CITY OF ISSAQUAH PLANNING POLICY COMMISSION MINUTES. August 27, Council Chambers Issaquah, WA 98027

Transcription

1 CITY OF ISSAQUAH PLANNING POLICY COMMISSION MINUTES August 27, 2015 City Hall South 135 E. Sunset Way Council Chambers Issaquah, WA PPC MEMBERS PRESENT Joan Probala, Chair Ray Extract Joy Lewis Carl Swedberg Justin Walsh Susan Kolwitz, Alt. Paul Weller, Alt. STAFF PRESENT Trish Heinonen, Policy Planning Manager Christopher Wright, Project Oversight Manager CALL TO ORDER PROBALA, Chair, called the meeting to order at 6:32 PM. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOVED BY WALSH, SECONDED BY SWEDBERG that minutes of the PPC meeting on April 23, 2015 be approved as presented. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOVED BY EXTRACT, SECONDED BY LEWIS that minutes of the PPC meeting on July 9, 2015 be approved as presented. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (WALSH abstained.) LAND USE CODE AMENDMENTS Heinonen gave an overview of the Land Use Code amendments under discussion at tonight s meeting. She explained the goals for tonight, which are (1) to understand the ramifications of round one of the land use code amendments, and (2) to explain an amendment to the Central Issaquah Plan, a subarea of the Comprehensive Plan, that will be presented at the next PPC meeting, which is also the public hearing on these amendments. She said the purpose of the Central Plan amendment is to have the plan be consistent with the City s Central Issaquah Urban Core area s recent designation as a Regional Growth Center and the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan. She noted the land use code amendments for your review tonight do not relate to each other; they are either required by state or federal regulations, or address an inconsistency that needs to be corrected. She said staff would like to hear any concerns or questions the Commission has tonight so that we can do any research needed before the public hearing on these proposed amendments at the September 10, 2015 PPC meeting. Exhibit A-1. Vested rights/vesting Heinonen gave staff s explanation of the amendment, including the definitions of vest and vested shown on page 15 of 42 of the agenda packet. Exhibit A-2. Master Site Plans Approval Criteria Applicability and New Definition Heinonen gave staff s explanation of the amendment, as detailed on page 16 of 42. Wright added generally speaking, Master Site Plans are being phased out as a land use tool. They are

2 not used in Urban Village developments, such as Issaquah Highlands or Talus, nor will they be used in developments within the Central Issaquah Plan, he continued. However, there are some minor changes that we want to make to the approval criteria for Master Site Plans, such as removing the ability of an applicant to receive an early clearing and grading permit prior to the construction permit being issued. The proposed changes would eliminate that option, he said. The amendment would also re-define what is the developable area, he continued. Again, Master Site Plans have primarily been used in the past for large projects, and we are not seeing as many of those anymore, he concluded. Exhibit A-3. Table of Permitted Uses Assisted Living Facility in SF-E Zone Heinonen explained this proposed change came about from working with an applicant for an assisted living facility in a location currently zoned SF-E (Single-Family Estate). Currently, assisted living facilities are not allowed in the Issaquah Municipal Code (IMC) Table of Permitted Uses for SF-E. We told the developer if you can show us information that an assisted living facility would have fewer environmental impacts and generate fewer traffic trips than if the property was to be developed as single-family homes, we would move the amendment request forward for consideration by the Planning Policy Commission and City Council, including changing the table to include assisted living facilities as a permitted use on parcels equal to or greater than 3 acres and on a Major Street. The developer did some studies which showed that there would be fewer environmental impacts and traffic trips than if the property was developed as single-family residences, she continued. Citywide, there are nine sites that would be affected by making this change to the SF-E Table of Permitted Uses, six of which are along Tibbetts Creek and could potentially result in more land being set aside as open space and fewer transportation trips if they were developed as an assisted living facility. The other criteria is that the property has to be on a major street, she noted. Wright added the City has been experiencing a surge in applications for these kinds of facilities, and as we get inquiries, we have been looking at the entire City and seeking where they would be a suitable fit. Assisted living facilities are allowed in nearly every other residential and commercial zone, and in looking at the SF-E zone, we did identify some good candidates for assisted living facilities, he noted. Exhibit A-4. Wireless Communication Facilities Heinonen gave staff s explanation of the amendment, as detailed on page 16 of 42. She noted that the federal government updated its FCC regulations in late 2014, and now the City is updating its regulations to be consistent with the federal government s provisions. She explained that most of the changes are about co-locations, specifically how they are processed and approved. WALSH asked are the numbers and specifics in the new amendment language, such as what constitutes a significant changes, taken from FCC regulations. Wright replied yes, that is correct. Exhibit A-5. Affordable Housing Definition and Impact Fee Exemption Consistency Heinonen explained that different definitions of affordable housing and exemptions have been used over time, and this amendment would create consistency throughout the land use code so that all definitions and exemption references are the same. She added staff worked with A Regional Coalition for Housing (ARCH) to be sure the definitions and exemption information are all up-to-date and are the most current available. Exhibit A-6. Storage of Firewood

