Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Economic and Community Development - 04/08/2013 (3) • Economic & Community Development �- KENT Wns HINQTQN Committee Agenda Councilmembers: Bill Boyce • Deborah Ranniger • Jamie Perry, Chair AGENDA April 8, 2013 5:30 p.m. Item Description ActionSpeaker(s) Time Pace 1. Approval of the March 11, 2013 Minutes YES Jamie Perry 5 min 1 2. PSRC —Growing Transit Communities NO Michael Hubner 10 min 5 Action Strategies Update with Informational Only Puget Sound Regional Council 3. LEAN Permitting NO Fred Satterstrom 10 min 9 Informational Only 4. Economic Development Report NO Ben Wolters 10 min 8 Informational Only Unless otherwise noted, the Planning and Economic Development Committee meets the 2nd Monday of each month at 5:30 p.m. in Council Chambers East, Kent City Hall, 220 4th Avenue South, Kent, 98032-5895. For information on the above item(s), the City of Kent's Website can be accessed at http://kentwa.igm2.com/citizens/Default.aspx?DepartmentID=1025 on Thursday, April 4, 2013 or contact Julie Pulliam, Pam Mottram or the respective project planner in the Planning Division at (253) 856-5454 or as indicated on the agenda. Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the City Clerk's Office at(253) 856-5725 in advance. ForTDD relay service call the Washington Telecommunications Relay Service at 1-800-833-6388. This page intentionally left blank. 400 iiiiii -/ KENT ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES March 11, 2013 Committee Members Committee Chair Jamie Perry, Deborah Ranniger, Bill Boyce. Committee Member Higgins attended for Ranniger. Perry called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.M. 1. Approval of Minutes Committee Member Boyce Moved and Committee Member Higgins Seconded a Motion to approve the February 11, 2013 Minutes. Motion PASSED 3-0. 2. Central Washington University Coming to Green River Community College Central Washington University (CWU) Kent Station Site Director Trina Ballard stated that CWU has established eight centers where a variety of student programs are offered. Kent's center is located within the Green River Community College Campus Building at Kent Station. Ballard stated that the main program focuses on elementary education with middle level science. Students can teach K-81h grade, can qualify to teach science up to 91h grade by taking a certification exam, and can add an optional math endorsement as well upon completing the mid- level science program. This program is defined as a two-plus-two program, where students are invited to transfer into the program after completing their first two years at a community college. Ballard spoke about a new program defined as Dual Admission where students can apply to CWU while attending community college. Ballard stated that though this program is designed as a transfer program, teachers holding a four-year degree may apply for certification to teach math or science. CWU began as a school to educate and train teachers for Washington State and has branched out to offer training programs through the eight centers. The centers limit enrollment to 25 students. Kent has 18 students enrolled at this time. The goal is to educate and certify teachers to instruct in their local school districts. Ballard stated that CWU is working with the City and with the Kent School District to promote awareness of their presence in the community. Once we have more clout in the community we will be able to have a higher profile in terms of marketing and signage. Informational Only 3. Federal Way Transit Extension Update Sound Transit's Federal Way Transit Extension Project Manager, Cathal Ridge stated that Sound Transit (ST) is in the midst of Phase I, the alternatives analysis stage, which will extend through mid 2013. At that time ST will move into the draft environmental impact stage which will extend through the end of 2014, then move into the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and preliminary engineering stage which will take ST into 2016. The goal is to reach a decision and attain environmental approval for the project in 2016 in order to move forward with design and construction. Ridge stated that ST will return to the ECDC possibly in June to report on the results of the analysis process. At that point ST will conduct public open houses. Based on results of the alternative analysis; and on input received from city councils, and the public during the open house period; ST will identify which alternatives to take into Phase II, the Draft EIS stage. Ridge described locations where ST is analyzing the feasibility for rail alignments such as along: SR-99, I-5/509, 301h Avenue running just south of 2161h to the Kent Des Moines Road, and a residential street alignment located one block west of Hwy 99 along 241h Avenue (primarily located within the City of Des Moines). ST is looking at potential crossing locations at 2401h and at 272nd ECDC Minutes March 11 2013 Pagel of 2 Ridge stated that a corridor segment from Angle Lake, South of 2001h down to Kent-Des Moines is currently funded for construction. ST is moving forward with the environmental process for the entire project south to the Federal Way Transit Center even though construction funding has not been identified for south of the Kent-Des Moines area. Ridge stated that ST feels that if they can obtain environmental approval for the entire project then perhaps at a later date ST will be able to identify funding to move forward with design and construction. Ridge described locations where it might be possible to transition from one corridor to another defining median, elevated and mixed median