Planning Commission

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF BELLINGHAM, WASHINGTON THURSDAY WORK SESSION 7:00 P.M. May 7, 2015 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER5 Video-taped www.cob.org CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Ali Taysi, Chairman of the Planning Commission. ROLL CALL: Tom Grinstad, Jeff Brown, Garrett O'Brien (VC), Ali Taysi (C), Phyllis McKee, Steve Crooks and Cerise Noah Present: Ali Taysi, Garrett O’Brien, Tom Grinstad, Jeff Brown, Phyllis McKee, Steve Crooks and Cerise Noah Absent: Staff Present: Rick Sepler, Planning Director; Greg Aucutt, Assistant Planning Director; Brian Henshaw, Finance Director; Lisa Pool, Senior Planner; Chris Behee, GIS Specialist; Brent Baldwin, Development Manager; and Heather Aven, Recording Secretary. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: Phyllis McKee / Jeff Brown moved to approve the April 16, 2015 minutes as written. VOTE: 6-0-1 (Crooks abstained) MOTION: Tom Grinstad / Phyllis McKee moved to approve the April 23, 2015 minutes as written. VOTE: ALL AYES 15 MINUTE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD Eric Scott commented on the new apartments being built along busy roads in the City. He specifically expressed concern about the well-being of the residents that will be subjected to the noise and stress that will be realized from the apartments that overlook the freeway. WORK SESSION Continued discussion on the key issues relevant to the development of a UGA boundary recommendation. STAFF PRESENTATION Rick Sepler reviewed the process and emphasized that this update is to solely address minor changes that have occurred and allow for some minor course corrections that may be necessary. He reviewed the Multi-family / Single-family housing mix, the implementing regulations that will be coming forward in the coming months and the affordable housing strategy. He discussed the existing utilities in the Urban Growth Areas (UGA) and the cost of annexation. Final Copy - 1 Greg Aucutt reviewed the alternatives being considered by the Commission. He explained how the cost analysis was done, and what information gets included in the report. He spoke to the key issues that would need to be addressed for each of the areas being considered for inclusion in the UGA. Brian Henshaw reviewed the financial analysis sheets and explained the information being presented. There was a discussion about how grants could be obtained and what kinds of infrastructure could be supported with those monies. There was a question about how much each individual household might realize in increased taxes and a discussion about the different ways that amount could be calculated. COMMISSION QUESTIONS / DISCUSSION There was a conversation about how the City balances existing obligations for infrastructure and amenities with the new obligations that would be realized with an annexation. Staff responded that strategies are being explored that would help analyze this very issue. There was a discussion about sales tax assumptions and how the City accounts for that when an annexation is being determined. There was a question about Slater Road becoming an east / west connector. Staff explained that this option has been identified in the Comprehensive Plan, and in recent months, Whatcom County has begun considering Slater Rd for an east/west connection to the Guide Meridian as well. Staff spoke to some of the other roads being identified as possible connections. There was a conversation about the water system improvement costs and how that affects the cost analysis and the decision to annex. Brian Henshaw replied that it is not included in the cost analysis because those system development costs will need to occur regardless of annexation. Brent Baldwin explained that one of the challenges the City faces is that no further development can occur in certain portions of the Yew St. area until these system improvements have been completed. Upon request, staff reviewed the pros and cons for Alternative D. There was a discussion about how fast the population will grow, and what it will mean for the County if the City's population projection changed. Staff reviewed the options. PUBLIC COMMENTS Darcy Jones spoke to the fiscal impact analysis and the fact that it should be considered at the time of annexation. He mentioned the petition to annex submitted by residents in the Kline / Kelly portion of the UGA, and pointed out that they were told they could not annex until they have sewer. He explained that if the southern section of the Caitac property were included in the UGA and annexed to the City, they would include the Kline / Kelly area as well, and front the necessary sewer costs. He stated that by doing this, the economic analysis would change and produce approximately 240 acres of light-industrial / commercial land. He addressed some density issues that had been previously brought up and emphasized that the mix between single-family and multi-family is very important and noted that Caitac can greatly change the land capacity. Issac Post commented on the mobility options / constraints in the two areas proposed for inclusion in the UGA. He expressed concern about the safety of pedestrians, the increase in traffic, mobility options and potential transportation opportunities if enough density was achieved. He brought up cul-de-sac and dead-ends and suggested that easements be considered so that future connections can be achieved. Final Copy - 2 Keith Howard expressed his support for the Caitac property being included in the UGA. He spoke to the advantages of developing on this site and the additional 240 acres that could help to pay for the existing deficiencies in the City. He pointed out that, since the City is requiring Kline / Kelly property owners to pay for improvements prior to any annexation occurring, there really is no upfront cost to the City and the same restrictions can be placed on the Caitac property owners. Alex W. commented on the positive things Caitac brings to the community, such as being a good affordable alternative for homebuyers, striving to develop the first "Green Community" in the summer of 2015, and utilizing local vendors - which keeps more dollars in our community. Clayton Petree spoke to the capital facilities