Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Land Use and Planning Board - 04/24/2000 CITY OF ,Jim White, Mayor - INVICTA Planning Department (253)856-5454/F,4X(253)856-64S4 James P Harris,Planning Director LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Public Hearing April 24, 2000 The meetingof the Kent Land Use and Planning Board was called to order b Chair Jon Johnson at g Y 7:00 p.m on Monday, April 24, 2000 in Council Chambers of Kent City Hall LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS PRESENT Fred N Satterstrom, Planning Manager Jon Johnson Chair Diana Nelson, Planner Ron Harmon, Vice Chair Pamela Mottram, Admm Secretary Steve Dowell Tom Brubaker, Deputy City Attorney David Malik Gary Gill, City Engineer Terry Zimmerman LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT Brad Bell, Excused Sharon Woodford, Excused APPROVAL OF MINUTES Steve Dowell MOVED and David Malik SECONDED to approve the minutes of February 28, 2000 Motion carried. ADDED ITEMS TO THE AGENDA None COMMUNICATIONS None NOTICE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS Planning Manager, Fred Satterstrom stated that it is likely that the Council Planning Committee will make a recommendation to move the Urban Separator issue on to the Full Council at their May 1, 2000 meeting #SCA-2000-1 SUBDIVISION CODE AMENDMENT Planner, Diana Nelson stated that the Planning Department has initiated an update of the Kent Subdivision Code, Chapter 12 04 to bring it into compliance with current state law and to reflect changes in City procedures and processes,which have occurred since the 1981 update. Ms. Nelson stated that the code has •been reorganized to improve both readability and usability Ms Nelson stated that workshops were held February 14, March 13 and April 10, 2000 with comments solicited from developers prior to the April 10 workshop Ms. Nelson stated that some proposed changes include: 220 4th AVE SO /KENT,WASHINGTON 98032-5895/TEL EPHONE (253)856-5200 Land Use and Planning Board Minutes April 24, 2000 .Page 2 ♦ Addition of sections on the determination and completeness of an application, vesting of an application, property annexed into the city with county plat approval as well as adding procedures for the alteration and vacation ofplats ♦ Updating the application process sections that no longer reflect current office procedures, ♦ Separating short subdivisions into Type I (two to four lot short plats) and Type 11 (five to nine lot short plats) categories. ♦ Reorganization of the short subdivision categories to include all requirements and standards for each type of plat within an inclusive element ♦ Adding approval criteria for each type of plat, ♦ Adding processing procedures and approval criteria for lot line adjustment applications, ♦ Removing specifics of application requirements when already included in the application forms, ♦ Simplifying language when possible, ♦ Consolidating sections or separating elements as appropriate for improved comprehension and text flow. Ms. Nelson stated that since the April 10 workshop, the following revisions were made to the proposed amendments in response to Public Works and Planning department comments: ♦ Preliminary and final plat requirements were revised to reflect Planning, Public Works and Property Management division requirements. ♦ Cross-reference section numbers were added to the "Determination of Completeness", "Notice of . Application"and"Public Notice"sections to guide users to the corresponding procedural sections of the Kent City Code Chapter 12 01 (procedural section of the City Code relating to subdivision and zoning processes). Ms.Nelson stated that the health agency recommendation section was revised to clarify that those recommendations must be submitted at the time of preliminary plat application and that the tentative plat sections were revised to reflect the City's process of making recommendations, conditions and modifications. ♦ Ms. Nelson spoke at length on the revisions to the Hearing Examiner's Request for Reconsideration section as well as the changes implemented in Chapter 12 01 140 "Notice of Application" which included deleting the notice of application requirement for a final subdivision plat. ♦ Ms. Nelson stated that a provision was added to require more than one notice board on a piece of property to correlate with any section of the City Code that made provisions for that requirement. Ms. Nelson spoke at length on the changes made to accurately define types of city parks and services ♦ Ms. Nelson spoke at length on language changes made to accurately reflect case law compliance pertaining to vesting of plats in relation to city and county standards. ♦ Ms. Nelson spoke at length on the Hearing Examiner duties and specifically on the section that allows the hearing examiner to make exceptions to the subdivision code. She stated that the Planning Director wishes to eliminate the exceptions section while allowing variances under the normal variance process. Ms Nelson stated that Section 2 32 090 referred only to the zoning code without any reference to the subdivision code for variances. Therefore, the language"subdivision code"was added to that section • to allow variances to be processed on the subdivision code, which allows for more consistent decision making processes U I USERDATAILUPBIMINUTES1000424mn doc Land Use and Planning Board Minutes April 24, 2000 •Page 3 Ms Nelson stated that this is a procedural amendment and that subdivision standards will be revised through a Phase II amendment process. She recommended that the Board include (as part of their motion) to allow the