HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning and Economic Development Committee - 06/17/2003 PAM MOTTRAM
PLANNING
r •
• WASH PLANNING COMMITTEE
CITY COUNCIL
Judy Woods June 17 2003
Council President �
220 Fourth Ave.S.
Kent,WA 98032-5895
The City Council Planning Committee will meet in Council Chambers East, Kent
Phone: 253-856-5712 City Hall, 220 4th Avenue South, at 3:00 PM on Tuesday,June 17, 2003.
Fax:253-856-6712
Committee Members: Leona Orr, Chair Tim Clark Bruce White
Action Speaker Time
1. Approval of Minutes of YES
May 20, 2003
2. Regulatory Review Process YES Fred Satterstrom 10 min
• 3. Impoundment Reservoir YES Charlene Anderson 15 min
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
#CPA-2003-2 &#CPZ-2003-1
Emergency Resolution
4. Kent City Code Amendment YES Charlene Anderson 10 min
#CPA-2003-1 (KIVA #2031290)
Capital Facilities Element Yearly
Update Process
The Planning Committee meets the third Tuesday of each month at 3:00 PM in Chambers East,Kent City
Hall,220 4 Ave.South,unless otherwise noted. For agenda information please contact Jackie Bicknell at
(253) 856-5712.
ANY PERSON REQUIRING A DISABILITY ACCOMMODATION SHOULD CONTACT THE
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AT(253)856-5725IN ADVANCE. FOR TDD RELAY SERVICE CALL
THE WASHINGTON TELECOMMUNICATIONS RELAY SERVICE AT 1-800-833-6388.
,*'iy,�r4
S4
-mv
t,
s
VV
Y _
M 3'" x .�
�«* F,
u r, 3f . +�: r -3 y
4A
r,
r l 4
4 x"" n r
11
Vr•. + �" yS}. VP
t
y
s
cll-
Os
IL
s
1311£-
;d
JI,
JP
8
006ib A,
Oft
UZ
PRO anl aft
sffi
110
" ed
1t
f i q
f' .
a.
pp
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director
PLANNING SERVICES
• Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager
K EN T Phone: 253-856-5454
WASHINGTON
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent,WA 98032-5895
DATE: JUNE 10, 2003
TO: CHAIR LEONA ORR AND PLANNING COMMITTEE MEMBERS
FROM: FRED N. SATTERSTROM, AICP, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR
THROUGH: MAYOR JIM WHITE
SUBJECT: REGULATORY REVIEW PROCESS
SUMMARY: At the April 15th Planning Committee meeting, staff introduced a request by
Councilmember Bruce White to create a mechanism for the public to initiate amendments to City
regulations. Such a mechanism presently exists for zoning code and other land use ordinances,
• but not for other City codes. The committee requested additional information regarding the
number and type of requests the City has received over the years, the time and effort involved,
and the impacts of the amendments
BUDGET IMPACT: No direct budgetary impact. There may be an indirect budgetary impact
should the fee be reduced and applications for such amendments increase.
MOTION: I move to direct/not direct City staff to establish a docketing process for citizen-
initiated code amendments through its administrative procedures.
BACKGROUND: The City of Kent established a process for citizen-initiated zoning code
amendments (also called "regulatory reviews") in 1985. Initially, there was no fee for this
request. Since December 1998, there has been a fee for such code amendments (established at
$1500) which may have the unintended effect of discouraging code amendments.
Councilmember White discussed this situation with City staff, and we bring the issue forward for
Committee consideration.
Staff reviewed the number of zoning code amendments initiated since 1990. Although the total
number of code amendments has not changed significantly since the fee was created, there are
fewer formal applications initiated by the private sector. Rather, the requests are being initiated
by the Mayor, City Council, or staff. The following chart shows the number of code amendments
and how they were initiated since 1990.
. ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS — 1990 —2003
F00AR TOTAL REG REVIEW STAFF MAYOR/CC
3 3 1 2
02 5 1 2 2
2001 3 3
2000 5 1 1 3
1999 7 4 3
1998 -6 -3 2 1
1997 9 6 3
1996 8 1 7
1995 10 4 6
1994 2 1 1
1993 7 4 3
1992 3 2 1
1 91 3 2 1
19 90 6-1 4 1
One can see from the chart that code amendment requests by private applicants ranged from zero
(0) to six (6) requests per year prior to 1999. After a fee was required in 1998, code amendment
requests by private applicants dropped off, averaging less than one per year, while code
amendments initiated by staff and City Council remained relatively constant.