3 Heinonen noted PPC discussed this issue at its April 23 public hearing, and made a recommendation to City Council. The Council s Land and Shore Committee reviewed it in May, and the Council returned a proposed amendment to PPC for more discussion. She referred to the proposed amendment on page 41 of 42 ( In residential areas, firewood shall be neatly stacked and elevated off of the ground ). WALSH said his recollection from the discussion was that the main issue was that the gentleman who had stacks and piles of firewood on his property was also selling it, and this doesn t seem to address the issue of him conducting a home-based business. He said some of the other issues discussed were noise, traffic trips, safety, and so on, and some residents felt that this activity could be quite disruptive to their neighborhood. This doesn t seem to really address any of those issues, he noted. Wright agreed the home-business aspect of this situation was a concern expressed by PPC. The Land and Shore Committee had other concerns as well, he said. The Council s reaction was that other people in the City might occasionally sell firewood from their property and not create any problems with doing that. So a compromise was to address the prohibition of the firewood pile in the front yard of an individual s property, he continued, including limiting its size and making sure it is stacked in a side or rear yard. That would indirectly address some of the other concerns as well, he stated. WALSH said another concern was the number of trips that would be generated by selling firewood from an individual property. SWEDBERG agreed, and said there was also a concern expressed about potentially blocking roads. WALSH asked was there any further discussion of perhaps regulating the amount of firewood that could be stored per square footage of the property. Wright said that specific possibility was not discussed. There was discussion about how to be fair to everyone, including those who want firewood for their own use, he added. WALSH asked was there any discussion about placing a limitation on the number of trips generated, or the hours that activity such as cutting logs could take place. Wright said that would require a monitoring-type of situation that the City is not prepared to undertake. PROBALA noted that noise would be covered under another part of the code as part of the responsibilities of operating a business in the City. Heinonen and Wright agreed. Heinonen added the individual in question said they were not operating a business, but rather indicated that the firewood was for their own personal use. WALSH said perhaps some regulations could be added specific to the use of log splitters, hours of operation, and so on. Wright said that s a possibility, although the Council was concerned about implications of such regulations citywide. LEWIS asked so was the Council primarily concerned with the aesthetic component of this issue, something more like a homeowners association might be. Wright said yes, along the lines of regulations about storing RVs and boats on individual properties. LEWIS said her recollection was that there were also concerns about safety, whereas this amendment only addresses aesthetics. Wright said aesthetics is a big part of this situation, and is easier to address than some of the other potential concerns. LEWIS asked has there been a preponderance of unsightly wood piles in the community. Wright said no, for the most part people are already doing what is specified in this amendment, but in at least one case we know about they are not, and this is intended to address it. Exhibit A-7. Definitions and Public Notice (SEPA) Heinonen gave staff s explanation of the amendment, as detailed on page 16 of 42, including corrections to the titles of newspapers and other means used for public outreach. WELLER asked were these newspapers not being used prior to this. Heinonen said this change updates the list of newspapers, such as dropping Bellevue Journal-American and Seattle P-I, which

4 no longer operate as they once did, and adds the Issaquah Reporter and a provision for local newspapers in case names change or new ones are added. Heinonen discussed the next steps in the review and approval process for the proposed amendments, including a public hearing at the PPC meeting on September 10, and culminating in final Council action on October 5. She explained that PPC will have a public hearing on round 2 of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments at a meeting on October 1, and if PPC feels comfortable moving the amendments forward to the Council, they could be taking action on them in December. Commissioner Discussion WALSH suggested adding a better definition of elevated to the proposed amendment on storing firewood. He said his understanding from the previous discussion was that firewood needed to be elevated off the ground to prevent rats, so adding something like at least three inches off the ground would be advisable. Wright made a note of it. PROBALA asked, regarding vesting, when does the clock begin once a developer has submitted plans to the City. Heinonen said the stages of a development, such as permitting, construction, and so on, all provide the City with a specific number of days for the City s review of the application. PROBALA said so what if a change in the regulations occurs during the permit review period. Wright explained when a project is vested, it is considered a complete application, and whatever codes are in place when the project is vested are then the codes that govern the project. By law, the City has 120 days from the time a developer submits a completed application to review it, he added. WELLER asked is the City required to align its code with the results of the case sited in the agenda materials on page 15 of 42 ( Potala Village Kirkland v. City of Kirkland ). Heinonen replied yes, the City s attorney has recommended we align our code with the decision on that case. WELLER gave details about his understanding of the case. He said he knows how much work a developer can put into getting plans and permits together, and it could amount to a lot of money just to get to that point. He said this does seem to shift more of the power onto the City s side. Wright said if a developer has a complete application ready for submittal, whether it is for a preliminary plat or a site development, the City works with the developer to ensure they are aware of the codes that are in effect at that time. The requirements may change as the project and its application process evolves over time, but the point of this amendment is to be able to make it clear when the application is considered complete so that all parties understand the regulations that are in effect. WALSH said it might be good, particularly on smaller projects, to reference the expiration of the IMC provisions so that a developer knows how long they have on their permits. Wright said he will check to see whether they are already all in the same section of the code. LEWIS asked clarifying questions about who would be the designee referred to in the vesting rights language ( the Development Services Director or his or her designee shall have the authority ). Heinonen said the designee must be another City employee. It could be the City planner in charge of the project, the Assistant City Administrator, or the City Administrator, depending on the complexity of the project, she added. LEWIS asked about a response to comments raised during public comment at the recent Development Commission meeting about lighting, parking lots, and other items for the assisted living facility in question. Heinonen explained those are project-specific questions that the Development Commission would take on, whereas PPC looks at policy-wide issues. The issue

