The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08-02-2011 * C1TV oF �` « PLANNING COMMISSION August 2, 2011 WASH I NGTON MINUTES I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Judi Roland called the meeting to order at 7:00 p,m. in the Council Chambers located on the first floor ofAubum City Hall, 25 West Main Street, Aubum, WA.. Commission Members present were: Chair Judi Roland, vce Chair Kevin Chapman, Ron Copple, Joan Mason, Wayne Osbome, and Dave Peace. Commission Members excused were: Bob Baggett antl Michael Hamilton. Staff present included: Planning Director Kevin Snyder, Planning Manager Elizabeth ChambeMain, and Planning. Audience members present.were: Richard Weinman representing Green River Community College (GRCC). Chair Roland stated Planning Commission received an agenda mod�catian from staff removing item VI. B. II.. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chair Roland asked if the Planning Commissioners have read the minutes and have any changes. Member Mason requested the_word "and" be inserted to page 3, first line, to read, "larger animals and pot belly pigs, miniature goats, and cfiickens." Commission:requested a spelling change for"Lowe's" under Planning Department RepoR. Commissioner Chapman moved and Commissione�Osbome seconded to approve the minutes from the July 6, 2011 meeting as amended. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 5—0 IIL PUBLIC COMMENT There were no members preserrt of the public wanting to make a public commeM. IV. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT Planning Manager Elizabeth Chamberlain briefed Commission on the Environmental Park (AEP)Wetlands Trail Boardwalk ground breaking. 1'he boardwalk will start from West Main Street, City property, continuing north and ending at the birding towers. Construction should be complete by the end of Septembec This is part of the AEP overall plan. ' Planning Commission MeeUng Minutes August 2, 2011 V. PUBLIC HEARINGS There were no pubiic hearings to bring before Committee� VI. OTHER BUSINESS A. ZOA11-0005—Proposed Code Amendment related to Master Plans Planning Manager Eli�abeth Chamberlain provided the staff report for proposed code amendmerrt related to master Plans. The concept of a master qlan process with the zoning code for larger institutions and commercial development to plan out phased redevelopment efforts holistically was discussed after the Lea Hill annexation by staff in an effort 4o frorrt load the review process to benefit both the City potentia( applicants. Planning Manager Chamberlain reviewed the intent, applicability, and other components of the potential master plan along with the proposed code amendments with Commission. Aubum City Code Section 14.03.030, which addresses project review types, will need to be amended fo include a master plan as a pertnit type if this code amendment is adopted. Commission and Ms. Chamberlain discussed and rey_iewed various componerrts of the plan. These are a ferti highlights obtained to clarify the contents of the draft master pla_mand proposed code amendments along with Commission's recommendations: . In response to the question, why a master plan is not mandatory, Ms. Chamberlain stated the Planning & Community Development Committee recommended a voluntary process with'incentives to leave flexibility to applicants since there may be extensiVe cost up front (application, environmental review, and traffic analysis fees as well as other costs). • Commissioner Peace asked if No. two and four in the incentives table allows for an additional story and is the intent for the ability of the applicant to gain two stories. Ms. Chamberlain answered, according to the draft they could. • Ms. ChambeMain asked Commission to consider a percentage of off-street parking within the, parking structure of the development as refleded under No. four, page five of the incentive table. Commission suggested allowing staff to determine the percentage based on the-applicanYs spec�c development during negotiations for qroposal. La4er in fhe discussion the Commission suggested 50%. • An applicant would be vested to the curreM development standards for ten years with an extension beyond'the ten years for a minimum of froe addftional years. This time frame provides the applicant enough certainty and canfidence to invest in the master plan. 2 � Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 2, 2011 � • Commission asked:'rf a master plan can go on for long periods. Ms. Chamberlain stated traffic pattems, storm drainage standards and critical areas ordinance may change so if a development is not finished at yea� 13 they need to consider . moving forward quidcly,.nat finishing the phasing, or applying for another master plan. During review, staff will determine if the phasing and master plan design is appropriate and reasonable for the applicant to complete. Due to the substantial upfrbnt cost staff feels the incentives virould motivate the applicant to complete the developmeM. • If open space is included the applicant would receive a reduction in required landscaping. A potential for parking la4 or perimeter landscaping may be reduced for providing open spacelplaza. Staff will clarify what "activated open space" means. • Commission requested staff clarify the intent of the incentive on page five, number four, "one additional story beyond the maximum height for the underlying zone for all buildings in the development" Staff also clarified ofF-street parking can be above or below grade. • Commission request staff ciarify the wording and intent on page five, No. four, regarding a parking garage or structure froming a street; Commission would like the possibility of having it a strudure/parking garage frorrt an intemal or extemal street(allowing flexibility depending on the development and street conditions). • Page five, No. four°Reduction in minimum parking standard" could be clarified to explain there is a reduction of the minimum standard by the City to benefit the applicantreducing the minimum required spaces. • Planning Manager Chamberlain stated since the Hearing Examiner approves the master plan code requires appeals of Hearing Examiner decisions be submitted to Superior Court. • The Planning Director or designee may revoke oc suspend any permit granted under the chapter if ceRain conditions are found to exist. An administrative decision appealable to the Hearing E�caminer: • Commission and Staff determined staff should consider clarifying the intent of the review by the City at year five. • Public notification shall be provided with mailing within 500 feet of the project site. Richard Weinman, land use consultant for Green River Community College came forvward to express his gratitude to the City for beginning to develop a master plan process. Mr. Weinman stated GRCC was embarking on a ten year master plan update and initiafed infortnal discussion with the City on their procedures for a master plan. Mr. Weinman thought the woiic staff has put together is a positive good start and is grateful the Planning Commission islooking into the details and providing feedback for clarity: Green River Community College is very anxious for the City to adopt a clear process to be used. The advantage for developmerit in this manner is the certainty it provides over an extended period of time which is profitable for the City as well. 3. � Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 2, 2011 Ms. Chamberlain will work to the proposed master plan code ready for public hearing on September 7, 2011; this wiil be an extended meeting since it will include the pubiic hearing for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment as weil. Staff will present a work shop to discuss the Phase II code amendmeMS on August 23, 2011 at 6:00 p.m. Staff would also like Commission to hold the first and third Tuesday of the month fhrough the end of the year for additional meetings. B. 2011 Comprehensive Plan Amendments This item has been removed from the Agenda. VII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chair Roland adjourned the meeting at 8:.12 p.m. 4