Staff conducted a cursory review of all privately-initiated code amendments during the 1990-
2003 period in order to assess the reason for the request as well as their outcome. Here is a
synopsis of what we found:
• Many of the code amendments were aimed at the use section of the Zoning Code,
expanding the permitted uses in various zones in order to allow a use which may have
been previously disallowed. Examples include churches in the M2 zone, towing yards in
CM-2, and automobile leasing in GWC.
• Some code amendments were aimed at development standards which permitted a form of
development not previously allowed by the zoning code. For instance, the PUD
regulations and single family development in multifamily zones were modified through
regulatory review applications.
• Several code amendments were sought by applicants who had been cited with code
violations. They sought relief from the violation by pursuing changes in the code.
Generally, these amendments did not have a favorable outcome for the applicant except
to delay eventual code compliance.
• The final outcome of successful regulatory reviews is varied. Some result in projects
being constructed, some do not. Among the successful code amendments is the
application by Polygon to permit residential PUD's in single family zones on sites larger
than 100 acres in size. As a result,the Kentview townhomes PUD was constructed. On a
smaller scale, a family dart billiard use was permitted in the M2 zone as a result of a
regulatory review request. Nevertheless, for every code amendment that results in an
• actual project, there is one where nothing was built at all.
Regulatory Review Process
Planning Committee Mtg 6/17/03
Page 2 of 3
• Since 1998 when the fee for code amendments was adopted by ordinance, the number of
private requests has fallen off. Staff assumes this is related to the inhibiting effect caused
by the fee.
In addition to the privately initiated requests, a number of code amendments have been
completed at the direction of the City Council or the City staff. For example, the billboard
regulations were modified in 1999 as a result of a request by the City Council, as was the
creation of the condominium zoning district (MR-T), also in the same year. Staff has initiated
several code amendments, including changes to the view, mixed use, wireless telecommunication
facilities, hazardous substance, and home occupation regulations. With respect to the hazardous
substance regulations, staff witnessed several, almost identical variance requests over the course
of a short time going to the Hearing Examiner. It seemed to suggest that the regulations may be
drawn too tightly, and staff brought a code amendment forward which has since eliminated the
need for these variances.
A fee of$1500 was adopted by the City Council in 1998. This was done in conjunction with an
overhaul of all of the Department's development application fees, and was done to cover the
costs of public notice, staff research and report writing, and other related administrative costs.
Code amendments which involve changing substantive requirements (as opposed to procedural
requirements) also require environmental review and, therefore, an additional $700 fee is
assessed. It is arguable that these fees do not adequately pay for all the costs involved with a
code amendment request. Advertising public notice can be very expensive and, depending on
the depth of research required by staff, many hours can go into the preparation of a staff report.
The more controversial or complex a request is, the more staff time is involved and, the less
chance the application fee will cover all or even a major part of the City's costs.
OPTIONS: There are presently three different ways in which a code amendment may be
initiated: 1) by City staff, 2) by City Council, and 3) by private application. City staff and City
Council will continue to bring code amendments forward as a result of state mandates, local
conditions, and other factors. And, for a fee, the privately-initiated code amendment process
provides citizens with an opportunity to sponsor their own suggestions for regulatory change.
There is an additional way in which private citizens could bring potential code amendments
forward and that would be through what is called a "docketing" process. This process could be
established on a no-fee basis. In a docketing program, citizens would submit suggested code
amendments on forms provided by the City and, on a regular basis, perhaps annually, these
amendments would be brought forward to the City Council and/or Land Use & Planning Board
for consideration. Those amendments considered to be in the public's best interest would
become part of the Department's work program. Those that were not would be dropped. As a
part of the Department's work program, docketed changes would be worked on by City staff as
time allows over the course of the year.
Staff recommends that the Planning Committee endorse the docketing process and, that such a
process be established for citizen-initiated code amendments through administrative procedures
adopted by the Department.
