City of
BURIEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
City Council Chambers
MINUTES
Planning Commission Members Present: Robert Simpson-Clark, chair; Rebecca McInteer, Janet Shull, and Barbara Williams
Absent: Jon Newton, Douglas Rahn, Bonnie Isenberg
Others Present:
The meeting began without a
quorum at
Agenda Confirmation
There was agreement to reverse the order of Old Business items A and B.
Public Comment – None
Old Business
B. Study Session on Comprehensive Plan Package 2: Land Use, Utilities and Storm Water, Capital Facilities Elements
Nancy Bird, consultant with
EDAW, commented that for the most part the land use policies are
acceptable. They cover a full spectrum of land use issues and have been
reviewed primarily to make sure they are consistent with current
practices. In order to comply with
Chair Simpson-Clark observed that the words “encourage” and “promote” are used frequently throughout the element when what is really meant is “require.” Ms. Bird said “require” is used in cases where there is a clear requirement; generally “encourage” and “promote” are used where the City intends to do the best it can without precluding development. She allowed that in EV 1.8 the word “requires” would be more accurate.
Planning Director
Mr. Greenberg commented that because the City is required to incorporate best available science, policy EV 1.8 may not be needed at all. He suggested talking more about the issue in upcoming meetings.
Chair Simpson-Clark said if the policy is to be retained, it should continue to reference the state law; that way if state law changes, it would not be necessary to change the Burien code.
Mr. Greenberg said the final version of the Land Use Element will include policy LU 1.11 designating an area as an urban center. He explained that in the early ‘90s the Puget Sound Regional Council adopted Vision 2020, a long-range growth, economic and transportation strategy for King, Pierce, Snohomish and Kitsap counties. One of the concepts included in Vision 2020 is the notion that urban growth should be occurring within the urban growth areas and in urban centers. Urban centers are relatively small areas of compact development where housing, employment, shopping and other activities are in close proximity. Within the four-county region there are 23 designated urban centers.
Continuing, Mr. Greenberg allowed that the planning done for the downtown area fits the definition of an urban center. He said staff, as part of the plan amendment process, will be recommending to the City Council pursuing an urban center designation for downtown Burien and the surrounding area. The first step is to have a local designation; the council must adopt policy and regulatory changes necessary to have all of the elements necessary in an urban center, and that has been done except for a policy designating an urban center. Once the council takes action, the matter will be brought before the Growth Management Planning Council. Following approval by the GMPC, there must be ratification by a certain number of cities in the county before an amendment can be made to the Countywide Planning Policies to show the designated area. Once that is done, the matter must be brought before the Growth Management Planning Board of the Puget Sound Regional Council which makes a recommendation to the full Executive Board.
The commissioners said the primary reason for designating the downtown an urban center is to set the stage for funneling transportation funding to the city. The planning already accomplished mean no steps will need to be taken to increase density or rewrite the codes in order to qualify. Mr. Greenberg allowed that the boundary of the urban center will need to be drawn so as to be within a half mile radius of the transit center. The proposal is to draw the boundary to take in essentially all of the downtown, some of the Community Commercial on Ambaum to about 144th, the multi-family west of the downtown near Lake Burien, Old Burien, the large multi-family area to the south of the downtown, and part of the Regional Commercial strip and the gateway area to the north. The proposed boundary meets all of the numerical criteria for employment and housing density.
Turning to the Community Character Element, Ms. Bird noted that aside from some minor formatting revisions, the major change is to policy DB 1.8 to reflect the planning for and current status of Town Square.
Chair Simpson-Clark asked if the Community Character Element is tied in any way to the development of the neighborhood plans. Ms. Bird answered that the element is new to the Comprehensive Plan and when completed will house all of the subarea plans, including the downtown area and neighborhood plans.
Mr. Johanson commented that the current Comprehensive Plan includes a Stormwater Element. The proposed revisions seek to refine the current code and add a great deal more detail.
At 7:43 p.m. Commissioner McInteer arrived.
Mr. Bath noted that infiltration is emphasized for single-family developments, but for commercial developments infiltration is not stressed first and foremost. That is one of the changes being recommended.
The commissioners were informed that in a number of policies the word “should” is proposed to be replaced with “shall.” Other language changes are proposed in order to comply with the Endangered Species Act and to incorporate low-impact development concepts. Several new goals and policies are proposed to address issues identified during master plan development; including low-impact development; retaining existing ditches; opening existing closed pipe drainage systems; repairing or retrofitting private storm drainage systems that route city stormwater; discourage conversions of pervious surfaces to impervious surfaces; permit the use of grasscrete in retrofits; increase the tree canopy and encourage the planting of additional trees during development and redevelopment; require use of the most recent storm drainage manual from King County; require higher detention and water quality standards for the Salmon Creek and Miller Creek basins; direct participation in multi-jurisdictional stormwater projects; and engage in public education and outreach with regard to stormwater impacts.