City Attorney's office to make all necessary formatting and typographical error changes in the subdivision code as they deem necessary prior to moving this amendment to City Council. Ron Harmon MOVED and David Malik SECONDED to open the public hearing Motion carried. Paul Morford, P O Box 6345, Kent, WA 98064 voiced his concern that staff is attempting to change procedures that conflict with both city and state law. He stated that it was his understanding that law must be changed first, then changes to the code could be implemented Mr. Morford noted the following changes he would like implemented within the Subdivision Code: 1) Updating the subdivision code to comply with current city practices is illegal and the code should be amended prior to changing city procedures 2) Include a member of the Land Use and Planning Board as part of the Subdivision Committee (Sec. 12 04 175 A)Page 22 3) Change language that states the "Hearing Examiner is appointed by the City Administrator", which needs to be changed to correctly reflect the proper title classification of"Director of Operations" (Sec. 12.04.025.)Page 10 and where applicable, replace the term"Planning Commission"with"Land Use and Planning Board". 4) Eliminate the Hillside subdivision section that indicates hillside requirements are applied to road slopes of only seven percent and lot definition should not be changed to include open spaces (Page 10). 5) Change definition of"lot frontage" to include language about lot width and configuration such as pie- shaped and flag lots. 6) Change definition of street to remove language regarding the 30 foot right of way. 7) Change language to address non-conforming lots (Sec 12 04 040 Penalties) 8) Change language in short plat purpose statement regarding mfill development to address non-conforming lots and lots of record. 9) Change language in Section 12.04.125B to not require information on the subdivision engineer for preliminary short plat applications. 10) Delete the language that indicates storm water retention and sidewalks are required for short plats because it could discourage development on four lot short plats (Sec. 12.04.130. #5 and #6)Page 18 11) Shorten approval time and determine completeness at the counter at the time of intake by changing the time lines for submittal and approval of a type I short subdivision preliminary plat application (Sec 12 04 135) Page 19. 12) Eliminate the requirement for interior monuments on four lot short plats (Sec. 12.04.215.A# 8) Page 28 13) Eliminate the requirement for listing all conditions of approval of the short subdivision on the face of the plat map as this could create problems if the applicant is required to modify drawings (Sec. 12.04.215 A#13) Page 28. 14) Delete the requirement that indicates that subdivision standards of adjoining jurisdictions should be taken into consideration(Sec. 12.04.130. #4)Page 18. 15) Add the statement "to make nonconforming lots of record conforming" as an additional purpose for creating lot Line adjustments (Sec. 12.04 905 ) (Sec 12.04 925 ) Page 71 and 73 Ron Harmon MOVED and David Malik SECONDED to close the public hearing. Motion carried. U I USERDATAILUPBIMINUTES1000424mn doe Land Use and Planning Board Minutes April 24, 2000 •Page 4 Diana Nelson stated that the"Determination of Completeness"procedures included in the subdivision code is mandated by House Bill 1724 and incorporated into Kent's City Code Chapter 12 01. Ms. Nelson stated that the requirements included in the subdivision code for preliminary and final plat approval and submission are currently required by public works and/or mandated by state survey law. Ms.Nelson stated that Public Works department determines if storm water detention is required on property. She stated that typically storm water detention is required on property with an excess of 5,000 square feet _ of impervious surface which could potentially apply to short plats. After extensive discussion, staff and the Board members concluded that it would be beneficial to include a member of the Board as part of the Short Plat Committee currently made up of department heads from Parks, Fire, Planning and Public Works departments Planning Manager, Fred Satterstrom stated that the ordinance is written to include a member of the Board on the Short Plat Committee and that this member is not needed for a quorum. The board members decided to reopen the public hearing in order to evaluate Mr. Morford's concerns one issue at a time. Steve Dowell MOVED and David Malik SECONDED to reopen the public hearing Motion carried Paul Morford, Post Office Box 6345,Kent,WA 98064 reiterated concerns that short plat procedures have become more complicated Ms. Nelson stated that though state and survey laws have changed, and House Bill 1724 was implemented, nothing in the ordinance prohibits procedures that the City of Kent has followed. She stated that staff has followed state law which overrides the subdivision code, which is now being updated to comply with state law and current procedures Assistant City Attorney, Tom Brubaker stated that the current Subdivision Code is not specific, rather, it provides a broad, general framework. He stated that the City has implemented processes over time based on changes in case and state law, which are implied in our authority under the existing code Mr. Brubaker stated that the purpose for updating the code is to bring it into conformance with recent changes in the law Mr Brubaker assured Mr. Morford that updating the code does not constitute an illegal or unauthorized procedure and stated that if Mr. Morford felt that the City was performing under