. FNS\pm S:\Permit\Plan\Planning Committee\20031RegReviewFeeRed2.doc
cc: Fred N.Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director
Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Manager
Project File
Regulatory Review Process
Planning Committee Mtg 6/17/03
Page 3 of 3
,�4zI
-4,�A
1 15
OP z"M
�Aw
IUM,
Z�w 1';��
vam
ZA
OR',
2�_j
'51
........
mo
Ov C"*,
the,
3- e4lIu5_
ag'�
q5
IBW
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director
4400 PLANNING SERVICES
KEN T Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager
W A 5 H 1 N G T O N Phone:253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
DATE: JUNE 10, 2003
TO: CHAIR LEONA ORR AND PLANNING COMMITTEE MEMBERS
FROM: CHARLENE ANDERSON,AICP,PLANNING MANAGER
THROUGH: MAYOR JIM WHITE
SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT,IMPOUNDMENT RESERVOIR
EMERGENCY RESOLUTION #CPA-2003-2 #CPZ-2003-1
SUMMARY: In 1983 the City purchased and later annexed approximately 157 acres of property outside
its boundaries for the purpose of constructing an impoundment reservoir for the City's water utility
system. The City no longer needs this property for water utility purposes and intends to sell the property.
In order to sell the property to a willing buyer, the City must assign an appropriate comprehensive plan
designation and zoning map designation. Amendments to the comprehensive may occur no more
frequently than once a year unless an emergency exists. The attached resolution declares that an
emergency exists and authorizes staff to implement appropriate procedures to develop an initial
comprehensive plan and zoning map designation for the property.
BUDGET IMPACT: $100,000 to $120,000 (for associated environmental review)
MOTION: I move to recommend/not recommend adoption of a resolution declaring an emergency to
pursue an amendment to the Kent comprehensive plan and zoning map in order to establish initial land
use and zoning designations for the impoundment reservoir property.
BACKGROUND: In 1983 the City purchased and later annexed approximately 157 acres of property
outside its boundaries for the purpose of constructing an impoundment reservoir for the City's water
utility system. Since then, many federal and state environmental regulations now make development for
an impoundment reservoir impractical. In addition, the City recently purchased additional water supply
from the Tacoma P5 Pipeline project. Therefore, the City no longer needs this property for water utility
purposes and it is appropriate to sell the property and deliver the proceeds into the City's water utility
account to defray costs of future rate increases. In order to sell the property to a willing buyer, the City
must assign an appropriate comprehensive plan designation and zoning map designation.
Kent City Code Section 12.02.035 authorizes amendments to the comprehensive plan more than once a
year only if an emergency exists. An emergency is defined as an issue of community-wide significance
that promotes the public health, safety, and general welfare. There has been expressed a high level of
interest in the purchase of the impoundment reservoir property, and the sale of the property under
favorable market conditions will best protect the interests of the City's water utility and its customers.
Therefore, the attached resolution declares that an emergency exists and authorizes staff to implement the
appropriate procedures to develop an initial comprehensive plan and zoning map designation for the
. impoundment reservoir property.
CA\pm:S:\Permit\Plan\CompPlanAmdments\2003\impoundmentreservoirpc.doc
Enc: Resolution
cc: Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Manager
Project Files
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION of the city council of the city of
Kent, Washington, declaring an emergency to pursue an
amendment to the Kent comprehensive plan and zoning map,
establishing the initial comprehensive plan and zoning
designations for previously undesignated city-owned
property.
WHEREAS,in 1983,the city of Kent purchased approximately 157 acres of
• property outside its then existing municipal boundaries for the purpose of constructing an
impoundment reservoir for the city's water utility system; and
WHEREAS, the city annexed this island of property as a municipal
annexation, under the authorization of RCW 35A.14.300; and
WHEREAS, over the intervening years, numerous new federal and state
regulations,including sensitive areas regulations,wetlands regulations,and the Endangered
Species Act, have made the development of this property for an impoundment reservoir
impractical; and
WHEREAS, in the Fall of 2002,the city purchased additional water supply
from the Tacoma P5 Pipeline project,thereby alleviating much of the need for the additional
water supply to be gained from the planned impoundment reservoir; and
•
t Comp.Plan Amendment—
Impoundment Reservoir Property
WHEREAS,the city has determined that it no longer needs this property for
water utility purposes,and it is now appropriate to attempt to sell the property at fair market
value and to deliver the proceeds of that sale into the city's water utility account to defray
costs of future water utility rate increases that would otherwise need to be imposed on the
utility's customers; and
WHEREAS,because this property was held for a municipal purpose,was not
planned for any other type of future development, and was an island outside the city's
potential annexation area, the city has never given this property any comprehensive plan
designation, not has it given the property a zoning designation, except for a low-density
default interim zoning designation under the Kent City Code; and
WHEREAS, in order to facilitate the sale of the property to a willing buyer,
the city must establish an appropriate comprehensive plan designation and zoning map
designation; and
WHEREAS,interested parties have indicated their interest in purchasing this
property and, in order to obtain the best possible sale price for the city's water utility
customers,the city must move quickly to capture favorable market conditions and proceed to
a beneficial sale of the property;NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON,DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Because a high level of interest has been expressed in the
purchase of the impoundment reservoir property,and because the sale of the property under
favorable market conditions will best protect the interests of the city's water utility and its
. customers, initial comprehensive plan and zoning map designations of the city of Kent's
2 Comp.Plan Amendment—
Impoundment Reservoir Property
impoundment reservoir property constitutes an issue of community-wide significance that
promotes the public health,safety,and general welfare in accordance with the definition of
an emergency as set forth in section 12.02.035 of the Kent City Code.
