Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Shoreline Planning Commission Meeting: Development Code Amendments and Elections - April 1, 2021

Planning Commission — Thursday, April 1, 2021

BodyShoreline, Washington

SessionPlanning Commission

DateThursday, April 1, 2021

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 47:53

Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

0:01

Welcome to the April 1st Planning Commission meeting.

0:08

The first order of business is the roll call.

0:16

All right.

0:19

Commissioner Callahan.

0:21

Yeah.

0:23

Vice Chairmatic.

0:25

Here.

0:26

Chair Mark.

0:28

Present.

0:29

Commissioner Mana Sunday.

0:32

Present.

0:32

Commissioner Singer.

0:35

Yeah.

0:35

Thank you.

0:36

Commissioner Clear Scott and Commissioner Lynn Hatson with notice.

0:43

Thank you.

0:44

Are there any changes to the agenda that anybody would like to make?

0:56

Hearing none.

0:58

Is there any uh are the meeting are the minutes okay as is?

1:05

Are there any changes that need to be made from that?

1:13

Hearing none.

1:14

Moving on to the next thing is uh some the minutes are approved.

1:19

Now is there anybody signed up for general public comment?

1:24

Not public comment associated with the public hearing, but general public comment.

1:32

Thank you.

1:33

Well then I would like to uh open the public hearing today is the 2021 Development Code amendments, part one.

1:46

The purpose of the hearing is to obtain public and for the commission to adopt a recommendation to forward to city council on this topic.

1:56

The process for the public hearing is as follows.

2:02

The commission will be given an opportunity to ask clarifying questions.

2:09

Individuals will be given an opportunity to testify.

2:13

After all testimony has been received, the commission will begin deliberation and may ask questions of the staff.

2:21

The commission will vote and then close the public hearing.

2:25

I now wish to open the public hearing.

2:29

Mr.

2:30

Sapron, are you uh going to provide the staff report?

2:36

Yes, I have a PowerPoint uh prepared.

2:41

And let me share this.

2:59

Okay.

3:09

So we'll start out by reviewing the uh potential changes to the development code on batch number one as we're calling it.

3:17

Um we'll take public comment if there is any.

3:21

Um, the commission will hold uh discussion on any of the amendments, and then eventually the commission will vote uh to recommend um some or all of the amendments to council.

3:35

Um so again, amendments are collected throughout the year of these amendments and bouts number one or more um housekeeping and um what we call them more of a time-sensitive amendments as there's some um developers and developments waiting on some of the potential changes in here to perhaps guide some of future development, and then again anyone in the community may submit an amendment to the development code.

4:07

Um so getting right into it.

4:09

Amendment number one would amend the uh definition of adult family home.

4:14

Um this is a little different than the language that was shown in your staff report.

4:20

So um before in the body of the definition six was crossed out and um it was replaced by eight adults.

4:32

Um so it's just a rearrangement of Al you know, used sentence at the end, basically an adult family home, and it provides services for up to eight adults upon approval uh from the state.

4:44

So it's it's six adults, but there may be eight if there is state approval for that particular group home.

4:53

So when the commission is ready to vote, uh we can bring this up to include this in in the motion to the council.

5:03

So moving on to amendment number two.

5:07

This is a housekeeping amendment to update the definition of best available science to be consistent with the WAC 365-195, which is the section of the Growth Management Act that lists the background purpose and criteria for establishing best available science.

5:27

Amendment three, this will allow public agencies like Sound Transit or the city to apply for land use permits without the requirement of the property owner's signature for the property that they do not currently own but are in the process of acquiring for public projects that are going on within the city.

5:51

Amendment number four, this amendment clarifies that single family attached developments are eligible for design departures.

5:59

This amendment also clarifies that landscaping regulations are also eligible for design departures.

6:16

Many new developments, especially those of the station areas, are having a difficult time meeting the landscaping requirements because of site constraints and multitude of regulations that are on the site at the same time.

6:33

So this amendment does it weigh landscaping, it just allows an alternate design if it meets the purpose and intent of the development code.

6:45

Amendment number five, this would add parking areas to the city's land use table.