issues being discussed. He suggested that the City consider removing those properties, currently located in the UGA, that either do not want to ever annex into the City or would be too expensive to bring into the City. He spoke to the advantages of including the Yew St. area in the UGA and shared a profitable development analysis done by the City in September 2008 showing a $19-million profit over 15 years for this area. Jim Hansen expressed his support for smart infill that does not disrupt the neighborhood character. He stated that the City should consider the low population projection, and expand the UGA only as necessary to accommodate growth. He encouraged the Commission to be realistic in the projection. Bob Carmichael spoke to the cost each household will realize each year (for 20 years) and pointed out that some of the infrastructure that is being paid for will provide benefit to the City for many years past that. He emphasized that the analysis provided tonight was high-level and not attached to any specific property. He noted that according to the Growth Management Act (GMA) a city is charged with not making up financial deficiencies, but instead accommodate population, guard against sprawl, and consider the environment without finances driving the decision. He pointed out the real needs of the community and the likely demands of those moving to Bellingham need to be considered and then, how to accommodate those demands can be decided. Patrick McKee suggested that a cautionary approach to the population project be taken and recommend adoption of the low range. He noted that within the established city limits, about 28,000 people can be accommodated and therefore there is no reason to expand into the UGA. He questioned why this approach would not be considered in an effort to get the necessary infrastructure in place for the already existing neighborhoods; and in six years, when the plan needs to be reviewed again, then adjust it and phase in the UGA areas. Christopher Grannis stated that a vibrant, urban city, requires an effective transit system that can only be achieved with a dense urban core, which cannot happen if we allow sprawl through the expansion of the UGA. He spoke to the fact that Lake Padden is already distressed and adding additional growth in the Yew St. area UGA would further that issue. He commented on the fact that a population growth forecast is being requested prior to any discussion occurring about what the citizens what to see their city look like. He recommended the Commission consider the low forecast range. Eric Scott questioned where the new job statistics came from and wanted to know what percentage of the number would be living-wage jobs. Steve James expressed support for "smart growth". He questioned why the City continues to accumulate burdens instead of taking care of the existing burdens, such as roads and sidewalks, just to accommodate growth. He stated that the growth that took place between 1960-1990 occurred when there was inexpensive and developable land available. He noted that all of that land has been annexed Final Copy - 3 and it is no longer reasonable to think we can accommodate 1600 people per year without sprawl occurring. Anne Mackie expressed her support for the low population projection given it is best supports the community's desired livability standards and the City's sustainability capacity. She also pointed out it is historically consistent with the growth pattern that we have seen over the years. She wanted to know why staff is standing behind the Berk Report given the amount of criticism it has received. She questioned if the citizens, who are currently living in the City, are being adequately served at this time. She commented on her neighborhood and the fact that there are still areas without sidewalks, and yet we are looking to include more land in the UGA that will add to that burden. She expressed concern about the process given that we do not have an unbiased cross-section of citizens sitting on the Planning Commission. Perry Eskridge stated that people should have the opportunity to live where they work. He pointed out that in 2003, the city stopped providing services to the UGA, and since then the growth has significantly decreased. He questions whether people are not moving to Bellingham because they don't want to or if they are not moving to Bellingham because they can't. He spoke to supply / demand and stated that if additional land is not included in the supply the cost of land will significantly increase. Cal Leenstra wanted to know if, given the fact that he lives outside of the City limits, any of his money assisted in the $3.2-million acquisition and development of the 21-acre park in the Cordata Neighborhood; and if so, would the City then consider constructing a fire station on Yew Street. He mentioned that even though he built the tower on Samish Highlands, given the exclusion from the City's UGA, he cannot even access the water from the tower he constructed. He commented on the cost of the annexation and stated that the Yew St. area makes more sense to annex given the proximity to the City. He noted that the pollution of Lake Padden derived from the hatchery at Whatcom Falls, and not the surrounding development. He expressed support for the higher population projection. Paul Schissler suggested that the low population projection be chosen. He commented on the affordable housing issue and noted the reasons that supply / demand does not work. He pointed out that according to the demographic statistics half of all developed units each year need to be affordable at $300 - $500 per month. Larry Horowitz commented on what the GMA says about public participation and noted that he would like to hear back from staff on their consideration of the comments they have been receiving. He expressed his support for the low population forecast and noted that the graph showing the City's downward trend looks exactly the same for the County. He suggested that the surveys, which were scientifically done, can help identify what the public is saying and should be reviewed. He questioned whether the cost analysis included the subsidies that the citizens pay for. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD CLOSED BREAK - 5 MINUTES Staff responded to the public comment. Additional COMMISSION QUESTIONS / DISCUSSION There was a discussion about the difference in planning for land located in the UGA verses land placed in the UGA reserve. Staff indicated that land located within the UGA is included in the transportation Final Copy - 4 plans, parks plans, etc.; however, land within the UGA Reserve is meant to provide direction to the City about where they want to go in the event additional land is needed in the UGA. There was a brief conversation about what the scope of the Comprehensive Plan update might include. Staff replied that the intention is that the update be a fine-tuning, not a complete overhaul; however, the Commission and the Council have the authority to identify items that require additional time for review and discussion. A conversation occurred about what the benefits of including both subject areas into the City's UGA might be, as well as how some of the same benefits could be realized in other ways. It was pointed out that although expanding our UGA is, in effect, sprawl, it might be necessary given the fact that the City has down-zoned a lot of developable land already located within the City limits. There was a discussion about the lack of clear policy direction from the City related to how infill should be promoted and achieved within the City limits. Staff commented that the City has attempted to provide infill for several years; but there is resistance to upzones in the neighborhoods. Commissioner Brown suggested that the housing types, location and the market they are being planned for, should be a strong consideration when trying to determine if the UGA should be expanded. There was concern expressed that Bellingham will become a destination to work in, but not live in. It was suggested that the community think "big picture" and consider ways that would make "smart growth" a reality. Some discussion occurred around the thought of allowing the City to grow in multiple directions. MOTION: Jeff Brown / Garrett O'Brien moved to direct staff to prepare Alternative B for consideration with some language that indicates what would trigger additional land being placed into the UGA. Garrett O'Brien stated that he would like to see additional analysis be done for the existing UGA with regard to the land supply and the potential number of housing units that would be realized in the event the area is annexed. Phyllis McKee expressed concern about the fact that Alternative B leaves S. Yew St. out of the UGA, even though development already exists in this area. Ali Taysi noted that a lot of policy currently exists in the comprehensive plan related to infill and the creation of affordable housing; however, the implementation of those things are what is lacking. He expressed concern about the urban service issue and the increased burden that will be placed upon the community if we continue to delay planning for these areas. Jeff Brown explained what he meant by "triggers" in his motion, and how that would provide the Council will many options for annexation when land is needed in the future. Steve Crooks mentioned that the discussion occurring actually supports Alternative C. He stated that S. Yew St. should remain in the UGA Reserve and noted that the single-family units that would be developed in this area will be expensive to build given the topography. He pointed out that the Caitac property should be included in the UGA as the development on this site could provide for some much needed affordable housing options. There was a brief discussion about the Annexation Phasing Plan and the reasons behind staff's recommendation to not include the S. Yew Street area in the UGA, even though there is agreement that it should be part of the City. Staff explained the Annexation Phasing Plan identifies the potential build out Final Copy - 5 and the improvements needed for each area in the UGA; however, it does not speak to when the annexations should occur. Staff stated that with regard to the S. Yew St. area, there are currently no mechanisms available to recover any of the costs, and it would just add to the deficiencies that already exist. Garrett O'Brien commented on the physical constraints on the City of Bellingham, and the fact that even if these two areas were included in the UGA, the impact on the single-family housing crisis would be very slight. VOTE: MOTION FAILS 3 - 4 (Mckee, Noah, Crooks and Taysi opposed). MOTION: Steve Crooks / Garrett O'Brien moved to direct staff to prepare Alternative C for consideration with some language that indicates what would trigger additional land being placed into the UGA from the UGA Reserve. Ali Taysi reiterated the concern that if the land is not included in the UGA, the planning for them will continue to be ignored. Jeff Brown pointed out that one thing to consider, as it relates to the increasing cost of annexing certain areas that have existing deficiencies, is the fact that the City may have a larger tax base in the future which would help to offset the total cost passed to the citizens to address those deficiencies. He stated that he is not in favor of holding both subject areas off for 20 years, and the triggers were meant to hold off the required planning efforts until there is an emanate need for the land. VOTE: MOTION FAILS 3 - 4 (Brown, Grinstad, O'Brien, Noah opposed) Cerise Noah suggested that the Commission consider looking at the bigger picture and planning for more people so that the City is adequately ready to serve them all. Jeff Brown brought up the consequences of over-planning. He stated that he does not feel that the mid- to high- population projection of Alternative D is supported by the public. MOTION: Ali Taysi / Garrett O'Brien moved to direct staff to prepare Alternative B and Alternative C for consideration with some language that indicates what would trigger additional land being placed into the UGA from the UGA Reserve. VOTE: MOTION PASSES 7-0 OLD / NEW BUSINESS NEXT MEETING: June 4, 2015 - Work Session for the continued discussion on the Critical Areas Ordinance update. ADJOURNED: 9:20 p.m. Minutes prepared by: _____________________________ Heather Aven, Recording Secretary Final Copy - 6 Minutes edited by Planning Commission members and various Planning Staff. Final Copy - 7