SECTION 2. The city council,therefore,declares that an emergency exists
and authorizes staff to implement the appropriate procedures to develop an initial
comprehensive plan and zoning map designation for the city of Kent impoundment reservoir
property,originally incorporated for municipal purposes.
PASSED at a regular meeting of the city council of the city of Kent,Washington this
day of June, 2003.
CONCURRED in by the mayor of the city of Kent, this day of June,2003.
JIM WHITE,MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. ,passed
by the city council of the city of Kent, Washington, the day of June, 2003.
BRENDA JACOBER,CITY CLERK(SEAL)
• P:tCivil\Rmlmion\CompPlanAmend-ImpoundmentReservair.doc
3 Comp.Plan Amendment—
Impoundment Reservoir Property
} t
�.Y 4
kMe
T'
S
NOT
Mg3 1 ,
0,C A OMEN DA,
L 0C
j -
WQV
WO
k3� SY TE' R J Y d
gSK Y
M1: z
- as
d _ .gam ry zi��
.?F f >j
� P
n
dYxd s `x
;�,�p t x ✓ lR(w1 k ! f
MIA -
c
n � 6
Yii
N—V its
PAN 'dots to
t Ir
A x f
3 tr;
1
1 4 Y2 �
}
G rYY �{ t
oil
Of
lit
ey
Al
WAS
SAL5 � R u e.
if
14.
WIM
-owl Y yes
a
Y`rw`
t A j ry
0 rmNwR e k f v�
20
tw
-
y�S- z�yr e ng' t'. �+ :-b.-� t•
x >x s t YY G` S A b e a
�ty
IgY Y
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director
PLANNING SERVICES
. KEN T Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager
WASH I N G T O N Phone:253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
DATE: JUNE 10,2003
TO: CHAIR LEONA ORR AND PLANNING COMMITTEE MEMBERS
FROM: CHARLENE ANDERSON,AICP, PLANNING MANAGER
THROUGH: MAYOR JIM WHITE
SUBJECT: KENT CITY CODE AMENDMENT#CPA-2003-1 (KIVA#2031290)
CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT YEARLY UPDATE PROCESS
SUMMARY: After considering testimony at their May 27"' public hearing, the Land Use & Planning
Board recommended, by a 4-0 vote, approval of amendments to Kent City Code regarding updates to the
Capital Facilities Element of the comprehensive plan. The proposal adds provisions for considering city-
initiated amendments to the comprehensive plan more frequently than once per year and provides for a
public hearing before the City Council rather than the Land Use & Planning Board for certain
amendments to the Capital Facilities Element.
• BUDGET IMPACT: None
MOTION: I move to recommend/not recommend approval of 4ZCA-2003-1 as recommended by the
Land Use & Planning Board and staff, and to direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance
to be considered on the Consent Calendar at the July 15`"City Council meeting.
BACKGROUND: RCW Section 36.70A.130 states that amendments to the comprehensive plan can be
considered by the governing body no more frequently than once every year except under a limited number
of circumstances, which include an amendment of the capital facilities element that occurs concurrently
with the adoption or amendment of the city budget. The capital facilities plans of the Kent and Federal
Way School Districts are part of the Capital Facilities Element of the Kent Comprehensive Plan, as is the
City's Capital Facilities Plan. For the past several years both the school districts and the Kent Finance
Department have submitted updated plans as part of the annual comprehensive plan amendment process.
