HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning and Economic Development Committee - 11/12/2013ECDC 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