Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Economic and Community Development - 11/12/2013 (3)ECDC Minutes November 12, 2013 Page 1 of 4 ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES November 12, 2013 Committee Members Committee Chair Jamie Perry, Deborah Ranniger, Bill Boyce. Perry called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 1. Approval of Minutes Committee Member Ranniger Moved and Committee Member Boyce Seconded a Motion to approve the Minutes of October 14, 2013. Motion PASSED 3-0. 2. Public Hearing: Planned Action Ordinance (PAO) and Infill Exemption Ordinance (IEO) associated with the Downtown Subarea Action Plan (DSAP) Study area. Long Range Planner Gloria Gould-Wessen spoke about key principles and action items that will implement the Downtown Subarea Action Plan Policies. The subarea action plan policies encourage mixed use, provide urban residential living, encourage qual ity development, improve livability through safety and open space, and develop economic incentives to help grow downtown successes. Gould-Wessen stated that Phase I of the DSAP implementation is nearly complete and includes the DSAP, Land Use Plan & Zoning Districts Map Amendments and Mixed Use Overlay (GC-MU) Development Regulations. Ordinances will be voted on at the November 19th City Council meeting. Gould-Wessen stated that Phase II intends to further implement the DSAP; considers the Planned Action and Infill Exemption Ordinances (IEO), updates the Downtown Design Guidelines, includes additional development regulations, adds economic development incentives, and considers outdoor gathering spaces and parks. This Phase will be brought to the Committee throughout 2014. Gould-Wessen stated that the PAO and IEO encourages mixed use, improves livability and offers economic development incentives. Planned Actions in Kent have included development of the Kent Station, the Platform Mixed Use development that will soon house 176 residents, and the Town Square Park. To meet GMA requirements, Kent created the DSAP and Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) to Kent’s comprehensive plan review EIS adopted in 2011. The DSAP/SEIS identifies significant environmental impacts, mitigation measures, and unavoidable adverse impacts associated with three land use alternatives that the SEIS studied. The DSAP/SEIS focus is to analyze impacts of land use alternatives to transportation, to open space, and to ensure consistency with existing plans and policies. The draft and final SEIS informs the planned action and the infill exemption ordinances. Gould-Wessen stated that the environmental review of the DSAP/SEIS was completed at a programmatic level. Staff analyzed land use, number of jobs and residences that would be brought to town, looked at transportation and impacts to open space and recreation in downtown. Through that environmental analysis, mitigation measures have been identified and future development must address those impacts as part of the permit process as is currently done with permitting. However, developers will not need to conduct additional SEPA review if they are deemed consistent with the DSAP/SEIS resulting in cost and time savings for the developer. ECDC Minutes November 12, 2013 Page 2 of 4 The PAO would affect a portion of the North Park Neighborhood. The center of the Planned Action (PA) area is Meeker Street. Gould-Wessen cited the boundaries of the Infill Exemption area where development will be able to utilize that particular ordinance. Meeker Street is in the center of the PA area and in the center of the effort to incentivize development. Gould-Wessen stated that there are a number of properties surrounding Kent Station with potential for redevelopment in the future which is par tly why the PA is associated with the North Park area. The PA area excludes 1st and 2nd Avenues to encourage different types of redevelopment to preserve the historic character of that area. Berk and Associates Consultant Lisa Grueter described the steps taken to complete the PAO with the first step being preparation and issuance of a Final SEIS issued on October 4, 2013 (that anticipates what future development will be in a specific area). The intent of this hearing is to consider adoption of the PAO. The PAO defines development levels and required mitigation anticipated in the SEIS. When developers implement the mitigation measures, SEPA review does not have to be repeated, and it facilitates the permit process where the city evaluates future development proposals for consistency with the ordinance. Most of the ordinance addresses the review process, establishes criteria for reviewing the planned actions, and adds a monitoring provision where the adopted PAO is reviewed for validity in five years. Grueter cited examples of mitigation measures evaluated in the DSAP/SEIS. She stated that the PAO is a tool used since the mid 90’s by a number of jurisdictions. It facilitates permit review and puts into motion the land use plan. Grueter stated that the IEO facilitates residential and mixed use residential commercial development in areas that are not meeting density goals set forth in the comprehensive plan. The IEO has been used in a number of cities; to focus on bringing more residential to an area. The IEO would incentivize the permit process for residential or mixed use developments. SEPA law was amended last year to allow for a small amount of stand -alone nonretail commercial use of 65,000 sf, whereas previously the exemption was only for residential or mixed use with residential. If the IEO is approved, it would be applied to about 400 of the 550 acre DSAP area. Grueter stated that the i nfill growth bank projects 3,560 new households, 2,323 new jobs and 3,790 new trips. She stated that the PA area (consistent with the downtown commercial enterprise zone located primarily in the southern area) is still the focus for growth and is where the most intensive development is planned. Gould-Wessen stated that having a PAO or IEO does not mean that comm ercial development can happen in an area zoned for residential. The MRT-16 zoning district within the North Park area would not be affected by adopting these ordinances. Changing boundaries to exclude portions of the North Park area from the PAO would requ ire additional changes to the ordinances. After deliberating, it was determined that making any adjustments to the boundaries would be considered a substantial change to the plan and would require a new public