The updated plans have been considered by the Land Use & Planning Board and have been forwarded to
the City Council along with applications from the private sector.
As provided for in RCW 36.70A.130 and Kent City Code 12.13.070, the proposed amendments to Kent
City Code allow the City Council to hear and consider the City's 6-year financing plan and the capital
facilities plans for the school districts concurrently with the annual budget. The code amendment details
of the proposal are attached.
The proposed procedural amendments are categorically exempt under the provisions of SEPA Rules per
WAC 197-11-800(20).
Code Amendment Details
#CPA-2003-1
1) Amend KCC 12.02.010 as follows: "The city council shall consider amendments to the
comprehensive plan no more than once a year except as provided in Tr�z?02.035 under
the following circumstances, which may be processed separately and in addition to the
standard annual update:
a) If an emergency exists; (An emergency is defined as an issue of community-wide
significance that promotes the public health, safety, and general welfare.)
b) To resolve an appeal of a comprehensive plan filed with a growth management
hearings board or with the court;
c) The adoption or amendment of a shoreline master program under the procedures set
forth in chapter 90.58 RCW;
d) The initial adoption of a subarea plan; and
e) The amendment of the capital facilities element of the comprehensive plan that
occurs concurrently with the adoption or amendment of the city budget.
2) Amend KCC 12.02.060, Hearing procedures — Notice requirements, to read, "The planning
depaFtmen services office shall prepare a report and recommendation on proposed plan
amendments which shall be presented to the planning eemaii land use and planning
board at a public hearing. For amendment of the capital facilities element of the
. comprehensive plan that occurs concurrently with the adoption or amendment of the city
budget, the city council will hold the public hearing instead of the land use and planning
board.
3) Delete KCC 12.02.035.
CA1pm:S:1Permit\Plan1ZONECODEAMEND12003\2031290-2003-lpc.doc
Enc: Minutes of 5/27/03 LU&PB hearing,5/19/03 staff memo to Board
cc: Fred N.Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director
File#ZCA-2003-1/KIVA 2031290
•
Planning Committee Meeting 6/17/03
Capital Facilities Element Yearly Update Process ZCA-2003-1/KIVA 42031290
Page 2 of 2
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom, C. D. Director
PLANNING SERVICES
400 Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager
KEN T Phone:253-856-5454
• W A S H I N O T O N Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent,WA 98032-5895
LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
PUBLIC HEARING
MAY 27, 2003
The meeting of the Kent Land Use and Planning Board was called to order by Chair Ron
Harmon at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, April 28, 2003 in Chambers West of Kent City Hall.
LUPB MEMBERS PRESENT: STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Ron Harmon, Chair Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager
Nicole Fincher, Vice Chair Gloria Gould-Wessen, Planner, GIS Coordinator
Steve Dowell William Osborne, Planner
Deborah Ranniger Kim Adams-Pratt, Asst City Attorney
Pamela Mottram, Administrative Secretary
LUPB MEMBERS ABSENT:
Jon Johnson, Excused
David Malik, Excused
Greg Worthing, Excused
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Nicole Fincher MOVED and Deborah Ranniger SECONDED to approve the Minutes of April
28, 2003. Motion CARRIED.
ADDED ITEMS:
None
COMMUNICATIONS
Planning Manager Anderson stated that the Planning Committee considered zoning code
amendments #ZCA-2003-1 Auto Repair as Home Occupations, #ZCA-2003-3 Auto Repair and
Washing Services in M-3 Zoning District, and #ZCA-2002-2 NCC, Neighborhood Convenience
Commercial District at their May 20, 2003 meeting unanimously recommending approval to the
City Council.
Ms. Anderson stated that these amendments will be placed on the Consent Calendar for the July
1, 2003 City Council meeting.
NOTICE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS
Ms. Anderson stated that a joint meeting will be held with the City of Sea Tac and the Land
Use and Planning Board at Sea Tac City Hall on June 16 at 6:00 pm.
#CPA-2002-1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CH 5 COMMUNITY DESIGN
Planner, William Osborne stated that the Community Design Element has been in the process
of revision for over a year. A number of changes have been made with consideration to
recommendations made by staff, citizens, and the Board. All changes made to the original
Comprehensive Plan document have been tracked, and are indicated with strikethroughs for
• deletions and underlines for insertions. Each succeeding revision to an element of the
Comprehensive Plan has indicated the most recent changes, including removal of previously
suggested additions or deletions.