illegal circumstances, that he could file a complaint through the application process under the existing code. Ms. Zimmerman stated that the Board has often reviewed staff recommendations based on procedures they have modernized and does not find the procedures recommended by staff unusual. Ms Zimmerman stated that action does not need to be taken on this item. Mr. Morford stated that after reading the state law, he concurred with the Board members that staff is not violating the law as it relates to the short plat process Mr. Morford stated that the procedures refer to the "plat process" and suggested changing terminology to refer to "short plat and long plat" rather than "short plat and plat" •Mr. Morford reiterated his request to include one of the Board members as part of the Short Plat Committee. David Malik stated that language could be added to the subdivision code to add a Board member to the Short Plat Committee with voting privileges Terry Zimmerman and Ron Harmon concurred. U I USERDATAILUPMMINUTES1000424mn doe Land Use and Planning Board Minutes April 24, 2000 •Page 5 Diana Nelson stated that if the Board wishes to include a member of the Board as part of the committee,that they not change the number that constitutes a quorum, so if that board member chooses not to attend regularly, the quorum of three is not affected. Mr. Brubaker stated that Section 12 04 175 establishes a short subdivision committee and designates four city staff members, with the planning director as chairman of the committee. Mr Brubaker stated that Subsection B of that section says that three of the four members form a quorum He stated that if a Land Use and Planning Board member was added to the short subdivision committee, the three out of five language for the quorum"could remain the same and the committee could continue to conduct business. Terry Zimmerman concurred with Mr. Brubaker's recommendation to add that "the short subdivision committee shall consist of one land use and planning board member..." as well as include the statement in Subsection B as "three of the five members of the short subdivision committee". Mr. Brubaker stated that if the Land Use and Planning Board member is included as part of the short subdivision committee with optional attendance, that person may not have voting privileges. Mr. Brubaker suggested that the Board consider the following options• • Designate a Land Use and Planning Board member as a voting member of the short subdivision committee. • Designate any single member of the currently existing Land Use and Planning Board to set in as the representative as a voting member, or • Designate a member of the Board as part of the committee with optional attendance to act in a monitoring capacity. Terry Zimmerman concurred with Diana Nelson that the two sentences in Section A on page 22 should remain as written and adding"Land Use and Planning Board member"at the beginning of the paragraph on "A„ The Land Use and Planning Board members concurred with Tom Brubaker that additional language should be added to Sec. 12.04.175.A. as follows: ".. e+d the fire chief and one Land Use and Planning Board member" Mr. Morford referenced the paragraph on page 10 of the subdivision document in stating that the terminology needs to change to reflect that the Mayor appoints the Hearing Examiner rather then by the City Administrator. Mr. Morford reiterated his concerns over the 7 percent slope issue as it relates to hillside development and that lot definition should not include open space. Ms Nelson stated that the slope issue is a"standard" and the lot definition came out of the zoning code and currently exists in Title 15 of the Zoning Code; both of which will be addressed in Phase Two of this project The Board members decided to not act on this item. Ms. Nelson responded to Mr. Morford's concerns on lot frontage, width and configuration by stating that the zoning code addresses widths, frontage and configuration of lots. Ms Nelson stated that internal planning department policy and the zoning code definitions provide for pie shape and flag lots. Ms Nelson stated that the paragraph on lot frontage relates to where the front of the lot is located in relation •to the public street and access. This definition is not intended to address lot width, which is addressed elsewhere as a standard. The lot frontage definition was changed to correlate with language in the zoning code U I USERDATAILUMMINUTES1000424mn doc Land Use and Planning Board Minutes April 24, 2000 Page 6 Ms. Nelson concurred with Mr Morford that language that is more specific is needed concerning lot configurations as the current language in both the zoning and subdivision code is vague. She stated that this 5 issue would be addressed at the Phase 2 level Ms. Nelson, in response to Mr. Morford's request that the thirty- (30) foot street right-of-way width be removed, stated that this definition exists to the zoning code. She stated that both the zoning and subdivision code definitions will be changed once new standards are set, as part of Phase 2. Ms. Nelson stated that since streets were defined in the zoning code, a definition was added to the subdivision code for consistency but voiced her concern with the definition She stated that until a set standard is established, staff would retain the definition as it exists in other portions of the City Code Ms. Nelson responded to Mr. Morford's concern that Section 12.04.040 on nonconforming lots does not comply with current code. She stated that language was added to the subdivision code as it exists in the RCW's. Ms Nelson stated that this language