alternatives. He cited locations where ST has considered placement of median, elevated or a mixed median light rail system. Ridge's power point presentation illustrated several light rail alignment possibilities. Ridge stated that the cost to build light rail alignments range from 1.3 to 1.7 billion dollars depending on location. Ridge stated that ST looked at suggested alternatives during the early scoping period with a view towards examining those alternatives to look at in more detail and which met the criteria for extending high capacity transit service further south. Ridge stated that ST determined that pursuing the transportation system management alternative was not a viable long-term option as congestion along I-5 is at 8 hours per day with congestion projected to increase to 11 hours per day by 2035. Similarly, along SR-99 ST expects up to 19 intersections to operate at Level-of-Service F in that timeframe unless there is some significant investment in the corridor. Additionally, population and employment in the corridor is going to increase and overall transit demand in the Seattle/Tacoma corridor is projected to increase by 30-40 percent by 2035. Ridge stated that ST dismissed the I-5 and SR-99 BRT alternatives options due to congestion issues, a requirement to invest in an exclusive right-of-way, and the fact that only 1000 people per hour could be transferred versus 82,000 people per hour with a light rail alternative. Ridge stated that ST ruled out: (1) a mixed median alternative north of 2401h, (2) an east side of I-5 alternative was cost prohibitive (5 to 6 times the cost of a normal structure) as it would require two 700 foot structures to span I-5 both from both the east and west side of I-5, (3) a west side of 24th Avenue alternative as 24th Avenue is a single family residential street with several community facilities, schools, churches, a fire station and memorial park that would be directly impacted, (4) a transitioning alternative from I-5 to SR-99 along 272"' Street as that is an east/west street requiring two right-angle turns to make that transition from one alignment to another which would significantly reduce travel time. Ridge stated that ST considered five big differentiators (daily ridership, travel time, traffic impacts, right-of-way impacts, and overall cost) in their analysis of alternatives. Ridge described several alternative options that ST considered which included: (1) A mixed west side I-5 alternative with a transition into the I-5 median south of 2401h ; (2) several at-grade and mixed median alternatives were considered for the SR-99 corridor with ST continuing to look at an elevated median alternative along SR-99, coupled with 301h Avenue from south of 216th to the Kent DesMoines Road; (3) an elevated median alternative along SR-99 coupled with the I-5 alternative; (4) an elevated east side alternative; (5) an elevated west side alternative, and (6) 24th Avenue alignment coupled with the SR-99 alternative. Ridge stated that ST favored moving forward to further analysis Option 5. Ridge stated that ST will continue to look at alternatives along I-5; both the mixed west side alternative and the mixed west side alternative combined with a mixed median alternative. ST feels that the alternative that makes the most sense along 301h Avenue is an elevated west side alternative due to the setbacks along 301h Avenue that could possibly accommodate an elevated guide-way. ST will continue to explore an elevated median alternative and a new hybrid alternative along SR-99 that would allow for transitioning back and forth from the east to the west side of the street within certain segments of the corridor to avoid major impacts to that corridor. Ridge stated that as part of the station location planning process, ST worked to whittle down the initial range of proposed alignments to something more manageable to look at in more detail. During the planning process ST identified station locations at the Kent Des-Moines Road, on 272"' Street and at the Federal Way Transit Center. As ST moves into the Level II analysis phase ECDC Minutes March 11,2013 Page 2 of 4 3 they will look at station locations in more detail, including travel time, ridership and cost implications for providing additional stations. Ridge stated that when ST moves into the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) stage of project development, ST will flesh out details regarding station layouts, access issues, and parking issues. The EIS process begins after Phase I during the latter part of 2013 through 2015. Ridge stated that ST also analysis the City of Des Moines request for a station location at 2161h Informational Only 4. DSAP & Planned Action Ordinance Update CPA-2012-1 Planning Director Fred Satterstrom stated that the Downtown Subarea Action Plan (DSAP) has been a Council priority for over two years. He stated that staff formed a Downtown Steering Committee which included Council Member Jamie Perry who also served as liaison for the Council and Randall Smith a member of the Land Use and Planning Board. Satterstrom stated that many of the DSAP's strategic actions (last updated in 2005) have been achieved. Staff is looking at a new subarea planning focus and expanding the geographic scope of the downtown study area. Satterstrom stated that the Subarea Plan (DSAP) will update the Comprehensive Plan. Staff is currently completing a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) with the assistance of a consultant. Satterstrom stated that the Planned Action Ordinance (PAO) serves as a guide to city-wide planning and capital improvement projects. The PAO will guide in evaluating environmental