6:52

The city wants to be clear that standalone paid parking areas are not allowed or not associated with an appropriate approved use within that zone, such as residential dwelling units or commercial uses or perhaps a transit parking line.

7:13

So this is related to amendment number five, which is the index criteria for parking areas.

7:19

And this is just to be super clear that parking areas are only allowed as an accessory use to the primary use of those uses that are allowed in the zone.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Land Use Planning█████████████████████████████████████████████47%

Procedural███████████████████████24%

Public Transportation███████7%

Pending Litigation██████6%

Parking Minimums Elimination█████5%

Transportation Safety█████5%

Public Engagement███3%

Transit Oriented Development██2%

Public Works█1%

Summary of Proceedings

Shoreline Planning Commission Meeting: Development Code Amendments and Elections - April 1, 2021

[Introductory paragraph summarizing the overall meeting.]

The Shoreline Planning Commission held a public hearing on the first batch of 2021 Development Code amendments, covering 14 items ranging from definition updates to parking and density regulations. The commission unanimously recommended all amendments to the City Council, with a correction to the definition of adult family home. Following the hearing, the commission elected Chair Mark and Vice Chair Zager (Sager) for the upcoming year. Updates were provided on the 192nd Street rezone and the Point Wells appeal.

Consent Calendar

Roll call: Commissioners Callahan, Vice Chair Malik, Chair Mark, Commissioner Mana Sunday, Commissioner Singer, Commissioner Clear Scott, and Commissioner Lynn Hatson (with notice) were present.
Minutes from the previous meeting were approved without changes.

Public Comments & Testimony

No members of the public signed up for general comment or testified during the public hearing.

Discussion Items

Staff Presentation on 2021 Development Code Amendments (Batch 1)

Mr. Sapron presented a staff report recommending approval of all amendments. He noted a correction to Amendment 1 (adult family home definition): the original language allowing eight adults only with state approval was clarified to read that the home provides services for up to six adults, but may serve up to eight with state approval under RCW 70.128.066.
Amendments included: updating definition of best available science (Amendment 2); allowing public agencies to apply for permits without property owner signature during acquisition (Amendment 3); clarifying single-family attached developments eligible for design departures including landscaping (Amendment 4); adding parking areas to land use table to prohibit standalone paid parking (Amendment 5); indexing criteria for parking areas (Amendment 6); rounding density calculations for multi-zoned sites (Amendment 7); zero-foot front yard setback in NR 70 zone (Amendment 8); director to determine parking for unlisted uses based on expert analysis (Amendment 10); 25% parking reduction near light rail before operation (Amendment 11); removing assigned parking spot requirement for residential units (Amendment 12); adding administrative design review reference for landscaping (Amendment 13); revising deep green incentive program to reserve expedited permit review for tiers 1-3 (Amendment 14).
Commissioner Callahan raised questions about parking management plans, the light rail sub-area parking study (last updated October 2018/2019), and the need for parking enforcement and restricted parking zones. Staff stated that parking management plans must cover the gap before light rail operations (scheduled mid-2024) and would be vetted by the city's traffic department.
Commissioner Mana Sunday referenced negative parking impacts from The Polaris on 12th, emphasizing the importance of parking regulations.
Commissioner Malik expressed appreciation for the amendments, especially the NR 70 design changes.
Chair Mark inquired about the non-motorized bridge and kiss-and-drop at 147th and First; staff indicated funding is not fully secured but a bank account has been started.

Election of Chair and Vice Chair

Following the rules of procedure, nominations were taken. Commissioner Mana Sunday nominated Chair Mark to continue as chair; Commissioner Malik nominated himself. Chair Mark was re-elected with affirmative votes from an unnamed commissioner (identified as "Tim Work" in transcript), Commissioner Callahan, Commissioner Mana Sunday, and Commissioner Sager. The clerk declared a majority.
For vice chair, Commissioner Callahan nominated Commissioner Sager; Commissioner Malik nominated Commissioner Mana Sunday. Commissioner Sager received affirmative votes from "Tim Work", Commissioner Callahan, and Commissioner Sager, and was elected Vice Chair.

