HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-20-2013 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA PACKETThe City of Auburn Planning Commission is an eight member advisory body that provides recommendations to the
Auburn City Council on the preparation of and amendments to land use plans and related codes such as zoning.
Planning Commissioners are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council.
Actions taken by the Planning Commission are not final decisions; they are in the form of recommendations to the
City Council who must ultimately make the final decision.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
August 20, 2013
SPECIAL WORK SESSION AND
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
SPECIAL WORK SESSION – 6:30 - 7:00 p.m., Council Chambers
I. Student/Rental Housing Code Amendments*
Staff: Elizabeth Chamberlain, Planning Services Manager
Summary: Discuss the proposed amendments to Titles 5 and 18 related to student/rental
housing.
II. C-1, Light Commercial Zone, Amendments*
Staff: Elizabeth Chamberlain, Planning Services Manager
Summary: Discuss the proposed amendments to the C-1, Light Commercial Zone, related
to mixed-use development standards
III. ADJOURNMENT
REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 p.m., Council Chambers
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL/ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. May 7, 2013
B. June 18, 2013
IV. PUBLIC COMMENT
Comment from the audience on any item not listed on the agenda for discussion or public
hearing.
V. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
Update on Planning and Development Department activities.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. ZOA13-0003 Student - Rental Housing Code Amendments* (Chamberlain)
Summary: Proposed amendments to Titles 5 and 18 related to student/rental
housing.
The City of Auburn Planning Commission is an eight member advisory body that provides recommendations to the
Auburn City Council on the preparation of and amendments to land use plans and related codes such as zoning.
Planning Commissioners are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council.
Actions taken by the Planning Commission are not final decisions; they are in the form of recommendations to the
City Council who must ultimately make the final decision.
B. ZOA13-0005 Amendments to C-1, Light Commercial Zone.* (Chamberlain)
Summary: Proposed amendments to the C-1, Light Commercial Zone, related to
mixed-use development standards.
C. ZOA13-0004, Amendments to the ACC 16.10.110, Critical Areas Regulations
(Dixon)
Summary: Amendments to the critical areas regulations and specifically to the
mitigation standards, criteria and plan requirements section to authorize mitigation to
be located outside the City under certain circumstances which is currently not
allowed.
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
A. 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendments (Dixon)
Summary: Review the 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendment docket that includes
city-initiated and two privately-initiated map amendments
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Page 1 of 1
Memorandum
To: Judi Roland, Chair, Planning Commission
Ron Copple, Vice Chair, Planning Commission
Planning Commission Members
From: Elizabeth Chamberlain, AICP, Planning Manager
Date: August 14, 2013
Re: Work Session – Student/Rental Housing
At the August 20, 2013 Planning Commission Work Session, staff will provide a brief overview
of the issues and proposed code amendments related to Student/Rental Housing. The
materials for the work session are what is provided for the public hearing so please refer to
those documents during the work session discussion.
If there are any questions prior to the August 20, 2013 or you need additional information for the
meeting please contact me echamberlain@auburnwa.gov or 253-931-3092.
Page 1 of 1
Memorandum
To: Judi Roland, Chair, Planning Commission
Ron Copple, Vice Chair, Planning Commission
Planning Commission Members
From: Elizabeth Chamberlain, AICP, Planning Manager
Date: August 14, 2013
Re: Work Session – C-1 Zone Mixed Use Code Amendments
At the August 20, 2013 Planning Commission Work Session, staff will provide a brief overview
of the issues and proposed code amendments related to the C-1 Zone Mixed Use Code
Amendments. The materials for the work session are what is provided for the public hearing so
please refer to those documents during the work session discussion.
If there are any questions prior to the August 20, 2013 or you need additional information for the
meeting please contact me echamberlain@auburnwa.gov or 253-931-3092.
DRAFT
PLANNING COMMISSION
May 7 , 2013
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 of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA.
II. ROLL CALL/ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
Planning Commission Members present were: Chair Judi Roland, Vice-Chair Copple,
Commissioner Couture, Commissioner Mason, Commissioner Baggett, Commissioner
Trout and Commissioner Smith. Commissioner Ramey was not present. The Planning
Secretary received an email upon returning from the meeting sent by Commissioner
Ramey at 6:51 p.m.
Staff present included: Planning and Development Interim Director Jeff Tate, Planning
Manager Elizabeth Chamberlain, and Planning and Development Secretary Tina Kriss.
Member of the audience present included: Citizen Scot Pondelick.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. April 2, 2013
Commissioner Copple moved and Commissioner Baggett seconded to approve the
minutes from the April 2, 2013 meeting as written.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 7-0
IV. PUBLIC COMMENT
There were no public comments on any item not listed on the agenda for discussion or
public hearing.
V. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
Planning Manager Chamberlain reported that the Landmark Development Group has a
Pre-Application meeting scheduled; they expect to submit their design review within two
weeks and by the end of June have their building permit application submitted.
Resolution No. 4947, authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to negotiate and execute a
purchase and sale agreement between the City of Auburn and Teutsch Partners, LLC
was presented at the May 6, 2013 City Council meeting. The resolution was passed by
Council and authorizes a negotiation and execution of the Purchase and Sale
Agreement for the purchase of either or both the SW Block and or the SE Block of the
City owned blocks downtown for the purposes of vertical construction and development.
Planning and Development Interim Director Jeff Tate stated by the end of this week the
Orion Industries building permit should be approved.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 7, 2013
Page 2
Last year the City experienced the biggest development year since 2000. This year 158
Single-Family Residential permits were issued with an approximate construction value of
$35,000,000.00 (as compared to 83 last year with an approximate construction value of
$19,000,000.00).
This year 100 Commercial permits have been issued with an approximate construction
value of $83,500,000.00 (as compared to 80 last year with an approximate construction
value of $12,000,000.00). There are currently a lot of projects in the review process and
a few more expected to be submitted, this will be a big year for development.
Ordinance No. 6461, Electric Fence Code update, was adopted by the City Council at
the May 6, 2013 City Council meeting as recommended by the Planning Commission.
At the February 5, 2013 Special Joint Meeting between the Planning and Community
Development Committee and the Planning Commission staff explained The Washington
State Building Code Council (the reviewing and adopting agency for the Washington
State Codes) will go through a process to adopt the 2012 Building Code updates. City
staff received the State amendments on May 6, 2013 and is currently reviewing the
proposed changes. Staff would like to meet for a work session with the Commission on
June 4, 2013 at 6:30 p.m. before the Public Hearing at 7:00 p.m. to review the proposed
updates. Staff will provide a memo to review the substantive changes from the 2009 to
2012 Building Code.
VI. PUBLIC HEARING
There were no public hearing items.
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Student/Rental Housing – Amending the Definition of Family in the Auburn City
Code (Chamberlain/Tate)
Planning Manager Elizabeth Chamberlain briefed the Commission on the proposed
code amendment to amend the definition of family in Title 18. Additionally,
background information was provided on Student/Rental Housing and the City’s
regulations currently in place.
Over the last several months, residents who live in the single family residential
communities near Green River Community College (GRCC) are observing a spike in
rental homes in their neighborhood that are occupied by students of GRCC. They
have expressed several concerns:
• Parking Impacts
• Unpermitted conversion of garages to living space
• Overcrowding of single family homes with too many occupants
• Lack of property solid waste management
• Noise impacts
• Lack of proper oversight by GRCC
Planning Manager Chamberlain reported that City staff has met with Green River
Community College (GRCC) to review their housing programs; staff reviewed these
programs with the Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 7, 2013
Page 3
Planning and Development Interim Director Jeff Tate explained that the current definition
of “Family” means a person living alone, two or more persons related by blood or
marriage, or a group of eight or fewer residents who are not related by blood or marriage
customarily living together as a single housekeeping unit and using common cooking
facilities. “Boardinghouse” means any dwelling in which three or more persons, either
individually or as families, are housed or lodged for hire with or without meals.
Changing the definition of “family” in the zoning code is an interim solution as staff works
on the longer Phase 2 steps to address more detailed code amendments and input by
Green River Community College on the proposed code amendments and community
outreach. The current definition is in conflict with the definition of “Boardinghouse”.
The City is concerned about Health, Life and Safety issues for students and rental
housing. The local and international student population has grown and will continue to
increase, the City would like to review policy and plan ahead for a trend that is
expanding and increasing the need for student housing.
The Planning Commission agreed they will review the new definition of “family” at the
June 4, 2013 work session in preparation for a public hearing that evening. In
discussing Phase 2 work with staff, the Planning Commission provided the following
input:
• Check with GRCC to see if, in addition to the three housing options, there are
other housing recommendations made by the college through student services
under the oversight of the college.
• Review the definition of “family” used within the City Code to understand if the
term is necessary and used appropriately.
• Research the number of local students that utilize housing around GRCC.
• Discuss incorporating a “hardship clause” to proposed code updates for those
individuals living with family members on a temporary basis.
• Discuss how the Owner/Landlord/Tenant can provide oversight (implementation
of any regulation could be implemented through a signed document linked to the
business license).
B. Major Comprehensive Plan Update (Chamberlain/Tate)
Planning and Development Interim Director Jeff Tate reported the City of Auburn is
required, under the Washington State Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A), to
develop and implement a Comprehensive Plan that is comprised of several
mandatory elements. Under the Growth Management Act (GMA), the City of Auburn
is required to update its Comprehensive Plan by June 30, 2015.
A Strategic Plan identifies broad commitments to the enhancing and maintaining of
community goals. This plan will serve as the road map to achieving those
commitments and will be (1) action oriented, (2) specifically targeted, (3)
appropriately sequenced, and (4) measurable over time.
The Strategic Plan and the Comprehensive Plan are two different documents. The
Comprehensive Plan will run its course through the Planning Commission process,
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 7, 2013
Page 4
with involvement in every area of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff believes the
existing plan can use an overhaul to streamline the plan and make it more user
friendly for citizens, policy makers, and implementers. Staff would like to create a
shorter, more nimble document that is much more usable. As part of the process
staff would like to conduct some visioning exercises through community wide
dialogue as to the direction in which the City should be steered over the next several
decades.
Staff reviewed the strategy schedule with the Planning Commission. As part of the
brainstorming process, staff asked the Commission for ideas or input on thoughts
and ideas to consider as staff moves forward to develop the structure and outline
that will be used to successfully implement these endeavors. The Commission
provided the following ideas and thoughts:
• Meet with Planning and Community Development Committee to discuss
strategy planning.
• When renewing a City business license they get a questionnaire for thoughts
and ideas about long-term planning and visioning.
• If there is a City event, the Mayor or a City official could be present at a booth
to provide and obtain information or a conduct a questionnaire from the public
for future planning.
• Put together a City staff team from every level of the City to obtain feedback
and input of the plan.
• Form committees from various areas of the City to gain insight from the
public.
The next meeting will be held Tuesday, June 4, 2013. A workshop will beg in at 6:30
p.m. for the proposed code updates for the definition of “family” and to discuss the
2012 Building Code updates. The public hearing on these two items will begin at
7:00 p.m. on June 4, 2013 after the work session.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chair Roland
adjourned the meeting at 8:36 p.m.
The City of Auburn Planning Commission is an eight member advisory body that provides recommendations to the
Auburn City Council on the preparation of and amendments to land use plans and related codes such as zoning.
Planning Commissioners are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council.
Actions taken by the Planning Commission are not final decisions; they are in the form of recommendations to the
City Council who must ultimately make the final decision.
PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL WORK
SESSION AND SPECIAL MEETING
June 18, 2013
MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER – Special Work Session 6:30 p.m., Council Chambers
Chair Judi Roland called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers
located on the first floor of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA.
II. ROLL CALL/ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
Planning Commission Members present were: Chair Judi Roland, Vice-Chair Ron
Copple, Commissioner Joan Mason, Commissioner Dale Couture, Commissioner Yolanda
Trout and Commissioner Jack Smith. Commissioner Bob Baggett was excused and
Commissioner Mark Ramey was unexcused.
Staff present included: City Attorny Dan Heid, Planning and Development Interim Director
Jeff Tate, Planning Manager Elizabeth Chamberlain, Building Official Tom Ushing,
Administrateve and Business Services Manager Darcie Hanson.
Members of the audience included: Carl Yuhasz, Ken Allgeier, Kenneth Pflugradt, Julia A.
Short, Russ Campbell, Jean Lix, Hank Galmish, Autsin Cole and Marjory Dodel.
III. Amendments to Title 15 of the Auburn City Code (The building Code) – Work
Session
Interim Planning Director Jeff Tate went through the proposed changes to the Building
code.
Commissioner Couture asked about the energy code and if it should be mentioned in the
code. Building Official Tom Ushing stated he could insert it.
Commissioner Jack smith asked about current code enforcement policies. Interim
Director Tate explained that ACC 1.25 addresses the ability to enforce city codes.
There were no further questions.
IV. Adjournment
There being no further discussion for the work session on amendments to Title
15 of Auburn City Code, Case No. ZOA13-0002, Chair Roland adjourned the work session
at 7:00 p.m, and stated there would be a short break.
I. CALL TO ORDER – Special Meeting, 7:00 p.m., Council Chambers
Chair Judi Roland called the public hearing to order at 7:16 p.m. in the Council Chambers
located on the first floor of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA.
II. ROLL CALL/ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
Planning Commission Members present were: Chair Judi Roland, Vice-Chair Ron
Copple, Commissioner Joan Mason, Commissioner Dale Couture, Commissioner Yolanda
The City of Auburn Planning Commission is an eight member advisory body that provides recommendations to the
Auburn City Council on the preparation of and amendments to land use plans and related codes such as zoning.
Planning Commissioners are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council.
Actions taken by the Planning Commission are not final decisions; they are in the form of recommendations to the
City Council who must ultimately make the final decision.
Trout and Commissioner Jack Smith. Commissioner Bob Baggett was excused and
Commissioner Mark Ramey was unexcused.
Staff present included: City Attorny Dan Heid, Planning and Development Interim Director
Jeff Tate, Planning Manager Elizabeth Chamberlain, Building Official Tom Ushing,
Administrateve and Business Services Manager Darcie Hanson.
Members of the audience included: Carl Yuhasz, Ken Allgeier, Kenneth Pflugradt, Julia A.
Short, Russ Campbell, Jean Lix, Hank Galmish, Autsin Cole and Marjory Dodel.
III. PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment on items not on this agenda.
IV. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
Interim Director Tate announced the hire of a new Planning and Development Director
who will begin employment on August 5th. Nancy Welch will join us from Wisconsin.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Amendments to title 15 of the Auburn City Code (The Building Code) – Case
No. ZOA13-0002
There was no public testimony on the Amendments to the Auburn City Code Title 15
changes.
Commissioner Copple asked is the charts in the agenda packet would be included in
the code or if they were for information purposes only. Interim Director Tate replied
that they were for information only in this agenda packet.
Commissioner Copple moved to recommend approval, Commissioner Trout
seconded the motion.
Motion carried unanimously 5-0.
B. Amendment to Auburn City Code – Case No. ZOA13 -0003
Planning Manager Chamberlain explained the staff report and briefed those in
attendance on the history of why the code amendment is being brought forward.
She also explained why the current definition of family is in conflict with other areas
of city code. She also defined Boarding House and handed out a definition.
She went through the staff report and highlighted the items that need to be on the
record. She also entered into the exhibits a copy of an email from citizen Robert
Dewitt who had comments but was unable to attend the public hearing.
Chair Roland asked for a few minutes for the Commissioners to read the material
handed out. Chair Roland then opened the public hearing on case ZOA13-0003 at
7:32 p.m.
Russ Campbell, 31606 126th AVE SE, Auburn, WA. 98092 spoke about the fact that
he and his neighbors welcome this definition change but that the City of Auburn does
not lose site of the fact that there are houses being sold and used for student
housing as well as all of the previous ones that are causing issues.
The City of Auburn Planning Commission is an eight member advisory body that provides recommendations to the
Auburn City Council on the preparation of and amendments to land use plans and related codes such as zoning.
Planning Commissioners are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council.
Actions taken by the Planning Commission are not final decisions; they are in the form of recommendations to the
City Council who must ultimately make the final decision.
Hank Galmish, 12443 SE 318th ST, Auburn, WA. 98092 who lives in the Rainier
Ridge subdivision expressed thanks for the proposed definition changes and
expressed concern about the general upkeep of most of the houses being rented out
in the area. He is concerned about affects on property values, health and quality of
life. They have issues with garbage and vermin due to unkept houses.
Kenneth Pflugradt, 12725 SE 312th ST #H201, Auburn, WA. 98092 spoke that at
Gentry Walk Apartments they have issues with foreign students renting units and
then the management does not enforce the number of occupants allowed in the unit.
This creates issues such as garbage overflowing, rats and tenants cooking in
bathrooms.
There being no further requests to speak Chair Roland closed the public hearing at
7:44 p.m.
Commissioner Smith asked how long has the current definition been in place?
Planning Manager Chamberlain stated she would have to research the answer. He
wanted to change the definition of boarding house as well. Chair Roland reminded
him that the proposal on the table for discussion was to change the definition of
family only.
Commissioner Mason asked about the timing of the change and when it would be
effective. Planning Manager Chamberlain explained it would be mid July before it
would be through the Council Committees and to full Council for review.
There was brief discussion on why we are proposing this change now rather than
waiting until we can look at the whole student housing issue. Planning Manager
Chamberlain and Attorney Heid explained that it is due to the conflict that current
code creates.
Commissioner Couture motioned to forward these changes for approval.
Commissioner Smith seconded.
Motion carried 3-2 with Commissioners Trout and Mason voting no.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chair Roland
adjourned the meeting at 8:01 p.m.
Zoning Code Text Amendment ZOA13-0003
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
August 7, 2013
Page 1
Zoning Code Text Amendment
ZOA13-0003
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
I. BACKGROUND AND GENERAL INFORMATION:
Over the last several months a number of residents who live in the single family residential
communities that are located nearby Green River Community College (GRCC) have
expressed concern that they are observing a spike in rental homes in their neighborhood
that are occupied by students of GRCC. Their concerns include:
• Parking impacts,
• Unpermitted conversion of garages to living space,
• Overcrowding of single family homes with too many occupants,
• Lack of proper solid waste management,
• Noise impacts, and
• An overall conversion of single family residences to rentals.
This staff report outlines the proposed amendments and program approach to rental
housing, more specifically addressed to rentals within single family neighborhoods.
II. SEPA STATUS:
Pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(6), non-project actions such as code amendments are not
exempt from environmental review. The City issued a Determination of Non-Significance
August 5, 2013. The comment period ends August 19, 2013 and the appeal period ends
on September 3, 2013.
III. FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. In general, the intent of the proposed zoning code amendments is to address an
inconsistency in the code and comments received from citizens related to student/rental
housing. The City originally broke the project into two phases but through the review
process ultimately determined that a holistic program approach was needed.
2. The process for zoning code text amendments is described in ACC Chapter 18.68:
18.68.020 Initiation of amendments.
B. Text.
1. The city council, or planning and development committee of the city council, upon its
own motion may request the planning commission to conduct a public hearing to amend
any portion or all of this title; provided, that text amendments that are purely
administrative or procedural do not require a public hearing, nor do they require
preliminary review or recommendations of the planning commission;
2. The planning commission may upon its own motion call for a public hearing to amend
any portion or all of this title, with the exception of purely administrative or procedural
amendments;
Zoning Code Text Amendment ZOA13-0003
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
August 7, 2013
Page 2
3. Any resident or property owner of the city may petition the city to request an
amendment to the text of this title.
C. For the purposes of this chapter, substantive amendments shall be distinguished
from procedural or administrative amendments in accordance with the following:
“Substantive” matters relate to regulations that define or limit what can be done in terms
of conduct, use or action (e.g., what use may be made of land, what requirements apply
to development, what public infrastructure may be required of certain developments),
and “procedural” or “administrative” matters are those that relate to the process of how
an application to take such action must be pursued (e.g., time limits for applications and
appeals, what forms must be used, and where or how applications must be submitted.
Essentially, “procedural” or “administrative” matters are the mechanical rules by which
substantive issues may be pursued). (Ord. 6287 § 2, 2010; Ord. 6198 § 3, 2008; Ord.
4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4304 § 1(46), 1988; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.)
18.68.030 Public hearing process.
A. Text Amendments. With the exception of purely administrative or procedural
amendments, the planning commission shall conduct at least one public hearing on all
amendments to this title. The planning commission shall make a recommendation to the
city council who may or may not conduct a public hearing.
C. City Council Decision. The city council may affirm, modify or disaffirm any
recommendation of the planning commission or hearing examiner with regard to
amendments of the text or map of this title. (Ord. 6198 § 4, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996;
Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.)
18.68.040 Public hearing notice requirements.
A. Text Amendments.
1. Planning Commission. For text amendments that require a public hearing under ACC
18.68.030(A), notice of a public hearing shall be given by publication, in a newspaper of
general circulation in the area, at least 10 days prior to the public hearing and by posting
the notice in three general public locations.
2. City Council. Notice of a public hearing shall be given by publication, in a newspaper
of general circulation in the area, prior to the public hearing and by posting the notice in
three general public locations.
3. The proposed code amendments are supported by the City of Auburn Comprehensive
Plan as identified in the conclusion section of this staff report.
4. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(6), non-project actions such as code amendments are
not exempt from environmental review. The City issued a Determination of Non-
Significance August 5, 2013. The comment period ends August 19, 2013 and the
appeal period ends on September 3, 2013. As of the writing of this report, no
comments have been received.
5. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed code amendments outlined in this staff
report were sent to the Washington State Department of Commerce and other state
agencies as required for the 60-day state review required for modification of
development regulations. The amendments were sent on August 5, 2013 and expedited
review was requested under RCW 36.70A.106(3)(b). The Department of Commerce
Zoning Code Text Amendment ZOA13-0003
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
August 7, 2013
Page 3
acknowledged receipt on August 7, 2013. Expedited review has not been granted as of
the writing of this staff report. If the expedited review request is denied then the
standard 60-days applies from the submittal date of August 5, 2013.
6. Staff presented the proposed code amendment concepts and program approach to the
Planning Commission and Planning and Community Development Committee at a joint
meeting held on August 12, 2013 for review and discussion.
7. The public hearing notice was published on August 8, 2013 in the Seattle Times at least
10-days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for August 20,
2013. The public hearing notice was also posted at the City’s Annex Building at One
East Main Street and on the City’s website.
8. The following conclusions support the proposed amendment to Title 18, Zoning, and
Title 5, Business and Licenses Regulations scheduled for the Planning Commission’s
August 20, 2013 public hearing with a staff recommendation.
IV. CONCLUSIONS:
1. Pursuant to ACC Section 18.68.020, amendments of Title 18 require a public hearing
before the Planning Commission with a public hearing notice published at least 10-days
prior to the public hearing date.
Staff Analysis:
The public hearing notice was published in the Seattle Times on August 8, 2013 which is
at least 10-days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for August
20, 2013. The public hearing notice was also posted at the City’s Annex Building at One
East Main Street and on the City’s website.
2. These code amendments are supported by the City of Auburn’s Comprehensive Plan as
follows:
GP-2: The City should develop its plans and programs after thorough analysis of
community problems, potentials, and needs.
Chapter 4 – Housing: Auburn’s housing strategy is for home buyers and renters of all
income groups have sufficient opportunities to procure affordable housing.
HO – 28: The City recognizes that the development of safe neighborhoods requires
the cooperation of property owners and/or their property managers. The City shall
organize, educate, and assist property managers in the creation and preservation of
safe neighborhoods.
Staff Analysis:
The proposed code amendments address rental housing within the City of Auburn, more
specifically student rental housing, and deal with existing conflicts within the Auburn City
Code. Staff proposes to amend the following:
Zoning Code Text Amendment ZOA13-0003
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
August 7, 2013
Page 4
Title 18 – Zoning
• Amend the definition of family
• Amend the definition of dwelling
• Add a new definition communal residence
• Add a new definition owner occupied
• Delete the boardinghouse definition
• Add a new section to Supplemental Development Standards for Communal
Residence
Title 5 – Business and Licenses Regulations
• Amend Rental Housing Business License section by adding licensing
requirements for Communal Residence
• Housekeeping item changing the fiscal year to calendar year
The proposed code amendments balance the allowance of rental housing within residential
neighborhoods and address issues associated with rental housing that have arisen such a
parking, solid waste service, yard maintenance, and noise. Particularly with the proposed
amendments to Title 5, a heavier burden is placed on the owner/landlord of the rental unit to
make sure tenants are following regulations and being good neighbors within the
community. If the conditions of the rental housing business license are not adhered to, the
City may revoke the license and move into code enforcement action. Code enforcement
procedures are outlined in Chapter 1.25 of the Auburn City Code. Staff will bring additional
information regarding code enforcement procedures to the August 20, 2013 public hearing.
The proposed amendments also address potential safety concerns, such as illegal garage
conversions and number of bedrooms, by requiring an annual inspection of the rental unit
verifying the information submitted with rental housing business license application is
correct. A primary goal of the proposed code amendments is to address the situation where
individual leases for each bedroom in a unit exist versus the traditional rental housing
situation where there is one lease for the occupants by requiring more oversight by the
landlord and requiring an annual inspection of the rental property/unit.
Also as part of the overall program, the City will be adding a page to its website on rental
housing with information for landlords, tenants, FAQs, a list of compliant properties, and the
application forms. We will also be working with Green River Community College and
request that they also include similar information on their website.
V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION/DECISION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval
of the proposed code amendment as presented.
VI. EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 Proposed code changes Auburn City Code
Exhibit 2 Request to Department of Commerce for Expedited State Review
Zoning Code Text Amendment ZOA13-0003
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
August 7, 2013
Page 5
Exhibit 3 Department of Commerce acknowledgement letter
Exhibit 4 Request to publish hearing notice in newspaper
Exhibit 5 Environmental Checklist
Exhibit 6 Determination of Non-Significance
Exhibit 7 Comments Letters Received
Exhibit 8 Table of Other Jurisdictions Regulations
Staff Report Prepared by: Elizabeth Chamberlain, Planning Services Manager
ZOA13-0003
Proposed Code Amendments
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Version 1
August 20, 2013
Page 1
Title 18 – Zoning
Chapter 18.04
Definitions
18.04.180 Boardinghouse.
“Boardinghouse” means any dwelling in which three or more persons, either individually or as
families, are housed or lodged for hire with or without meals. A roominghouse or a furnished-
room house is a boardinghouse. (Ord. 6245 § 3, 2009; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.)
18.04.XXX Communal residence.
A dwelling, without an owner occupant, that is rented to a group of unrelated individuals.
18.04.330 Dwelling.
“Dwelling” means a building designed exclusively for residential purposes for occupancy by a
person, or family, or unrelated group with one or more rooms for living and sleeping purposes,
containing kitchen facilities and rooms with internal accessibility, including single-family, two-
family, and multiple-family dwellings, and townhouse dwellings but not including hotels or motel
units without kitchens. (Ord. 6245 § 3, 2009; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.)
18.04.340 Dwellings, types of.
“Types of dwellings” means:
A. Dwelling, Single-Family. “Single-family dwelling” means a detached building designed
exclusively for occupancy by one family or communal residence and containing one dwelling
unit that is permanently attached to the ground. A manufactured home may be considered a
single-family dwelling if sited per ACC 18.31.050.
B. Dwelling, Two-Family (Duplex). “Two-family dwelling” or “duplex” means a building designed
exclusively for occupancy by two families or communal residence living independently of each
other, and containing two dwelling units.
C. Dwelling, Multiple-Family. “Multiple-family dwelling” means a building designed for occupancy
by three or more families or communal residence living independently of each other, and
containing three or more dwelling units.
D. Dwelling, Townhouse. “Townhouse dwelling” means a building designed exclusively for
occupancy by one family or communal residence, occupying space from the ground to the roof
and not lying vertically under or over adjacent units, and attached to one or more other dwelling
units by common walls. (Ord. 6245 § 3, 2009; Ord. 6162 § 1, 2008; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.)
18.04.350 Dwelling unit.
“Dwelling unit” means one or more rooms designed for or occupied by one family or communal
residence for living or sleeping purposes and containing kitchen facilities for use solely by one
family. All rooms comprising a dwelling unit shall have access through an interior door to other
parts of the dwelling unit. An efficiency apartment, also known as a studio apartment,
constitutes a dwelling unit within the meaning of this title. (Ord. 6245 § 3, 2009; Ord. 4229 § 2,
1987.)
18.04.360 Family.
ZOA13-0003
Proposed Code Amendments
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Version 1
August 20, 2013
Page 2
“Family” means a person living alone, two or more persons related by blood or marriage, or any
other analogous family union recognized under Federal and/or State statute, or a group of eight
or fewer residents who are not related by blood or marriage customarily living together as a
single housekeeping unit and using common cooking facilities, as distinguished from a group
occupying a hotel, club, boardinghouse or lodginghouse or communal residence. For the
purposes of this definition, minors living with a parent shall not be counted as part of the
maximum number of residents. The purpose of defining family is to assist in the regulation of
occupancy standards within dwelling units and to define different types of structures; it is not
intended to interfere with the civil rights of individuals who establish relationships under the
terms of state and federal laws. (Ord. 6245 § 3, 2009; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.)
18.04.XXX Owner occupied unit.
A dwelling unit in which the owner resides on a regular, permanent basis.
18.04.794 Renting of rooms.
“Renting of rooms” means the provision of rooms for lodging purposes to not more than two
persons in addition to the owner occupant and/or family who lives in the residence. (Ord. 6245 §
3, 2009.)
Chapter 18.07
RESIDENTIAL ZONES
Sections:
18.07.010 Intent.
18.07.020 Uses.
18.07.030 Development standards.
18.07.020 Uses.
Table 18.07.020
Permitted Use Table – Residential Zoning Designations
P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted
Land Uses Zoning Designations
RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-
10
R-
16 R-20
A. Residential Uses.
ZOA13-0003
Proposed Code Amendments
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Version 1
August 20, 2013
Page 3
Accessory dwelling units P P P P X1 X1 X1
Accessory use, residential P P P P P P P
Adult family home P P P P P P P
Bed and breakfast P P P P P P P
Boardinghouses (with three or more boarders) X X X X C C C
Communal Residence 4 or less unrelated individuals P P P P P P P
Communal Residence more than 4 unrelated individuals C C C C C C C
Duplexes; provided, that minimum lot size of zoning designation is
met and subject to compliance with Chapter 18.25 ACC (Infill
Residential Development Standards)
X X A P P P X
Foster care homes P P P P P P P
Group residence facilities (7 or more residents) X X X X C C C
Group residence facilities (6 or fewer residents) P P P P P P P
Keeping household pets4 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2
Multiple-family dwellings X X X X A P P
Neighborhood recreational buildings and facilities owned and
managed by the neighborhood homeowners’ association A6 A6 A6 A6 A6 P P
Renting of rooms, for lodging purposes only, to accommodate not
more than two persons in addition to the immediate family or owner
occupied unit
P P P P P P P
Residential care facilities including but not limited to assisted living
facilities, convalescent homes, continuing care retirement facilities P P X X A P P
ZOA13-0003
Proposed Code Amendments
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Version 1
August 20, 2013
Page 4
Single-family detached dwellings, new P P P P P P X
Supportive housing, subject to the provisions of ACC 18.31.160 X X X X X P P
Swimming pools, tennis courts and similar outdoor recreation uses
only accessory to residential or park uses P P P P P P P
Townhouses (attached) X X X X P P P
B. Commercial Uses.
Commercial horse riding and bridle trails A X X X X X X
Commercial retail, included as part of mixed-use development and
not a home occupation in compliance with Chapter 18.60 ACC X X X X A A A
Daycare, limited to a mini daycare center. Daycare center, preschool
or nursery school may also be permitted but must be located on an
arterial
X A A A A A A
Home-based daycare as regulated by RCW 35.63.185 and through
receipt of approved city business license P P P P P P P
Home occupations subject to compliance with Chapter 18.60 ACC P P P P P P P
Mixed-use development3 X X X X P P P
Nursing homes X X X X C C C
Private country clubs and golf courses, excluding driving ranges X X C C C X X
Privately owned and operated parks and playgrounds and not
homeowners’ association-owned recreational area X A A A A P P
Professional offices, included as part of mixed-use development and
not a home occupation in compliance with Chapter 18.60 ACC X X X X A A A
ZOA13-0003
Proposed Code Amendments
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Version 1
August 20, 2013
Page 5
C. Resource Uses.
Agricultural enterprise:7
When 50 percent, or more, of the total site area is dedicated to active
agricultural production during the growing season, and with 52 or less
special events per calendar year
A7 X X X X X X
When less than 50 percent of the total site area is dedicated to active
agricultural production during the growing season, or with more than
52 special events per calendar year
C7 X X X X X X
Agricultural type uses are permitted provided they are incidental and
secondary to the single-family use:
Agricultural crops and open field growing (commercial) P X X X X X X
Barns, silos and related structures P X X X X X X
Commercial greenhouses P X X X X X X
Pasturing and grazing4 P X X X X X X
Public and private stables4 P X X X X X X
Roadside stands, for the sale of agricultural products raised on the
premises. The stand cannot exceed 300 square feet in area and must
meet the applicable setback requirements
P X X X X X X
Fish hatcheries C X X X X X X
D. Government, Institutional, and Utility Uses.
Civic, social and fraternal clubs X X X X A A A
Government facilities A A A A A A A
ZOA13-0003
Proposed Code Amendments
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Version 1
August 20, 2013
Page 6
Hospitals (except animal hospitals) X X X X X C C
Municipal parks and playgrounds A P P P P P P
Museums X X X X A A A
Religious institutions, less than one acre lot size A A A A A A A
Religious institutions, one acre or larger lot size C C C C C C C
Transmitting towers C C C C C C C
Type 1-D Wireless Communication Facility (see ACC 18.04.912(J)) P P P P P P P
Utility facilities and substations C5 C5 C5 C5 C5 C5 C5
1. An accessory dwelling unit may be permitted with an existing single-family residence pursuant to ACC
18.31.120.
2. Please see the supplemental development standards for animals in ACC 18.31.210.
3. Individual uses that make up a mixed-use development must be permitted within the zone. If a use
making up part of a mixed-use development requires an administrative or conditional use permit, the
individual use must apply for and receive the administrative or conditional use approval, as applicable.
4. Proximity of pasture or livestock roaming area to wells, surface waters, and aquifer recharge zones is
regulated by the King or Pierce County board of health, and property owners shall comply with the
provisions of the King County board of health code.
5. Excludes all public and private utility facilities addressed under ACC 18.02.040(E).
6. Administrative use permit not required when approved as part of a subdivision or binding site plan.
7. Agricultural enterprise uses are subject to supplemental development standards under ACC 18.31.210,
Agricultural enterprises development standards.
(Ord. 6369 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6363 § 3, 2011; Ord. 6269 § 3, 2009; Ord. 6245 § 5, 2009.)
Chapter 18.31
SUPPLEMENTAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Sections:
18.31.010 Daycare standards.
18.31.020 Fences.
18.31.030 Height limitations – Exceptions.
18.31.040 Lots.
18.31.050 Single-family dwelling siting and design standards.
18.31.060 Recreational vehicle parks.
18.31.070 Setbacks.
18.31.080 Heliports.
18.31.090 Work release, prerelease and similar facilities.
18.31.100 Wireless communications facilities siting standards.
18.31.110 Siting of microcells.
ZOA13-0003
Proposed Code Amendments
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Version 1
August 20, 2013
Page 7
18.31.115 Wetland mitigation.
18.31.120 Accessory dwelling units.
18.31.130 Reserved Communal Residence.
18.31.140 Gated residential subdivisions.
18.31.150 Secure community transition facilities.
18.31.160 Supportive housing development standards.
18.31.170 Reserved.
18.31.180 Performance standards.
18.31.190 Supplemental development standards for residential mobile home communities.
18.31.200 Architectural and site design review standards and regulations.
18.31.210 Agricultural enterprises development standards.
18.31.220 Permitted animals.
18.31.230 Table of allowed districts
18.31.130 Communal Residence
A. Parking Requirements
1. There must be one off-street parking stall per renter. A landlord may reduce the off-
street parking requirement if an affidavit is signed that a tenant does not own a vehicle.
B. Solid Waste Management Requirements
1. ACC Section 8.08.070 requires all occupied units to have minimum garage service.
The landlord is required to provide tenants with adequate garbage and recycle receptacles
meeting the minimum garage service level.
2. The landlord is responsible to provide each tenant with the solid waste collection
schedule and that schedule is to be posted within the unit.
C. An annual building inspection is required for a communal residence as part of the required
rental housing business license.
D. International Property Maintenance Code occupancy requirements are applicable to a
communal residence regardless of the number of individuals living in the residence.
E. Amortization Schedule
1. Existing communal residences have 6 months to become compliant with the
regulations outlined in this Title as it pertains to communal residences.
F. The following criteria are required to be met for any communal residence over 4 unrelated
individuals in addition to the required criteria for a conditional use permit under ACC 18.64.040.
As stated in ACC 18.07.XXX, a conditional use permit is required.
1. Adequate living space based on the International Property Maintenance Code
standards will be taken into account when a request for more than 4 unrelated individuals is
requested.
2. A designated property manager that is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week is
required.
3.The request for more than 4 unrelated individuals will not adversely impact the
surrounding community.
4. The applicant must show how noise will be mitigated.
Chapter 5.22
RENTAL HOUSING BUSINESS LICENSE AND STRATEGIES
Sections:
ZOA13-0003
Proposed Code Amendments
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Version 1
August 20, 2013
Page 8
5.22.010 Definitions.
5.22.020 Business license – Fee.
5.22.030 Advisory board on rental housing.
5.22.040 Rental housing business license criteria.
5.22.050 License application – Required – Form.
5.22.060 License application – Approval or disapproval procedure.
5.22.070 License – Display – Nontransferability – Responsibility.
5.22.080 License – Revocation.
5.22.090 Employment of law enforcement officers.
5.22.100 Duty to comply with all federal, state and local laws and regulations – Business
license revocation.
5.22.110 Reimbursement for transitional costs.
5.22.120 Violation – Penalty.
5.22.130 Nonexclusive enforcement.
5.22.020 Business license – Fee.
Each rental housing business operating in the city, as defined herein, shall obtain and maintain
in good standing a “rental housing business license” issued by the city in accordance with the
procedures of this chapter and this title.
A. The fee for a rental housing business license shall be as set forth in the city of Auburn fee
schedule.
B. The business license fee shall be for the fiscal calendar year (July 1st through June
30thJanuary 1st through December 31st), and each applicant for the business license must pay
the full business license fee for the current fiscal calendar year or portion thereof during which
the applicant has engaged in business, regardless of when during the fiscal calendar year the
license is obtained.
C. The rental housing business license fee required by this chapter is in lieu of, and not in
addition to, the general business license fee required by Chapters 5.05 and 5.10 ACC; provided,
however, that any person required to obtain a rental housing business license must also obtain
a general business license, at no cost, pursuant to Chapters 5.05 and 5.10 ACC. (Ord. 5882 §
1, 2005; Ord. 5651 § 1, 2002.)
5.22.040 Rental housing business license criteria.
A. Managers and operators of rental housing businesses shall comply with the criteria
established in this section and chapter in order to maintain their rental housing business license
in good standing as required by ACC 5.22.020. The city shall identify and communicate with the
managers and operators of rental housing businesses, as it deems appropriate, regarding the
criteria established in this chapter. The city shall establish forums for information sharing and
enforcement review, as it deems appropriate, in order to encourage voluntary compliance with
these criteria prior to mandatory enforcement. Rental housing business owners or their non-
owner managers shall comply as necessary with the following specific criteria as well as all
other requirements of this chapter in order to maintain their business license in good standing:
1. Attendance and participation in crime-free housing training programs when such
are offered by the Auburn police department or other city department and the
license holder is given written notice to attend. Attendance and participation may
be required by the city whenever a residential unit is the location for any criminal or
nuisance activity which results in an arrest for criminal activity or the issuance of an
ZOA13-0003
Proposed Code Amendments
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Version 1
August 20, 2013
Page 9
infraction citation in the case of a nuisance, whether or not the arrestee or cited
person is a tenant;
2. Mutually derived crime prevention strategies as established and agreed to by
and between the city and the rental housing owner and/or manager;
3. City directed crime prevention strategies. If the implementation of criteria in
subsections (A)(1) and (2) of this section is unsuccessful in eliminating recurring
criminal or nuisance activity the city will notify the rental housing business owner or
manager in writing of the requirement to comply with a particular city directed crime
prevention strategy. The city may implement a city directed crime prevention
strategy whenever a residential unit is the location for any criminal or nuisance
activity which results in an arrest or issuance of a citation whether or not the
person arrested or cited is a tenant. Strategies will be reasonably tailored to the
particular location and situation and will be consistent with strategies implemented
by other municipalities in similar situations;
4. Upon written request, the rental housing owner or manager shall allow
inspection of rental housing residential units consistent with their ability to do so
under the requirements of the landlord-tenant statutes of the state of Washington
and the Auburn City Code. The city may, with the legally obtained consent of an
occupant or owner, or pursuant to a lawfully issued warrant, enter any building,
structure or premises in the city to inspect or perform any duty imposed by this
code;
5. In the event that recurring criminal or nuisance activity continues at any
particular location which is subject to the licensing requirements of this chapter and
the imposition of criteria in subsections (A)(1) through (4) of this section has failed
to eliminate the recurring criminal or nuisance activity at the location, the rental
housing owner may hire security officers selected by the manager-operator.
Voluntary implementation of manager-operator selected security shall stay
revocation of the business license so long as the security is effective in eliminating
the recurring criminal and/or nuisance activity at said licensed location;
6. In the event that criminal or nuisance activity continues to occur at any particular
location which is subject to the licensing requirements of this chapter and the
imposition of criteria in subsections (A)(1) through (4) of this section and
implementation of criteria in subsection (A)(5) of this section has failed to eliminate
recurring criminal or nuisance activity at the particular location the rental housing
owner may request or agree to city directed off-duty police security. Voluntary
implementation of city directed off-duty police security shall stay revocation of the
business license so long as the security is effective in eliminating ongoing criminal
and/or nuisance activity at the particular licensed location;
7. In the event that the rental housing business owner does not comply with criteria
in subsections (A)(1) through (6) of this section, the city may revoke the rental
housing business owner’s license. Business license revocation shall be the
ultimate resort for enforcement purposes. Business license revocation shall occur
as otherwise set out in this chapter.
B. The criteria listed above shall be implemented in a priority beginning with criteria in
subsection (A)(1) of this section and ending with criteria in subsection (A)(7) of this section. It is
envisioned that most problems can be resolved by participation in crime-free housing training
and implementation of its recommended practices. Failure to participate in strategies in
ZOA13-0003
Proposed Code Amendments
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Version 1
August 20, 2013
Page 10
subsections (A)(1) through (6) of this section may subject the licensed/registered party to
revocation. Any expense incurred in connection with subsections (A)(2) through (5) of this
section will be borne by the licensed/registered party.