5 in question for PPC is not about a specific project, but rather is a change to the Table of Permitted Uses for SF-E zones citywide. LEWIS asked are there any answers available to the people who raised their concerns about rezoning the property to allow this assisted living facility to be developed. Heinonen said the amendment before PPC is not for a rezone, but rather an addition to the Table of Permitted Uses. PPC would not be in a position to resolve any issues about parking, lighting, location of dumpsters, and so on for a specific project, she continued. Wright noted the City does have code that defines acceptable illumination levels on adjacent properties, for example, that a specific project would have to follow. Public Comment PROBALA invited any audience members who wish to add their comments to do so at this time. Todd Alexander, 7804 Renton-Issaquah Road SE, Issaquah, said the assisted living facility would be just south of his home. He continued with his concerns about allowing a facility of this size, which is 90 beds and a 34,000 square-foot facility with staff and visitors coming and going on a 24/7 basis, on property that is only zoned to accommodate something like five or six homes, for a total of probably only 24 to 30 people. He said his biggest concern is that many more traffic trips will be generated by this project versus if the property was developed with single-family residences. He said he thinks the facility will have a big impact on his property, and it doesn t adhere to the concept of zoning that was in place when he purchased his property. Wright responded that the change before the Commission for deliberation is a citywide amendment and not specific to this particular project. As for the site in question, he continued, we have looked at how many single-family homes could be built on the buildable parcels in this 22-acre site, and we came up with a number around 24 homes. Wright and Mr. Alexander discussed how that number was calculated. Mr. Alexander noted that much of the parcel has creek setbacks and wetlands that would allow far fewer homes than 24. Wright said clustered development is allowed in SF-E, which would allow for up to 24 homes. Mr. Alexander said he feels that far fewer homes would be possible to be built there. KOLWITZ and WELLER both noted that a 34,000 square-foot facility with 90 beds does seem incompatible with the concept of an estate zone. Wright said the term estate refers to the density in the SF-E zoning district, 1.24 dwelling unit per acre; the assisted living facility would essentially be a clustered development. PROBALA asked whether plans for the assisted living facility Mr. Alexander is referring to are available. Heinonen replied yes, the Development Commission is reviewing them now. PROBALA suggested that Mr. Alexander speak to staff after the meeting about his concerns, and that this issue be brought back at the next PPC meeting with any additional changes or comments from staff. Mr. Alexander added the City appears to have a lot of interest in these kinds of facilities, and he understands that land within the City is becoming more and more scarce. He referred to recent lawsuits at the City of Sammamish where developments are being put on hold. He said he understands that people want to use their land for their own interests, but he feels they should have to conform to the regulations the same way he did and use it the same way he had to. PROBALA said she understands Mr. Alexander s points, and said change is hard but sometimes change also results in something better. She said she appreciates hearing from citizens about their concerns and said maybe something new can be learned when staff takes another look at this before PPC s next meeting on September 10. She thanked Mr. Alexander for coming to the meeting.

6 Mary Moore, 7804 Renton-Issaquah Road SE, Issaquah, said when she moved into Tibbetts Valley in 2000, she and her husband hired a consultant and had an engineer lay out the site plan for their home. She said her understanding was that only four homes could be put on their five acres, and there was no discussion of clustered development as a possibility. She said she was surprised to hear that clustered development is permitted in SF-E. She also explained that when the Talus development went in, part of that discussion was that the east side of SR-900 would remain SF-E, in part to protect the wildlife corridor there. She described the wildlife that live on this property and said this is a very critical area, the kind you don t see much of in Issaquah anymore. She spoke about the pace of change taking place in the City, and said you have a responsibility to balance growth in good ways, which includes slowing down the pace of the growth we are experiencing. She asked the Commission to think about the effect of the change in permitted uses being proposed, and said we live here, and so are also thinking about what could happen with this change in place if this particular developer sold out and another development wanted to move in. Todd Sargeant, th NE, Bellevue, said he was chair of Issaquah s Planning Policy Commission back in the 1990s, and he congratulates the Commission for keeping the City s comprehensive plan a living document. He spoke in favor of taking the time to look over the proposed changes in the form of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to keep it current. OTHER BUSINESS/ANNOUNCEMENTS/ADJOURN With no further business to conduct, PROBALA adjourned the meeting at 7:32 PM. Respectfully submitted, Susan Lowe Recording Secretary