norman concurred. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 3-0 , C. Permission to award Confcact 10-28 to the lowest bidder, Game Farm Park Project No. CP1001 The purpose of the project is to install Musco Green Lighting on the two Turf Soccer Fields located at Auburn's Game Farm Park. These lights will allow for more fieldsto _ be utilized at night, take advantage of energy efficient lighting systems, and get the City one step closer to systemizing the City's parks lighting. Bids will be opened on September 28, 2010. After bid opening, staff will evaluate the apparent low bidder and provide a revised agenda bill and bid tabulation at the Council meeting scheduled for October 4, 2010. The project funded with by a Federal Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block grant, 321 Grant Fund. . The project has a credit of $70.00 remaining. It was moved by Member Wagner, seconded by Councilmember Partridge, to bring before full City Council contract 1 Q-28 for permission to award to the lowest bidder; Game Farm park Project No. CP1001, Chair Norman concurred. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 3-0 VI. DISCUSSION AND INFORMATION A. Downtown Development Efforts with Master Developer Spencer Alpert, Alpert Capital Mayor Lewis discussed the possibility ofi the City adding a performance measures to the future development agreement.which is about to expire as efforts continue to Page 4 Planning and Community Development Committee Minutes September 27, 2010 develop Aubum Junction. The Committee may want to think about what specifics measures council may want and how they wquld be addressed in an agreement. Spencer Alpert of Alpert Capital introduced members of his team, Mel Maertz of M2 Architects, and Mike Homer and Steve Crantz of Pacific Real Estate'Partners. Mr. ' Alpert then provided the Committee with a Current Status Report dated September 23, 2010, which includes a binder with several reports and maps. Alpert stated they have put a.team together to move the project forward and Auburn is ready and the stage is sef; with the current amenities fhe feam feels the can attract a hotel, cinema; a boutique grocer, a mix of smaller shops or neighborhood services, a diversity center or cultural center. Committee asked how the team expects to merge or connect Historic Main Street with the four block development. Mr. Alpert stated pedestrians will wander to Historic Main Street by being drawn by other development. Mr. Alpert stated from a practical standpoint the two blocks owned by the City will most likely be the firsf to kick off , development.' He believes the southwest block has the connection to thetransit center and would be a good starting point to develop. Mr. Alpert stated Main Street is a huge amenity because of the historic buildings and the look and feel that is appealing in working into an urban project but you have more ' parades west of the Mississippi. If will fif nicely with developing those types of shops along Main Street with the same look and feel. Committee asked if there was an interest in bringing in federal govemmental facilities. Mr. Alpert answered committee stating yes we believe in an office element connected to the hospifal like federal or govemmental buildings would be prudent at this time. Committee emphasized thinking past the current economic situation and the next five years to broaden development possibilities. Committee and Mr. Alpert discussed the design plan changes. Mr. Maertz stated the design is all driven by future tenants and what types of uses will be looked at as well as the people that will synergize this development. This plan is a generic master plan that has not been set at this time but a more organic block by block approach. Mr. Alpert added there are not developers who specialize in mixed-use; it is residential or commercial. We do not want to make the same mistakes as other cities where you go forward with a plan without really thinking through the practical aspects of where you are heading and what happens next. • Committee asked if the market analysis provided from 2008 is relevant given the current conditions and how it will affect the City. Mr. Alpert stated the report was provided to show what Alpert Has accomplished in the past and is out of date; Mr. Alpert will provide a cument market analysis in thefuture which will include information from the new design finished in April 2010. Committee stated their concem that the design looks like a massive project verses a block by block approach with sidewalks, lighting and infrastructure making it a cohesive unit that is tied together; Committee feels it would be more prudent in this Page 5 Planning and Community Development Committee Minutes September 27, 2010 economy to get individual developers for a block by block approach since it appears banks will not provide loans for a complete four block development. Mr. Alpert stated there is no possibility of having the massive project approach, the possibility is gone. The design was intended to show a completed master plan showing 1/4 blocks; '/2 blocks; or a block by block.flexible long term plan. Mr. Alpert