Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning and Economic Development Committee - 10/10/1994KENT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 10, 1994 The meeting of the Kent Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Kent Morrill at 7:03 p.m. on October 10, 1994 in Kent City Hall, Chambers West. PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Morrill, Chair Janette Nuss, Vice Chair Gwen Dahle Ken Dozier Connie Epperly Edward Heineman, Jr. Bob MacIsaac Russ Stringham PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Raymond Ward, Excused PLANNING STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: James Harris, Planning Director Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager Linda Phillips, Planner Matthews Jackson, Planner NanSea Potts, Recording Secretary OTHER CITY STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: May Miller, Finance Director Gary Gill, City Engineer Ed White, Transportation Engineer Mary Berg, Assistant Fire Chief APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 26, 1994 MINUTES It was stated that Commissioner Ken Dozier's name was inadvertently omitted as a commissioner in attendance at the September 26, 1994 meeting. Commissioner Dozier said he wished to clarify the recording of his comments from the previous meeting. Reference was made to the first sentence on page 6, listed under Areas F,K and L. 1 Commissioner Dozier wished the record to reflect, "Commissioner Dozier stated he wished to go on record as saying he felt established commercial property owners are not given adequate consideration for their wishes for their property, and should be allowed to continue, expand or use for any purpose that the present zoning would allow. It is wrong to do otherwise." It was MOVED and SECONDED to accept the minutes of the September 26, 1994 Planning Commission meeting as corrected. The motion CARRIED. ADDED AGENDA ITEMS Commissioner Nuss stated the elections will need to be considered for the agenda, possibly at the November 28, 1994 meeting. Discussions followed whether the Planning Commission will meet in the month of December. It was decided to make the decision at a later date, before the end of the year. COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner Nuss reported that she attended the Oregon -Washington Regional Planning Conference. She distributed valuable information to each of the commissioners on how to be a more effective planning commissioner. Commissioner MacIsaac asked the commission if everyone had received an invitation to attend the Regional Transit Authority (RTA) meeting on October 11th. Planning Director, Jim Harris said this issue would be addressed under "Notice of Upcoming Meetings." NOTICE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS Commissioner Nuss gave details concerning the RTA roundtable discussion meeting which was to be held the following night. Mr. Harris asked for a head count of those commissioners planning to attend. REGULAR MEETING #CPA -94-1 - Continuation of Deliberations on the Kent Draft Comprehensive Plan Chair Morrill opened deliberations on the remainung Land Use issues, and asked Fred Satterstrom to recap each of the tabled issues before discussions and taking a preliminary the vote. Please refer to Staff Memorandum dated September 6, 1994, Land Use Map. Area A - Request for multi -family designation for the James Property at 21251 94th Place 2 Planning Commission Minutes October 10, 1994 Mr. Satterstrom indicated the James' property on the map and gave a brief description of the parcel. He reiterated the fact that planning staff recommends an SF -3 designation. It was MOVED and SECONDED to accept staff's recommendation. The motion CARRIED. AREAS F, K, L - Request for Commercial designation (Tulloch, Scarcella) Request to allow existing office and nursery operations to remain conforming (Ranniger, Curran) Mr. Satterstrom indicated the areas on the map, named the owners, the current zoning and uses of each parcel. He stated staff's recommendation of SF -6, to remain consistent with present county and city zoning. Mr. Satterstrom indicated small county areas that could have a potential designation of MF -2400, which he said could be closely equated to Kent's MRG/MRM designations. Mr. Satterstrom outlined existing zoning regulations concerning legal and illegal non -conforming uses. Discussions followed regarding the classification of the property, and the costs and process involved for a Conditional Use Permit which is required if owners of legal non- conforming uses wish to expand their businesses. It was MOVED and SECONDED to recommend a commercial designation allowing existing office and nursery operations to remain conforming. The motion CARRIED. Mr. Harris requested a clarification of the motion and after discussions, the commissioners chose to change the motion. Mr. Harris suggested that the chairman solve the zoning issue by requesting a separated vote for the designation of each parcel. A clarification was requested regarding the ownership of each area. (Area F = Ranniger, Area L = Tulloch, Area K = Scarcella) Commissioner Dozier withdrew his original motion. Discussions followed regarding possible commercial uses or an alternative RA -1 designation for Area F. It was MOVED and SECONDED to designate Area F as Commercial. The motion was DEFEATED. It was MOVED and SECONDED to accept staff's recommendation for Areas L and K. The motion CARRIED. c Planning Commission Minutes October 10, 1994 It was MOVED and SECONDED to accept staff's recommendation for Area F, with the allowance that the businesses that have operated for years should remain. VOTE: Yea - Commissioners Dahle, Nuss, Morrill and Heineman Nay - Commissioners Stringham, MacIsaac, Epperly and Dozier. It was agreed to continue discussion of the designation for Area F to a later date. Area H - Request for multifamily designation at 108th Avenue SE and SE 264th Street Linda Phillips indicated the area on the map, and gave a brief background summary. Mr. Satterstrom informed the commission that this area is located in the Ramstead/East Hill annexation area, and proposed that this issue be postponed until the workshop is completed. The commissioners agreed to postpone further deliberations on this issue. Area I - Request for SF -3 designation for a 29 acre site between South 208th and 212th Street, east of 92nd Avenue South (Chestnut Ridge - Ross) Mr. Satterstrom indicated the area on the map, and summarized the zoning history of the site and the developer's proposals. He provided a topographical assessment, and restated staff's recommendation of SF -1. Discussions followed regarding the City's ability to regulate density through the development permit review. In support of retaining the SF -1 designation, additional comments were made regarding the impact of higher density on schools and city services, and the long-range impacts to the environment