Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Public Works/Planning - 08/14/1997 ` CITY OF L"LtJ2 • Jim White, Mayor PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM i To: LEONA ORR, CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE, TIM CLARK AND JON JOHNSON From: JAMES P. HARRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR Date: AUGUST 14, 1997 Subject: PROPOSED DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN AND INTEGRATED PRELIMINARY FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT As discussed in a memo to the Planning Committee from Linda Phillips, dated July 15, 1997, the Land Use and Planning Board recommended approval of the Downtown Plan to the City Council, on June 2nd with 9 modifications. • The Board's recommendation was presented to the Council at its Public Meeting on July 1st. At that time the plan was referred to the Planning Committee where two meetings have been held; July 15th and August 6th. Following is an outline of the plan's proposals with an emphasis on the different Downtown districts. The document that this outline comes from is dated June 13, 1997 and is titled: CITY OF KENT DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC ACTION PLAN AND INTEGRATED PRELIMINARY FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL EWPACT STATEMENT PART I INTRODUCTION page I-1 This is a straight forward section that explains how the plan was formulated. PLANNING CONCEPT page H-1 This section deals with the market analysis and a redevelopment strategy. It is • important to note here that the Downtown Strategic Plan is intended to implement the goals and policies contained in the City's Growth Management Act Comprehensive Plan adopted on April 18, 1995. ] 0 doh AVE.SO.. I KENT WASHINGTON 95032-4WB I TELEPHONE 206)819-3300/FAX x 8i9-i334 • One suggested addition in this section is.to add a bullet after Hotel/Convention Center on page II-3 with the title Natural Medicine Center and which states that the City Council has supported this concept. The redevelopment strategy, begins on page II-3 and contains 5 parts: 1. Connect and unify important downtown features. 2. Enhance the periphery of the downtown to achieve a higher quality development that supports its central activities. 3. Define special activity districts. 4. Select "target" areas as a basis for a phased implementation program to accomplish redevelopment and/or infill consistent with the plan. 5. Enhance civic identity. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTIONS page III-1 This section needs to have the following general recommendations added to the plan: A. Encourage residential development in the downtown. B. Adopt street standards for the entire downtown area. Currently, street standards are often determined on a case-by-case basis. The street character could be enhanced by matching street standards to specific areas of the downtown in order to accentuate the character of each area. C. Develop a street tree/vegetation plan for downtown which provides a guide for creating an attractive pedestrian network of green spaces. D. Continue to incorporate pubic art into the downtown design pattern to reinforce Kent's downtown character _and unique traditions. Provide for public art that appeals to children and that is easily accessed by children. E. Work with developers to ensure high-quality development on designated building sites: a. Signature Buildings: New buildings on highly visible gateway sites should receive special attention. For example, commercial development on these sites should not include parking in front yards. The City may provide incentives, such as expediting project review, to encourage high-quality design as specified by the guidelines. 2 • The above recommendations were in the draft that the Land Use and Planning Board approved but were inadvertently omitted from the June 13, 1997 draft. The map on page II-2 presents the Summary of Recommended Actions contained in the different districts beginning on page IV-1. It should be noted here, and will be noted again in the district discussion, that the Land Use and Planning Board's modifications affect the summary proposals as follows: A. The depot location, both north and south be further studied. B. The North Park area east of Fourth Avenue South and on the north side of James Street, remain residential. C. The North Park area between Fourth Avenue South and Fifth Avenue South, and lying between James Street and Cloudy become mixed use. D. Eliminate the parking shown on the Commons playfield. E. Create angle parking on the west side of an improved Fifth Avenue South, adjacent to the Commons play field and create a drop-off and pick-up area for children along this improved right-of-way. iF. Study traffic patterns in North Park for ingress, egress and safety. G. Study the parking for the Uplands playfield