stated loans are not even being given for those types of projects; we are in the planning stages. Committee asked Mr. Alpert what his personal benchmarks for success will be in the next year. Mr. Alpert stated 2011 will be a planning year and he does not expect to see a closing for development. He stated 2012-2013 is when the economy should improve and people who do the planning will start effectuating their plan. Committee asked, beyond. selling properties what would be the accomplishments and personal benchmarks for the next yeac: Mr. Alpert responded to be the best positioned within the next year. Mr. Alpert then asked Steve and Mike from Pacific Real Estate Partners to talk about the market since it is market driven. Mr. Crantr stated he feels Mr. Alpert has articulated adequately .what the market condition is so far. Only discussions for opening or turnover in 2012 - 2013 do we have something to talk about and even explore a tenants'. Mc. Crantr addressed the Committee's question on a benchmark; he stated a benchmark for both he and Mr. Homer would be obtaining non-binding letters of intent by a developer, restaurant, retailer or land buyer; the intent to purchase the propeity under certain terms and conditions. Mr. Horner stated this will also help aid financing. Mr. Alpert stated we have a concept plan thaf Mel has put together and it needs to be refined in the context of the market which requires inputfrom Mr. Crantz and Mr. Horner. , Mr. Alpert reemphasized he feels a reasonable wayto approach this is to look at 2011 as a planning year, some of your infrastructure will be going in and get a real updated study of what the economics are of the project and with thaf in hand start getting the tenants. Mr. Alpert stated he feels`in 2012 and 2013 is when development will start. Mr. Homer stated they are excited about this project and want the City to understand they will not be paid until the end of the project after evecything comes together. They will be spending a lot of time and effort and be very proactive spending a lot of time and effort up front because they are very specific about the projects they pick - that they will be successful with and also leave something for the community for generations down the road visited by all types of people from all over the area.. . . Committee stated there were nine projects from Pacific Real Estate Partners (PREP) • here in Aubum from them, they are all indusfrial. Mr. Alpert talked, about a limifed number of brokers who specialize in large mixed-use developments so Mr. Horner Page 6 Planning and Community Development Committee Minutes September 27, 2010 and Mr. Crantz have participated in PREP projects that are industrial but also have retails experience. . Committee and Mr. Alpert discussed the Sunbreak Cafe being part of the plan and , Mr. Alpert concucred. Committee stated they would like to see the farmers market. and that gathering spot integrated into the drawing. Mr. Alpert concurred. B. Site Plan Review Process & Procedures ' In 2003, the:City of Aubum commissioned an outside third party review by Shockey Brent, Inc. of its development approval process. This report recommended the City adopt a site plan review process. In 2007, the City commissioned the same firm to conduct a follow up analysis to review implementation of its 2003 recommendations and identify needed improvement areas. A key recommendation of both review efforts was the implementation of a site plan review process. Site plan review is a development review process used in many cities and counties to provide early on review of proposed development in advance of the preparation of detailed building and/or engineering plans. Site plan review can help identify and address key concems and identify options pertaining to land use, environmental, transportation and utilities impacts. In most instances, site plan review is applied to commercial,. industrial, insfifutional multi-family and mixed use developmenf. Often, local governments will establish size or scale thresholds for these types of projects that require site plan review. In many instances, site plan review is conducted as an administrative review process subject to public noticing. Committee was supportive of looking into this process but wants staff to consult with WCIA to make sure it meefs the scrutihy of the.insurance industry. Director Snyder stated he will check with risk management and report back to the Committee. Committee also stated it may be beneficial from a marketing standpoint due to the . economy, Committee also asked how vesting would be impacted. Director stated , underWashington State Law within 120 days a decision must be made for all land use decisions. Committee also st_ated they are not in favor ofi an administrative approval but hearing examiner decision. C. PCDC Status Matrix Chair asked committee to contact staff if#hey had any questions or changes. VI. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Planning and Community Development Committee, Chair Norman adjoumed the meeting at p.m. APPROVED THIS DAY OF Lynn Norman, Chair Tina Kriss, Adminisfrative Support Clerk. Page 7