refers to lots created under the subdivision code and not about lots of record created prior to the adoption of a subdivision code, which is dealt with in the zoning code under"nonconforming" In response to Mr Morford's concern on Section 12.04.105. regarding infill development, Ms Nelson stated that this section is intended as a purpose statement and general summary defining short platting processes. She stated that the sections dealing with lot of record, nonconforming lots and combining adjacent nonconforming lots are dealt with in the zoning code separately. *Ms. Nelson stated that amending procedures governing non-conforming lots would encompass a major policy change that would need to be reviewed as a separate amendment She stated that the City has been progressing towards smaller lots for some time and through this progression, it is likely that an increasing number of small nonconforming lots may become conforming if the city embraces smaller lot sizes Ms. Nelson stated that the non-conforming lots are dealt with in the zoning code and it would be inappropriate to address these procedures in a general amendment of the subdivision code. Mr. Morford stated that"subdivision engineer" should be deleted from Sec. 12.04.125 B of the code. Ms. Nelson stated that this language is the same used for"long subdivision" requirements, which implies the engineer on the project and if there is no engineer, that information would be excluded from the application. She stated that Public Works requires this information be on the application Mr. Brubaker stated that this section should be rephrased to read: "Licensed Land Surveyor and, if applicable. Subdivision Engineer Staff and Board members concurred with this decision. Mr Morford stated that in Sec 12 04 125 B #10 should eliminate the consideration for sidewalk section as it seems this section would indicate that sidewalks would be mandatory for short plats. Ron Harmon, Steve Dowell and David Malik concurred that the language for consideration of sidewalks should remain intact, as providing for safe walking conditions for the citizens of Kent is critical Diana Nelson stated that RCW 58 17 030 says "cities, towns and counties shall include in their short plat regulations and procedures pursuant to Subsection one of this section provisions for considering sidewalks +and other planning features as assure safe walking conditions for students who walk to and from schools." Mr Gill stated that he feels that Mr. Morford's concern is legitimate, but that the language to consider sidewalks is in place in the event that sidewalks need to be considered as a key link to he into public schools walking routes, a public facility or for use by public transit. U I USEPDATAILUPBWINUTESI000424mn doc Land Use and Planning Board Minutes April 24, 2000 .Page 7 Paul Morford questioned how the wetlands are determined within the city. Ms. Nelson stated that the city has an internal negotiation, arbitration process between Public Works and the wetland specialist hired by the applicant who work out most wetland issues. Paul Morford reiterated his concerns that in Sec 12.04.130. #5, storm water detention could be required for short plats. Ms. Nelson reiterated that the language in #5 states to "make provision for" and "as deemed necessary" Ms Nelson stated that with more fish species being added to the endangered species list, storm water regulations will continue to change, so this definition was made as general as possible in order that staff does not have to continuously update this section She stated that Public Works interprets the need for storm water detention for short plats on a case by case basis Mr. Gill stated that the intent of this language is to convey that storm water detention would be required as indicated under the provisions of other codes Mr Gill stated that the typical threshold for determining the need for storm water detention is 5,000 square feet of new impervious surface. Mr. Gill stated that under rare circumstances storm water detention may be required for short plats if a public street is going in that could require a future extension. Mr Gill recommended rephrasing the language to say: "as required under other city codes or ordinances" for clarity. Mr. Morford concurred with Mr. Gill that the phrasing should be changed to clarify when stormwater detention is needed as previously stated. Mr. Brubaker stated that Sec. 12.04.130 #5, where it says "deemed necessary" should be removed and •replaced with."as required by other applicable laws, codes, rules and regulations". Ms. Nelson stated that this same language needs to be changed in Sec. 12.04.440 #5. for Type II short plats. Mr. Morford referred to Sec. 12.04.135. on determination of completeness while reiterating his concern that the time frame for determining completeness on short plats is too lengthy. Ms Nelson stated that Section 12 01 140 says that"a notice of application shall be issued for Process I and Process II permits requiring SEPA review ." and that this requirement is part of House Bill 1724. Ms. Nelson stated that the Notice of Application requirement is tied to the Determination of Completeness. Ms. Nelson stated that state law allows the city 28 days to determine that information is complete on an application and once determined complete, generally the Planning department meets the 28-day requirement with determinations typically made within one week as cited by Mr Satterstrom. Mr Morford reiterated his concern that"interior monuments"should not be required on four lot short plats and suggested the inclusion of language that states "if applicable" in Section 