Planning Commission

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF BELLINGHAM, WASHINGTON THURSDAY WORK SESSION 7:00 P.M. March 31, 2016 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 Lisa Anderson Present: Ali Taysi, Tom Grinstad, Jeff Brown, Phyllis McKee, Steve Crooks and Lisa Anderson Absent: Garrett O'Brien Staff Present: Greg Aucutt, Assistant Planning Director; Lisa Pool, Senior Planner; Chris Koch, Planner II; Leslie Bryson, Parks Department Director; Julia Burns, Parks Planner; and Heather Aven, Recording Secretary. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes were approved, by general consensus, for February 18 and March 17, 2016. 15 MINUTE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD Brad Burdick, Mt. Baker Theatre noted that next year will be the theater's 90th Anniversary. He provided some history on the theater and pointed out that the operation of the theater occurs in joint partnership with the City. He spoke to the number of visitors that come to the theater in a year, and commented on the impact that this has on the community. Jeff Kochman, Barkley Co. referenced the written comment that has been submitted and noted the changes that he has seen take place in the various comprehensive plan chapters. He mentioned that he would be available to field any questions that might come up through the Commission's work on the plan. WORK SESSION Review the updates to the draft Community Design Chapter and Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan. PARKS, RECREATION and OPEN SPACE PLAN (PRO PLAN) STAFF PRESENTATION: Leslie Bryson introduced the PRO Plan and explained the reasons this chapter is different from the other components of the Comprehensive Plan. She said the chapter will be revised again in 2020 to remain eligible for state grant funding. She pointed out that, due to the limited number of edits, a red-lined version was provided - except for Chapter 4, which was a total rewrite. Julia Burns reviewed the four requirements of the Growth Management Act that must be included in the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan. She reviewed the key updates to the plan and commented on the fact that the needs and demand analysis includes more of a focus on equitable distribution and Draft Copy - 1 making sure everyone has equal access to parks and trails (within a half mile walking distance of where people live). Leslie Bryson spoke to the proposed facilities and pointed out where some of the gaps exist. She clarified that the half-mile level of service benchmark does not apply to open spaces, given the nature of that amenity. She discussed how many acres of parkland exist in the City and stated that over the next 20 years, it is proposed that an additional 203 acres of land be required. She also shared the projected funding and expenditures and noted that it is important that the City maintain a plan that the community can pay for. She also discussed some of the edits that occurred after the packet was distributed. PUBLIC COMMENT Jeff Kochman, Barkley Co. referenced the written comment he has submitted and called out the proposed idea of including Barkley's trails and open space in the PRO Plan to allow for a more complete picture of what is available to the community. He spoke to impact fees and suggested that they be more targeted. He pointed out where some of the trails his company has created exist and explained why his company would like to maintain ownership of the trails and public space. PLANNING COMMISSION QUESTIONS / COMMENTS: There was a discussion about including private parks / trails in the PRO Plan. Leslie Bryson explained that private property with public access easements are included in the plan. Without a public access easement, the park/trail cannot be guaranteed to be available to the public. She said that credits for parks impact fees can be negotiated with a parks impact fee ordinance. Brief conversations were held on use of parks by the homeless. Staff said that the mayor is committed to finding housing for those who want it. The adopt-a-trail program was also discussed. Some comments were made on the length of the plan and the need to reduce some of the repetition in goals and policies. A suggestion was made to consider a more detailed clean-up of the plan for the next update in 2020. Concern was expressed about how the City would provide the proposed funding for facilities in the event another Greenways Levy was not passed by the community. Staff addressed the concern and explained that the Levy is not the only funding source for parks and trails. If the next Greenways Levy is not passed, the City would try to implement the priority projects and work with developers through parks impact fees, as well. Staff said that funding for improvements to Maritime Heritage Park is also including in the recreation budget. This includes improvements such as vegetation management, a new single- use restroom, increased use of the City-owned building in the park, and park stewards, and summer concerts. A discussion occurred about funding for maintenance. Staff said that about 10 years ago when open space was dedicated to the City, parks would maintain the property (e.g. wetlands with trees). The City no longer accepts those properties unless they're in the plan. There are a lot of strategies, in addition to the Greenways Levy, to fund maintenance, including a metropolitan parks district. Parks maintenance levels will go down if the money isn't there. Parks impact fees can't be used on maintenance. COMMUNITY DESIGN CHAPTER STAFF PRESENTATION: Draft Copy - 2 Chris Koch reviewed the different components of the Community Design Chapter and the proposed changes as they relate to the five focus areas. PLANNING COMMISSION QUESTIONS / COMMENTS: There was a discussion on how the design of a building and its surroundings can affect fire truck access and staging areas (second to last bullet point on page 4), and staff stated they would consider simplifying / revising the language. It was also suggested to eliminate the last bullet on page 4 due to the fact that it Policy CD-27 is similar. There was a discussion about sign standards, specifically the terms "encourage" and "discourage" in the policies. Staff explained that having this subject included in the Comprehensive Plan will provide support for future code amendments. Concern was expressed about signs that pose a distraction to drivers, such as those along Lakeway and the Guide Meridian. Staff stated that the City does have sign regulations, but some standards aren't enforced and certain sign issues are not currently regulated (e.g. visual clutter). With regard to electronic signs, it was suggested that they continue to be allowed. There was a question about how the goal to provide outdoor dining areas can be accomplished, if the design standards require the development to be built to the sidewalk. Staff responded that the design standards allow alternatives if the intent of the area is to promote / encourage placemaking. There was concern expressed with regard to the design standards becoming overly prescriptive. It was requested that some allowances be provided to accommodate for creativity and flexibility, so that a vibrant community can be created. The opposite view was also voiced, stating that standards / guidelines are a way to provide predictability to the community and to avoid poor design (e.g. the Guide Meridian). It was noted that a lot of the additions to the chapter are positive, such as the promotion of native species and solar access. Staff acknowledged the discussion points and stated that the chapter includes policies related to design variety. Also, the Comprehensive Plan is a policy guide for implementation, not the actual design standards or regulations. There was also a discussion about the various policies in the Comprehensive Plan and the fact that any project could be supported by them. A counter-point was offered, noting that it's good to have a mix of viewpoints in a Comprehensive Plan, as everybody has a different lens through which they view projects. It's the job of the Commission and City Council to make decisions based on the merits of projects. GENERAL BUSINESS NEXT MEETING - April 7th: A public hearing on the draft Bellingham Comprehensive Plan. ADJOURNED: 9:30 p.m. Minutes prepared by: _____________________________ Heather Aven, Recording Secretary Minutes edited by Planning Commission members and various Planning Staff. Draft Copy - 3