hearing. Councilmember Perry asked staff to craft a couple of additional options for the Committee’s consideration. She stated that a group of North Park Community residents don’t want redevelopment, yet she voiced her concern that the Planned Action incentivizes redevelopment and includes some single family residential parcels within North Park. Planning Director Fred Satterstrom stated that the last DSAP update was completed in 2005 simultaneously with some rezoning up to Cloudy Street. At that time, half of that block area located immediately adjacent to James Street was rezoned Downtown Commercial Enterprise (DCE), and rezoned the other half to Multifamily Residential Townhouse (MRT- 16) which serves as a buffer for the North Park area. The intent with the PAO and IEO is to incentivize development and attempt to induce the type of development consistent with its land use plans. ECDC Minutes November 12, 2013 Page 3 of 4 Satterstrom suggested three options for the Committee to consider related to the subject site north of James Street; (1) Incentivize the subject area with a planned action to allow for more flexible zoning (2) incentivize through the infill exemption, limiting the commercial aspect but incentivizing residential, or (3) do not designate the subject area through either a planned action or infill exemption. Committee member Ranniger stated that the rezoning in 2005 incentivized and galvanized the North Park neighborhood to really take ownership of their community and to work to keep the integrity of that community as a residential neighborhood . Ranninger spoke in opposition to include the North Park community as part of the planned action area with Committee Member Boyce concurring. Satterstrom stated that staff could provide additional options for the Committee’s consideration at their December 9 th meeting, preceding the City Council meeting of December 10th. 3. Business Incubators Economic Development Specialist Josh Hall stated that staff has been asked to conduct research on business incubators and to determine if the City might be interested in engaging in, supporting or creating an incubator type space in the City. Hall defined business incubation as specific programing designed to accelerate successful development of small entrepreneurial companies. Most incubator programs focus on market analysis and financial assistance. Many incubators provide space for companies to grow and succeed at a lower cost. He described Accelerators, Technology, Mixed Use, Manufacturing, Service Industry, and Virtual Incubator programs. Hall stated that the Virtual Incubator Programs are similar to what the Green River Community College (GRCC) provides with their small business assistance center programs. Hall stated that staff considered costs, who could manage a facility, considered what some of the other facilities in the regi on are doing, considered partnership opportunities, desired outcomes for Kent businesses and the purpose for the facilities. Hall stated that staff specifically researched city-driven, initiated incubators in the region and found that the City of Kenmore just started a two-year technology incubator pilot program backed by the city with a budget of $240,000 . Kenmore feels they have a particular niche because of their proximity to Redmond’s Microsoft and Google technology businesses. The City of Federal Way began a Mixed Use incubator program in 2009 with an initial investment of $200,000, receiving additional funding from the State and other sources for a total estimated start-up cost of $325,000. The Federal Way Chamber of Commerce runs and manages the program with collaboration between the multiservice center and the Federal Way School District. It has been estimated that Federal Way has created about 150 new jobs since startup. The city has recently changed its focus from general use incubators to more specific technology incubators. Hall stated that revenue is generated to support these incubators by charging companies rental fees and service fees at a reduced level. The incubators may bring in webinars where they will charge a fee to go through their course. Hall spoke about the pros and cons of incubation programs with some arguments that businesses who get incubation services have a much higher success rate than those companies that don’t, that companies tend to l ocate near where they have an incubator, and if services are being provided to those companies many times they are going to continue to stay in the city as they grow. ECDC Minutes November 12, 2013 Page 4 of 4 In response to Committee inquires Hall stated that he believes that advanced manufacturing is an industry Kent is strong in and has regional significance. The Obama Administration is looking at siting an advanced manufacturing innovation center . The University of Washington, University of Oregon and the Department of Commerce (DOC) is involved in this effort with the DOC currently applying for a planning grant. The Center For Advanced Manufacturing Puget Sound (CAMPS) is located in Kent and a part of this process and could help direct location of an eventual facility. Perry stated that she would like to have more information on technology incubators that have worked in the past, how they work, what they look like, and what type of facilities they have. She opined that technology incubators would likely require a larger initial investment, than starting up a service based incubator which would require less space and be less heavy equipment intensive. Perry voiced support to continue evaluating options. Ranninger stated that she was in Washington DC where she met with the Department of Commerce to talk about planning grant dollars. She stated that it is all about collaboration and partnerships. She stated that if staff’s instincts leads to considering advanced manufacturing, the city needs to play to its strengths and the next step would be to reach out and see about obtaining planning grants, perhaps form collaborative partnerships with other business municipalities and educational institutions to strengthen the opportunities for obtaining grants. Informational Only 4. Economic Development Report Josh Hall reported that Ben Wolters would give Council an update at their November 19th meeting. Adjournment Committee Chair Perry adjourned the meeting at 7:36 p.m. ________________________________________ Pamela Mottram, Secretary Economic & Community Development Committee P:\Planning\ECDC\2013\Minutes\10-14-13_Min.doc