It is further provided that the “inspection of the residential units of rental housing units,”
subsection (A)(4) of this section, includes inspection of residential units in the complex for any
applicable health, building, fire, housing or life-safety code violations, or other serious violations.
(Ord. 5882 § 1, 2005; Ord. 5651 § 1, 2002.)
C. The following requirements are established for communal residences as defined in Title 18.
1. The owner/landlord must provide the following information and any additional
information on the rental business license application form at the time of submittal:
a. Total number of bedrooms in the rental unit
b. Total number of occupants
c. Total number of occupants who are students
2. The owner/landlord must provide updated information for each of the items outlined in
ACC 5.22.040(C)(1) each year with their rental business license renewal.
3. The owner/landlord must sign a statement that confirms their understanding and
acceptance of the conditions and obligations incurred as a landlord. At a minimum, the
statement will:
a. Outline the landlord’s responsibilities for providing a safe living environment
for their tenants.
b. That structural additions and modifications are to be properly permitted and
inspected.
c. That garbage and recycling will be properly managed.
d. That adequate off-street parking will be provided for all tenants meeting the
requirements of ACC 18.31.130.
e. That noise and other public nuisances will be monitored and controlled.
f. That annual inspections are required in order to obtain a rental housing
business license.
g. That anyone under the age of 18 is subject to the curfew regulations in ACC
9.10.
4. If the owner/landlord is in violation of the requirements for a communal residence,
then the code enforcement actions outlined in Chapter 1.25 will be taken.
1
Elizabeth Chamberlain
From:Elizabeth Chamberlain
Sent:Monday, August 05, 2013 4:27 PM
To:'DAHP'; 'larry.fisher@dfw.wa.gov'; 'ramin.pazooki@wsdot.wa.gov'; 'DNR';
'sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov'; 'MIT Cultural Program'; 'WA DOC'; 'Washington Environmental
Council'; 'Auburn School District'; Dave Hill; 'City of Federal Way'; 'Corbin, Douglas L';
'Futurewise'
Subject:DNS - two non-project action code amendments
Attachments:20130805154450514.pdf; Revised Checklist Student_Rental Housing.pdf; Proposed Code
Amendments and program SEPA version.pdf; 20130805154441529.pdf; Checklist C-1 Zone
Amendments.pdf; Multi Family Amendments SEPA version.pdf
Good Afternoon,
Attached please find the following:
Revised DNS, checklist, and proposed code amendments related to student/rental housing within the
City
DNS, checklist, and proposed code amendments related to the C-1, Light Commercial Zone, mixed use
requirements
The City anticipates a public hearing before the Planning Commission on August 20, 2013 and City Council
action in September.
For commerce – the City will be requesting expedited review for the proposed code amendments and will be
sending that request shortly under separate cover.
If there are any questions please let me know.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth
Elizabeth F. Chamberlain, AICP
Planning Manager
City of Auburn
253-931-3092
Dear Ms. Chamberlain:
Senior Planner
City of Auburn
25 W Main Street
Auburn, Washington 98001-4998
Thank you for sending the Washington State Department of Commerce (Commerce) the following materials
as required under RCW 36.70A.106. Please keep this letter as documentation that you have met this
procedural requirement.
August 7, 2013
Elizabeth Chamberlain
City of Auburn - Proposed code amendments related to student/rental housing and proposed code
amendments related to the C-1, Light Commercial Zone, mixed use requirements. These materials
were received on August 06, 2013 and processed with the material ID # 19421. Expedited Review is
requested under RCW 36.70A.106(3)(b).
If this submitted material is an adopted amendment, then please keep this letter as documentation that you
have met the procedural requirement under RCW 36.70A.106.
If you have submitted this material as a draft amendment requesting expedited review, then we have
forwarded a copy of this notice to other state agencies for expedited review and comment. If one or more
state agencies indicate that they will be commenting, then Commerce will deny expedited review and the
standard 60-day review period (from date received) will apply. Commerce will notify you by e-mail regarding
of approval or denial of your expedited review request. If approved for expedited review, then final adoption
may occur no earlier than fifteen calendar days after the original date of receipt by Commerce. Please
remember to submit the final adopted amendment to Commerce within ten days of adoption.
If you have any questions, please contact Growth Management Services at reviewteam@commerce.wa.gov,
or call Dave Andersen (509) 434-4491 or Paul Johnson (360) 725-3048.
Sincerely,
Review Team
Growth Management Services
REQUEST TO PUBLISH
Please publish the following Notice of Public Hearing in the Seattle Times on August 8, 2013
Bill the City of Auburn: City of Auburn
ATT: City Clerk
25 West Main
Auburn, WA. 98001
An "Affidavit of Publication" is requested for this billing. Thank you.
CITY OF AUBURN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Planning Commission of the City of Auburn, Washington, will conduct a public hearing on Tuesday,
August 20, 2013 at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Auburn City Hall located at 25 West Main
Street on the following:
Case Number ZOA13-0003: Amendment to Auburn City Code
The proposal amends the Auburn City Code related student/rental housing. The proposed amendments
affect Title 18, Zoning, and Title 5, Business and Licenses Regulations.
Case Number ZOA13-0005: Amendment to Auburn City Code
The proposal amends the Auburn City Code related to the C-1, Light Commercial, Zone. Specifically, the
proposed code amendments address mixed-use development standards.
Case No. ZOA13-0004: Amendment to ACC 16.10.110, Critical Areas Regulations
Amendment to the critical areas regulations to authorize mitigation to be located outside the City under
certain circumstances which is currently not allowed.
The public hearing will be held in the Council Chambers, Auburn City Hall, located at 25 West Main
Street. The public is invited to attend to express comments or opinions. Written comments may be
submitted up until and at the public hearing for ZOA13-0003 and ZOA13-0005 to Elizabeth Chamberlain,
Planning Services Manager, Planning and Development Department, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA
98001-4988 or Jeff Dixon, Principal Planner, for ZOA13-0004 at the same address. If you have further
comments or questions, please contact Elizabeth Chamberlain at echamberlain@auburnwa.gov or at
(253) 931-3092.
For citizens with speech, sight or hearing disabilities wishing to review documents pertaining to this
hearing, should contact the City of Auburn within 10 calendar days prior to the meeting, as to the type of
service or equipment needed. Each request will be considered individually according to the type of
request, the availability of resources, and the financial ability of the City to provide the requested services
or equipment.
Planning and Development Department
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Page 1 of 16
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Student/Rental Housing Code Amendments
2. Name of Applicant:
City of Auburn
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Applicant:
Planning and Development Department
25 West Main
Auburn, WA 98001-4998
Elizabeth Chamberlain, AICP, Planning Services Manager
(253) 931-3092
4. Date checklist prepared:
Original Checklist – June 3, 2013 (Phase 1 of the code amendments)
Revised checklist - August 1, 2013 (code amendments not being broken into phases)
5. Agency requesting checklist:
City of Auburn
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
Environmental Review – August 2013
Planning Commission Public Hearing – August 20, 2013
City Council Review – September 2013
City Council Action – September 2013
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related
to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
The City issued a DNS in June 2013 for Phase 1 of the student/rental housing code
amendments which was to amend the definition of family. After further review, the City
determined that breaking the code amendments into phases was not the best course of
action so the project is moving forward as one phase.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or
will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 2 of 16
Determination of Non-Significance issued June 3, 2013 for the amendment to the
definition of family.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of
other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes,
explain.
None.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if
known.
The City of Auburn Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the proposed
code amendments addressed in this environmental checklist and will forward a
recommendation to the Auburn City Council. The City Council may or may not hold a
public hearing prior to taking action adopting, adopting in part, or not adopting the
amendments.
Although not an approval or permit, the proposed zoning text amendments are also
subject to the 60-day State Agency review process pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106. The
City will be requesting expedited review.
11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses
and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this
checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You need not
repeat those answers on this page.
The City has recently been faced with issues related to student/rental housing near
Green River Community College. The City will be proposing several code amendments
to Title 18, Zoning, and Title 5, Business Licenses and Regulation, to address rental
housing.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand
the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any,
and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a
range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal
description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available.
While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required
to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related
to this checklist.
The proposed code amendment would be applicable city wide.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS:
1. Earth:
A. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes,
mountainous, other.
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 3 of 16
The City of Auburn is characterized by a relatively flat valley floor bordered by steep hillsides
that plateau.
B. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
The slope of the valley walls in the city varies, but some slopes associated with the
valley walls reach 100%. Most sites on the valley floor have limited slopes.
C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel,
peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and
note any prime farmland.
The valley floor is made up primarily of soils of the Oridia, Renton, Snohomish and Briscott
series. These soils are fairly poorly drained and formed in the alluvium (river sediments)
associated with the White and Green rivers. These are considered good agricultural soils,
though in many areas, are not well-drained. There is no designated prime farmland within
the City of Auburn.
The soils in the uplands are predominantly of the Alderwood series. These soils drain
moderately well and are typically located on slopes ranging from 0 - 70%.
D. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity? If so, describe.
Many factors affect slope stability including soil type, parent material, slope and
drainage. These factors can be further affected by human intervention such as slope
alteration, and vegetation removal. The city has identified categories of geologic hazard
areas and inventoried these areas. Maps of the erosion and landslide hazard areas are
provided as Maps 9.6 and 9.7, respectively in the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
E. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading
proposed. Indicate source of fill.
Not applicable. The proposed amendments are non-project actions, so no site
alteration, construction, or earthwork is proposed.
F. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally
describe.
Not applicable. Non-project action.
G. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after
project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
Not applicable. The action does not involve site specific development proposals
H. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth.
This is a non-project action so no site specific erosion control is proposed. However, the
existing comprehensive plan includes numerous policies to reduce or control erosion
through the use of best management practices, landscaping requirements, limitations on
alteration of steep slopes and other critical areas protections. Impacts to earth will be
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 4 of 16
identified and, if necessary, mitigated during the development review process as specific
development proposals are made that might be associated with these plan amendments.
The city also has design and construction standards that address erosion control
measures.
2. Air:
A. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust,
automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project
is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if know.
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
B. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odors that may affect your
proposal? If so, generally describe.
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
3. Water:
A. Surface:
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site
(including year round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands): If
yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it
flows into.
The major bodies of water within Auburn are the Green River, the White River, Mill
Creek, Bowman Creek, and White Lake. The City has conducted an inventory of
wetlands within the city limits. These are shown on Map 9.3 of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the
described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans.
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or
removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that
would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material.
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 5 of 16
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site
plan.
Proposal is non-project action.
However, several areas within Auburn lie within the 100-year floodplain of the Green or
White River and Mill Creek. These areas as well as frequently flooded areas as defined
by the City of Auburn Public Works Department are shown on Map 9.4 of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If
so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
Proposal is a non-project action.
B. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water?
Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks
or other sources, if any (for example: domestic sewage; industrial, containing any
toxic chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the
number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the
number of animals or humans the system(s) is (are) expected to serve.
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
C. Water Runoff (including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection
and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow?
Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe.
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
D. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water
impacts, if any:
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
4. Plants:
A. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 6 of 16
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other. X
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other. X
shrubs. X
grass. X
pasture. X
crop or grain. X
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage,
other.
X
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other. X
other types of vegetation. X
B. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
Not applicable. This is non-project action. However, in general urban development
results in the removal or alteration of many types of vegetation.
C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site:
None that are known.
D. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or
enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
5. Animals:
A. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are
known to be on or near the site:
Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: geese, ducks, crows, etc.
Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: urban animals such as dogs, cats,
squirrels, rodents, opossums, raccoons, etc. are also present in the city.
B. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
There are nesting/breeding sites of bald eagles, great blue herons and green back heron
within Auburn as shown on Map 9.2 of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The
Environmental Impact Statement for the Auburn Thoroughbred Racetrack indicates that
peregrine falcons, bald eagles, and the Aleutian Canadian Goose have been seen in the
Auburn area.
Chinook salmon are currently listed as a threatened species by the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS). Bull trout are also listed. Chinook salmon are known to use
the Green and White Rivers.
C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
Auburn is a portion of the Pacific Flyway for migratory birds.
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 7 of 16
D. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
6. Energy and Natural Resources:
A. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet
the completed project’s energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating,
manufacturing, etc.
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
B. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
properties? If so, generally describe.
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this
proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if
any:
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
7. Environmental Health:
A. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals,
risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this
proposal? If so, describe.
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required:
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
B. Noise:
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:
traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project
on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation,
other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site.
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 8 of 16
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impact, if any:
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
8. Land and Shoreline Use:
A. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
The City and PAA contain a variety of land uses including residential, industrial, commercial,
open space, and public land uses. The proposed code amendment would be applicable to
residential zoned property within the City.
B. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe:
Much of the Green River Valley and the City of Auburn were used for agriculture at some
time in the past. Over the last several decades, rapid growth in the area resulted in
much of the agricultural land converting to urban uses. No land within the city is
designated as agricultural, though some parcels continue as that type of use.
C. Describe any structures on the site:
Structures within the City range from small single family detached homes to large industrial
and warehousing facilities.
D. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
E. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
City zoning districts include: RR (Rural Residential); R-1 (1 du/acre) R-5 (5 du/acre); R-7
(7 du/acre); R-10 (10 du/acre), R-20 (20 du/acre); RMHP (Residential Manufactured
Home District); RO (Residential Office); RO-H (Residential Office-Hospital); CN
(Neighborhood Commercial); DUC (Downtown Urban Center); C1 (Light Commercial);
C2 (Central Business District); C3 (Heavy Commercial); M1 (Light Industrial); M2
(Heavy Industrial); BP (Business Park); LF (Airport Landing Field); P1 (Public Use); UNC
(Unclassified Use); I (Institutional Use); LH (Lea Hill).
The proposed code amendment would affect all the zoning districts.
F. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
A Comprehensive Plan map of the City is contained in the City’s Comprehensive Plan
and includes 13 different plan designations.
G. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the
site?
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 9 of 16
Portions of the City along the Green and White Rivers fall under the Shoreline Master
Program. A map of the shoreline designations for those areas is Map 9.1 of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan. Zoning districts that are applicable to this proposed code
amendment doe fall within the City’s Shoreline Management area.
H. Has any part of the site been classified as an “environmentally sensitive” area? If
so, specify:
Not applicable. This is a non-project action. However, areas of the City do have sensitive
areas and the regulation and protection of sensitive areas are addressed through the City’s
critical areas ordinance.
I. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
Not applicable. This is a non-project action and no specific development is proposed.
J. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
None specifically. Proposal is a non-project action.
K. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
None specifically. Proposal is a non-project action.
L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and
projected land uses and plans, if any:
None specifically. Proposal is a non-project action.
9. Housing:
A. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
B. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether
high, middle, or low-income housing.
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
10. Aesthetics:
A. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is
the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 10 of 16
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
B. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
11. Light and Glare:
A. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it
mainly occur?
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
B. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with
views?
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
D. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
12. Recreation:
A. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
The City of Auburn provides a full range of parks and recreational facilities. Map 11.1 of the
City’s Comprehensive Plan shows the location of these facilities.
B. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so,
describe.
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation including
recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation:
A. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local
preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe:
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 11 of 16
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
However as a matter of information, in Auburn, the Blomeen House located at 324 B Street
NE is on the National Register of Historic Places. The Carnegie Library Building at 306
Auburn Avenue (currently Auburn Dance and Music Center) and the Auburn Post Office
(currently Seattle-King County Health Department) at 20 Auburn Avenue NE are local and
county landmarks. The Olson Farm, located at 28728 Green River Road South, was
designated as King County Landmark in 2000 and the Masonic Temple Building at the
southeast corner of Auburn Way South and East Main Street was designated as a King
County Historical Landmark in 2002.
B. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological,
scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
Several Indian campsites have been identified along the Green and White rivers in the
Auburn Thoroughbred Racetrack EIS and in preliminary work for the Army Corps of
Engineers’ Special Area Management Plan.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
14. Transportation:
A. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access
to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
Figure 2-1 of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan (transportation element) shows the
City’s current and future classified street system.
B. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance
to the nearest transit stop?
Not applicable, non-project action. However, Figure 4-1 of the Comprehensive
Transportation Plan (transportation element) shows the location of public transit routes
within the City. Also, a commuter rail station exists along the Burlington Northern Santa
Fe railroad right-of-way just south of West Main Street and east of C Street SW.
C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would
the project eliminate?
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
D. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing
roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate
whether public or private):
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 12 of 16
E. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe:
There is no water transportation in the Auburn area other than for recreational uses.
The area is particularly well served by rail. At this time, local freight service is available.
Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union Pacific both operate freight lines within Auburn.
Auburn is also a commuter rail station site for the Sounder commuter rail line between
Tacoma and Seattle. Service began September 18, 2000. Amtrak trains pass through
Auburn but do not stop here. The Auburn Airport is located north of 15th Street NE.
F. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project?
If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
Not applicable. Non-project action.
G. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
Not applicable. Non-project action.
15. Public Services:
A. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire
protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe:
Not applicable. Non-project action.
B. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impact on public services, if any:
The comprehensive plan contains policies that seek to maintain a sufficient level of
service for public services as development occurs. Also, Auburn reviews under SEPA,
the impacts of significant development on these public services. Mitigation measures
are required to reduce significant adverse impacts.
16. Utilities:
A. Circle utilities currently available at the site:
Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other
– Cable TV.
All of the above utilities are available within the City of Auburn.
B. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service,
and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which
might be needed:
This is a non-project action. However, the Comprehensive Plan includes a utilities
element (as required by the Growth Management Act), which describes the utilities that
serve the Auburn area and includes policies for their provision.
Also, the city actively engages in planning for public facilities. A new Comprehensive
Water Plan and new Comprehensive Sewer Plan were adopted by the City in 2009. A
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 13 of 16
new Comprehensive Drainage Plan was adopted in 2009. A new six year Capital
Facilities Plan was adopted in 2012 (2013-2018).
These plans ensure that utility impacts are adequately monitored and evaluated on a
project level and city-wide basis.
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead
agency is relying on them to make its decision.
OWNER/AGENT SIGNATURE: Elizabeth Chamberlain
DATE SUBMITTED: August 1, 2013 _
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 14 of 16
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(Do not use this sheet for project actions.)
Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction
with the list of the elements of the environment.
When answering these questions, be aware of the extent of the proposal, or the types of
activities likely to result from the proposal that would affect the item at a greater intensity
or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in
general terms.
1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air;
production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of
noise?
The proposed code amendments to Title 18, Zoning, and Title 5, Business Licenses and
Regulations, should have a minimal change in discharging to water, emissions to air,
production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances or the production of noise.
While the proposed code amendment could apply to undeveloped property, the City’s
stormwater design manual addresses stormwater discharges and the City has other
regulations addressing emissions to air and hazardous substances.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are:
The City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan contains provisions to reduce increases or
emissions caused by new development. Emphasis in the Comprehensive Plan on reducing
the reliance on the automobile for transportation should reduce the amount of emissions to
the air. Policies in the Environment Chapter also provide guidance in the review of
development proposals to encourage native vegetation. This should support wildlife habitat
areas, particularly near streams, as the policies assist the City in addressing adverse
impacts to water quality and wildlife habitat from runoff since native plantings may require
less pesticide use.
An environmental review of all non-exempt (from SEPA) development will be conducted to
evaluate and mitigate impacts related to discharges, emissions, and the release of toxic
substances. Evaluation of the site specific proposals will be based on the policies of the
Comprehensive Plan and appropriate mitigation will take place on a case by case basis.
City development standards including but not limited to the critical areas ordinance,
shoreline master program regulations, and the Design and Construction Manuals, also
provide additional protection for these types of impacts.
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
The proposal is not likely affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life. However, as noted
below, the City has development standards to provide protection for these types of impacts.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are:
Generally, the adopted Auburn Comprehensive Plan and critical areas ordinance seek to
protect and conserve plants, animals, fish, and marine life. An environmental review under
SEPA of all non-exempt development is conducted to measure impacts. Evaluation based
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 15 of 16
on the policies of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan and appropriate mitigation will take place
on a case-by-case basis.
Policies within the Environment Chapter also provide guidance in the review of development
proposals to encourage native vegetation be used and/or retained. This should support
wildlife habitat areas, particularly near streams as the policies assist the city in addressing
adverse runoff impacts to water quality and wildlife habitat since native plantings may
require less pesticide use.
City development standards including but not limited to the critical areas ordinance and the
shoreline master program regulations also provide additional protection for these types of
impacts.
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
Future development will use natural gas and electricity and could result in increased
automobile uses. However, there does not appear to be any significant adverse increases
in the use of energy of natural resources resulting from the amendments being proposed to
the existing comprehensive plan over what might occur under existing plan designations.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
None specifically, as this is a non-project action. However, in addition to the provisions of
the Auburn Energy Management Plan (adopted in 1986), which encourages energy
conservation in public buildings, street lighting, and recycling, the comprehensive plan
places an emphasis on providing for alternative methods of travel to the automobile such as
transit, walking, and biking. An environmental review under SEPA of all significant
development will be conducted to measure the project impacts.
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or
areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as
parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat,
historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
Taken as a whole, there should not be any change in impacts from existing regulations on
environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated for government protection. Regulations are
in place to protect environmentally sensitive areas regardless of the use of the land or these
proposed code amendments.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
The comprehensive plan and, in particular, the critical areas ordinance, seek to protect
environmentally sensitive areas (wetlands, streams, geologically hazard areas, floodplain, wildlife
habitat, and aquifer recharge areas) and to reduce the impacts of development on them. The
Auburn Comprehensive Plan provides for the implementation of innovative land management
techniques to protect these resources. An environmental review under SEPA for all non-exempt
development will be conducted to evaluate impacts.