located between Meeker Street and Smith Street adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad. H. Develop realistic costs for the plan. I. Develop a gateway at the intersection of North Central Avenue and the Valley Freeway. This section also has an important phasing strategy of which the Transportation part will need to be revised when the actual location for the RTA depot is determined. KENT DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS page IV-1 This section is the train part of the plan. The Downtown Districts are: * North Frame District * Central Avenue District * East Frame District • * West Frame District 3 • * South Core District * North Core District * Historic Core District A. The North Frame Area (North Park) page IV-1 Important elements of the North Frame Area are: 1). Upgrade Commons Park. Remember, the Land Use and Planning Board recommends modifying the Commons Park as Follows: a). Eliminate the parking on the Commons playfield. b). Create parking on the west side of an improved Fifth Avenue South adjacent to the Commons playfield and create a drop-off and pick-up area for children along this improved right-of-way. 2). Improve James Street. The plan states that, "ultimately, James Street will be an important pedestrian and bicycle route connecting the Commons Park and Interurban Trail to the Bordon site redevelopment and the commuter rail station." Note: The Land Use and Planning Board did not recommend a specific RTA depot site but rather made the statement that, "The depot location, both north and south, be further studied." 3). Provide Gateway Improvements at Fourth Avenue and James Street. The gateways are discussed on page IV-5. Note: The Land Use and Planning Board recommends that a gateway improvement be placed at the intersection of North Central Avenue and the Valley Freeway (SR 167). 4). Encourage Office/Residential Mixed Use Development at the N. Fourth Avenue/N. Fifth Avenue Target Area. Note: The Land Use and Planning Board recommended that this nixed use end at Cloudy Street; the staff recommendation was that it extend three properties north of Cloudy Street. 4 5). Encourage Office Development of Properties Within the North James Street Corridor Target Area. Note: The Land Use and Planning Board recommends that the North Park area east of Fourth Avenue South and on the north side of James Street remain residential. B. The Central Avenue Corridor District page IV-9 The Downtown Plan targets this area for redevelopment. Important elements of the Central Avenue Corridor are: 1). Upgrade Streetscape Along Central Avenue. 2). Establish gateways. The plan recommends gateways at the intersections of Central Avenue with Smith and Titus Streets. 3) Design Guidelines The plan calls for specific standards to be added to the Downtown . Design Guidelines - see page IV-11. 4). The map on page IV-10 indicates the RTA depot at the north site and improvements of Smith Street at the depot: remember the Land Use and Planning Board did not recommend a specific depot site, but rather a study of the north site and south site. The following recommendation needs to be added to this section: Conduct a corridor study to serve as a basis for improvement of the Central Avenue corridor. Include Railroad Avenue as related to the proposed commuter rail station. Address design guidelines, buffers for adjacent residential neighborhoods, zoning code enforcement, zoning use issues, and streetscape improvements. This recommendation was in the draft approved by the Land Use and Planning Board but was inadvertently omitted from the June 13,1997 draft. C. East Frame District page IV-15 5 • Residents of this area emphasize the need for a more stable residential neighborhood. Key elements of this district are: 1). Construct a Pedestrian Trail along Mill Creek. 2). Improve Meeker and Gowe Streetscapes 3). Design Guidelines to: * Increase compatibility between commercial and residential uses through screening and design. * Increase security and safety in the area by providing lighting and pathways, reducing hazardous area, and providing visible entries. * Provide useful open space and pedestrian-oriented streetscapes. West Frame District page IV-16 The plan envisions the area south of Smith Street experiencing dynamic • redevelopment. Key elements of this district are: 1). Review Proposal for a New Access Street. This street would extend northerly of Willis Street to Meeker Street easterly of Naden Avenue. 