City of Burien
BURIEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
September 23, 2003
7:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
MINUTES
Planning Commission Members Present: Robert Simpson-Clark, chair; Janet Shull, Barbara Williams
Absent: Jon Newton, Bonnie Isenberg, Rebecca McInteer, Douglas Rahn
Others Present: David Johanson, planner
The meeting began at 7:20 p.m. with Chair Simpson-Clark presiding. A quorum was not present. Upon the call of the roll all commissioners were present with the exception of Commissioners Newton, Isenberg, McInteer and Rahn.
Agenda Confirmation
It was agreed that approval of the minutes should be moved to the end of the meeting in the hope of having a quorum by then.
Public Comment - None
Old Business
A. Public Hearing on Comprehensive Plan Updates (Land Use, Housing, Storm Water and Existing Conditions Sections)
Chair Simpson-Clark declared the public hearing open.
There were no members of the public present to speak on the topic.
Commissioner Williams asked staff to determine whether the term “Hispanic” or “Latino” should be used.
Chair Simpson-Clark suggested deferring to whatever term the US Census uses.
Chair Simpson-Clark declared the public hearing closed.
B. Public Hearing on Amendments to BMC 19.65.095 (Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process)
Chair Simpson-Clark declared the public hearing open.
There were no members of the public present to speak on the topic.
Chair Simpson-Clark declared the public hearing closed.
David Johanson, senior planner, provided the commissioners with copies of the Comprehensive Plan sections that have been updated.
With regard to the schedule of upcoming meetings, it was agreed that the October 14 meeting should be rescheduled owing to a conflict with the state American Planners Association meeting. The meeting was set for October 22.
Commissioner Shull referred to Section 2.2 Land Use Element, page ii-2, and questioned use of the word “intent.” She also asked if the wording of Policy LU-1.11 to designate downtown Burien and the surrounding area as an urban center could be included given that the City has not yet been through the process.
Chair Simpson-Clark noted that policy language must be written assuming approval. If urban center approval is not realized, the language of the policy will become moot.
Commissioner McInteer arrived and a quorum was reached.
Commissioner Williams referred to the specific reference to Miller Creek in Section 4.3.5, pg 4/36 and suggested that Salmon Creek also should be mentioned. Staff was asked to verify the classifications of the two creeks. Mr. Johanson added that the intent is to include the critical area map, though it may not be specific with regard to stream classifications.
Commissioner Shull asked if the code would include language outlining the criteria used in determining if Comprehensive Plan amendments should move forward in the process for consideration. Mr. Johanson said the first step in determining the docket for a given year is the open process during which anyone is free to suggest issues to the Planning Commission. Ultimately the City Council makes the decision as to what items are to be docketed; that is done by resolution. He said the term “eligible” has more to do with meeting the deadline or other legal reasons. There are specific criteria that must be met in reviewing specific amendments.
Chair Simpson-Clark reiterated his desire to see some data included with regard to commuting distances to indicate Burien’s importance as a bedroom community versus an employment center.
Commissioner Williams referred to page 4-3 and asked if there is a rationale behind the geographic areas considered. Mr. Johanson said the context is historical. The only other city that has been around for a significant amount of time is Normandy Park. Chair Simpson-Clark noted that because Burien has not been a city for very long, the comparative numbers are for the Highline area as used for the 1990 federal census.
Commissioner Williams noted that there is a reference to the North Hill area south of Burien, an area not shown on the map. Mr. Johanson allowed that the area has been annexed and should be shown accordingly on the map. Commissioner Williams also asked staff to verify the miles of shoreline and show it correctly in the document.
Mr. Johanson encouraged the commissioners to e-mail staff with any additional corrections to the draft.
Approval of Minutes
Commissioner Shull referred to page 6 and noted that the motion to recommend approval of the Northeast Special Planning Area zoning and design standards was made by her and was seconded by Commissioner Williams instead of the other way around, as shown.
Motion to approve the minutes as amended was made by Commissioner Williams. Second was by Commissioner Shull and the motion carried unanimously.
Old Business (continued)
C. Expansion of Public Facility Discussion Part 2
Mr. Johanson provided the commissioners with a memo that, among other things, showed how other Washington state cities go about addressing public facilities. Of the 58 cities on the list, 35 do not have a specific public use or facilities zone. Five of those 35 do have a park zone. There is a public use or facility zone or something similar in 23 area cities. The approaches taken by Auburn, Issaquah and Edmonds represent three very different approaches to the same issue.
Commissioner Williams said she was originally in favor of having some designation for public facilities, primarily as a means of ensuring continuity of use. She added, however, that the approach has lead to dissension from an economic point of view in some jurisdictions. The Burien Senior Center site, which belongs to the Highline School District, could conceivably be worth a lot of money if put on the market for sale, and the site could be open to a usage that is very different from its current use. Having a public facilities designation could, in fact, lead to more complexities.