12.04.215 A #8 at the beginning of that sentence Mr. Gill defined a"monument' as a survey monument to define a corner, the center of a street or a property comer Mr Gill reiterated that typically interior monuments are not required for short plats He stated that the rare occasion where it would be required is if a public street needs to be extended through the property which would require a monument to denote the interior center line of the road. Ms. Nelson stated that the same language "if applicable"would need to be added to Section 12 04.215 A #8 and Section 12.04.525 B #8 for Type I and II plats. OMr Morford voiced his objection to the requirement that all conditions of approval for the short subdivision must be placed on the face of the plat as indicated in Sec 12 04 214 A#13 Mr Morford stated that having to place plat conditions on the mylars could be cumbersome based on the volume of conditions that would have to be applied to the plat map. U I USEPDATAWPYMINUTES1000424mn doc t Land Use and Planning Board Minutes April 24, 2000 Page 8 Mr. Satterstrom stated that the King County Recorder's office requires that plat conditions be to be incorporated on the mylars prior to recording. Mr. Morford reiterated his objection to Sec. 12 04 130 #4 that states subdivision standards of adjacent jurisdictions must be taken into consideration. Ms. Nelson reiterated that the Growth Management Act mandates coordination between jurisdictions when property development is considered and Ms. Zimmerman stated that the way in which the code is written states that subdivision standards must be taken into consideration which does not indicate that this is a mandated requirement Ms. Nelson stated that it part of our notice procedures to notify adjacent jurisdictions of potential development She stated that these jurisdictions are allowed to comment and typically do not respond. Mr. Morford stated that he would like to see that in Sec. 12.04.905. that language should be added to make nonconforming lots of record conforming. Ms Zimmerman stated that Section 12 04 910. possibly covers Mr. Morford's concerns in that it states " correlate property lines with survey or map lanes or to create better lot design while conforming to all applicable code requirements" which allows for lot line adjustments. Ms. Nelson stated that lot line adjustments are allowed for some types of nonconformities but that issues dealing with nonconforming lots include lots of record as well as other legal restrictions which are addressed •under the nonconforming lot section. Ms. Nelson said that a large number of legal issues are associated with nonconforming lots of record and advised the Board that it would be best to address this item as a separate amendment. Mr. Morford stated that lot line applications should be determined for completeness at the time of submittal at the counter. Ms. Nelson stated that based on staffing and other elements, staff felt that five days provided an adequate amount of time for staff to determine completeness along with an additional fifteen day period to approve the application The Board members concurred that five days is a reasonable time frame. Ron Harmon MOVED and David Malik SECONDED to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Ron Harmon stated that a motion should be made on#SCA-2000-1 Subdivision Code Amendment with the following amendments: ■ Change the language in 12.04.130 and 12.04.440 Item#5 ■ 12.04.175 A & B to add language for inclusion of a Land Use and Planning Board member to the Short Plat Committee. ■ 12.04.215.A.#8 Ms. Zimmerman said that Section 12.04 125.B #1 is to be amended to read- "the short subdivision name, the name and address of the owner, the name and the address of the licensed land surveyor, and, if applicable, subdivision engineer" Ms Nelson stated that this same language needs to be amended in Section 12 04 435 B #1. 1 Mr. Brubaker asked the Board to allow the legal attorney liberty to change "City Administrator" to the appropriate title as defined under Sec 12.04.025. Tom Brubaker stated that the Legal department has been directed by the Board to address several of Mr. Morford's comments under Phase 11 and Mr Hannon concurred. U IUSERDATAiLUPBIM/NUTESI000424mn doc Land Use and Planning Board Minutes April 24, 2000 Page 9 David Malik MOVED and Terry Zimmerman SECONDED to recommend approval of the proposed subdivision code amendment #SCA-2000-1 and associated city code amendments with the following amendments as addressed by staff. ■ to amend the title"city administrator"to the appropriate title as indicated in Sections 12 04 175 under "Hearing Examiner" definition ■ to amend Sections 12.04.130 5 and 12 04.440 5 regarding storm water detention with the addition of the following language at the end of the statement. "as required by other applicable laws, rules and regulations " ■ to amend Sections 12 04.215 A8 and 12.04 525 B8 regarding interior monuments to include at the beginning of the statement "if applicable" ■ to amend Sections 12 04 125 #B1 and 12 04.435 #B1 to read: "...and, applicable, subdivision engineer; ■ to amend any typographical errors and make formatting changes as deemed necessary. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Satterstrom in response to Mr. Johnson, stated that it would not be beneficial to pursue a request to reverse procedures for placing conditions on mylars recorded by the King County recorders office. ADJOURNMENT Terry Zimmerman MOVED and David Malik SECONDED to close the meeting Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, 4JameP. Harris ary U IUSERDATAILUMMMUTES1000424mn doe .A