5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether
it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 16 of 16
Amendments can only be approved if it can be assured that future development is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and its policies and related regulations. Those
proposals that are not consistent with the comprehensive plan policies or other existing
plans will not be approved.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
The comprehensive plan, critical areas ordinance, and other development regulations, such
as the zoning ordinance and shoreline master program, seek to protect these land and
shoreline resources and to reduce the effects of development on them. An environmental
review under SEPA of all development that is non-exempt will also be conducted to evaluate
a proposal’s land use and environmental impacts.
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public
services and utilities?
The proposed amendment could lead towards development that may increase demands on
public services, the transportation network, and utilities. The City has adopted a traffic
impact fee structure to address impacts to the transportation network.
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
The Auburn Comprehensive Plan presently incorporates the 2013-2018 Capital Facilities
Plan updated, which seeks to maintain a sufficient level of service for public services as
development occurs.
Also, the city actively engages in planning for public facilities. The Comprehensive Water
Plan and Comprehensive Sewer Plan updates were adopted by the city in 2009. The
Comprehensive Drainage Plan update was also adopted in 2009. The Comprehensive
Transportation Plan was adopted in 2005 with updates during the 2006 and 2009
Comprehensive Plan amendment cycles. These plans help ensure that utility impacts are
adequately monitored and evaluated on a project level and city-wide basis.
7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal
laws or requirements for the protection of the environment.
The proposal does not appear to present any conflict with local, state, or federal laws or
requirements.
From:Jeff Tate
To:Elizabeth Chamberlain
Subject:FW: Follow Up Item From May 21st Community Meeting at Green River Community College
Date:Monday, June 17, 2013 12:47:32 PM
From: Robert Kent DeWitt [mailto:kent.dewitt@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 11:11 AM
To: Jeff Tate
Subject: Re: Follow Up Item From May 21st Community Meeting at Green River Community College
Good morning Mr. Tate,
Sorry for not get this done earlier.
A little about me first:
I am Robert Kent DeWitt, retired fire chief and former Asst. State Fire Marshal. I have a
Bachelors degree in Fire Command Administration but, more importantly, I have an AA
degree in Real Estate, which gives me some perspective on the issues related to residential
real estate here in my community.
I have a home in the Rainier Ridge development on Leah Hill. I purchased it about 10 years
ago, close to GRCC so my daughter could attend. I started renting rooms out to other
students while she was here so that she wouldn't be alone if I was off traveling (which I do a
lot of as I am retired).
I have continued to rent rooms to students because I am gone more than I am here and it
keeps the home occupied, which protects my property rather than being vacant and
uninsurable. I have had many international students over the years....some from Hong Kong,
mainland China, Taiwan, Viet Nam, Indonesia, Korea, California (?), and a few others that I
can't recall at the moment.
My house is a 4 bedroom rambler and I usually rent two rooms but have rented all of them on
occasion, depending on my plans for being here or not. I have also had ongoing maid service
to clean common areas as the students aren't big on cleaning other's messes. My yard is
professionally maintained as well. This protects my investment and keeps the neighbors
happy too.
I am familiar with various codes and have even been responsible for certain programs like
weed abatement requirements for maintenance of residential property. I am also aware of
building codes and requirements for habitable spaces. Both of these areas are generally
already in existing codes enforced by cities.
As a foreign traveler, I have visited over 23 countries around the world, many of them 3rd
world. Many cultures do not share the luxury of having a private bedroom for each person. In
my experience, the norm would be a shared room, sometimes entire families sharing one
sleeping room. I certainly do not advocate that but it is important to note what is relevant to
others.
I recently attended an informational meeting at GRCC where issues of concern to neighbors
were discussed. Some of my neighbors seemed upset and, perhaps a little racist, as to their
concerns about students living in their midst. They talked about cars being parked and about
speeding cars as well. The few times I have seen speeders here, they were not students but
others who live here. I was almost hit once when I pulled onto 318th Way from 126th by a
car doing about 40. I made a hand signal for him to slow down and he came racing back to
ask what I was complaining about. I told him the speed limit was 25 and he insisted it was 35
though he was doing about 40+. I digress!
I think that as a responsible homeowner (landlord?) living here that I have the right to rent
out individual rooms to students. I am filling part of a huge need for housing. The
neighborhood is evolving as it does in every other college neighborhood. There are already
sufficient rules and codes dealing with yard maintenance (nuisance abatement), garages being
converted to living space (building code and fire codes), on street parking, speeding, etc. We
DO NOT need more rules, just enforcement of those already in existence.
The tricky part of the issue is probably in the area of number of occupants to occupy a
bedroom. For the sake of my property, I usually limit one person to each of the regular
bedrooms. However, I have in the past rented a room to a student with a baby, who shared
the same bedroom. I have also rented out the master bedroom to a couple (married but what
difference?). In this day and age of marriage for same sex couples and for same sex couples
to live together as a couple, how in the world do you expect to regulate that and why would
you want to?
From a truly pragmatic point of view, I think it is the home owner who should decide how
many people he rents his property to, not the government. Government can and should
regulate that the property be maintained in a clean and safe manner. As a homeowner, I know
that the wear and tear on a property is significantly increased when the number of people in
residence increases. But that is my problem, not the city's problem.
So regulate and enforce rules about smoke detectors, emergency lights, yard maintenance,
parking regulations (don't block driveways, etc.). But we do not need government telling us
how many people can be in our homes. Common sense and economic conditions will dictate
this. If my neighbors are truly concerned, then they should realize that their properties' value
is determined by their highest and best use, and that that use is changing. GRCC is growing
as is the entire world. Things have changed in this neighborhood and given the proximity to
GRCC, it is going to become more reliant on the availability as a student housing option.
The campus apartments currently charge about $700 per student to live in a 4 bedroom
apartment. My home is only a couple blocks away and I charge $550. Theoretically I could
bring in $2,200 per month if I didn't maintain space for myself. That leaves a lot of room for
maintenance and management as well as potential profit. There are waiting lists for the
apartments and I have never had problems with renting out rooms, usually renting to kids
who are friends of the ones who are graduating and moving on. Homes such as mine are
necessary for the college to function as an international school.
As an added note, I declare the income I receive by renting out rooms. Someone at the school
once told me that there was an IRS ruling that said I didn't have to claim it as income. That
didn't seem to make sense so I continue to claim on my taxes. If others are not, then perhaps
there is a need to evaluate this "exclusion" as a means of controlling the potential growth of
rentals here in this neighborhood. But if my neighbors think that they can regulate room
rentals out of existence, then they should rethink their goals and realize that the economics of
it will dictate that this is no longer a simple neighborhood that will remain a cluster of
families living in isolation. The best use of the homes in this neighborhood is for auxiliary
student housing and that will be the future. Investors are going to buy our homes, not young
families. The values will be higher as a result and that should bode well for the existing
owners too.
I am sorry that I can not be there on the 18th. I will be visiting friends in Port Angeles and
then spending a few days in Oregon. However, I am willing to attend future meetings to
answer any questions you may have of me (subject to my travels of course) and you may also
feel free to call me at as well on my cell phone: . (I would prefer to not publish
my phone number in case my thoughts might provoke others to harass me though I would
gladly defend my opinions publicly at any time.
Thank you for the opportunity to be considered on this issue.
Robert Kent DeWitt
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Jeff Tate <jtate@auburnwa.gov > wrote:
Mr. Dewitt,
I apologize that the scheduling change creates a conflict. Written comments would be very
helpful. Perhaps we can schedule a phone call as well so that we can go over your comments
in advance of the June 18th meeting? That way, I can do the best job I can to present them to
the Planning Commission. Additionally, this first action is limited to revising the definition
of family so that we don’t have a gap in our code that allows up to 8 non-family members to
live together as a single housekeeping unit. Removing this language will help code
enforcement take action on properties that are loaded with renters who have no relation to
each other. I hope that you see this as a good first step for the City to take while we discuss
the next steps/actions.
I would be happy to make myself available for a phone call in the next two weeks, however I
think it would be most productive if you prepared your comments first so that I have a chance
to read them and we can have a little deeper conversation about how to get you plugged in
and to make sure you are able to influence the process.
Jeff Tate
From: Robert Kent DeWitt [mailto:kent.dewitt@gmail.com ]
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 8:47 AM
To: Jeff Tate
Subject: Re: Follow Up Item From May 21st Community Meeting at Green River
Community College
Jeff, I am disappointed that the meeting was changed. I had planned to be there tonight but
will be in Port Angeles on the 18th. I will try to put some of my concerns in writing and
email to you before then if they can be presented to the hearing.
On Jun 4, 2013 8:20 AM, "Jeff Tate" <jtate@auburnwa.gov > wrote:
Good morning Lea Hill residents,
I wanted to provide an update to one of the subjects that we discussed on May 21st. During
the meeting I stated that the City's Planning Commission would be holding a public hearing
on June 4th to consider an amendment to City code which effects the number of non-family
members that can occupy a single home. I mentioned this item because it has an impact on
the authorities we have for addressing issues that spring up with some of the rental houses
throughout town. Modifying the definition of family would be the first item in a series of
potential code changes that works towards creating a more definable and manageable rental
housing program.
The purpose of this email is to inform those who are interested in this subject that tonight’s
meeting has been rescheduled to the evening of Tuesday, June 18th at 6:30 pm. There were
several other items on the agenda that are also rescheduled to June 18th .
I apologize for any inconvenience that this may create and hope that this email reaches you
before you make the trip to City Hall.
Jeff Tate
Interim Director of Planning and Development
The information contained in this electronic communication is personal, privileged and/or
confidential information intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) to which
it has been addressed. If you read this communication and are not the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication,
other than delivery to the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail. Thank you.
The information contained in this electronic communication is personal, privileged and/or
confidential information intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) to which
it has been addressed. If you read this communication and are not the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication,
other than delivery to the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail. Thank you.
--
R. Kent DeWitt
kent.dewitt@gmail.com
1
Elizabeth Chamberlain
From:Stacey Griffin (253) 394-3991 [forsalebystacey@yahoo.com]
Sent:Saturday, August 03, 2013 6:10 PM
To:Elizabeth Chamberlain
Subject:Citizen Comment to the PCDC-August 12, 2013
Dear Elizabeth,
I am not able to attend the meeting on August 12, but, would like my opinion heard. I live in Rainier Ridge at
31812 125th PL SE, Auburn. It has come to my attention that the zoning codes for my area are in consideration
for change. I bought my home 14 years ago with the intention of living in a community of other single family
homes with the knowledge that some rentals would be in the neighborhood. I am completely against the zone
codes being modified so that rooming and boarding houses would be legal in my neighborhood. The fact that it
is happening illegally already is bad enough, let's not make it worse. I find that home owners typically have a
better love for their house and therefore take better care. In turn that keeps the neighborhood looking nice and
the values higher than if the neighborhood was filled will boarding houses of people who do not have the same
love for the home. Being a Realtor I have seen more than the average person in regards to housing and
therefore have a strong opinion in this matter. If boarding/rooming houses are in need let's build some more
student housing and leave the existing neighborhoods alone. Enforcement of the current code would also be
appreciated to prevent further illegal activity from continuing. Kindly include my email in your discussion and
consideration.
Best Regards,
Stacey Griffin
Broker
RE/MAX Choice Executives
Cell: 253.394.3991
Office: 253.220.0858
Fax: 866.601.3274
Web: http://staceycgriffin.remaxagent.com
By the way, I'm never too busy for any of your referrals!
1
Elizabeth Chamberlain
From:Hank Galmish [HGalmish@greenriver.edu]
Sent:Sunday, August 04, 2013 9:19 PM
To:Elizabeth Chamberlain
Subject:FW: Keep the Integrity of our Neighborhood
Dear Ms. Chamberlain,
I had this email sent back so I am forwarding it.
Hank Galmish
________________________________
From: HENRY GALMISH [hpgalmish@msn.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2013 8:08 PM
To: Hank Galmish
Subject: FW: Keep the Integrity of our Neighborhood
________________________________
From: hpgalmish@msn.com
To: echamberlain@auburnwa.gov
Subject: Keep the Integrity of our Neighborhood
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 03:06:29 +0000
Dear Elizabeth,
I know that the City of Auburn is considering changing the zoning codes in the neighborhood adjacent to Green
River Community College. I am an English professor at Green River Community College, and I live in the
Ranier Ridge subdivision at 12443 SE 318th Way. I have lived at this location for over twelves years and over
the years have watched as people have bought houses in the area not to live in , but to carve up, cutting up
garages and even living rooms without permits, and changing their houses into Boarding Rooming Houses.
These are currently illegal by the code we live under. And now it appears that the city wants to change the
zone to accomodate these illegal conversions.
One of these conversions is right next to me, and I can attest that no family lives there. In fact, at times there
have been eight students living there. The house has been allowed to run down, cars have been parked on the
lawn, trash is left out for days, there has been little, if any, repair done on the structure, and rats have been
found on the property who have migrated onto my property. I maintain my home and find it offensive that the
city is willing to support people who do not live in the area who are going to make a quick buck at the expense
of the neighborhood. I know my neighbors and I love living in a neighborhood designed for families. I am aware
that a couple of my neighbors have filed complaints to the Planning/Code Enforcement Office of Auburn about
these conversions, only to learn that one of the long term code enforcers of Auburn is doing the same type of
illegal conversions in houses close to the college. Those who have complained have been visited by code
enforcers and have been cited for seeming "irregularities" on their property. It is appalling that those with the
authority to enforce the law are not only violating the laws themselves, but are also using their office and power
to stiffle legitimate complaints. This is a country of laws and not coercion. This problem has also been pointed
out to city officials.
And now the city is exploring possibilities of allowing Boarding Houses in our single family neighborhood. I am
totally against this possible change. The college needs to build more dorms if it cannot handle the international
students that it is recruiting, instead of creating a serious problem for the neighborhood that is affecting both
the quality and the safety of our home and our families. Of course, it is also affecting the economic values of
2
our homes. I supported being annexed to Auburn because I thought we as a community would be more
protected by our elected representatives. I expect you to take that responsibility seriously.
I want this email to be officially included in your formal discussions and for your thoughtful consideration.
Sincerely,
Hank Galmish
12443 SE 318th Way
Auburn, WA 98092
253-939-4943
1
Elizabeth Chamberlain
From:thesurecure@netzero.net
Sent:Tuesday, August 06, 2013 11:44 AM
To:Elizabeth Chamberlain
Subject:Citizen Comment to the PCDC - August 12, 2013
Hello,
We have lived at 12817 SE 318th Way for 5 years. We could rent an apartment for much cheaper than we pay
to live here; but we choose to live here because we want to live in a peaceful neighborhood of single family
homes.
Please do not change the zoning codes; we implore you to enforce the code as it now exists. If this turns into a
neighborhood of rooming houses, we will probably move.
Thank you for letting us express our concerns.
Jonathan and Julie Hord
Exhibit 8
Student/Rental Housing
Matrix of Jurisdictions’ Regulations
August 20, 2013 Planning Commission Public Hearing
Jurisdiction How Address Rental and Student Housing Proposed to be Incorporated into Auburn’s Amendments
Saint Paul, Minnesota • Established a moratorium while the issue was studied
• Created a student housing overlay district: limits a student
dwelling to be at least 150 feet from another student dwelling
located on a different lot
• Define student dwellings as a one or two family dwelling in which
at least one (1) unit is occupied by three (3) or four (4) students.
• … property which exceeds occupancy limits at the time the
article was adopted are ineligible for registration and
establishment as an existing student dwelling during the
registration and establishment period.
• Created an 18 month registration and establishment period for
existing student dwellings to register within 120 days of the
effective date of the code being adopted.
• Utilizing the 4 or less unrelated persons
• Considering a registration and establishment period for existing
rentals
Newark, New Jersey • Defined student home and limited where they could be located
by prohibiting them in certain subdivisions/streets
• Student home must have a rental permit
• Landlord ensure that tenants comply with applicable noise and
other code provisions
• Landlord is responsible for compliance with the occupancy limits
which is 3 students in a home
• Student home shall be located on a lot which is no closer to
another lawfully established student home than a distance
determined by multiplying times 10 the required lot width for a
single family detached dwelling in the zone in which the lot is
located (example: 50 foot lot width x 10 = 150 feet separation).
The code section also establishes existing rental units that have
a valid rental permit are considered a student home.
Public Outreach:
• The City of Newark and the University of Delaware jointly have a
website that provides a guide for owners and occupants of
single-family type rental housing.
• Effort is called Town & Gown; committee consists of City of
Newark officials/staff and University of Delaware staff.
Committees charge is established in Newark’s code.
• http://www.udel.edu/towngown/index.html
• Proposing that communal residences must have rental business
license
• Landlord responsible that tenants comply with code provisions –
will be part of the rental business license
• Landlord responsible for occupancy limits – Staff proposing 4 or
less permitted outright; more than 4 a conditional use permit
process required with public hearing before the Hearing
Examiner
Town of Hamden • Requires landlord to obtain a Student Housing Permit – includes
notice to adjacent property owners and information for tenants
• Requires that the unit meet building codes and fire codes
• No exterior changes to the building unless required for
compliance with building or fire code
• Meet parking requirement of one off-street parking space per
student with at least two spaces per dwelling unit having
unimpeded access
• Expanding the rental business license requirements to include
Exhibit 8
• No parking in the required front or side yard that is unpaved
• Landlord must provide trash and recycling bins and posting
instructions regarding the pick -up schedules
• Submission of floor plans and any proposed modifications
• Providing a 24-hour contact person in the state to resolve
complaints
• Maximum of 4 students per dwelling unit providing compliance
with the building code for minimum square footage.
Boston • Extensive website with information specifically outlined for:
o Landlords
o Tenants – specific information for students
o Frequently Asked Questions
o Good Neighbor Handbook
o http://www.cityofboston.gov/dnd/brhc/
• Incorporate elements from City of Boston’s website into Auburn’s
website update when we implement the program
Tacoma • Definition of Student Housing but it is housing specifically
associated with the college/institution.
• The Student Housing is owned and operated by the
college/institution. Student Housing could be dormitories,
sororities, or fraternities.
• No definition of rental housing
• Definition of family allows up to 6 unrelated individuals to live
together
Des Moines, WA • Looked at Des Moines because of Highline Community College
• No specific definition for student housing or rental housing
• Definition of family allows up to 5 unrelated individuals to live
together
Zoning Code Text Amendment ZOA13-0005
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
August 13, 2013
Page 1
Zoning Code Text Amendment
ZOA13-0005
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
I. BACKGROUND AND GENERAL INFORMATION:
Recent inquiries from private developers have raised questions about the market viability of
meeting the mixed-use standards required for the C-1, Light Commercial zone. In
particular, concerns have been raised over the required 50% of the cumulative ground floor
space for a development with 2 or more buildings be dedicated to commercial retail,
entertainment, of office uses.
This staff report outlines the proposed amendments related to mixed-use development
within the C-1, Light Commercial zone.
II. SEPA STATUS:
Pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(6), non-project actions such as code amendments are not
exempt from environmental review. The City issued a Determination of Non-Significance
August 5, 2013. The comment period ends August 19, 2013 and the appeal period ends
on September 3, 2013.
III. FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. In general, the intent of the proposed zoning code amendments is to amend what
amount of commercial is required for multi-family development within the C-1, Light
Commercial zone.
2. The process for zoning code text amendments is described in ACC Chapter 18.68:
18.68.020 Initiation of amendments.
B. Text.
1. The city council, or planning and development committee of the city council, upon its
own motion may request the planning commission to conduct a public hearing to amend
any portion or all of this title; provided, that text amendments that are purely
administrative or procedural do not require a public hearing, nor do they require
preliminary review or recommendations of the planning commission;
2. The planning commission may upon its own motion call for a public hearing to amend
any portion or all of this title, with the exception of purely administrative or procedural
amendments;
3. Any resident or property owner of the city may petition the city to request an
amendment to the text of this title.
C. For the purposes of this chapter, substantive amendments shall be distinguished
from procedural or administrative amendments in accordance with the following:
“Substantive” matters relate to regulations that define or limit what can be done in terms
of conduct, use or action (e.g., what use may be made of land, what requirements apply
to development, what public infrastructure may be required of certain developments),
and “procedural” or “administrative” matters are those that relate to the process of how
Zoning Code Text Amendment ZOA13-0005
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
August 13, 2013
Page 2
an application to take such action must be pursued (e.g., time limits for applications and
appeals, what forms must be used, and where or how applications must be submitted.
Essentially, “procedural” or “administrative” matters are the mechanical rules by which
substantive issues may be pursued). (Ord. 6287 § 2, 2010; Ord. 6198 § 3, 2008; Ord.
4840 § 1, 1996; Ord. 4304 § 1(46), 1988; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.)
18.68.030 Public hearing process.
A. Text Amendments. With the exception of purely administrative or procedural
amendments, the planning commission shall conduct at least one public hearing on all
amendments to this title. The planning commission shall make a recommendation to the
city council who may or may not conduct a public hearing.
C. City Council Decision. The city council may affirm, modify or disaffirm any
recommendation of the planning commission or hearing examiner with regard to
amendments of the text or map of this title. (Ord. 6198 § 4, 2008; Ord. 4840 § 1, 1996;
Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987.)
18.68.040 Public hearing notice requirements.
A. Text Amendments.
1. Planning Commission. For text amendments that require a public hearing under ACC
18.68.030(A), notice of a public hearing shall be given by publication, in a newspaper of
general circulation in the area, at least 10 days prior to the public hearing and by posting
the notice in three general public locations.
2. City Council. Notice of a public hearing shall be given by publication, in a newspaper
of general circulation in the area, prior to the public hearing and by posting the notice in
three general public locations.