Chair Simpson-Clark said he was leaning toward having a park designation but not a public facilities designation. He allowed that such a designation could mean that a park zoned as a park would need the maximum amount of community input in order to change to some other use. The current approach of having the underlying zoning as the controlling factor works very well; if a school were to be sited in a commercial district, the school would have to comply with the commercial standards. One of the laws cited from another jurisdiction would make existing property owners – or at the very least the next property to develop – provide the buffer for properties designated as public facilities.
Commissioner McInteer commented that Burien is a growing and changing community only in that there are a number of new features. The philosophy of “if it’s not broken don’t fix it” needs to be balanced against what might be coming up in the future that would be appropriate for a public facilities designation. The focus should be on the future and not on how things have been done in the past. Beyond just looking at the economic values involved, there should be an eye on the character of the neighborhood and the community contribution having the designation would bring.
Chair Simpson-Clark stated that under the current approach if the school district chooses to surplus and sell a piece of property, the use of the property must be determined by the underlying zone. If zoned as a public facility or school zone, before selling a property the school district would have to come before the City seeking a zoning change in order to sell the property for any use other than a school use. The result could be a conflict between the requirement of the school district to maximize its investments and the desire of the community to have the site used for residential.
Commissioner McInteer asked what other types of uses might fall under a public facilities designation. Chair Simpson-Clark said examples would include parks, power substations, and city properties.
Commissioner Williams suggested that having a park designation could serve as a disincentive to selling park lands. That would enhance the community by ensuring a due process before allowing parks to be turned into some other use. Chair Simpson-Clark proposed that changing park sites to other uses is a political process that does not need to be governed by zoning. If at some point the City were to require public green space, there would be value in having a green space zoning that would make it difficult to convert privately dedicated green space to some other use.
Mr. Johanson said one reason for having a public facilities designation would be to allow for better facilitation of existing uses. In Edmonds the public facilities designation was developed specifically to allow for school and park expansions without having to go through a large land use process associated with the underlying zone. Chair Simpson-Clark suggested that there would be merit to having that approach written into the ordinances, but it should not necessarily require a separate zone.
Commissioner Williams said her original position was that there should be new code regulations pertaining to public facilities, but was swayed by the research against taking that approach. She said she continued to hold to the notion of having a park zone, however. Chair Simpson-Clark said he could see no particular down side to having a park zone.
Mr. Johanson said in his research one of the issues that came up repeatedly was that of local control. Many of the jurisdictions developed their public facilities designation because of a desire to have better control and coordination of land use-related issues.
Chair Simpson-Clark proposed that a public facilities designation could lead to abuses. He cited as examples the post office and the police precinct office, neither of which would be allowed to operate as commercial establishments in the manner they are now operating. Both have fenced off parking for outside storage of vehicles, which was not permitted under the King County rules at the time the action was taken. Both uses simply exempted themselves by writing the public facilities rules to allow what they wanted to do. Such uses should be viewed as any other commercial establishment would be and treated the same.
Motion to recommend to the City Council consideration of implementing a park zone for the city was made by Commissioner Williams. Second was by Commissioner Shull.
Chair Simpson-Clark said he would prefer to see the motion amended to say the idea has merit but has not yet reached the level of requiring a policy amendment.
Commissioner Shull said the motion on the floor outlines the position of the commission, which is that a parks designation has merit for further study; the motion does not include a recommendation to develop a policy.
The motion carried unanimously 4-0.
Mr. Johanson explained that depending on the discussion at the council level, the matter may or may not come back before the commission as a docketed item or directive.
New Business
A. Discussion of Draft 2004 Planning Commission Work Program
The commissioners were provided copies of the draft 2004 commission work program.
Commissioner Shull said she had communicated with staff her desire to see a housing demonstration project and development of a Comprehensive Plan policy included on the list, along with work on the urban center designation and amending the code to set up the process for development agreements citywide. Mr. Johanson allowed that the latter idea is out there but has not grown legs as yet. He agreed to add the issue to the list.
Commissioner Williams noted that the existing plan includes a paragraph that talks about looking at redeveloping a 10-acre area in the heart of the downtown. She said she saw nothing on the work program reflecting that. Mr. Johanson said all of that falls under Priority 2, support Town Square redevelopment efforts. He allowed that the commission will have a supportive role to play.
Commissioner Williams asked if the commission would be dealing at all with the Salmon Creek watershed issue. Mr. Johanson said the primary focus for that issue will be for Public Works.
Chair Simpson-Clark asked if development of design guidelines for the Town Square will be an issue with which the commission will grapple. Mr. Johanson explained that there are already established design guidelines and an administrative design review process. Chair Simpson-Clark suggested that the guidelines are not very sophisticated or precise. The commission has discussed the possibility of having a much more defined requirement for the areas, starting at the Town Square and graduating outward. The Town Square redevelopment process should be used to further define the design guidelines, so that the entire downtown area becomes an integrated whole.
Director’s Report - None
Adjournment
Chair Simpson-Clark adjourned the meeting at 8:59 p.m.
Approved:
/s/ Robert Simpson-Clark, chair
Planning Commission
/s/ Scott Greenberg, director
Community Development Department