and critical areas. It was also stated that planning commissioners are obligated to consider ethical principles including: 1) serve in the public interests, 2) recognize the right of citizens to influence decisions and 3) recognize the long-range nature of planning decisions. It was MOVED and SECONDED to recommend an SF -3 designation for Area I. The motion CARRIED. VOTE: Yea - Commissioners Dozier, Epperly, Stringham, Morrill, MacIsaac Nay - Commissioners Heineman, Dahle, Nuss TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT DELIBERATIONS - Mr. Satterstrom introduced Mr. Ed White, City of Kent Transportation Engineer, as the spokesperson from the Public Works Department. The commissioners referred to the Department of Public Works memorandum, dated October 4, 1994, for responses to transportation issues raised at the public hearings. Also introduced were Gary Gill, City 4 Planning Commission Minutes October 10, 1994 Engineer and Laura Jackson, Transportation Engineer from the consulting firm, W & H Pacific. Mr. White explained he was prepared to address the transportation issues raised through the public hearing process. It was decided to proceed with the Transportation discussions in the same manner as the Land Use deliberations. Issue #1 - July 25, 1994 - Robert Whalen (Transportation Policies) Mr. White stated after review of the Transportation Goals and Policies, the word "Public" was intended to reflect all alternatives available to the public rather than excluding private transportation organization. It was MOVED and SECONDED to accept staff's response. The motion CARRIED. Issue #2 - August 8, 1994 - Steve Nuss (Non -Motorized Transportation) Mr. White commented regarding encouragement to use bicycles as an alternative to motorized transportation in the comprehensive plan. He outlined the City's involvement in promoting bicycle transportation. He stated staff will continue to work closely with the Bicycle Advisory Board to help strengthen the language in the transportation element. Mr. White said federal funds were available to finance non -motorized improvements. He said the City will also investigate other funding opportunities to promote non -motorized transportation alternatives. It was MOVED and SECONDED to accept staff's response. The motion CARRIED. Issue #3 - August 8, 1994 - Michael Skehan (Level of Service Standards) Mr. White said this is a very complex issue and staff's intent was to reflect a flexible, broad framework to deal with the issues presented to the City Council as well as the Planning Commission. He explained the three basic areas in the Transportation element relating to level of service, (arterial, transit, non -motorized) and how they relate and complement each other. He further explained how Metro relates to the City of Kent's future transit service needs. It was MOVED and SECONDED to accept staff's response. The motion CARRIED. VOTE: Yea - Commissioners Dozier, Nuss, Morrill, Dahle, MacIsaac, Heineman, Epperly Nay - Commissioner Stringham Issue #4 - August 22, 1994 - Steve Babbitt (Non -Motorized Goals and Policies) 5 Planning Commission Minutes October 10, 1994 Mr. White said staff intends to include as many Bicycle Advisory Board -recommended goals and policies in the comprehensive plan as possible. He said the next step in the process will be to continue to work with the board on additions and changes to the element. It was MOVED and SECONDED to accept staff's response. The motion CARRIED. Issue #5 - August 22, 1994 - Michael Skehan (Transit Advisory Board's Recommendations to the Transportation Element) Mr. White said the Transportation Goals and Policies were intended to be broad, to be used as a framework for the comprehensive plan, and to not address specific issues. In answer to a question regarding two areas which were believed to be omitted from the goals and policies, Mr. White stated generalized assumptions were made during modeling to allow more flexibility to the plan. Mr. White distributed two letters to the commissioners; one from KJS Associates and another from HT Associates he stated that the letters provide additional information concerning mode split and the model mode shares. Ms. Jackson further explained the issues concerning transit use, elaborating on the variables in transit specific to the City of Kent. It was MOVED and SECONDED to accept staff's response. The motion CARRIED. Issue #6 - August 22, 1994 - Robert Whalen (Local Control Over Transit Service) Mr. White addressed specific issues concerning center -based transit, King County Transit Committee and Metro's provision of additional service and programs for Kent. It was MOVED and SECONDED to accept staff's response. The motion CARRIED. CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES DELIBERATIONS Fred Satterstrom discussed the Capital Facilities Draft Goals and Policies which was distributed to the commissioners, and said the transportation part of this element should be available at the next planning commission meeting, completing the overall capital facilities element. Mr. Satterstrom introduced Linda Phillips to further explain the Capital Facilities Goals and Policies. Chair Morrill requested the Capital Facilities Goals and Policies (CFP) be handled all together, unless the commissioners have specific areas to review individually. Planning Commission Minutes October 10, 1994 Ms. Phillips gave an overview of the goals and policies, mentioned the City departments involved in its review, and distributed a list of reference definitions relative to the element. She also outlined modification procedures, and read specific areas of the goals and policies. Chair Morrill stated these goals and policies are very broad guidelines, and since they were thoroughly reviewed by City staff, he hoped they would be accepted. Ms. Phillips answered questions regarding the difference between a neighborhood park and a community park. She stated it concerned the size of the park and who the park serves. She also responded to a question regarding the status of the CFP financing plan. Ms. Phillips said the transportation portion of the financing plan was not available, but would be inserted in the overall financing plan and presented to the commission when the transportation plan is complete. A clarification was given by Ms. Phillips concerning the term "some providers" in CFP 6.3 regarding payment of fees, and the level of service as outlined in category B. It was MOVED and SECONDED to continue deliberations on the Capital Facilities Goals and Policies until the financing plan and the transportation element are completed. The motion CARRIED. It was MOVED and SECONDED to continue the meeting to October 24, 1994. The motion CARRIED. At 9:10 p.m., an informal workshop concerning the Ramstead/East Hill Annexation Zoning was conducted in preparation for the October 24, 1994 the public hearing. Respectfully submitted, J es P. Harris ecording Secretary 7