3. The proposed code amendments are supported by the City of Auburn Comprehensive
Plan as identified in the conclusion section of this staff report.
4. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(6), non-project actions such as code amendments are
not exempt from environmental review. The City issued a Determination of Non-
Significance August 5, 2013. The comment period ends August 19, 2013 and the
appeal period ends on September 3, 2013. As of the writing of this report, no
comments have been received.
5. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed code amendments outlined in this staff
report were sent to the Washington State Department of Commerce and other state
agencies as required for the 60-day state review required for modification of
development regulations. The amendments were sent on August 5, 2013 and expedited
review was requested under RCW 36.70A.106(3)(b). The Department of Commerce
acknowledged receipt on August 7, 2013. Expedited review has not been granted as of
the writing of this staff report. If the expedited review request is denied then the
standard 60-days applies from the submittal date of August 5, 2013.
6. Staff presented the proposed code amendment approach to the Planning Commission
and Planning and Community Development Committee at a joint meeting held on
August 12, 2013 for review and discussion.
Zoning Code Text Amendment ZOA13-0005
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
August 13, 2013
Page 3
7. The public hearing notice was published on August 8, 2013 in the Seattle Times at least
10-days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for August 20,
2013. The public hearing notice was also posted at the City’s Annex Building at One
East Main Street and on the City’s website.
8. The following conclusions support the proposed amendment to Title 18, Zoning,
scheduled for the Planning Commission’s August 20, 2013 public hearing with a staff
recommendation.
IV. CONCLUSIONS:
1. Pursuant to ACC Section 18.68.020, amendments of Title 18 require a public hearing
before the Planning Commission with a public hearing notice published at least 10-days
prior to the public hearing date.
Staff Analysis:
The public hearing notice was published in the Seattle Times on August 8, 2013 which is
at least 10-days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for August
20, 2013. The public hearing notice was also posted at the City’s Annex Building at One
East Main Street and on the City’s website.
2. These code amendments are supported by the City of Auburn’s Comprehensive Plan as
follows:
LU-57: Mixed-use developments with both commercial and residential components are
encouraged in Light Commercial centers. These developments should include
primarily retail stores and offices designed to provide convenient shopping and other
services for nearby residents. Industrial and heavy commercial uses should be
excluded
Objective 9.3:
To encourage the appropriate use of areas adjacent to heavily traveled arterials while
minimizing land use and traffic conflicts by:
1. Managing the continued commercial development of existing commercial arterials in
a manner which minimizes traffic and land use conflicts.
2. Conserving residential qualities along heavily traveled arterials which are not yet
commercialized, by restricting commercial development to types which provide an
appropriate buffer.
3. Protecting existing, viable residential areas along lesser-traveled arterials, from
commercial development.
4. Concentrate population and employment growth within the eight key economic
development strategy areas within the City identified as follows:
• Auburn Way North Corridor
• Auburn Way South Corridor
Zoning Code Text Amendment ZOA13-0005
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
August 13, 2013
Page 4
• Urban Center
• Auburn Environmental Park and Green Zone
• 15th Street SW/C Street SW/West Valley Highway/Supermall
• A Street SE Corridor
• SE 312th Street/124th Avenue SE Corridor
• M Street SE between Auburn Way North and Auburn Way South.
LU-58: The City has identified those existing commercial arterials that are appropriate
for continued commercial development and employment growth as well as a
concentration of population growth. These areas are identified as the eight economic
development strategy areas as identified under Objective 9.3. Sub-area plans for
these strategy areas should be developed.
ED-10: The City should develop a formal economic development strategy as an
element of the Comprehensive Plan to specifically identify the types of businesses most
consistent with community aspirations and lay out a program to attract those
businesses.
a. The City should work cooperatively with other governmental agencies in its
economic development efforts, including the Muckleshoot Tribe, King County,
Pierce County, the Port and the State.
b. The City should implement its economic development strategy through a
partnership with the private sector.
c. Identified in the 2005 Economic Development Strategies documents are six
strategy areas along with two additional strategy areas. These economic
development strategy areas are targeted for population and employment growth
to meet the City’s 20-year (2031) growth target. Sub-area plans should be
developed for these strategy areas. The economic development strategy areas
are as follows:
• Auburn Way North Corridor
• Auburn Way South Corridor
• Urban Center
• Auburn Environmental Park and Green Zone
• 15th Street SW/C Street SW/West Valley Highway/Supermall
• A Street SE Corridor
• SE 312th Street/124th Avenue SE Corridor
• M Street SE between Auburn Way North and Auburn South
ED-15: Implement the recommendations of the City’s 2005 Economic Development
Strategies brochure including the addition of the SE 312th Street/124th Avenue SE
corridor and M Street SE between Auburn Way North and Auburn Way South. The
City’s 20-year housing and employment growth shall be concentrated to these
economic development strategy areas.
Problems related to Existing Uses – Lea Hill Area:
Area : Area annexed on January 1, 2008.
Zoning Code Text Amendment ZOA13-0005
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
August 13, 2013
Page 5
Problem: The City has been concerned for years that the rapid growth taking place
within the Lea Hill PAA will overwhelm city streets. Through annexation the City can
better manage the amount and type of growth in this area and help ensure that
appropriate infrastructure to support development is provided concurrent with that
development.
The Auburn City Council envisions retaining the predominantly single-family character of
the Lea Hill area rather than allow the trend of rapidly developing multi-family projects to
continue. The City's codes will help ensure that the neighborhood character, traffic and
environmentally sensitive features are protected and/or managed.
Staff Analysis:
The proposed code amendments recognize the market sensitivity surrounding mixed-
use development while maintaining the City’s goal of having the SE 312th/124th corridor,
Auburn Way South, A Street SE Corridor, and Urban Center Extended districts be
economic development strategy areas that supports both residential and commercial
development. Auburn has identified eight economic development strategy areas
throughout the City with the goal of concentrating population and employment growth
within these strategy areas and C-1, Light Commercial zoning currently exists in four of
the strategy areas. Over the next twenty years, Auburn will need to plan for
approximately 9,600 new housing units and 19,000 jobs (starting year is 2006). The
proposed code amendments allow for multifamily development within the C-1, Light
Commercial zone while requiring some commercial be incorporated into a project
meeting the goal of accommodating the City’s future housing and job growth.
To address the C-1, Light Commercial zone, specifically on Lea Hill, in 2008, when the
remainder of Lea Hill was annexed, the City added a policy statement limiting multi-
family development as the area had experienced a trend of multi-family development. In
order to balance slowing down the rapid multi-family development but still plan for
housing and job growth targets, the City implemented a mixed-use requirement if multi-
family is to be developed within the C-1, Light Commercial zone. The proposed
amendments today, recognize the market sensitivity of mixed-use projects while still
maintaining the City’s goal of limiting multi-family development to the SE 312th/124th
Avenue area and having commercial development be part of a project.
V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION/DECISION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval
of the proposed code amendment as presented.
VI. EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 Proposed code changes Auburn City Code
Exhibit 2 Request to Department of Commerce for Expedited State Review
Exhibit 3 Department of Commerce acknowledgement letter
Exhibit 4 Request to publish hearing notice in newspaper
Exhibit 5 Environmental Checklist
Exhibit 6 Determination of Non-Significance
Exhibit 7 Comments Letter(s) Received
Zoning Code Text Amendment ZOA13-0005
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
August 13, 2013
Page 6
Exhibit 8 Economic Development Strategy Areas
Staff Report Prepared by: Elizabeth Chamberlain, Planning Services Manager
ZOA13-0005
Proposed Code Amendments
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Version 1
August 20, 2013
Page 1
Chapter 18.57
STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC LAND USES
Sections:
18.57.010 Intent.
18.57.015 Applicability.
18.57.020 Industrial, manufacturing and processing, wholesaling.
18.57.025 Recreation, education and public assembly.
18.57.030 Residential.
18.57.035 Retail.
18.57.040 Services.
18.57.045 Transportation, communication and infrastructure.
18.57.050 Vehicle sales and services.
ACC Section 18.57.030 Residential.
A. Multiple-Family Dwellings as Part of a Mixed-Use Development.
1. C-1 Zone. Multiple-family dwelling as part of a mixed-use development is allowed;
provided, that compliance to all of the following is demonstrated:
a. Multiple-family dwellings shall only occur concurrent with or subsequent to the
development and construction of nonresidential components of the mixed-use
development;
b. Applications for mixed-use development inclusive of multiple-family residential
dwellings shall include transportation and traffic analyses appropriate to the type and
scale of the proposed development based on the concurrent determination of the
planning director and city engineer. The planning director and city engineer may
require the analysis to address, including, but not limited to, a.m. or p.m. traffic
impacts; and/or area circulation planning for motorized and nonmotorized modes of
travel and connectivity; and/or transportation demand management (TDM)
strategies;
c. Applications for the mixed-use development inclusive of multifamily residential
dwellings shall include written and plan information demonstrating compliance to
applicable design standards for mixed-use development contained in the city of
Auburn multifamily and mixed-use design standards;
d. Applications for the mixed-use development inclusive of multifamily residential
dwellings shall comply, as applicable, with the neighborhood review meeting
requirements of ACC 18.02.130 (Neighborhood review meeting);
e. Mixed-use development comprised of a maximum of one building on a development
site shall have the entire 50 percent ground floor comprised of one or more
commercial retail, entertainment or office uses that are permitted outright or
conditionally; provided, that uses normal and incidental to the building, including, but
not limited to, interior entrance areas, elevators and associated waiting areas,
mechanical rooms, and garbage/recycling areas, may be allowed on the ground
floor, except that non-street frontage vehicle garages located on the ground floor
together with all other normal and incidental uses shall occupy a maximum of 50
percent of the ground floor space; orand
ZOA13-0005
Proposed Code Amendments
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Version 1
August 20, 2013
Page 2
f. Mixed-use development that is geographically distributed on a development site
amongst two or more buildings shall have a minimum of 50 25 percent of the
cumulative building ground floor square footage comprised of one or more
commercial retail, entertainment or office uses that are permitted outright or
conditionally; or
g. Mixed-use development that has more than two buildings shall have a minimum
percentage of the cumulative building ground floor square footage comprised of one
or more commercial retail, entertainment, or office uses that are permitted outright or
conditionally as follows:
1. For 3 buildings 20 percent of the cumulative building ground floor square
footage.
2. For 4 buildings, 15 percent of the cumulative building ground floor square
footage.
3. For 5 or more buildings 10 percent of the cumulative building ground floor
square footage.
h. A project proponent may select to set aside a non-residential building pad(s), meeting
the percentage requirements above, for future development, provided that the site
plan for the development must identify the general location for the building(s),
associated parking areas, drive aisles, landscaping areas, and utility locations.
During the interim period that the non-residential site(s) remains undeveloped, it
must be maintained as a landscaped area meeting the requirements of ACC 18.50.
2. C-2 Zone. Multiple-family dwellings are permitted as part of a mixed-use development
provided they are:
a. Located in a multi-story building the ground floor of which must contain a permitted
use listed in Table 18.23.030, “Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited
Uses by Zone.” No density limitations shall apply.
3. C-3 Zone. Multiple-family dwellings are permitted as part of a mixed-use development
provided 1,200 square feet of lot area is provided for each dwelling unit.
4. C-4 Zone. Multiple-family dwellings are permitted provided they are:
a. Located in a multi-story building and the ground floor must contain a permitted use or
combination of uses, other than parking facility.
b. An exception to this ground floor commercial requirement is allowed for uses
accessory to the upper story residential at a rate of 1,500 square feet of area per
upper story of residential. The ground floor areas accessory to the upper story
residential may include, but are not limited to, entry space, lobby, hallway, mail
areas. The 1,500 square feet of upper floor area does not include exiting required to
meet applicable building and fire codes.
5. M-1 Zone. Multiple-family dwellings are permitted as part of a mixed-use development,
provided they are:
a. Located in a multi-story building the ground floor of which must contain one of the
retail or service uses listed in Table 18.23.030, “Permitted, Administrative,
Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone.” The ground floor may contain entrance
and lobby areas which serve the dwellings.
B. Multiple-Family Dwellings, Stand-Alone.
1. C-3 Zone. Multiple-family dwellings are permitted provided:
ZOA13-0005
Proposed Code Amendments
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Version 1
August 20, 2013
Page 3
a. One thousand two hundred square feet of lot area is provided for each dwelling unit;
and
b. The multiple-family development is arranged in the following manner based on its
orientation to a public roadway (Scenarios 1 – 4):
ZOA13-0005
Proposed Code Amendments
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Version 1
August 20, 2013
Page 4
2. EP Zone. Multiple-family dwellings are permitted provided:
a. The multiple-family development incorporates sustainable design and green building
practices and qualifies to be built green certified.
1
Elizabeth Chamberlain
From:Elizabeth Chamberlain
Sent:Monday, August 05, 2013 4:27 PM
To:'DAHP'; 'larry.fisher@dfw.wa.gov'; 'ramin.pazooki@wsdot.wa.gov'; 'DNR';
'sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov'; 'MIT Cultural Program'; 'WA DOC'; 'Washington Environmental
Council'; 'Auburn School District'; Dave Hill; 'City of Federal Way'; 'Corbin, Douglas L';
'Futurewise'
Subject:DNS - two non-project action code amendments
Attachments:20130805154450514.pdf; Revised Checklist Student_Rental Housing.pdf; Proposed Code
Amendments and program SEPA version.pdf; 20130805154441529.pdf; Checklist C-1 Zone
Amendments.pdf; Multi Family Amendments SEPA version.pdf
Good Afternoon,
Attached please find the following:
Revised DNS, checklist, and proposed code amendments related to student/rental housing within the
City
DNS, checklist, and proposed code amendments related to the C-1, Light Commercial Zone, mixed use
requirements
The City anticipates a public hearing before the Planning Commission on August 20, 2013 and City Council
action in September.
For commerce – the City will be requesting expedited review for the proposed code amendments and will be
sending that request shortly under separate cover.
If there are any questions please let me know.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth
Elizabeth F. Chamberlain, AICP
Planning Manager
City of Auburn
253-931-3092
Dear Ms. Chamberlain:
Senior Planner
City of Auburn
25 W Main Street
Auburn, Washington 98001-4998
Thank you for sending the Washington State Department of Commerce (Commerce) the following materials
as required under RCW 36.70A.106. Please keep this letter as documentation that you have met this
procedural requirement.
August 7, 2013
Elizabeth Chamberlain
City of Auburn - Proposed code amendments related to student/rental housing and proposed code
amendments related to the C-1, Light Commercial Zone, mixed use requirements. These materials
were received on August 06, 2013 and processed with the material ID # 19421. Expedited Review is
requested under RCW 36.70A.106(3)(b).
If this submitted material is an adopted amendment, then please keep this letter as documentation that you
have met the procedural requirement under RCW 36.70A.106.
If you have submitted this material as a draft amendment requesting expedited review, then we have
forwarded a copy of this notice to other state agencies for expedited review and comment. If one or more
state agencies indicate that they will be commenting, then Commerce will deny expedited review and the
standard 60-day review period (from date received) will apply. Commerce will notify you by e-mail regarding
of approval or denial of your expedited review request. If approved for expedited review, then final adoption
may occur no earlier than fifteen calendar days after the original date of receipt by Commerce. Please
remember to submit the final adopted amendment to Commerce within ten days of adoption.
If you have any questions, please contact Growth Management Services at reviewteam@commerce.wa.gov,
or call Dave Andersen (509) 434-4491 or Paul Johnson (360) 725-3048.
Sincerely,
Review Team
Growth Management Services
REQUEST TO PUBLISH
Please publish the following Notice of Public Hearing in the Seattle Times on August 8, 2013
Bill the City of Auburn: City of Auburn
ATT: City Clerk
25 West Main
Auburn, WA. 98001
An "Affidavit of Publication" is requested for this billing. Thank you.
CITY OF AUBURN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Planning Commission of the City of Auburn, Washington, will conduct a public hearing on Tuesday,
August 20, 2013 at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Auburn City Hall located at 25 West Main
Street on the following:
Case Number ZOA13-0003: Amendment to Auburn City Code
The proposal amends the Auburn City Code related student/rental housing. The proposed amendments
affect Title 18, Zoning, and Title 5, Business and Licenses Regulations.
Case Number ZOA13-0005: Amendment to Auburn City Code
The proposal amends the Auburn City Code related to the C-1, Light Commercial, Zone. Specifically, the
proposed code amendments address mixed-use development standards.
Case No. ZOA13-0004: Amendment to ACC 16.10.110, Critical Areas Regulations
Amendment to the critical areas regulations to authorize mitigation to be located outside the City under
certain circumstances which is currently not allowed.
The public hearing will be held in the Council Chambers, Auburn City Hall, located at 25 West Main
Street. The public is invited to attend to express comments or opinions. Written comments may be
submitted up until and at the public hearing for ZOA13-0003 and ZOA13-0005 to Elizabeth Chamberlain,
Planning Services Manager, Planning and Development Department, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA
98001-4988 or Jeff Dixon, Principal Planner, for ZOA13-0004 at the same address. If you have further
comments or questions, please contact Elizabeth Chamberlain at echamberlain@auburnwa.gov or at
(253) 931-3092.
For citizens with speech, sight or hearing disabilities wishing to review documents pertaining to this
hearing, should contact the City of Auburn within 10 calendar days prior to the meeting, as to the type of
service or equipment needed. Each request will be considered individually according to the type of
request, the availability of resources, and the financial ability of the City to provide the requested services
or equipment.
Planning and Development Department
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Page 1 of 16
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: C-1, Light Commercial Zone, Mixed-use
Amendments
2. Name of Applicant:
City of Auburn
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Applicant:
Planning and Development Department
25 West Main
Auburn, WA 98001-4998
Elizabeth Chamberlain, AICP, Planning Services Manager
(253) 931-3092
4. Date checklist prepared:
August 5, 2013
5. Agency requesting checklist:
City of Auburn
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
Environmental Review – August 2013
Planning Commission Public Hearing – August 20, 2013
City Council Review – September 2013
City Council Action – September 2013
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related
to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
None
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or
will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
None
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 2 of 16
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of
other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes,
explain.
None.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if
known.
The City of Auburn Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the proposed
code amendments addressed in this environmental checklist and will forward a
recommendation to the Auburn City Council. The City Council may or may not hold a
public hearing prior to taking action adopting, adopting in part, or not adopting the
amendments.
Although not an approval or permit, the proposed zoning text amendments are also
subject to the 60-day State Agency review process pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106. The
City will be requesting expedited review.
11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses
and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this
checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You need not
repeat those answers on this page.
The City put into place regulations that requires a certain amount of commercial
development when developing a multifamily project. The current regulations have not
responded well to the current market and the City is interested in making the regulations
more flexible by allowing alternatives to the traditional mixed-use development.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand
the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any,
and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a
range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal
description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available.
While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required
to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related
to this checklist.
The proposed code amendment would be applicable to properties zoned C-1, Light
Commercial.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS:
1. Earth:
A. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes,
mountainous, other.
The City of Auburn is characterized by a relatively flat valley floor bordered by steep hillsides
that plateau.
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 3 of 16
B. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
The slope of the valley walls in the city varies, but some slopes associated with the
valley walls reach 100%. Most sites on the valley floor have limited slopes.
C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel,
peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and
note any prime farmland.
The valley floor is made up primarily of soils of the Oridia, Renton, Snohomish and Briscott
series. These soils are fairly poorly drained and formed in the alluvium (river sediments)
associated with the White and Green rivers. These are considered good agricultural soils,
though in many areas, are not well-drained. There is no designated prime farmland within
the City of Auburn.
The soils in the uplands are predominantly of the Alderwood series. These soils drain
moderately well and are typically located on slopes ranging from 0 - 70%.
D. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity? If so, describe.
Many factors affect slope stability including soil type, parent material, slope and
drainage. These factors can be further affected by human intervention such as slope
alteration, and vegetation removal. The city has identified categories of geologic hazard
areas and inventoried these areas. Maps of the erosion and landslide hazard areas are
provided as Maps 9.6 and 9.7, respectively in the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
E. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading
proposed. Indicate source of fill.
Not applicable. The proposed amendments are non-project actions, so no site
alteration, construction, or earthwork is proposed.
F. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally
describe.
Not applicable. Non-project action.
G. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after
project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
Not applicable. The action does not involve site specific development proposals
H. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth.
This is a non-project action so no site specific erosion control is proposed. However, the
existing comprehensive plan includes numerous policies to reduce or control erosion
through the use of best management practices, landscaping requirements, limitations on
alteration of steep slopes and other critical areas protections. Impacts to earth will be
identified and, if necessary, mitigated during the development review process as specific
development proposals are made that might be associated with these plan amendments.
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 4 of 16
The city also has design and construction standards that address erosion control
measures.
2. Air:
A. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust,
automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project
is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if know.
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
B. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odors that may affect your
proposal? If so, generally describe.
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
3. Water:
A. Surface:
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site
(including year round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands): If
yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it
flows into.
The major bodies of water within Auburn are the Green River, the White River, Mill
Creek, Bowman Creek, and White Lake. The City has conducted an inventory of
wetlands within the city limits. These are shown on Map 9.3 of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the
described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans.
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or
removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that
would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material.
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 5 of 16
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site
plan.
Proposal is non-project action.
However, several areas within Auburn lie within the 100-year floodplain of the Green or
White River and Mill Creek. These areas as well as frequently flooded areas as defined
by the City of Auburn Public Works Department are shown on Map 9.4 of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If
so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
Proposal is a non-project action.
B. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water?
Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks
or other sources, if any (for example: domestic sewage; industrial, containing any
toxic chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the
number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the
number of animals or humans the system(s) is (are) expected to serve.
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
C. Water Runoff (including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection
and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow?
Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe.
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
D. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water
impacts, if any:
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
4. Plants:
A. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 6 of 16
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other. X
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other. X
shrubs. X
grass. X
pasture. X
crop or grain. X
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage,
other.
X
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other. X
other types of vegetation. X
B. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
Not applicable. This is non-project action. However, in general urban development
results in the removal or alteration of many types of vegetation.
C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site:
None that are known.
D. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or
enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
5. Animals:
A. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are
known to be on or near the site:
Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: geese, ducks, crows, etc.
Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: urban animals such as dogs, cats,
squirrels, rodents, opossums, raccoons, etc. are also present in the city.
B. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
There are nesting/breeding sites of bald eagles, great blue herons and green back heron
within Auburn as shown on Map 9.2 of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The
Environmental Impact Statement for the Auburn Thoroughbred Racetrack indicates that
peregrine falcons, bald eagles, and the Aleutian Canadian Goose have been seen in the
Auburn area.
Chinook salmon are currently listed as a threatened species by the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS). Bull trout are also listed. Chinook salmon are known to use
the Green and White Rivers.
C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
Auburn is a portion of the Pacific Flyway for migratory birds.
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 7 of 16
D. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
Not applicable. This is non-project action.
6. Energy and Natural Resources:
A. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet
the completed project’s energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating,
manufacturing, etc.
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
B. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent
properties? If so, generally describe.
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this
proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if
any:
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
7. Environmental Health:
A. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals,
risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this
proposal? If so, describe.
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required:
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
B. Noise:
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:
traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project
on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation,
other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site.
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 8 of 16
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impact, if any:
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
8. Land and Shoreline Use:
A. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
The City and PAA contain a variety of land uses including residential, industrial, commercial,
open space, and public land uses. The proposed code amendment would be to properties
zoned C-1, Light Commercial.
B. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe:
Much of the Green River Valley and the City of Auburn were used for agriculture at some
time in the past. Over the last several decades, rapid growth in the area resulted in
much of the agricultural land converting to urban uses. No land within the city is
designated as agricultural, though some parcels continue as that type of use.
C. Describe any structures on the site:
Structures within the City range from small single family detached homes to large industrial
and warehousing facilities.
D. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
Not applicable. This is a non-project action.
E. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
City zoning districts include: RR (Rural Residential); R-1 (1 du/acre) R-5 (5 du/acre); R-7
(7 du/acre); R-10 (10 du/acre), R-20 (20 du/acre); RMHP (Residential Manufactured
Home District); RO (Residential Office); RO-H (Residential Office-Hospital); CN
(Neighborhood Commercial); DUC (Downtown Urban Center); C1 (Light Commercial);
C2 (Central Business District); C3 (Heavy Commercial); M1 (Light Industrial); M2
(Heavy Industrial); BP (Business Park); LF (Airport Landing Field); P1 (Public Use); UNC
(Unclassified Use); I (Institutional Use); LH (Lea Hill).
The proposed code amendment would affect the C-1, Light Commercial zone.
F. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
A Comprehensive Plan map of the City is contained in the City’s Comprehensive Plan
and includes 13 different plan designations.
G. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the
site?
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 9 of 16
Portions of the City along the Green and White Rivers fall under the Shoreline Master
Program. A map of the shoreline designations for those areas is Map 9.1 of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan. Zoning districts that are applicable to this proposed code
amendment do fall within the City’s Shoreline Management area.
H. Has any part of the site been classified as an “environmentally sensitive” area? If
so, specify:
Not applicable. This is a non-project action. However, areas of the City do have sensitive
areas and the regulation and protection of sensitive areas are addressed through the City’s
critical areas ordinance.
I. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
Not applicable. This is a non-project action and no specific development is proposed.
J. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
None specifically. Proposal is a non-project action.
K. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
None specifically. Proposal is a non-project action.
L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and
projected land uses and plans, if any:
None specifically. Proposal is a non-project action.
9. Housing:
A. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
B. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether
high, middle, or low-income housing.
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
10. Aesthetics:
A. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is
the principal exterior building material(s) proposed?
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 10 of 16
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
B. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
11. Light and Glare:
A. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it
mainly occur?
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
B. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with
views?
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
D. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
12. Recreation:
A. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
The City of Auburn provides a full range of parks and recreational facilities. Map 11.1 of the
City’s Comprehensive Plan shows the location of these facilities.
B. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so,
describe.
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation including
recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation:
A. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local
preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe:
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 11 of 16
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
However as a matter of information, in Auburn, the Blomeen House located at 324 B Street
NE is on the National Register of Historic Places. The Carnegie Library Building at 306
Auburn Avenue (currently Auburn Dance and Music Center) and the Auburn Post Office
(currently Seattle-King County Health Department) at 20 Auburn Avenue NE are local and
county landmarks. The Olson Farm, located at 28728 Green River Road South, was
designated as King County Landmark in 2000 and the Masonic Temple Building at the
southeast corner of Auburn Way South and East Main Street was designated as a King
County Historical Landmark in 2002.
B. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological,
scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
Several Indian campsites have been identified along the Green and White rivers in the
Auburn Thoroughbred Racetrack EIS and in preliminary work for the Army Corps of
Engineers’ Special Area Management Plan.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
14. Transportation:
A. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access
to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
Figure 2-1 of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan (transportation element) shows the
City’s current and future classified street system.
B. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance
to the nearest transit stop?
Not applicable, non-project action. However, Figure 4-1 of the Comprehensive
Transportation Plan (transportation element) shows the location of public transit routes
within the City. Also, a commuter rail station exists along the Burlington Northern Santa
Fe railroad right-of-way just south of West Main Street and east of C Street SW.
C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would
the project eliminate?
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
D. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing
roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate
whether public or private):
Not applicable. Proposal is a non-project action.
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 12 of 16
E. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe:
There is no water transportation in the Auburn area other than for recreational uses.
The area is particularly well served by rail. At this time, local freight service is available.
Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union Pacific both operate freight lines within Auburn.
Auburn is also a commuter rail station site for the Sounder commuter rail line between
Tacoma and Seattle. Service began September 18, 2000. Amtrak trains pass through
Auburn but do not stop here. The Auburn Airport is located north of 15th Street NE.
F. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project?
If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
Not applicable. Non-project action.
G. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
Not applicable. Non-project action.
15. Public Services:
A. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire
protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe:
Not applicable. Non-project action.
B. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impact on public services, if any:
The comprehensive plan contains policies that seek to maintain a sufficient level of
service for public services as development occurs. Also, Auburn reviews under SEPA,
the impacts of significant development on these public services. Mitigation measures
are required to reduce significant adverse impacts.
16. Utilities:
A. Circle utilities currently available at the site:
Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other
– Cable TV.
All of the above utilities are available within the City of Auburn.
B. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service,
and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which
might be needed:
This is a non-project action. However, the Comprehensive Plan includes a utilities
element (as required by the Growth Management Act), which describes the utilities that
serve the Auburn area and includes policies for their provision.
Also, the city actively engages in planning for public facilities. A new Comprehensive
Water Plan and new Comprehensive Sewer Plan were adopted by the City in 2009. A
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 13 of 16
new Comprehensive Drainage Plan was adopted in 2009. A new six year Capital
Facilities Plan was adopted in 2012 (2013-2018).
These plans ensure that utility impacts are adequately monitored and evaluated on a
project level and city-wide basis.
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead
agency is relying on them to make its decision.
OWNER/AGENT SIGNATURE: Elizabeth Chamberlain
DATE SUBMITTED: August 5, 2013 _
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 14 of 16
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(Do not use this sheet for project actions.)
Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction
with the list of the elements of the environment.
When answering these questions, be aware of the extent of the proposal, or the types of
activities likely to result from the proposal that would affect the item at a greater intensity
or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in
general terms.
1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air;
production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of
noise?
The proposed code amendments to the C-1, Light Commercial zone, should have a minimal
change in discharging to water, emissions to air, production, storage, or release of toxic or
hazardous substances or the production of noise. While the proposed code amendment
could apply to undeveloped property, the City’s stormwater design manual addresses
stormwater discharges and the City has other regulations addressing emissions to air and
hazardous substances.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are:
The City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan contains provisions to reduce increases or
emissions caused by new development. Emphasis in the Comprehensive Plan on reducing
the reliance on the automobile for transportation should reduce the amount of emissions to
the air. Policies in the Environment Chapter also provide guidance in the review of
development proposals to encourage native vegetation. This should support wildlife habitat
areas, particularly near streams, as the policies assist the City in addressing adverse
impacts to water quality and wildlife habitat from runoff since native plantings may require
less pesticide use.
An environmental review of all non-exempt (from SEPA) development will be conducted to
evaluate and mitigate impacts related to discharges, emissions, and the release of toxic
substances. Evaluation of the site specific proposals will be based on the policies of the
Comprehensive Plan and appropriate mitigation will take place on a case by case basis.
City development standards including but not limited to the critical areas ordinance,
shoreline master program regulations, and the Design and Construction Manuals, also
provide additional protection for these types of impacts.
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
The proposal is not likely affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life. However, as noted
below, the City has development standards to provide protection for these types of impacts.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are:
Generally, the adopted Auburn Comprehensive Plan and critical areas ordinance seek to
protect and conserve plants, animals, fish, and marine life. An environmental review under
SEPA of all non-exempt development is conducted to measure impacts. Evaluation based
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 15 of 16
on the policies of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan and appropriate mitigation will take place
on a case-by-case basis.
Policies within the Environment Chapter also provide guidance in the review of development
proposals to encourage native vegetation be used and/or retained. This should support
wildlife habitat areas, particularly near streams as the policies assist the city in addressing
adverse runoff impacts to water quality and wildlife habitat since native plantings may
require less pesticide use.
City development standards including but not limited to the critical areas ordinance and the
shoreline master program regulations also provide additional protection for these types of
impacts.
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
Future development will use natural gas and electricity and could result in increased
automobile uses. However, there does not appear to be any significant adverse increases
in the use of energy of natural resources resulting from the amendments being proposed to
the existing comprehensive plan over what might occur under existing plan designations.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
None specifically, as this is a non-project action. However, in addition to the provisions of
the Auburn Energy Management Plan (adopted in 1986), which encourages energy
conservation in public buildings, street lighting, and recycling, the comprehensive plan
places an emphasis on providing for alternative methods of travel to the automobile such as
transit, walking, and biking. An environmental review under SEPA of all significant
development will be conducted to measure the project impacts.
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or
areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as
parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat,
historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands?
Taken as a whole, there should not be any change in impacts from existing regulations on
environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated for government protection. Regulations are
in place to protect environmentally sensitive areas regardless of the use of the land or these
proposed code amendments.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
The comprehensive plan and, in particular, the critical areas ordinance, seek to protect
environmentally sensitive areas (wetlands, streams, geologically hazard areas, floodplain, wildlife
habitat, and aquifer recharge areas) and to reduce the impacts of development on them. The
Auburn Comprehensive Plan provides for the implementation of innovative land management
techniques to protect these resources. An environmental review under SEPA for all non-exempt
development will be conducted to evaluate impacts.
5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether
it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?
Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
Page 16 of 16
Amendments can only be approved if it can be assured that future development is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and its policies and related regulations. Those
proposals that are not consistent with the comprehensive plan policies or other existing
plans will not be approved.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
The comprehensive plan, critical areas ordinance, and other development regulations, such
as the zoning ordinance and shoreline master program, seek to protect these land and
shoreline resources and to reduce the effects of development on them. An environmental
review under SEPA of all development that is non-exempt will also be conducted to evaluate
a proposal’s land use and environmental impacts.
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public
services and utilities?
The proposed amendment could lead towards development that may increase demands on
public services, the transportation network, and utilities. The City has adopted a traffic
impact fee structure to address impacts to the transportation network.
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
The Auburn Comprehensive Plan presently incorporates the 2013-2018 Capital Facilities
Plan updated, which seeks to maintain a sufficient level of service for public services as
development occurs.
Also, the city actively engages in planning for public facilities. The Comprehensive Water
Plan and Comprehensive Sewer Plan updates were adopted by the city in 2009. The
Comprehensive Drainage Plan update was also adopted in 2009. The Comprehensive
Transportation Plan was adopted in 2005 with updates during the 2006 and 2009
Comprehensive Plan amendment cycles. These plans help ensure that utility impacts are
adequately monitored and evaluated on a project level and city-wide basis.
7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal
laws or requirements for the protection of the environment.
The proposal does not appear to present any conflict with local, state, or federal laws or
requirements.
1
Elizabeth Chamberlain
From:Jeff Tate
Sent:Tuesday, July 23, 2013 10:04 AM
To:Elizabeth Chamberlain
Subject:Fwd: Lea Hill (C-1)
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Nicole Petrino-Salter <nicolepetrinosalter@hotmail.com>
Date: July 23, 2013, 8:39:20 AM PDT
To: "nbackus@auburnwa.gov" <nbackus@auburnwa.gov>, "jtate@auburnwa.gov"
<jtate@auburnwa.gov>, "jholman@auburnwa.gov" <jholman@auburnwa.gov>,
"lwales@auburnwa.gov" <lwales@auburnwa.gov>
Subject: Lea Hill (C-1)
Deputy Mayor Nancy Backus, Interim Planning Director Jeff Tate, Councilman
John Holman, and Councilwoman Largo Wales:
As the property owners of the 14+ acres zoned C-1 in the Lea Hill location
bordering The Seasons apartments/commercial/retail space, we appreciate your
efforts on our behalf to address the City Code which stipulates all development
in this zoning/location must contain 50% allocated for ground
floor commercial/retail space for the mixed-use criteria. As most of you know,
this 50% requirement was and is responsible for the dissolving of two contracts
for the sales of our properties to a developer. It wasn't feasible when it first was
introduced, and it's currently not feasible fiscally, economically, and location-
wise.
Last evening (July 22, 2013), Deputy Mayor Backus asked us if we had anything
new to present besides what has been stated on record via personal visits to Mr.
Tate and emails to both Nancy and Jeff. Mr. Rudy Terry felt compelled to
emphasize we're at the mercy of all of you. May I take this time to give you a not-
so-hypothetical situation . . .
Living in the rural beauty of unincorporated Lea Hill, many of us have spent 20
to 40 years up here on the hill, most of our adult lives. Thinking this might just
be where we spend the rest of our lives, we realized as neighbors sold their
properties due to aging or deaths/inheritances, this would no longer be a rural
area. Those of us with large animals became concerned about their well-being
with more residential occupants and their curiosities. After annexation, we faced
the realities of being "in the city" and watched as multiple houses continued (and
continue) to be erected adjacent to our properties. When we collectively decided
2
to sell to a developer who offered us prices we couldn't refuse, we signed
contracts and began to plan for our futures.
Some of our futures are on the shorter side of life. We've probably got one more
move in us. Others of us yearn for the more rural lifestyles to accomodate
large animals and pets. Most of us (not all) have spent a great deal of money on
our homes, properties, and contributed to the economy in Auburn for
many years. For some of us, our retirement depends on the sale of our property.
To be stopped and/or hindered from selling our properties by a City Code seems
unreasonable, but it has happened twice to us and leaves us with few options, if
any.
Last night the random percentage of 25% allotment for commercial/retail space
was suggested to illustrate there needed to be a new minimum percentage written
into the code. As you no doubt realize, this number (25%) is excessive. Since The
Seasons' percentage is at 18% and has two units vacant since its inception with
the food market being subsidized to stay in business, how can it be reasonable to
assume a higher or even a same percentage is realistic? With more vacancies at
the small retail location adjacent to the 7/11 on 124th and 312th it's clear that
Lea Hill has a surplus of empty retail/commercial space.
The more retail/commercial (higher percentage) space required, the less likely it
is that we will ever be able to sell our properties. What value is there for
a developer to waste money on empty building space(s)? We're asking for what
Nancy called "thinking outside the box". We're asking for a more reasonable
percentage (based on the allotted empty spaces and subsidized space on Lea Hill)
with flexible language to invite a developer to work with the city to accommodate
both of their needs. Make that percentage too high and no developer will invest
in a losing situation. If the code is too restrictive, the value of buildable land
diminishes along with the offers/prices for our properties.
If any of you were offered a price for your dwellings which you valued and could
not refuse, after deciding for your needs you needed to relocate, would you
appreciate the city making such unreasonable restrictions cementing
the impossibility for you to sell to the buyer of your choice? This has happened to
us more than once. We are landlocked. We are stuck. And it is because of the
city's regulations for development.
We realize this is a reiteration of all that's been presented to you, but we can't
emphasize it enough. Time is truly running out for us. Money for development is
tenuous at best. How long it will be available no one can say. We have what we
consider a dire need, and without your assistance, understanding, and action we
will remain stuck. The timeline presented at the meeting is clearly on a fast-track
which we deeply appreciate. However, without the helpful language and much
less restrictive requirements, we will be left with no options.
3
Thank you for all that you've done so far, for hearing and listening, for taking
the time out of your multi-level work issues to include our needs in your
agendas. If we sound "desperate", it's because we are. Thank you.
(I would appreciate if you could let me know you've received this email. Thank
you.)