impacts for the entire subarea and for the City's proposed actions and desirable use patterns. Satterstrom stated that the streamlined environmental review process is used when private development proposals are consistent with the SP; with the same holding true for mixed use residential infill exemptions (residential infill projects with a component of mixed use or commercial development). Satterstrom stated that as a follow-up to the DSAP, staff anticipates producing some zoning amendments and updates to Kent's Downtown Design Guidelines. Satterstrom spoke about the planning principles and how they formed the basis for putting together a proposal. Satterstrom stated that the downtown subarea is comprised of old town blended with the area designated as the historic urban center. Staff expanded the DSAP boundaries to include the commercial area west of SR-167 with a goal to achieve better connection with downtown and by association influence development in the downtown area. Portions of Central Avenue have been added to the subarea due to its proximity and location relative to downtown. Long Range Planner Gloria Gould-Wessen stated that this project included a public participation process whereby staff reached out to the communities, used online resources, the city's website, and multimedia social media sites. Staff reached out to the communities of North Park, Scenic Hill, Mill Creek and Kent SODO, neighborhoods that surround downtown. She acknowledged a North Park representative present in the audience. Gould-Wessen acknowledged the efforts of the 13 member steering committee stating that the committee held six sessions, moved through a SWAT exercise brainstorming strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and threats to downtown. Based on committee impressions and considerations staff created the first online survey that allowed people to consider what is missing, what is needed, and what would make Kent more livable, receiving over 300 responses. Survey results indicated that people want more shopping options, entertainment, social gathering places for eating, drinking, and music venues and that they want connectivity for the neighborhoods surrounding downtown. Gould-Wessen stated that those impressions were taken to the Steering Committee who then crafted possible DSAP actions that became the basis of a second survey launched online during the holidays with over 200 responses received. Folks were asked to rank preliminary actions related to land use, zoning, and urban design. Gould-Wessen stated that based on the public and Steering Committee input, staff found that increasing allowed land use designations should be considered a strategic action, citing as an example the area west of SR-167 as having a land use designation of Mixed Use, though its not ECDC Minutes March 11,2013 Page 3 of 4 4 zoned commercial mixed use. Staff is considering rezoning that area to a Commercial Mixed Use and increasing allowed heights from 45 to 65 feet with the hope of stimulating new development. Gould-Wessen stated that some actions under consideration include: changing the appearance and function along Central Avenue; rezoning the Downtown Commercial (DC) area to Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE); revising the Design Guidelines to maintain the historic street character while allowing development to occur in a more robust way; rezoning a half-block area north of James Street adjacent to the ShoWare Center presently zoned Multifamily Residential Townhouse (MRT-16) to Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE) in an effort to encourage redevelopment for that entire block to create a more desirable urban environment; and consideration to change the current setback regulations for MRT-16 to be more suburban in nature. Gould-Wessen stated that other actions under consideration include: identifying and implementing methods to connect Kent Station with the historic core; improve the pedestrian experience around the SR-167 underpasses; implement high speed fiber optics and Wi-Fi in downtown; reposition existing park assets to contribute to a new expanded park system; and create prominent and distinctive gateways. Gould-Wessen stated that staff will first update the DSAP, then complete the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS), followed by holding a Land Use and Planning Board (LUPB) workshop then public hearing. The LUPB's recommendation will go to the Economic and Community Development Committee (ECDC) for consideration possibly in May, then on to City Council for consideration possibly in June. Next steps include dealing with rezones and any amendments to the zoning code to implement DSAP directives requiring a separate public hearing, then revising the Downtown Design Guidelines. Bruce Malcom, 944 3r' Avenue N, Vice President, North Park Neighborhood Association, voiced his community's fears that their North Park neighborhood could disappear entirely as the city continues to encroach upon their community, stating that the city has taken property from James to Cole, reducing the number of North Park homes from 400 to 200 residences. Malcom spoke about the need for a safe and secure environment being the number one priority for downtown if the City wants to encourage inflow of restaurants, theatres etc. He encouraged the Council to walk the City's downtown streets in the evening to get a feel for safety and security in the community. He voiced concerns with graffiti and homeless encampment issues. Committee Chair Perry suggested that this item be brought directly to the ECDC for public hearing rather than the LUPB as Council is so fully involved in this project, suggesting