Mr. Osborne stated that the Community Design Element is the policy guide for the physical
manifestation of several comprehensive plan elements including the Land Use, Capital
Facilities and Transportation Elements.
• Mr. Osborne articulated the changes made since the Board's March 24th workshop. He stated
that the term "pedestrian oriented" was replaced with "pedestrian friendly" in the first
paragraph of the Introduction as suggested by Board member Johnson.
Mr. Osborne stated that throughout the element, reference to the Parks Element has been
changed to"Parks and Open Space Element", to reflect the new title for that element.
Mr. Osborne stated that attention has been brought to the topical sections in the introduction of
this element with the addition of text stating "As noted in each of the topical sections below,...".
Mr. Osborne stated that most of these issues were raised originally in 1992 in the Community
Forum on Growth Management and Visioning.
Mr. Osborne stated that the reference to automobiles has been generally changed to motor
vehicle, to incorporate other forms of motor vehicles such as trucks, motorcycles or mopeds, if
one wanted to consider these as a motor vehicle rather than a bicycle.
Mr. Osborne stated that there are language changes to Policy CD-2.3 referring to streets. He
stated that the language "in consideration of existing building features" was added to Policy
CD-2.4 as suggested by former Board member Thomas.
Mr. Osborne stated that staff has added language "appropriate opportunities"to Policy CD-2.6.
Mr. Osborne stated that the term "motor vehicle"replaces "automobile"in Goal CD-3.
Mr. Osborne stated that the term `landscaping" has been removed from CD-3.2 to
acknowledge other permeable barriers.
Mr. Osborne stated that one of the concerns of the Board was the coordination of amenities for
transportation mode connections. Mr. Osborne said that staff changed language to say that
the City would encourage the location of transit type facilities, rather than to coordinate the
location of those facilities, as there may be a responsible agency such as Sound Transit or
King County Metro to provide those facilities.
Mr. Osborne stated that although Board member Dowell voiced concern with reference to
Policy CD-5.1, staff has not made any changes. He stated that staff feels that the existing
policy language addresses the avoidance of blank walls.
Mr. Osborne stated that the term "activity centers"has been replaced with "activity areas" He
stated that Transit Agencies are encouraged to provide attractive and distinctive shelters that
are tied to the identity of the city.
Mr. Osborne stated that CD-6.4 addresses Mr. Dowell's concerns regarding street walls. He
stated that this policy has been added to the Community Design Element and reads
"Encourage ground floor building fagade treatments and activities that generate pedestrian
interest and comfort. Large windows, canopies, arcades, plazas and outdoor seating are
examples of such amenities." Mr. Osborne stated that language was changed in Policy CD-
11.2 with some of this language replicated in CD-6.4. He stated that CD-11.4 is changed,
incorporated and copied into CD-6.4.
Mr. Osborne stated that the term "mixed use" as been removed from Policy CD-8.5.
• Mr. Osborne stated that the phrase "by encouraging structured parking" has been removed
from CD-11.8 because the city has regulations encouraging structured parking. He stated that
Land Use and Planning Board Minutes
May 27,2003
Page 2 of 4
staff desires to reduce the visual impact of off-street parking in the downtown area without
discouraging parking for downtown businesses.
Mr. Osborne stated that a reference to the Kent Downtown Design Guidelines has been added
. to Goal CD-12.
Mr. Osborne stated that in the Residential Development section, the term "and fencing" has
been added to acknowledge that many problems with the larger apartment complexes was
that they were basically isolated with undesirable design features.
Mr. Osborne stated that in the Residential Development section, it acknowledges that
multifamily complexes "comprise a large amount of Kent's housing stocV. At this time single
family housing is outpacing the development of multifamily housing in Kent.
Mr. Osborne stated that Goal CD-14 is redefined to reflect the City's desire to lay out
neighborhoods oriented to the pedestrian and fostering a sense of community. The changes
to the Policies under CD-14 address these issues and the concerns of the Board members
about the block length issue. Mr. Osborne stated that there are regulations limiting block
lengths to 500 feet with flexibility in the design review and application review process. Mr.
Osborne stated that the revisions to Policy CD-14.2 reflect a connection with community.
Mr. Osborne stated that Policy CD-14.3 has been moved to CD-15.5, where it is more
representative of that goal referring to setbacks.