Respectfully,
Nicole Petrino-Salter
http://hopeofglory.typepad.com
LAKETAPPS
18
18
MARYOLSONFARM
AUBURNGAMEFARM
AUBURNENVIRONMENTALPARK
MOUNTAINVIEWCEMETERY
BRANNANPARK
SUNSETPARK
GAMEFARMWILDERNESSPARK
GSAPARK
LEAHILLPARK
ROEGNERPARK
AUBURNNARROWSSTATEPARK
NORTHGREENRIVERPARK
HATCHERYNATURALAREA
NEELYBRIDGENATURALAREA
ISAACEVANSPARK
FENSTERPROPERTY
MILLPONDPARK
CEDARLANESPARK
LESGOVECOMMUNITYCAMPUS
SOOSCREEKPARKANDTRAIL
AUBURNDALEPARK
YMCASPORTFIELDS
FULMERPARK
ROTARYPARK
VETERANSMEMORIALPARK
CAMERONPARK
DORTHYBOTHELLPARK
LAKELANDHILLSPARK
SHAUGHNESSYPARK
RIVERPOINTPARK
JORNADAPARK
DYKSTRAPARK
GAINESPARK
SCOOTIEBROWNPARK
TERMINALPARK
LEAHILLTENNISCOURTS
BICENTENNIALPARK
BALLARDPARK
PIONEERCEMETARY
INDIANTOMPARK
CENTENNIALVIEWPOINTPARK
FORESTVILLATOTLOT
BSTREETPLAZA
SLAUGHTERMEMORIALPARK
167
167
BUENAVISTASCHOOL
AUBURNHIGHSCHOOL
TOTEMMIDDLESCHOOL
OLYMPICMIDDLESCHOOL
RAINIERMIDDLESCHOOL
CASCADEMIDDLESCHOOL
SEQUOIAMIDDLESCHOOL
VALLEYCHRISTIANSCHOOL
ILALKOELEMENTARYSCHOOL
AUBURNADVENTISTACADEMY
WESTAUBURNHIGHSCHOOL
CHINOOKELEMENTARYSCHOOLPIONEERELEMENTARYSCHOOL
HORIZONELEMENTARYSCHOOL
MOUNTBAKERMIDDLESCHOOL
LEAHILLELEMENTARYSCHOOL
HAZELWOODELEMENTARYSCHOOL
STJAMESOFTHOMASSCHOOL
GILDOREYELEMENTARYSCHOOL
WASHINGTONELEMENTARYSCHOOL
STARLAKEELEMENTARYSCHOOL
MILLENNIUMELEMENTARYSCHOOL
PINETREEELEMENTARYSCHOOL
AUBURNRIVERSIDEHIGHSCHOOL
HOLYFAMILYELEMENTARYSCHOOL
GREENRIVERCOMMUNITYCOLLEGE
DICKSCOBEEELEMENTARYSCHOOL
SCENICHILLELEMENTARYSCHOOL
NORTHWESTFAMILYCHURCHSCHOOL
MESSIAHLUTHERANCHURCHSCHOOL
MEADOWRIDGEELEMENTARYSCHOOL
TERMINALPARKELEMENTARYSCHOOL
AUBURNMOUNTAINVIEWHIGHSCHOOL
MEREDITHHILLELEMENTARYSCHOOL
LAKELANDHILLSELEMENTARYSCHOOL
ARTHURJACOBSENELEMENTARYSCHOOL
EVERGREENHEIGHTSELEMENTARYSCHOOL
MUCKLESHOOTCASINO
SUPERM ALL
S R 18 -E AS T
A ST SE
B ST NW
AUBURN WAY S
M ST SE
C ST SW
I ST NE
SR 167-SOUTH
SR 167-NORTH
AUBURN WAY N
R ST SE
S R 18 -W E S T
124TH AVE SE
132ND AVE SE
E MAIN ST
WEST VALLEY HWY N
C ST NW
C ST NE
S 277TH ST
STUCK RIVER DR SE
2ND ST E
15TH ST SW
SE 304TH ST
W MAIN ST
LAKE TAPPS PK
W
Y SE
15TH ST NW
53RD ST SE
41ST ST SE
KERSEY WAY SE
51ST AVE S
29TH ST SE
M ST NW
SE 312TH ST
M ST NE
SE 320TH ST
SE 288TH ST
37TH ST SE
8TH ST NE
PAC
IFIC
AV
E S
22ND ST NE
37TH ST NW
SE 284TH ST
L
A
K
E
L
A
N
D
H
I
L
L
S
W
A
Y
S
E
ORAVETZ RD SE
4
6
T
H
P
L
S
17TH ST SE
PERIMETER RD SW
25TH ST SE
12TH ST SE
R ST NE
S 296TH ST
ACADEMY DR SE
D ST SE
55TH AVE S
D ST NW
110TH AVE SE
A ST NE
4TH ST SE
104TH AVE SE
I ST NW
116TH AVE SE
A ST NW
WEST VALLEY HWY S
118TH AVE SE
GREEN RIVER RD SE
D ST NE
L E A H I L L R D S E
EMERALD DOWNS DR NW
SE 299TH ST
N ST NE
E ST NE
S
C
E
NIC D
R S
E
O ST NE
W ST NW
6 9 T H S T S E
56TH AVE S
37TH ST NE
S 316TH ST
S 287TH ST
H ST NW
62ND ST SE
321ST ST S
44TH ST NW
CLAY ST NW
SR 167-SOUTH RAMP
SE 316TH ST
SR 18-EAST RAMP
14TH ST NE
AUBURN-BLACK DIAMOND RD SESR 167-N O R T H R A M P
RIVERWALK DR SE
P
E
A
S
L
E
Y
C
A
N
Y
O
N
R
D
S
112TH AVE SE
EV ERG REEN WAY SE
K ST SE
144TH AVE SE
EA
ST VA
LLEY HW
Y E
I ST SE
4TH ST NE
HARVEY RD NE
BRIDGET AVE SE
L ST SE
7TH ST SE
4TH ST SW
5TH ST SE
S 331ST ST
DOGWOOD ST SE
FRONTAGE RD
F ST SE
C ST SE
T ST SE
PIKE ST NE
6 7 T H S T S E
EA
ST BLVD (BO
EING)
8TH ST SE
FOSTER AVE SE
H ST SE
B ST SE
G ST SE
MILL POND DR SE
JOHN REDDINGTON RD NE
E ST SE
140TH AVE SE
52ND AVE S
G PL SE
RIVER DR SE
32ND ST NE
10
5
T
H
P
L S
E
SE 316TH PL
A ST SW
SE 310TH ST
47TH ST SE
56TH ST SE
15TH ST NE
32ND PL NE
54TH AVE S
SE 296TH WAY
QUI
NC
Y AVE
SE
U
S
T
N
W
SE 290TH ST
S 305TH ST
57TH PL S
J ST SE
35TH WAY SE
130TH AVE SE
127TH PL SE
28TH ST NE
OLIVE AVE SE
BOUNDARY BLVD SW
R ST NW
E
L
I
Z
A
B
E
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
31ST ST NE
30TH ST NE
R I V E R V I E W D R N E
O ST SW
5 1 S T S T N E
B ST NE
26TH ST SE
65TH AVE S
HO
WARD RD SE
SE 323RD PL
SE 31 8 TH WAY
SE 301ST ST
3 2 N D S T S E
3RD ST SE
S 300TH ST
THOMAS AVE SE
A ST E
SE 287TH ST
6 4 T H S T S E
50TH ST SE
M
O
N
T
E
V
I
S
T
A
D
R
S
E
5 0 T H S T N E
10TH ST NE
HEMLOCK ST SE
29TH ST NW
31ST ST SE
V ST NW
21ST ST NE
108TH AVE SE
SE 304TH WAY
F O R E S T RI D G E D R S E
2ND ST NW
30TH ST SE
85TH AVE S
23RD ST SE
24TH ST SE
AUBURN AVE NE
22ND ST SE
H
I
G
H
L
A
N
D
D
R
S
E
H ST NE
S 318TH ST
SE 298TH PL
PIKE ST NW
64TH AVE S
G ST NE
S R 1 8-W EST R A M P
SUPERMALL DR SW
36TH ST SEO ST SE
S K Y W A Y L N S E
58TH AVE S
42ND ST NW
SE 282ND ST
LUND RD SW
D ST SW
S 288TH ST
TERRACE DR NW
16TH ST NE
17TH ST NE
ELLINGSON RD SW
1
0
2
N
D
A
V
E
S
E
SUPERMALL WAY SW
V ST SE
126TH AVE SE
HI CREST DR NW
51ST ST SE
19TH DR NE
10TH ST SE
49 TH ST NE
111TH PL SE
20TH ST SE
F ST SW
SE 295TH ST
V CT SE
NATHAN AVE SE
SE 326TH PL
E ST SW
SE 286TH ST
37T H W AY SE
66TH ST SE
7 2 N D S T S E
148TH AVE SE
Z ST SE
10
4T
H P
L SE
16TH ST SE
2ND ST SE
128TH
PL SE
13TH ST SE
42ND ST NE
G ST SW
ELM ST SE
B PL NW
73 RD S T S E
3RD ST NW
S 312TH ST
T ST NW
2 4 T H S T N W
PEARL AVE SE
S
U
M
N
E
R
-
TA
P
P
S
H
W
Y
E
6TH ST NW
ELM LN SE
SE 312TH WAY
SE 294TH ST
118TH
PL SE
SE 294TH PL
57TH ST SE
L ST NE
S 2 9 2 N D S T
55TH PL S
9TH ST SE
I
S
A
A
C
A
V
E
S
E
1ST ST SW
PERRY AVE SE
52ND PL S
GINKGO ST SE
105TH AVE SE
SE 285TH ST
C
H
A
R
L
O
T
T
E
A
V
E
S
E
H
A
Z
E
L
A
V
E
S
E
67TH LN SE
61ST ST SE
28TH ST SE
SUPER MA LL AC RD SW
T ST NE
SE 307TH PL
PANORAMA DR SE
15TH ST SE
109TH AVE SE
J ST NE
11TH ST NE
20TH ST NE
63RD ST SE
14TH ST SE
S 303RD PL
SE 299TH PL
26TH ST NE
45T H ST N E
SE 281ST ST
HEATHER AVE SE
SE 308TH PL
RANDALL AVE SE
SE 43RD ST
U
S
T
S
E
6 0 T H S T S E
K ST NE
S 319TH ST
SE 290TH PL
22ND ST NW
6TH ST SE
20TH ST NW
109TH PL SE
R PL SE
WARD AVE SE
61ST AVE S
52ND ST NE
S 3 1 4 T H S T
19TH ST SE
57TH DR SE
SE 289TH ST
S 302ND PL
SE 297TH ST
21ST ST SE
LAKE TAPPS DR SE
3RD ST SW
33RD ST SE
30TH ST NW
I PL NE
129TH PL SE
N DIVISION ST
SE 323RD ST
55TH ST SE
S E 3 0 7 T H S T
N ST SE
PIKE ST SE
DOGWOOD LN SE
MILL P O N D L O O P SE
S 324TH ST
WESTERN AVE NW
DOGWOOD DR SE
OLYMPIC ST SE
111TH AVE SE
D PL SE
114TH AVE SE
F ST NW
SE 292ND ST
TERRACE VIEW LN SE
14TH ST NW
107TH PL SE
117TH PL SE
53RD PL S
M D R N E
G ST NW
42ND PL NE
SE 306TH ST
INDUSTRY DR SW
1
1
2
T
H
P
L
S
E
5TH ST NE
134TH PL SE
12TH ST NE
ORAV ETZ PL SE
110TH PL SE
18TH ST NE
ORCHARD ST SE
35TH ST NE
8TH ST SW
SE 302ND PL
KATHERINE AVE SE
SE 286TH PL
JASMINE AVE SE
F
R
A
N
C
I
S
A
V
E
S
E
133RD AVE SE
1ST ST NE
59TH AVE S
43RD ST NE
S 296TH PL
SE 300TH ST
40TH ST NE
22ND WAY NE
63RD PL S
62ND LOOP SE
2ND ST NE
FIR ST SE
9TH ST NE
27TH ST SE
O CT SE
JAMES AVE SE
ELAINE AVE SE
3RD ST NE
66TH AVE S
130TH WAY SE
KENNEDY AVE SE
19TH PL SE
107TH AVE SE
UDALL AVE SE
SE 308TH ST
V PL SE
SE 305TH PL
S 307TH ST
SE 288TH PL
56TH PL S
SE 31 3 TH S T
SE 314TH PL
AABY DR NW
GREEN RIVER ACRD SE
SE 302ND ST
SE 45TH ST
28TH CT SE
16TH ST NW
121ST PL SE
S 297TH PL
SE 293RD ST
SE 318TH PL
SE 313TH PL
1ST ST SE
C PL SE
O PL NE
71ST ST SE
F P L N E
37TH PL SE
56
TH CT S
DOUGLAS AVE SE
125TH AVE SE
120TH
AVE SE
28TH PL SE
26TH ST NW
SE 304TH PL
1
1
3
T
H
P
L
S
E
S 2 9 2 N D P L
5 8 T H W A Y S E
S ST SE
SE 315TH ST
10TH ST NW
S 321ST ST
1
1
4
T
H
W
A
Y
S
E
S 328TH ST
S 329TH PL
49TH ST SE48TH C T S E
SE 311TH ST
SE 321ST PL
6
0
T
H
P
L
S
FRANKLIN AVE SE
SE 282ND WAY
67TH CT SE
11TH ST SE
SE 320TH PL7TH ST NE
128TH AVE SE
124TH PL SE
65TH ST SE
3RD CT SE
2 1 S T S T N W
SE 322ND PL
138TH AVE SE
44TH ST SE
CEDAR DR SE
167TH AVE E
W
E
S
L
E
Y
P
L
S
E
S 326TH LN
S 320TH ST
SE 309TH ST
122ND PL SE
178TH AVE E
SE 325TH PL
SE 315TH PL
181ST AVE E
122ND AVE SE
100TH
AVE SE
13TH ST NE
70TH ST SE
SE 305TH ST
23RD ST NE SE 306TH PL
123RD AVE SE
305TH PL SE
E
L
I
Z
A
B
E
T
H
L
O
O
P
S
E
U ST NE
SE 324TH ST
171ST AVE E
54
TH PL S
JORDAN AVE SE
TRANSIT RD SW
8TH ST NW
5 T H S T S W
5
7
T
H
P
L
S
E
HAZEL L
N SE
S 294TH ST
A
N
N
E
T
T
E
AV
E
S
E
EVA N CT SE
SE 322ND ST
129TH AVE SE
15TH ST CT
137TH AVE SE
S E 2 9 1 S T S T
LAURELWOOD RD S
IRENE AVE SE
37TH CT SE
4TH PL NE
J
C
T S
E
L PL SE
53RD AVE S
SE 312TH PL
SE 306TH CT
SE 283RD ST
O CT N
E
SE 30 8 TH CT
L CT NE
59TH PL S
SE 29 7 TH PL
SE 324TH LN
115TH LN SE
S 288TH PL
68TH ST SE
S 336TH PL
SE 317TH CT
17TH DR SE
W PL NW
SE 312TH CT
M PL NE
51ST CT S
JUNIPER LN SE
C CT SE
PIKE PL NE
26
TH
P
L N
E
S 344TH CT
56TH CT SE
S 304TH ST
G ST SE
108TH AVE SE
SE 295TH ST
M ST NE
SE 29 0 TH PL
5TH ST NE
72ND ST SE
S ST SE
S 329TH PL
SE 307TH ST
D ST SE
1ST ST SE
PIKE ST SE
65 T H S T S E
108TH AVE SE
D ST NE
S 328TH ST
D ST NE
G ST SE
10
8TH
AVE
SE
O ST SE
PIKE ST NE
67TH ST SE
7TH ST SE
2 8 T H S T S E
52ND AVE S
30TH ST NE
8TH ST NE
R ST NE
1 6 T H S T N E
66TH ST SE
S 288TH ST
107TH
AVE SE
SR 18-WEST RAMP
1ST ST NE
8TH ST SE
50TH ST SE
112TH AVE SE
6TH ST SE
55TH AVE S
9TH ST NE
W ST NW
H ST SE
4TH ST NE
G ST NW
2 9 T H S T N W
SR 167-SOUTH RAMP
SE 288TH PL
124TH PL SE
A ST NE
4TH ST SE
5
7
T
H
P
L
S
67TH ST SE
16TH ST NE
SE 299TH ST
F ST SE
T ST SE
49TH ST SE
E ST NE
24TH ST SE
D ST NW
B ST SE
20TH ST SE
SR 167-SOUTH RAMP
21ST ST SE
D ST SE
112TH PL SE
25TH ST SE
A ST NW
15TH ST NE
51ST ST SE
CHAR
LOT
TE AVE SE
17TH ST NE
14TH ST SE
56TH AVE S
10TH ST NE
SR 167-NORTH RAMP
12TH ST NE
107TH AVE SE
R ST NW
52ND AVE S
SE 321ST PL
22ND ST SE
53RD PL S
K ST NE
PIKE ST NE
F ST SE
A ST NE
I
P
L
N
E
N ST NE
29TH ST NW
DOGWOOD ST SE
L ST SE
PI
KE
ST N
E
K ST SE
4TH ST SW
SE 320TH ST
SR 167-NORTH RAMP
I PL NE
M
S
T
N
E
SE 286TH ST
2ND ST SE
I ST SE
D ST SE
C ST SE
D ST SE
108TH AVE SE
118TH AVE SE
3RD ST NE
N DIVISION ST
O
L
I
V
E
A
V
E
S
E
J ST NE
J ST SE
S 292ND ST
28TH ST SE
23RD ST SE
SE 305TH PL
15TH ST SE
57 TH ST SE
65TH ST SE
L
S
T
N
E
RIVERVIEW DR NE
G ST SE
SE 28 2 ND ST
SE 299TH PL
ELM ST SE
1ST ST NE
R ST SE
ELM ST SE
6 8 T H S T S E
SR 18-WEST RAMP
O ST NE
111TH
AVE SE
47TH ST SE
R ST NW
T ST SE
SE 295TH ST
D ST SE
5TH ST NE
1
2
5
T
H
A
V
E
S
E
SR 18-WEST R AMP
S E 3 1 0 T H S T
V ST NW
SE 301ST ST
129TH AVE SE
SE 282ND WAY
7TH ST NE
23RD ST SE
K ST NE
U ST NW
4 0 T H S T N E
52ND AVE S
D ST SE
SE 294TH ST
L ST NE
H ST NE
SE 314TH PL
K ST SE
SE 286TH PL
S E 3 2 6 T H P L
O ST NE
MONTEVISTA DR SE
17TH ST NE
5
7
T
H
P
L
S
32ND ST SE
K ST NE
HOWARD RD SE
FIR ST SE
SE 281ST ST
SE 315TH PL
A ST SE
2 4 T H S T S E
SR 167-NORTH RAMP
SE 302ND ST
116TH AVE SE
5 0 T H S T S E
55TH ST SE
51ST AVE S
SE 288TH ST
55TH AVE S
L ST SE
35TH WAY SE
56TH AVE S
Information shown is for general reference purposes only and does not necessarily represent exact geographic or cartographic data as mapped. The City of Auburn makes no warranty as to its accuracy.
Map ID: 4095Printed On: 02/19/13
Economic Development Strategy Areas
Auburn City Limits
Potential Annexation Areas
15th ST Street SW/C Street SW/W Valley Highway
A Stre et SE Corridor
Auburn Environmental Park Developable Area
Auburn Way North Corridor
Auburn Way Sou th Corridor
Green Zone
M Stree t and Harvey Road Corridor Strate gy Are a
Northwest Auburn
SE 312th Stree t /124th Avenue SE Corridor
Urban Center
Urban Center Extended
1 INCH = 3,485 FEET
Map 14.3
The location of economic development strategies areasare depicted generally based on city council discussionsand the precise boundaries will be established throughsubsequent planning actions.
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject: Proposed amendments to Auburn City Code Section
16.10.110 related to mitigation standards, criteria and plan requirements
to allow mitigation outside the city (File No. ZOA13-0004).
Date: August 12, 2013
Department: Planning and
Development
Attachments: See exhibit list (at end
of report) Budget Impact: N/A
Administrative Recommendation: Planning Commission to hold a public hearing on amendments to
Auburn City Code Chapter Section 16.10.110 and make a recommendation to the City Council.
Summary:
The purpose of this amendment to the code is to provide greater flexibility in the regulations which apply
to the city’s critical area regulations and specifically to allow mitigation, especially wetland mitigation, to
be located outside the city limit which is not currently allowed.
Reviewed by Council & Committees: Reviewed by Departments & Divisions:
Arts Commission COUNCIL COMMITTEES: Building M&O
Airport Finance Cemetery Mayor
Hearing Examiner Municipal Serv. Finance Parks
Human Services Planning & CD Fire Planning
Park Board Public Works Legal Police
Planning Comm. Other Public Works Human Resources
Information Services
Action:
Committee Approval: Yes No
Council Approval: Yes No Call for Public Hearing ___/___/____
Referred to _________________________________ Until ____/___/____
Tabled ______________________________________ Until ___/___/____
Councilmember: Staff: Dixon
Meeting Date: August 20, 2013 Item Number:
Background
The City adopted its critical area regulations in 2005 by Ordinance No. 5894. The adoption was
a culmination of a series of extensive workshops and hearings over more than a 9-month period
with the Planning Commission and City Council. The regulations have been in effect now for 8
years, and have been working well and proven effective.
One subject area of the critical areas that has been evolving since the time of the City’s
adoption of these regulations however, is the way in which mitigation is accomplished,
especially mitigation related to wetlands. The City’s regulations generally provide for “mitigation
sequencing”; as contained in the following definition. Mitigation is defined in the Auburn City
Code (ACC) as:
“ACC 16.10.020 Definitions.
"Mitigation" means activities which include:
1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of actions.
2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation.
3. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment.
Agenda Subject: Agenda Subject: Proposed amendment to ACC
16.10.110 related to mitigation standards, criteria and plan requirements
to allow mitigation outside the City (File No. ZOA12-0003)
Date: August 12, 2013
Page 2 of 8
4. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance
operations during the life of the action.
5. Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or
environments.
While monitoring without additional actions is not considered mitigation for the purposes of
these regulations, it shall be part of a comprehensive mitigation program.”
Where mitigation or compensating for the impact is appropriate, there is generally a movement
and desire in the environmental regulating agencies to move to an eco-region approach to
addressing the impact and mitigation. In the case of wetlands, this is generally based on a
watershed area or drainage basin—replacing the resource within the same contributory surface
water area of a river or lake as the impact. This watershed basis to evaluating the location of
impacts and the location of the mitigation sites takes into account the natural environment of the
resource and the fact that environmental resources do not always neatly fit into or observe
corporate or political boundaries.
Auburn City Code Section 16.10.110 establishes the standards, criteria, and plan requirements
for development activities that result in mitigation of impacts to critical areas. While this section
applies to all types of critical areas, it is most commonly implemented in relation to wetlands.
This is because other types of critical areas tend to be more geographically dependant. ACC
16.10.110.B states that “Mitigation Sites shall be located in the City.” And it is recommended
that this language be modified so that the location of mitigation sites can be more flexible and
can be located outside of the City including through a mitigation bank or fee in-lieu. The change
would allow the mitigation site to be located outside the City for those projects that are allowed
to impact critical areas.
While the City’s critical area regulations promote avoidance of impacts to critical areas and on-
site mitigation as preferred approaches, where these are not viable, mitigation within the same
watershed is a commonly accepted approach. Different portions of the City are located within
the watershed of the Green and White Rivers, each of which extend substantially beyond the
city limits which means there is potential for pursing mitigation opportunities outside the city.
The change would also increase consistency with the approach utilized by other agencies that
have jurisdiction for wetland impacts, such as the Army Corps of Engineers, thus making it
easier for applicants to meet the mitigation requirements of various levels of government that
have jurisdiction for regulating wetlands.
Findings of Fact
1. In summary, the intent of the proposed code amendment is to provide greater flexibility in
the administration of the city’s existing critical area regulations contained in Auburn City
Code (ACC) Section 16.10.
2. The City of Auburn contains numerous areas that can be identified and characterized as
critical or environmentally sensitive. Such areas within the city include wetlands, streams
(and rivers), wildlife habitat, geologic hazards, ground water protection areas, and flood
hazard areas.
Agenda Subject: Agenda Subject: Proposed amendment to ACC
16.10.110 related to mitigation standards, criteria and plan requirements
to allow mitigation outside the City (File No. ZOA12-0003)
Date: August 12, 2013
Page 3 of 8
3. The City finds that these critical areas perform a variety of valuable and beneficial
biological and physical functions that benefit the city and its residents. Alteration of
certain critical areas may also pose a threat to public safety or to public and private
property or the environment. The city therefore finds that identification, regulation and
protection of critical areas are necessary to protect the public health, safety and general
welfare.
4. The critical area regulations and other sections as incorporated by reference contain
standards, procedures, criteria and requirements intended to identify, analyze, and
mitigate potential impacts to the city's critical areas, and to enhance and restore
degraded resources where possible. The general intent of these regulations is to avoid
impacts to critical areas. In appropriate circumstances, impacts to specified critical areas
resulting from regulated activities may be minimized, rectified, reduced and/or
compensated for, consistent with the requirements of this chapter.