holding a Council workshop. Committee Member Higgins stated that he would poll the council members. Informational Only Adiournment Committee Chair Perry adjourned the meeting at 6:45 p.m. Pamela Mottram, Secretary Economic & Community Development Committee PIAPlanningAECDCA20]3\Mlnutes\03 1113_Mln.doc ECDC Minutes March 11,2013 Page 4 of 4 5 ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ben Wolters, Director PLANNING DIVISION Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director KEN T Charlene Anderson, AICP, Manager wasiiiucrou Phone: 253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent, WA 98032-5895 April 4, 2013 To: Chair Jamie Perry and Economic & Community Development Committee From: Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager Subject: Growing Transit Communities For the April 8, 2013 Meeting MOTION: None required — for information only SUMMARY: The Committee will hear an update from Michael Hubner of the Puget Sound Regional Council regarding the Growing Transit Communities Partnership. Michael last updated the Committee in November, 2012. The Growing Transit Communities Partnership is designed to help make the most of a voter-approved $15 billion investment in regional rapid transit by considering strategies for locating housing, jobs, and services close enough to transit that it is a viable option for many people. The Committee will hear about draft Corridor Action Strategies as well as a regional compact that articulates a partner commitment to implementation of strategies relevant to existing and potential station locations and station type. The Growing Transit Communities Partnership is complementary to the work Sound Transit is doing to consider alternatives for light rail extension from the S. 2001h Street station to the Federal Way Transit station, as well as the work products from the Envision Midway project. CA/pm P:\Planning\ECDC\2013\Packet Documents\04-08-13\Growing_Transit_Communities.doc cc: Michael Hubner, Puget Sound Regional Council Fred N. Satterstrom,AICP, Planning Director ECDC File 6 This page intentionally left blank. ��L� 7 Growing Transit Communities Implementation Frequently Asked Questions 4 i;araPw What is the Growing Transit Communities Partnership? The Growing Transit Communities Partnership is an advisory body of diverse public, private, and nonprofit agencies and organizations working together to promote successful transit communities. The Partnership is funded by a three- year grant from the federal Partnership for Sustainable Communities and is housed at the Puget Sound Regional Council. The Partnership is developing recommendations for best practices and new tools and resources to address three overarching goals that advance adopted regional policy: • Attract more of the region's residential and employment growth near high-capacity transit • Provide housing choices affordable to a full range of incomes near high-capacity transit • Increase access to opportunity for existing and future community members in transit communities Why equitable transit communities?Why now? Building communities around high-capacity transit is a key strategy to promote a more sustainable, prosperous, and equitable central Puget Sound region. While the region is already a recognized national leader on planning for sustainable development, the investment of more than $15 billion in light rail and other forms of transit requires bold, coordinated action to ensure the greatest value from these investments is realized. Success means creating a region that can compete globally for jobs and investment, and is well positioned to attract scarce state and federal funds for transportation and community development. Success also means providing the tools, resources, and public support necessary to achieve a regional vision where compact growth, improved transit connections, and a range of community investments provide benefits fairly to all. How do the Growing Transit Communities recommendations relate to state or regional policies and requirements? The recommendations do not create new mandates for partners across the region; rather, they identify tools, resources, and incentives to help partners carry out what is already adopted regional policy in VISION 2040 and Transportation 2040, and in state requirements of the Growth Management Act. The Partnership's recommendations have been developed for regional and local governments, as well as a range of private, non-profit, and community partners. Adoption of the Partnership's recommendations will depend on appropriate legislative or board approval. What are the mechanisms for implementing the Growing Transit Communities Partnership recommendations? There are three primary ways to implement the recommendations of the Growing Transit Communities Partnership: The Regional Compact affirms support for the Partnership's work and a commitment to work toward regional goals by implementing the Corridor Action Strategies. The ml�uflllilu016�� f�(Ihl���l��l��l Compact calls for a continuing regional effort involving the region's diverse partners. The Compact does not obligate partners to implement all recommendations, but rather to consider and adopt tools that fit best with community needs and available resources. Erg The Corridor Action Strategies include 24 detailed recommendations that identify actions for public, private, and nonprofit partners. The strategies identify effective transit community development approaches, shaped by input from experts and the Partnership's corridor task forces and advisory committees. The strategies vary for different types of communities. �of r��uq�iw The Local Implementation Agreements are local government, agency, or organization �q specific work plans which define short- and medium-term actions that can implement the Corridor Action Strategies. The nature and format of the Local Implementation Agreements will vary to reflect the diversity of public and private partners, legislative and decision making processes, and actions adopted. 