Mr. Osborne stated that Goal CD-15 refers to residential site design and architecture and
addresses setbacks. He pointed out changes to CD-15.2 which includes limiting the repetitive
character of new development.
Mr. Osborne stated that terminology "Establish flexible standards for small lot design." has
been removed from Policy CD-15.3. Mr. Osborne stated that the intent of this policy is to
address garages, where to site them, and how to organize them to maximize the efficiency
and use of the overall site area.
Mr. Osborne stated that Policy CD-15.5 has been moved from Goal CD-14. He stated that
"parking"has been included in Policy CD-15.6 as one of the amenities that could be commonly
owned within clustered, cottage or attached single family residential housing types.
Mr. Osborne stated that in Policy CD-15.7 the term "pleasing addition..." was changed to
"complimentary to neighborhoods...",
Mr. Osborne stated that in regards to Board member Malik's concern over Planned Unit
Developments, no change was made to Policy CD-15.11 as the language is general and
states that the city would "utilize the PUD process where appropriate to realize the benefits of
desirable community design"which would be addressed through development regulations.
Mr. Osborne stated that "public spaces' was rephrased to "public open spaces" in CD-18 to
acknowledge that the city is referring to spaces that can be used for passive or active
recreation.
Mr. Osborne stated language has been both added and deleted to the "Environmentally
Sensitive Design and Construction" section, explanatory of the Built Green Program which is
the Master Builder's Association of King and Snohomish County, a voluntary incentive based
certification program; the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) sponsored
by the US Green Building Council, a voluntary consensus based program that sets national
standards for passive energy use; and Low Impact Development is an approach to minimizing
• the impacts on land.
Land Use and Planning Board Minutes
May 27,2003
Page 3 of 4
Mr. Osborne referenced the following goals and policies added to the "Environmentally
Sensitive Design & Construction section of the Community Design Element: Goal CD-21,
Policy CD-21.1, Policy CD-21.2, Policy CD-21.3, Goal CD-22, Policy CD-22.1, Policy CD-22.2
and Policy CD-22.3.
• Mr. Osborne defined a "rain garden" per Deborah Ranniger's request.
Ms. Fincher spoke about her concerns with vehicular movement as it is stated in Policy 14.1.
Mr. Osborne stated that the intent of this policy is to support safe pedestrian, bicyclist and
vehicular movement.
Chair Harmon questioned the intent of Policy 15.1 and 15.6 & 7. Mr. Osborne stated that this
policy encourages the development of cluster, cottage, attached single-family and multifamily
housing within a neighborhood context. The intent of the language is to establish design
standards so that when this type of housing is developed, it will fit into the existing
neighborhood context.
Chair Harmon declared the Public Hearing open. Seeing no speakers, Steve Dowell MOVED
and Nicole Fincher SECONDED to close the Public Hearing. Motion CARRIED.
Steve Dowell MOVED and Deborah Ranniger SECONDED to accept CPA-2002-1,
Comprehensive Plan Update, Chapter 5 Community Design Element, as recommended by
staff. Motion CARRIED.
#CPA-2003-1 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT YEARLY UPDATES PROCESS
Planning Manager, Charlene Anderson stated that this proposal comes before the Board as a
result of issues in the past with the annual comprehensive plan amendments. She stated that
the City receives private requests for amending the comprehensive plan and zoning, as well
as capital facilities updates from the Kent and Federal Way School District, and the City itself
as required annually.
Ms. Anderson stated that the capital facilities updates include suggestions regarding school
impact fees that are implemented as code.
Ms. Anderson stated that the State requirements in GMA allow these capital facilities updates
to occur with the annual budget. Ms. Anderson stated that this proposal is a request to allow
the City Council to hold a public hearing at the time they consider the annual budget to
address the City's Six Year Capital Improvement Program as well as consider the School
Districts Capital Facilities Plans which include impact fees.
Chair Harmon declared the Public Hearing open. Seeing no speakers, Steve Dowell MOVED
and Nicole Fincher SECONDED to close the Public Hearing.
Steve Dowell MOVED and Nicole Fincher SECONDED to approve #CPA-2003-1 Capital
Facilities Element, Yearly Update Process, as recommended by staff, sending this on to City
Council. Motion CARRIED.
Ms. Anderson stated that this item will be considered by the Planning Committee on June 17"'
and will possibly be considered at the July 15`h City Council meeting. The sixty day State
notification prevents this item from being moved to Council sooner.