5. It is the further stated intent of the city’s critical area regulations to:
1. Comply with the requirements of the Growth Management Act (Chapter
36.70A RCW) and implement rules to identify and protect critical areas and to
perform the review of development regulations required by RCW 36.70A.215;
2. Develop and implement a comprehensive, balanced and fair regulatory
program that avoids impacts to critical resources where possible, that requires
that mitigation be performed by those affecting critical areas, and that thereby
protects the public from injury, loss of life, property or financial losses due to
flooding, erosion, landslide, seismic events, soil subsidence, or steep slope
failure;
3. Implement the goals and policies of the Auburn comprehensive plan,
including those pertaining to natural features and environmental protection, as
well as goals relating to land use, housing, economic development,
transportation, and adequate public facilities;
4. Serve as a basis for exercise of the city's substantive authority under the
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and the city's environmental review
procedures, where necessary to supplement these regulations, while also
reducing the city's reliance on project-level SEPA review;
5. Provide consistent standards, criteria and procedures that will enable the
city to effectively manage and protect critical areas while accommodating the
rights of property owners to use their property in a reasonable manner;
6. Provide greater certainty to property owners regarding uses and activities
that are permitted, prohibited, and/or regulated due to the presence of critical
areas;
7. Coordinate environmental review and permitting of proposals involving
critical areas with existing development review and approval processes to avoid
duplication and delay pursuant to the Regulatory Reform Act, Chapter 36.70B
RCW;
8. Establish conservation and protection measures for threatened and
endangered fish species in compliance with the requirements of the Endangered
Agenda Subject: Agenda Subject: Proposed amendment to ACC
16.10.110 related to mitigation standards, criteria and plan requirements
to allow mitigation outside the City (File No. ZOA12-0003)
Date: August 12, 2013
Page 4 of 8
Species Act and the Growth Management Act requirements to preserve or
enhance anadromous fisheries, WAC 365-195-925;
9. Alert members of the public, including appraisers, assessors, owners,
potential buyers or lessees, to the development limitations of critical areas and
their required buffers.
6. The City adopted its critical area regulations in 2005 by Ordinance No. 5894.
7. The proposed amendment of the city’s critical area regulations is exempt from the
“Notice of Application” procedures under ACC 14.02.070, “Project permit or project
permit application” and ACC 14.02.040, “Development regulations”, since the adoption
or amendment of critical area regulation is a type of “development regulation” that is not
a "Project permit" or "project permit application". The Notice of Application is required
only for project permits and not development regulations.
8. The code amendment is subject to environmental review process under the Washington
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). A Determination of Non-Significance (DNS)
was issued July 22, 2013 and the city observed a fourteen-day public comment period.
The City did not receive any comments in response to notice of the public comment
period.
9. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed critical area code amendment was sent to
the Washington State Department of Commerce and other state agencies as required
for the state review of modifications of development regulations. The amendments were
sent on June 27, 2013. The City requested expedited review, as allowed by their
procedures. The Department of Commerce granted expedited review and
acknowledged receipt on July 1, 2013.
10. In response to submittal of the proposed critical area amendment to the Washington
State Department of Commerce and other state agencies, the city received comments
from the Washington State Department of Ecology, Critical Area Ordinance Coordinator
and Alternative Mitigation Specialist. The comments made some edits to clarify under
what circumstances mitigation is allowed to be constructed off-site and added some
language to allow more mitigation options. The city incorporated their comments.
11. The general approach of these code amendments was discussed with and reviewed by
the Planning and Community Development Committee of the City Council on May 28,
2013 at their regular meeting. The Committee was supportive of the general approach.
12. Staff discussed and presented an earlier draft of the code amendments language to the
Planning Commission on July 2, 2013 at their regular meeting. The proposed critical
areas regulations were subsequently modified in response to the Washington State
Department of Ecology comments received.
13. The public hearing notice was published on August 8, 2013 in the Seattle Times
newspaper at least 10 days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled
for August 20, 2013.
Agenda Subject: Agenda Subject: Proposed amendment to ACC
16.10.110 related to mitigation standards, criteria and plan requirements
to allow mitigation outside the City (File No. ZOA12-0003)
Date: August 12, 2013
Page 5 of 8
14. The following conclusions support the proposed amendments to Chapter 16.10.110,
scheduled for the Planning Commission’s August 20, 2013 public hearing with a staff
recommendation of approval.
Conclusions
1. These code amendments are supported by the City of Auburn’s Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan contains several goals, objectives, and policies that promote
flexibility in the City’s development regulations and prescribe the approach to
development regulations. The Comprehensive Plan also has sections that address the
protection and management of environmentally-sensitive or critical area resources. The
following goals, objectives, and policies excerpted from the Comprehensive Plan relate
to this proposal:
2. Excerpt from : CHAPTER 1 – PLAN BACKGROUND
“GOAL 2 – FLEXIBILITY: To provide predictability in the regulation of land use
and development, especially where residential uses are affected, but to also
provide flexibility for development through performance standards that allow
development to occur while still protecting and enhancing natural resources,
cultural resources and critical lands and in overall compliance with this
Comprehensive Plan.”
“Discussion: Predictability of land development regulation is important to both
existing and future property owners and to new development. It assures property
owners that adjacent properties will develop in a consistent manner and it helps
new development to plan for their development based on knowing what is
allowed and what is not. Since all parcels are not identical, however, it is helpful
to have some flexibility in land development regulation. While a variance can
sometimes resolve some of these issues, regulations which provide some
flexibility in the form of performance standards can help to provide development
which better meets the goals and policies of this Comprehensive Plan rather than
strict adherence to a set standard established in the zoning ordinance.”
(emphasis added)
“A discussion of issues and polices related to this goal can be found in Chapter
2: General Approach to Planning.”
Complies: This goal sets out that all of the City’s regulations should be designed to
provide predictability while maintaining the ability for flexibility. By providing a wider
range of methods critical area mitigation is accomplished this code amendment provides
predictability and consistency. Also, in furtherance of this goal, the code amendment
provides that mitigation banking or fee in lieu programs may also be used to satisfy
mitigation. On-site mitigation also continues to be an option.
3. A similar theme as the goal in Chapter 1 is expressed in Chapter 2 as follows:
Agenda Subject: Agenda Subject: Proposed amendment to ACC
16.10.110 related to mitigation standards, criteria and plan requirements
to allow mitigation outside the City (File No. ZOA12-0003)
Date: August 12, 2013
Page 6 of 8
CHAPTER 2 – GENERAL APPROACH TO PLANNING
“GOAL 2 – FLEXIBILITY: To provide predictability in the regulation of land use
and development, especially where residential uses are affected, but to also
provide flexibility for development through performance standards that allow
development to occur while still protecting and enhancing natural resources, and
critical lands and in overall compliance with this Comprehensive Plan.”
“Objective 2.4. To provide for the development of innovative land management
techniques to implement this Comprehensive Plan.”
“Policies:
“GP-17 Flexible land development techniques including, but not limited
to, clustering and planned unit developments (PUDs) for the development
of residential, commercial, and industrial properties shall be considered to
implement this comprehensive plan.”
“GP-18 Flexibility should be provided to encourage compact urban
development, to protect critical areas and resource lands, to facilitate the
use of transit or non-motorized transportation, and to encourage the
redevelopment of underutilized or deteriorated property.”
“GP-19 Any flexibility should be easy to administer and should provide
the community with an adequate level of predictability.”
Complies: This goal, objective, and related policies address the need for flexibility in
critical area regulations while addressing the importance of protection and management
of critical areas.
4. Excerpt from : CHAPTER 9 – ENVIRONMENT
“GOAL 18. ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
To maintain and promote a safe and healthy environment and preserve the
quality of life and to protect the area's most unique, sensitive and productive
natural resources. To encourage natural resource industries within the city to
operate in a manner which enhances, (rather than detracts from), the orderly
development of the City.”
“Objective 18.4 To continue to enhance and maintain the quality of important
wetland resources in the City and region.”
“Policies:”
Agenda Subject: Agenda Subject: Proposed amendment to ACC
16.10.110 related to mitigation standards, criteria and plan requirements
to allow mitigation outside the City (File No. ZOA12-0003)
Date: August 12, 2013
Page 7 of 8
“EN-27 The City recognizes the important biological and hydrological
roles that wetlands play in providing plant and animal habitat, protecting
water quality, reducing the need for man-made flood and storm drainage
systems, maintaining water quality, and in providing recreational, open
space, educational and cultural opportunities. The City will consider these
roles and functions in all new development and will also pursue
opportunities to enhance the existing wetland system when these multiple
benefits can be achieved.”
“EN-28 The City recognizes that wetlands provide varying degrees of
biological and hydrological functions and values to the community
depending on the size, complexity and location of the individual system,
and that the overall degree of functions and values should be considered
when reviewing proposals which impact wetlands. In a similar manner,
the levels of protection afforded to a wetland shall be consistent with its
existing function and values. The City shall continue to promote policies
and practices of enhancing the wetlands that are hydraulically connected
to the river systems to improve fish resources and aquatic habitat.”
“EN-29 The City shall consider the impacts of new development on the
quality of wetland resources as part of its environmental review process
and shall require appropriate mitigation and monitoring measures of
important wetland areas. Such mitigation may involve conservation,
enhancement or restoration or replacement of important wetlands, and
provisions for appropriate buffering. The goal of the mitigation should be
no net loss of wetland functions and values. A permanent deed
restriction shall be placed on any wetlands created or enhanced to ensure
that they are preserved in perpetuity.”
“EN-30 Wetlands which are associated with a river or stream, or provide
significant plant and animal habitat opportunities are recognized by the
City as the most important wetland systems, and shall receive the highest
degree of protection and mitigation through conservation, enhancement
or relocation measures. Wetlands which are limited in size, are isolated
from major hydrological systems, or provide limited hydrological or plant
and animal habitat opportunities may be considered by the City for
development and displacement in conjunction with appropriate
mitigation.”
Complies: This goal, objective and the related policies address the need for flexibility
the approach to critical area regulations and seek to balance the importance of
protection and management of critical areas commensurate with the quality of the
resource. These policies, which are specifically related to wetlands, address
opportunities for enhancement of wetland resources as provided through mitigation,
address that mitigation should be designed to replace functions and values lost due to
impacts, that mitigation may involve conservation, enhancement or restoration or
replacement of wetlands and that the degree of protection and mitigation will vary with
Agenda Subject: Agenda Subject: Proposed amendment to ACC
16.10.110 related to mitigation standards, criteria and plan requirements
to allow mitigation outside the City (File No. ZOA12-0003)
Date: August 12, 2013
Page 8 of 8
the quality or the resource. The proposed code change provides increase flexibility
without a reduction in mitigation standards.
Staff Recommendation
Planning Commission to recommend approval to the City Council the critical areas regulations
amendment as shown in Exhibit A.
Exhibits:
Exhibit A: Proposed code changes to ACC 16.10.110, “Mitigation standards, criteria and plan
requirements” –with changes shown in strike through and underline.
Exhibit B: Request for Dept of Commerce for state review
Exhibit C: Request to publish hearing notice in newspaper
Exhibit D: Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) and Completed Environmental Checklist
Application.
Draft 8-12-13
Chapter 16.10 Critical Area Regulations
16.10.110 Mitigation standards, criteria and plan requirements.
A. Mitigation Standards. Adverse impacts to critical area functions and values shall
be mitigated. Mitigation actions shall generally be implemented in the preferred
sequence identified in this chapter. Proposals which include less preferred and/or
compensatory mitigation shall demonstrate that:
1. All feasible and reasonable measures as determined by the department have
been taken to reduce impacts and losses to the critical area, or to avoid impacts where
avoidance is required by these regulations;
2. The restored, created or enhanced critical area or buffer will be as viable and
enduring as the critical area or buffer area it replaces; and
3. No overall net loss will occur in wetland or stream functions and values. The
mitigation shall be functionally equivalent to or greater than the altered wetland or
stream in terms of hydrological, biological, physical, and chemical functions.
B. Location and Timing of Mitigation.
1. The preferred location of mitigation is on-site when ecologically preferable.
Mitigation may be allowed off-site only when it is determined by the department that on-
site mitigation is not scientifically feasibleecologically preferable or practical due to
physical features of the property, or, in the case of wetlands, where the affected site is
identified as appropriate for off-site mitigation in the Mill Creek Special Area
Management Plan (SAMP), April 2000. The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to
demonstrate that mitigation cannot be provided on-site or is consistent with the SAMP.
When mitigation cannot be provided on-siteIf it isit’s determined on-site mitigation is not
ecologically preferable, mitigation shall be provided in the same drainage basin as the
permitted activity on property owned, secured, or controlled by the applicant, or
provided by the applicant using alternative mitigation options such as mitigation banking
or in-lieu fee programs. The where such mitigation should result in no net lossis
practical and beneficial to to the critical area functions impacted and associated
watershedresources. Mitigation sites shall be located within the city. Where mitigation
is authorized to be located outside the City limits, the Applicant shall assure to the
satisfaction of the Department that other requirements of this Chapter will be met,
including but not limited to, monitoring and maintenance.
2. In-kind mitigation shall be provided except when the applicant demonstrates, and
the department concurs, that greater functional and habitat value can be achieved
through out-of-kind mitigation.
3. When wetland, stream or habitat mitigation is permitted by these regulations, the
mitigation project shall occur near an adequate water supply (river, stream, ground
water) with a hydrologic connection to the critical area to ensure a successful mitigation
or restoration. A natural hydrologic connection is preferential as compared to one which
relies upon manmade or constructed features requiring routine maintenance.
4. Any mitigation plan shall be completed before initiation of other permitted
activities, unless a phased or concurrent schedule that assures completion prior to
occupancy has been approved by the department.
Rev 01/2013
Notice of Proposed Amendment
Request for Expedited Review
Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106(3)(b), the following jurisdiction provides notice of a
proposed development regulation amendment and requests expedited state agency
review under the Growth Management Act.
Under statute, proposed amendments to comprehensive plans are not eligible for
expedited review. The expedited review period is 10 business days (14 calendar
days).
(If needed, you may expand this form and the fields below, but please try to keep the
entire form under two pages in length.)
Jurisdiction: City of Auburn Planning and Development
Mailing Address: 25 West Main Street Auburn WA 98001
Date: June 27, 2013
Contact Name: Jeff Dixon
Title/Position: Principal Planner
Phone Number: 253-804-5033
E-mail Address: jdixon@auburnwa.gov
Brief Description of the
Proposed/Draft Development
Regulations Amendment:
(40 words or less)
Proposed amendment to Code Amendment to
City’s Critical Area Regulations (ACC 16.10)
related to the location of mitigation sites outside
the City
Is this action part of the periodic
review and update? GMA
requires review every 8 years under
RCW 36.70A.130(4)-(6).
Yes: ___
No: _X__
Public Hearing Date: Planning Board/Commission: To be determined
Council/County Commission: To be determined
Proposed Adoption Date: To be determined
REQUIRED: Attach or include a copy the proposed amendment text.
Rev 01/2013
Chapter 16.10 Critical Area Regulations
16.10.110 Mitigation standards, criteria and plan requirements.
A. Mitigation Standards. Adverse impacts to critical area functions and values shall
be mitigated. Mitigation actions shall generally be implemented in the preferred
sequence identified in this chapter. Proposals which include less preferred and/or
compensatory mitigation shall demonstrate that:
1. All feasible and reasonable measures as determined by the department have
been taken to reduce impacts and losses to the critical area, or to avoid impacts where
avoidance is required by these regulations;
2. The restored, created or enhanced critical area or buffer will be as viable and
enduring as the critical area or buffer area it replaces; and
3. No overall net loss will occur in wetland or stream functions and values. The
mitigation shall be functionally equivalent to or greater than the altered wetland or
stream in terms of hydrological, biological, physical, and chemical functions.
B. Location and Timing of Mitigation.
1. The preferred location of mitigation is on-site. Mitigation may be allowed off-site
only when it is determined by the department that on-site mitigation is not scientifically
feasible or practical due to physical features of the property, or, in the case of wetlands,
where the affected site is identified as appropriate for off-site mitigation in the Mill Creek
Special Area Management Plan (SAMP), April 2000. The burden of proof shall be on
the applicant to demonstrate that mitigation cannot be provided on-site or is consistent
with the SAMP. When mitigation cannot be provided on-site, mitigation shall be
provided in the same drainage basin as the permitted activity on property owned,
secured, or controlled by the applicant where such mitigation is practical and beneficial
to the critical area and associated resources. Mitigation sites shall be located within the
city. Where mitigation is authorized to be located outside the City limits, the Applicant
shall assure to the satisfaction of the Department that other requirements of this
Chapter will be met, including but not limited to, monitoring and maintenance.
2. In-kind mitigation shall be provided except when the applicant demonstrates, and
the department concurs, that greater functional and habitat value can be achieved
through out-of-kind mitigation.
3. When wetland, stream or habitat mitigation is permitted by these regulations, the
mitigation project shall occur near an adequate water supply (river, stream, ground
water) with a hydrologic connection to the critical area to ensure a successful mitigation
or restoration. A natural hydrologic connection is preferential as compared to one which
relies upon manmade or constructed features requiring routine maintenance.
4. Any mitigation plan shall be completed before initiation of other permitted
activities, unless a phased or concurrent schedule that assures completion prior to
occupancy has been approved by the department.
-Notice Details-
Total NET Cost: $122.65
Class Name: Hearing Notices
Account #: 107302
Advertiser Name: City of Auburn, Finance Dept
Agency Name:
Contact: Dani (City Clerk) 253-931-3037
Address: 25 W Main St
Auburn, WA 98001
Telephone: (253) 876-1980
These are the details of your notice scheduled to run on the dates indicated below.
CITY OF AUBURNNOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The Planning Commission of the City of Auburn, Washington, will conduct a pub-lic hearing on Tuesday, August 20, 2013 at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Auburn City Hall located at 25 West Main Street on the following: Case Num-ber ZOA13-0003: Amendment to Auburn City CodeThe proposal amends the Auburn City Code related student/rental housing. The proposed amendments affect Title 18, Zoning, and Title 5, Business and Licenses Regulations. Case Number ZOA13-0005: Amendment to Auburn City Code The proposal amends the Auburn City Code re-lated to the C-1, Light Commercial, Zone. Specifically, the proposed code amend-ments address mixed-use development standards.Case No. ZOA13-0004: Amend-ment to ACC 16.10.110, Critical Areas Regulations Amendment to the critical areas regula-tions to authorize mitigation to be located outside the City under certain circum-stances which is currently not allowed. The public hearing will be held in the Council Chambers, Auburn City Hall, lo-cated at 25 West Main Street. The public is invited to attend to express comments or opinions. Written comments may be submitted up until and at the public hear-ing for ZOA13-0003 and ZOA13-0005 to Elizabeth Chamberlain, Planning Services Manager, Planning and Development De-partment, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA 9800-4988 or Jeff Dixon, Principal Planner, for ZOA13-0004 at the same ad-dress. If you have further comments or questions, please contact Elizabeth Cham-berlain at echamberlain@auburnwa.gov or at (253) 931-3092. For citizens with speech, sight or hearing disabilities wish-ing to review documents pertaining to this hearing, should contact the City of Auburn within 10 calendar days prior to the meet-ing, as to the type of service or equipment needed. Each request will be considered individually according to the type of re-quest, the availability of resources, and the financial ability of the City to provide the requested services or equipment.
*The ad preview below may not be to actual scale
Account Information
Legals Desk Contact Information
Phone # (206) 652-6018
Email: legals@seattletimes.com
Notice Placement Information
Prepayment Information
Seattle Times 08/08/13
NWclassifieds 08/08/13
NWclassifieds 08/09/13
NWclassifieds 08/10/13
NWclassifieds 08/11/13
NWclassifieds 08/12/13
NWclassifieds 08/13/13
NWclassifieds 08/14/13
Run Date(s)
Notice ID: 350288
Purchase Order #:
# of lines: 55
Date Method Card Type Last 4 Digits Check # Amount
Page 1 of 1
Memorandum
To: Planning Commissioners
From: Jeff Dixon, Principal Planner
CC: Mayor Lewis
Nancy Welch, Planning and Development Director
Elizabeth Chamberlain, AICP, Planning Manager
Date: August 14, 2013
Re: Discussion Topic: Docket of 2013 Annual Comprehensive Plan
Amendments
BACKGROUND
Annually the City amends its Comprehensive Plan. The City processes city – initiated
amendments in response to items that are “docketed” (text or map). The city also
includes private – initiated amendments. Private initiated Comprehensive Plan
amendment applications (text or map) were accepted by the City of Auburn until Friday,
June 7, 2013. In response to the public notification of the time period for applications,
the City received two private – initiated comprehensive plan amendments; both are map
amendments; no private text amendments were submitted. The docket was reviewed by
the City Council’s Planning and Community Development Committee at their June 24,
2013 meeting.
DISCUSSION
At the July 2, 2013 Planning Commission meeting staff described the docket. However,
since a quorum was not present, staff would like to again explain, review, and discuss
the docket of items as part of this year’s amendments.
The docket will be distributed at the meeting.
Enclosures:
Attachment A - Draft proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Schedule.
City of Auburn
2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Schedule
DRAFT
Page 1 of 1 Revised 8/14/2013
6-7-13 6-24-13 7-2-13 or
7-16-13
8-6-13 8-20-13 9-4-13 10-8-13 10-14-13 11-5-13 11-12-13 11-18-13 11-25-13 12-2-13 12-2-13
Staff PCDC PC PC PC PC PC PCDC PC PCDC PWC PCDC PWC CC
Group 1
• City initiated
text and map
amendments
• Private
initiated map
amendments
Private
initiated
amendments
applications
due
Final
Direction
on Docket
Study
Session
Cancelled Study
Session
Study
Session
or Public
Hearing
Public Hearing
continued if
needed
Discuss if
needed
Discuss/Recommendation
if needed
PCDC
Discussion
Discussion PCDC
Recommendation
to Council
Discussion
if needed
Council Action
Group 2
• Capital
Facilities Plan
Private
initiated
amendments
applications
due
Final
Direction
on Docket
N/A Cancelled Study
Session
Public Hearing Discuss if
needed
Discuss/Recommendation
if needed
PCDC
Discussion
Discussion PCDC
Recommendation
to Council
Discussion
if needed
Council Action