8 Is this just about light rail stations? By promoting transit ridership, sustainable patterns of development, and equitable social outcomes, the Corridor Action Strategies are intended to benefit the entire region. The Partnership has focused on 74 transit communities along the region's three long-range light rail corridors identified in Transportation 2040. This includes portions of 16 cities (Everett, Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, Shoreline, Seattle, Mercer Island, Beaux Arts Village, Bellevue, Redmond, Tukwila, SeaTac, Kent, Des Moines, Federal Way, Fife, and Tacoma) and three counties (Snohomish, King, and Pierce). Other important transit nodes also exist throughout the region. Future work will expand the approaches developed by the Partnership to additional transit communities not in the three light rail corridors. What is the Transit Community Typology and how does it guide implementation? From the outset, the Partnership recognized that one set of strategies cannot address the diversity of communities that currently exist or are planned around the region's high-capacity transit investments. For this reason,the Growing Transit Communities Partnership has developed a Transit Community Typology to link key implementation strategies to transit communities based on characteristics of the existing community. The Typology resulted in eight different types, each with priority strategies, that demonstrate the varying needs and opportunities present in different transit communities across the region. Do the recommendations include updates to VISION 2040,Transportation 2040 or the Regional Economic Strategy? The focus of Growing Transit Communities is to develop tools and resources to help carry out existing regional policy. One first step will be integrating regional data and tools developed under this grant with the minor update to Transportation 2040 currently underway. As implementation of the Corridor Action Strategies proceeds in the coming years, PSRC may consider further refining or adding detail to its policies and plans to advance regional goals for transit communities. Any such amendments or policy changes will be subject to PSRC board approval. Will the Corridor Action Strategies affect project funding or plan certification through PSRC? Transportation project funding can be an effective tool to support transit communities in the region. The Partnership has identified key infrastructure needs as well as opportunities to reward implementation of best practices throughout the region.The Corridor Action Strategies suggest adding greater detail or additional points to the current funding criteria used for competitive regionally-managed transportation funds or refinements to the local comprehensive plan certification review criteria. Adoption of changes to project funding or plan certification criteria would be subject to PSRC board approval. Recommended strategies that may inform project funding and plan certification criteria include adoption of: • Station area plans consistent with regional guidance • Housing needs assessment and a strategy to address local needs • Community engagement strategies in public processes consistent with regional guidance • Tools to address regulatory barriers to development What is the timeline for implementation? The Growing Transit Communities Partnership's Oversight Committee is expected to release the draft Regional Compact and Corridor Action Strategies for public comment in mid-April, with final adoption in summer 2013. Growing Transit Communities staff will work with Consortium Members and other regional partners on the Regional Compact and the Local Implementation Agreements through the end of 2013. Looking beyond the end of the grant period in early 2014, implementation will continue through regional and local work plans. "014111— Communities For more information, please contact Program Manager Ben Bakkenta at 206-971-3286 or bbakkentaC@psrc.ore. March 8,2013 9 ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ben Wolters, Director Phone: 253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 KENT Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S W1"' lIIGTI Kent, WA 98032-5895 April 4, 2013 To: Chair Jamie Perry and Economic & Community Development Committee From: Fred Satterstrom, Planning Director Through: Ben Wolters, Economic Development Director Subject: LEAN Permitting Exercise/ECD MOTION: Information Only During the week of March 18-22, 14 permitting staff in ECD, Fire and Public Works participated in an intensive LEAN workshop. The focus of this workshop was the permitting process and the objective was to identify areas where greater efficiencies could be made. The week proved to be fruitful, and there were some significant results. For example, the timeline for review of a new commercial building permit was proposed to be cut in half, from nine (9) weeks to four and a half (4 1/2) weeks. There were also a number of less dramatic but cumulatively significant changes proposed, and staff developed an Action Plan for implementing these process changes. At the April 81h ECDC meeting, staff will present the results of the LEAN exercise as well as give you glimpse of what the workshop process was like. FS/pm P:\P1anning\ECDC\2013\Packet Documents\04-08-13\LEANS�ffRptdocx