Planning Commission

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF BELLINGHAM, WASHINGTON THURSDAY WORK SESSION / PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 P.M. November 20, 2014 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Video-taped www.cob.org CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Tom Grinstad, Chairman of the Planning Commission. ROLL CALL: Tom Grinstad, Jeff Brown, Garrett O'Brien, Ali Taysi, Phyllis McKee, Steve Crooks and Cerise Noah Present: Tom Grinstad, Jeff Brown, Garrett O’Brien, Ali Taysi, Phyllis McKee, Steve Crooks and Cerise Noah Absent: Staff Present: Greg Aucutt, Assistant Director; Lisa Pool, Senior Planner; Kurt Nabbefeld, Senior Planner; Chris Koch, Planner II; and Heather Aven, Recording Secretary. Applicants: Scott Swanson, Belcher Swanson Law APPROVAL OF MINUTES - November 6, 2014 MOTION: Phyllis McKee / Jeff Brown moved to approve the November 6, 2014 minutes as written. VOTE: ALL AYES (Motion Passes 7-0) 15 MINUTE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD No testimony given. WORK SESSION Additional discussion on the amendments to the Bellingham Municipal Code (BMC) Titles 20 and 21 to improve the design review process for new and existing development based on LEAN process recommendations. STAFF PRESENTATION Chris informed the Commission that the requested information was sent to them and each of the citizens that testified. He stated that staff received no additional public comment. COMMISSION QUESTIONS / DISCUSSION Ali Taysi expressed his support for the opportunity for public input earlier in the process. He wanted to know if there were any changes made to the standard multi-family design review. Staff discussed some of the changes that have been implemented through Mayoral directives and the LEAN process event regarding design review. MOTION: Jeff Brown / Garrett O'Brien moved to accept the Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Recommendations as amended at the November 6, 2014 meeting and forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council for the amendments to the BMC Titles 20 and 21 to improve the Final Copy - 1 design review process for new and existing development based on LEAN process recommendations, including the changes listed in the staff memorandum. Jeff Brown stated that given there was no additional public comment, he feels comfortable supporting it. Ali Taysi stated that, in his opinion, the changes could have even gone further. He commented that changes to the regular multi-family design process, which includes the review of more projects, would have been nice. VOTE: ALL AYES (MOTION PASSES 7-0) PUBLIC HEARING ZON2014-00007: Amend the Samish Neighborhood Plan and BMC to rezone Area 9 from Commercial, Planned, non-retail to Commercial, Planned. Area 9 is south of the Elks Lodge (710 Samish Way) and north of the Community Baptist Church (810 Samish Way). APPLICANT PRESENTATION Scott Swanson, Belcher Swanson Law Firm, stated that he is representing the applicant. He provided background information on the property and noted the subject property is zoned Commercial, Planned non-retail. He explained that the existing zoning restricts the site's use and through this rezone request, the applicant would like to have the non-retail qualifier removed. Scott Swanson reviewed how this rezone meets the criteria listed in the Comprehensive Plan. He reiterated this is a planned zone and that any development that occurs on this property will go through further public process / review. He addressed some concerns that have been raised:  Traffic - He stated that, according to written comment from the City's Public Works Department there will be no impact to traffic from this proposal.  Separate proposal - He explained that this proposal is requesting the removal of the non-retail restriction, which differs from the request for 801 Samish Way, a residentially zoned property. Scott Swanson reviewed those uses that are currently allowed and pointed out that this proposal is asking for an expansion of those uses. He emphasized that the applicant does not have any intention of developing retail on this site. He stated that, in his opinion, the rezone criteria have been met. STAFF PRESENTATION Lisa Pool reviewed the uses that are currently allowed through the existing zoning, as well as those that would be allowed with the removal of the non-retail restriction. She stated that staff believes the proposal has met both the comprehensive plan amendment and rezone criteria. Lisa Pool reviewed the concerns expressed through the written public comments and noted that they would be addressed in more detail after the public hearing is held. There was a discussion about how the cumulative effects of this area can be considered if the Commissioners are only reviewing one proposal. Final Copy - 2 Steve Crooks expressed concern that the Commission was asked to only review one at a time. He suggested that the Planning Commission consider the two proposals for this area of the city together. Garrett O'Brien commented that it would be important to consider the overall effect on the neighborhood; however, they are separate rezone requests and should be considered individually. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED Dick Conoboy noted that the property owner did not ask for any changes when the Samish Neighborhood Plan was amended in 2007. He requested that the Commission not take action on the proposal given the fact that the cumulative effects cannot be considered without the second proposal. He pointed out that if the rezone is granted, there will be two commercially zone properties right across from one another. He pointed out that although the applicant claims there will not be a retail use on the property at this stage, anything could happen in the future. Ron Judd expressed concern over the claim that there will be no traffic impacts to Samish Way. He pointed out that if these two properties being discussed are rezoned and developed, there will definitely be additional traffic generated. He questioned the fact that the rezone criteria has in fact been met. Laird McHattie spoke to the lack of infrastructure (no sidewalks or bike lanes) along Samish Way. He commented on the existing height restriction of 20', and wanted to know if that would be changed. He read the applicant's response to the question "why the amendment is needed" from their application, and expressed his confusion. He stated that he is against the removal of the restriction and, in his opinion, traffic impacts, safety concerns and potential crime have not been considered. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED STAFF RESPONDED TO COMMENTS Lisa Pool stated that the height limit would be 35'. She addressed the cumulative impact comments and pointed out that strip commercial is not supported in this location by the Comprehensive Plan. Chris Comeau, Public Works Transportation Planner, clarified that he did not state that there would be no traffic impacts, as stated by the applicant. He stated that there would not be significant traffic impacts as it relates to the thresholds set by the City. He pointed out that all development on this site will be subject to all development regulations, such as transportation concurrency, trip counts and the required street improvements. There was a discussion about Samish Way (Old Highway 99) and the capacity for the additional traffic that development in this area will create. Chris Comeau explained the formula that Public Works considers to determine the threshold that would require a traffic analysis. APPLICANT RESPONDED TO COMMENTS: Scott Swanson reiterated that they are already zoned Commercial, Planned and pointed out that the traffic impacts already exist. He noted that the safety concerns would be addressed with the development through the required street frontage improvements that will need to occur. COMMISSION QUESTIONS / DISCUSSION: There was a discussion about cumulative impacts. Final Copy - 3 Steve Crooks recommended that both proposals be reviewed together once 801 Samish Way has submitted their application. Garrett O'Brien pointed out that the proposal being considered is a rezone, not a development proposal. Jeff Brown noted that the two proposals are very different. He stated he is not interested in blending the two discussions given the only thing they have in common would be the traffic issues. Phyllis McKee is also interested in keeping the proposals separate. MOTION: Garrett O'Brien / Phyllis McKee moved to accept the Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Recommendations as written in the November 20, 2014 staff report and forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council on the removal of the non-retail restriction. Cerise Noah stated that although she can understand the lack of desire for additional development along Samish Way, she expressed support for the benefits that new development brings to the neighborhood. Steve Crooks does not have any objections to the proposal; however, he is not in favor of approving it and having it just sit around and collect dust until the 801 Samish Way proposal comes forward, therefore he will vote no. Garrett O'Brien referenced the rezone criteria and noted that circumstances have changed in Bellingham as a whole. He pointed out that the development would help pay for needed amenities and the sites zoning includes too many restrictions as-is. There was a discussion about if the proposed zoning is the best option for this site, and if not what the zoning could / should be. Staff explained how the retail restriction could remain on the site while removing the short list of existing uses that are allowed and opening it up to all of the other Commercial, Planned uses. Staff pointed out that residential uses are only allowed when combined with a commercial component and suggested that the Commission consider simply allowing residential uses to be permitted outright. AMENDMENT: Garrett O'Brien / Phyllis McKee amended motion to allow for residential uses to be permitted outright. SECONDED. VOTE: MOTION PASSES (6-0) VOTE: MOTION PASSES (5-1, Crooks Opposed) OLD / NEW BUSINESS: ADJOURNED: 8:30 p.m. NEXT MEETING: December 4, 2014 Minutes prepared by: _____________________________ Heather Aven, Recording Secretary Final Copy - 4 Minutes edited by Planning Commission members and various Planning Staff. Final Copy - 5