Reports and Updates

Commissioner Callahan requested an update on the 192nd Street rezone. Staff reported that at the March 29 City Council meeting, a private amendment to change the comprehensive plan from public facility to high-density residential (rezoning from R-18 to R-48) was not added to the docket due to significant public opposition. However, a request by King County Metro to rezone a park-and-ride lot at 192nd and Aurora from mixed-use one to mixed business and from R-18 to mixed business for transit-oriented development was added to the docket.
Julie Teller reported on the Point Wells appeal: Snohomish County Council unanimously affirmed the hearing examiner's denial of BSRE's resubmittal application. BSRE may appeal to King County Superior Court, and potentially further to the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court, though such escalation is unlikely.
Commissioner Mana Sunday thanked Vice Chair Malik for his leadership.

Upcoming Meeting

The April 15th meeting will feature an update from Nora Daily Payne on the city's Transportation Master Plan update, including the comprehensive plan update and transportation element.

Key Outcomes

Public Hearing Vote: The commission unanimously voted to recommend all 14 Development Code amendments to the City Council, with the correction to Amendment 1 (adult family home definition) as presented by staff. The vote was by roll call: Chair Mark (yes), Commissioner Callahan (yes), Commissioner Mana Sunday (yes), Commissioner Sager (yes), and Commissioner Singer (yes).
Election: Chair Mark was re-elected Chair for the upcoming year. Commissioner Sager was elected Vice Chair.
Rezoning: The City Council did not add a private rezone at 192nd Street to the docket but did add King County Metro's request to rezone the park-and-ride lot for transit-oriented development.
Point Wells: Snohomish County Council affirmed denial of BSRE's application; further appeals are possible but uncertain.
Staff will provide updates requested by commissioners, including the light rail sub-area parking study and information on tier four projects outside light rail areas.

Meeting Transcript

Welcome to the April 1st Planning Commission meeting. The first order of business is the roll call. All right. Commissioner Callahan. Yeah. Vice Chairmatic. Here. Chair Mark. Present. Commissioner Mana Sunday. Present. Commissioner Singer. Yeah. Thank you. Commissioner Clear Scott and Commissioner Lynn Hatson with notice. Thank you. Are there any changes to the agenda that anybody would like to make? Hearing none. Is there any uh are the meeting are the minutes okay as is? Are there any changes that need to be made from that? Hearing none. Moving on to the next thing is uh some the minutes are approved. Now is there anybody signed up for general public comment? Not public comment associated with the public hearing, but general public comment. Thank you. Well then I would like to uh open the public hearing today is the 2021 Development Code amendments, part one. The purpose of the hearing is to obtain public and for the commission to adopt a recommendation to forward to city council on this topic. The process for the public hearing is as follows. The commission will be given an opportunity to ask clarifying questions. Individuals will be given an opportunity to testify. After all testimony has been received, the commission will begin deliberation and may ask questions of the staff. The commission will vote and then close the public hearing. I now wish to open the public hearing. Mr. Sapron, are you uh going to provide the staff report? Yes, I have a PowerPoint uh prepared. And let me share this. Okay. So we'll start out by reviewing the uh potential changes to the development code on batch number one as we're calling it. Um we'll take public comment if there is any. Um, the commission will hold uh discussion on any of the amendments, and then eventually the commission will vote uh to recommend um some or all of the amendments to council. Um so again, amendments are collected throughout the year of these amendments and bouts number one or more um housekeeping and um what we call them more of a time-sensitive amendments as there's some um developers and developments waiting on some of the potential changes in here to perhaps guide some of future development, and then again anyone in the community may submit an amendment to the development code. Um so getting right into it. Amendment number one would amend the uh definition of adult family home. Um this is a little different than the language that was shown in your staff report. So um before in the body of the definition six was crossed out and um it was replaced by eight adults. Um so it's just a rearrangement of Al you know, used sentence at the end, basically an adult family home, and it provides services for up to eight adults upon approval uh from the state. So it's it's six adults, but there may be eight if there is state approval for that particular group home. So when the commission is ready to vote, uh we can bring this up to include this in in the motion to the council. So moving on to amendment number two.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com