ADJOURNMENT
Chair Harmon adjourned the meeting at 7:50 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager
• Secretary, Land Use and Planning Board
S:\Permit\Plan\LUPB\2003\Minutes\052703min.doc
Land Use and Planning Board Minutes
May 27,2003
Page 4 of 4
I
• COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director
PLANNING SERVICES
KEN T Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager
WASHINGTON
Phone:253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
DATE: MAY 19, 2003
TO: CHAIR RON HARMON AND MEMBERS OF THE LAND USE AND PLANNING
BOARD
FROM: CHARLENE ANDERSON,AICP,PLANNING MANAGER
SUBJECT: CAPITAL FACILITIES PLANS—UPDATES TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
LUPB Public Hearing May 27, 2003
INTRODUCTION: At their March 18, 2003 meeting, the City Council Planning Committee directed
staff to move forward with a proposal to explore options for updating the Capital Facilities Element of the
Kent Comprehensive Plan concurrent with the annual budgeting process. Staff introduced at the May 12`h
Land Use & Planning Board workshop proposed amendments to Kent City Code to allow updates of the
Capital Facilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan to include updates of the School District Capital
Facilities Plans and the City's Capital Facilities Plans concurrent with adoption of the city's budget.
BACKGROUND: RCW Section 36.70A.130 states that amendments to the comprehensive plan can be
considered by the governing body no more frequently than once every year except under a limited number
of circumstances, which include an amendment of the capital facilities element that occurs concurrently
with the adoption or amendment of the city budget. Kent City Code (KCC) Section 12.02.010 states the
City Council shall consider amendments to the Kent comprehensive plan no more than once each
calendar year, except if an emergency exists. Kent City Code currently does not provide for an exception
for the annual budget or other exceptions allowed by the Growth Management Act.
In March 1996, Ordinance #3281 adopted the school districts' capital facilities plans as part of the Capital
Facilities Element of the Kent Comprehensive Plan and established an impact fee schedule. KCC
12.13.060 requires school districts on an annual basis to submit their updated capital facilities plan, and
KCC 12.13.070 requires Council review of the updates in conjunction with any update of the Capital
Facilities Element of the Kent Comprehensive Plan.
RCW Section 36.70A.070 requires Capital Facilities Elements to contain an inventory of existing public
facilities, a forecast of future needs, the location and capacity of proposed facilities, and a six-year
financing plan with projected funding capacities; and to coordinate the land use element, capital facilities
element, and financing plan. The City Council reviews the 6-year financing plan annually during the
. budget cycle. The school districts capital facilities plans also address 6-year financing. Staff believes
both the City's 6-year financing plan and the capital facilities plans for the school districts may be
considered by the City Council concurrently with the annual budget.
LUPB Public Hearing 5/27/03
Capital Facilities Plans—Updates to Comprehensive Plan
Staff Report
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION:
Following are the specific amendments for which staff is recommending Board approval.
Code Amendment Details:
1) Amend KCC 12.02.010 as follows: "The city council shall consider amendments to the
comprehensive plan no more than once a year except as provided in KGG 12 02 m e under
the following circumstances, which may be processed separately and in addition to the
standard annual update:
a) If an emergency exists; (An emerizency is defined as an issue of community-wide
significance that promotes the public health, safety, and general welfare.)
b) To resolve an appeal of a comprehensive plan filed with a growth management
hearings board or with the court;
c) The adoption or amendment of a shoreline master program under the procedures set
forth in chapter 90.58 RCW;
d) The initial adoption of a subarea plan; and
e) The amendment of the capital facilities element of the comprehensive plan that
occurs concurrently with the adoption or amendment of the city budget.
2) Amend KCC 12.02.060, Hearing procedures — Notice requirements, to read, "The planning
department services office shall prepare a report and recommendation on proposed plan
amendments which shall be presented to the planning eommi^^ ^~land use and planning
board at a public hearing. For amendment of the capital facilities element of the
comprehensive plan that occurs concurrently with the adoption or amendment of the city
budget, the city council will hold the public hearing instead of the land use and planning
board.
3) Delete KCC 12.02.035.
Staff will be available at the May 27 h hearing to present the proposal.
CA\pm:S:\Permit\Plan\ZONECODEAMEND\2003\capfacilitieslupbph.doc
cc: Fred N.Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director
Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Manager -
Project File