Answering a question asked by Commissioner McInteer, Mr. Bath said the King County stormwater manual was last updated in 1998. He said there are plans to update the manual again in 2004.
Chair Simpson-Clark officially called the meeting to order.
With regard to the Capital Facilities Element, Mr. Johanson said the primary focus will be on updating the charts. Mark Personius with the consulting firm EDAW said the element will be updated for the public hearing draft of the package of elements.
Approval of Minutes
A. August 26, 2003
Motion to approve the minutes as submitted was made by Commissioner Williams. Second was by Commissioner Shull and the motion carried unanimously.
Old Business (continued)
A. Discussion and Recommendation on Northeast Redevelopment Area (SPA-4)
Mr. Greenberg sought to correct several minor errors in the materials provided to the commission. With regard to the chart on the second page of the memo titled “Draft Zoning and Design Standards for SPA-4,” he indicated that the square footage of floor area per job should be shown as 708, and that the jobs per net acre of land should be listed as 18. On the same page, Mr. Greenberg noted that under Option 2 one way to regulate uses based on job density would be to simply limit the total square footage in SPA-4A and SPA-4B for warehouse and distribution uses by limiting the percentage of a project’s floor area in those two zones. The figure of 25 percent is used in the memo, but after rechecking the figures it turns out that five percent would more accurately match the desired outcome.
Mr. Greenberg said the zoning and design standards were revised to clarify the cargo container issue. In addition the landscaping reduction provisions were revised to allow for only one option. With regard to certain FAA restrictions, Mr. Greenberg informed the commissioners that there are strings attached to land purchased with certain federal funds that could preclude the development of some preferred land uses. The concept of incompatible uses could apply even to private land.
Mr. Greenberg said he met earlier in the day with a representative from the Port of Seattle to discuss applicability, height limitations, and FAA notification requirements. He provided the commissioners with a handout with comments from the Port on the regulations, and a sheet listing the city staff response to those comments and proposed revisions to the draft.
Chair Simpson-Clark referred to 19.15.070.1.A.v.g and suggested that there should be some specification with regard to who defines what an aviation hazard is. He proposed adding “as defined by state or federal law” or words to that effect.
Answering a question asked by Commissioner Williams regarding 19.15.070.1.A.iii, Mr. Greenberg said the minimum for a development agreement is two acres. He agreed that the word “site” should be used in place of “lot” because it is a defined term in the code.
Commissioner Shull suggested simplifying Option 2 in the staff memo by requiring SPA-4A and SPA-4C to meet one of the two employment density ratios shown in the chart, and having no specific language for job density for SPA-4C. The reference to a percentage could thus be removed entirely. Mr. Greenberg allowed that the percentage approach has an arbitrary feel to it. He said he would much prefer to use the ratio approach.
Chair Simpson-Clark commented that regardless of their size, warehouses can be run by only a few people. The provisions should not preclude uses that are relatively small but which are fairly high in employment by trying to eliminate a long-term storage facility or the like that employs very few people per square foot. There should be a minimum size restriction included.
Mr. Greenberg said staff does not want to, over time, be continually monitoring who will be working in each building; it would be a nightmare and not the right approach. On the other hand, staff does not want to see all low-employment uses developed. The trick is in finding an approach that will yield a balance.
Commissioner McInteer asked how the City could achieve the employment goals over time absent some active monitoring. Mr. Greenberg said the reality is that the City would seek traffic data up front as part of the permitting process. The traffic data would include employment figures. Another approach would be to apply an employment ratio at the time of development. Beyond that there would be no official monitoring of the uses. Mr. Johanson said there would, over time, be some general checking to see how the zone is doing, and there would be general economic indicators looked for, but all of that would be different from an active monitoring approach.
Chair Simpson-Clark agreed with the notion of just looking at job criteria in permitting the original development as outlined in Option 1 in the staff memo. The reality is the area is not suited to very large warehouses working with giant containers, nor is it suited to attracting high-quality office space.
Commissioner Shull said her concern with Option 1 is that as written it applies to all three areas of SPA-4.
Mr. Greenberg said the total number of jobs projected for SPA-4A and SPA-4B is 2161. The total projected square footage is 1,376,060, which yields a ratio of 636 square feet of floor area per job, or 19.6 jobs per net acre of land. He suggested those numbers could be used, leaving out SPA-4C altogether. Commissioner Williams said that would make the most sense to her.
There was agreement to round the 636 square feet per job up to 650, and the 19.6 jobs per net acre of land up to 20.