2) Connect Interurban Trail to Core Districts. The Land Use and Planning Board recommends the following: 3). Study parking for the Uplands playfield located between Meeker Street and Smith Street adjacent to the Union Pacific Railroad. E. South Core District page IV-19 The Downtown Plan encourages residentially-oriented mixed use in this district to help achieve the Comprehensive Plan's housing goals and to provide a built-in market for downtown businesses. Important elements of this district are: • 1). Extend Angled Parking Along Saar Street to the Union Pacific 6 Rail Road. 2). Extend Pedestrian/Bicycle Paths from the Interurban Trail to the Core. 3). Design Guidelines page IV-21 4). Other Redevelopment Incentives page IV-23 F. North Core District page IV-24 Although this district indicates that the RTA depot would be developed in this district, north of Smith Street, the Land Use and Planning Board recommends that no definitive station site be identified at this time, but that the depot location, both north and south, be further studied. Many of the elements of this district revolve around the siting of the depot at the northern site, but until a specific site is determined, through City input to the RTA and the RTA's own determination as to the ultimate site, these elements need to be placed on hold. A statement dealing with this situation is recommended as follows: At the time of the determination of the site for the RTA depot, the Downtown Plan transportation elements shall be revised in the North Frame, North Core, Historic Core South Core and Central Avenue Corridors, to accommodate peak commuter travel times with an emphasis on public transportation. Elements of this district not related directly to the location of the Rta depot are: 1). Locate a Town Square Park Near the Smith Street/Meeker Street Spine of the Core. 2). Construct Pedestrian "All Cross" or Scramble System at the Corner of Fourth Avenue and Smith Street. 3). Redefine Design Guidelines page IV-31 4). Establish Design Parameters and Review process for Redevelopment of the Borden Site. . 5). Support a Civic and Performing Arts Center Between Meeker 7 • and Smith Streets. This_element is very site specific. Perhaps one way to address this issue is to support the development of a Civic and Performing Arts Center Downtown, but without identifying a specific site. 6). Support the Public Market G. Historic Core District. page IV-34 The Plan points out that the Historic Core District is the traditional and geographic heart of downtown Kent. Several actions are recommended for this district: 1). Enhance the historic architectural character and pedestrian amenities. 2). Develop vacant or underutilized sites. 3). Visually and physically connect the Historic Core District to the surrounding districts. 4). Make pedestrian Improvements 5). Enhance Gateway (Meeker and Fourth Avenue). 6). Design Guidelines and Historic Preservation Activities page IV- 36 PART H page VI-1 IMPLEMENTATION This section of the downtown Plan deals with the Preliminary Final Environmental Impact Statement. Alternatives and mitigating factors will change as the plan is amended. Traffic impacts, discussed on page VI-9 will change as the Downtown Plan is amended. The Land Use and Planning Board recommends that, Realistic costs associated with the plan should be developed. As discussed in PART I, C PROCESS, page I-2, the Plan was prepared to be consistent with the requirements of State Law (ESHB 1724) which contains a i 8 Y ` • provision to allow cities to adopt a "Planned Action" ordinance if the city has an adopted comprehensive plan. A city can create a subarea or neighborhood plan- in this case the Downtown Strategic Action Plan is a subarea plan - develop a 20 year vision for the "Planned Action", and analyze the environmental impacts of the actions with a Planned Action environmental impact statement. This is the course of action Kent's Downtown Strategic Action Plan has followed and as stated on page I-4, "This plan meets the requirements of the Planned Action State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)provision by providing public participation and environmental analysis in advance, in conjunction with a subarea plan." This Implementation Section contains the required elements of the Planned Action environmental impact statement. Section A is the typical EIS fact sheet(page VI- 1). Section B is a summary of the process used to arrive at a preferred alterative (page VI-3). Section C is a summary of the preferred alternative and the recommendation process (page VI-5). Section D is organized by recommended action. It contains a discussion of each action, the environmental impact evaluation, the mitigation measures, and it identifies the entity responsible for the action (VI-6). Section E outlines a monitoring system which would be further refined for administration by the Planning and Public Works Department (page VI-58). An analysis of the current capital facilities plan for downtown in relation to the • planned actions recommended by this plan will take place when the plan is adopted. The phasing schedule for the actions will be revised if necessary, and the capital facilities plan will be updated to reflect the actions proposed. 9