Commissioner Williams asked if the concerns of the Port have been addressed to its satisfaction. Mr. Greenberg said Port staff continues to have concerns. The proposal represents the recommendation of the City, not the Port.
Chair Simpson-Clark observed that it takes a year or more to make changes to Burien codes, whereas changes made to FAA regulations take no time at all. He said applicants seeking a development permit should be informed that there are federal regulations they will also have to adhere to, not all of which will always be reflected in the Burien regulations. It would be a disservice to imply that the Burien code covers all aspects of developing the SPA-4 area. The federal regulations are all readily available.
Chair Simpson-Clark asked if there is a permitting authority for the FAA. Barbara Rudge, Port of Seattle representative, said the 7460 process allows for review of potential development and makes a recommendation. The process is admittedly very slow. If the City were able to recognize in advance incompatible uses, such as tall buildings, the 7460 process could be circumvented.
Mr. Greenberg noted that 19.15.070.1.A.ii references FAA regulations in general, telling the reader that there are regulations other than city regulations that will need to be reviewed. He added that the City issues permits all the time, especially along Puget Sound, that might require some other jurisdiction also to issue a permit. Chair Simpson-Clark stressed the need to be very clear about other agencies having authority over the SPA-4 area.
Chair Simpson-Clark said adult entertainment facilities and eating and drinking establishments could represent major assemblies of people, and therefore not be compatible land uses. There is a guideline from the FAA that sets a limit of 25 to 40 people per acre. He said with the permission of the commission he would add the restriction in at the upper level. There was concurrence with the suggestion.
With regard to Secure Community Transmission Facilities, Mr. Greenberg said there is a very small risk that Burien will have to deal with the issue in the near future. Because a Secure Community Transmission Facility could be considered a residential use, it likely is not a compatible land use. Accordingly the use should be restricted to SPA -4A and SPA-4B north of South 140th Street out of the Approach Transition Zone. The commissioners concurred.
Mr. Greenberg said the SPA-4 zoning and design standards will be reviewed by the Business and Economic Development Partnership on September 12 and will be before the City Council in study session by the middle of the month. That will be followed by a public hearing before the council in October and adoption on or before November 3.
Motion to recommend to the City Council approval of the Northeast Redevelopment Area SPA-4 zoning and design standards as revised was made by Commissioner Shull. Second was by Commissioner Williams and the motion carried unanimously.
New Business
A. Study Session on Expansion of the Public Facility Designation
Mr. Johanson said docket item No. 2000-3.b is aimed at exploring the notion of developing a public facility designation. The matter was placed on the docket at the direction of the City Council. The cities of Auburn and Edmonds took a very simple approach in developing a public facility zone. Issaquah went a step further and developed a number of different zones, including public parks, open space, and public utility facilities.
The method currently used in Burien is to allow any of the uses listed on the use zone chart for the underlying zone in the event a public facility is surplused or changed to another use. Creation of a public facilities zone would give the City more control in what happens with the land, but it could also reduce flexibility.
Commissioner Williams said she likes the idea of having a public facilities designation. Should the school district decide to develop an apartment complex on the property where the senior center is located, the character of the neighborhood would be changed dramatically. Having a public facilities designation would allow for a mandated review process with public comment before anything could be changed.
Commissioner Williams said she would like to hear more about the pros and cons of the Issaquah approach.
Commissioner McInteer agreed that the study should move forward.
Chair Simpson-Clark disagreed, commenting that the current system is workable and not in need of change.
Commissioner Shull said she would like to see the possibilities explored.
Mr. Johanson said the commission has a public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan updates scheduled for September 23. If a policy is to be established regarding a study to establish a public facilities designation, it should be included in the packet of updates. The commission will not officially act on its recommendation until October 14.
Chair Simpson-Clark suggested that the time is far too compressed. He said he would prefer to see the matter brought up again next year.
Mr. Johanson said he was seeking only to find out from the commission if the notion has merit or not. If it is agreed that the idea has merit, a general policy directing a study to create a public facility zone will be drafted. If approved by the council, staff would have a policy basis upon which to move the study ahead.
Chair Simpson-Clark suggested that there is no need to amend the Comprehensive Plan by adding a policy that gives permission to explore something that will not be presented until the next time the Comprehensive Plan is reviewed. The study could go forward without having a policy.
There was agreement to send to the council a recommendation to explore the development of a public facilities designation without adding a policy to the Comprehensive Plan.
Director’s Report - None
Adjournment
Motion to adjourn was made by Commissioner McInteer. Second was by Commissioner Williams and the motion carried unanimously. Chair Simpson-Clark adjourned the meeting at 9:28 p.m.
Approved:
/s/ Robert Simpson-Clark, chair
Planning Commission
/s/
Community Development Department