Planning Commission

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF BELLINGHAM, WASHINGTON THURSDAY WORK SESSION 7:00 P.M. October 20, 2016 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 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, Garrett O'Brien, Tom Grinstad, Jeff Brown, Steve Crooks, Phyllis McKee and Lisa Anderson Absent: Steve Crooks and Phyllis McKee Staff Present: Rick Sepler, Director of Planning and Community Development Department (PCDD); Kurt Nabbefeld, PCDD Development Services Manager; Kathy Bell; Senior Planner; Renee LaCroix, Assistant Director - PW Natural Resources; Brent Baldwin, PW Development Services Manager; Jason Porter, PW Stormwater Development Manager and Heather Aven, Recording Secretary. Guests: AHBL Staff - Ryan Givens and Collin Poff APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes from September 1, 2016 were approved by general consensus. 15 MINUTE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD Bill Geyer addressed the idea of regulatory reform. He outlined three principles that, in his opinion, should be kept front and center: 1) the development regulations adopted should permit and allow for the density that is defined by the zoning to be achieved; 2) be certain the development regulations are is internally and externally integrated; 3) provide for regulations that have an expedient review, clear decision-making authority, transparency for everyone and a clear path for appeal. WORK SESSION #1 The purpose of this work session is to provide the Planning Commission and general public an introduction to Low Impact Development (LID) principles and upcoming code amendments that will incorporate these principles into city regulations. STAFF INTRODUCTION: Kurt Nabbefeld introduced the agenda item and briefly spoke to the Commission about the NPDES permit, and the requirement to ensure the municipal code contains low-impact development (LID) strategies. PRESENTATION: Ryan Givens pointed out that the 2013-2018 Western WA Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit is driving the updates to the code. He shared the LID principles and explained that the code will be reviewed to decide what, if any, changes will need to be made to achieve the principles. He also shared the project schedule and the approach that will be taken. Final Copy - 1 Colin Poff indicated that low-impact development is a two-promise strategy related to both storm water and land-use. He explained how the City is addressing compliance with regard to storm water and pointed out that the proposed revisions to Titles 13, 15, 16, 18 and 20 in the code will address land use. He shared some of the attributes of LID and how they can benefit the community. He spoke to how the City might integrate the LID principles and BMPs into the code. PLANNING COMMISSION QUESTIONS / COMMENTS: There was concern expressed for the catch-basins that are installed around the City and then never maintained, and how that might also occur with the proposed swales in residential areas.  Rene LaCroix explained that the City would provide education on how to work with and maintain the new LID practices that are being required. A brief discussion ensued regarding the existing stormwater retention ponds and what, if anything, will be done to retrofit those ponds and make them more LID compliant.  Rene LaCroix noted that the first priority would be to bring storm water treatment options to those areas of the City that were developed before any regulations were implemented, prior to retrofitting any of the existing facilities.  Kurt Nabbefeld commented on the issues that could be faced when retrofitting an existing stormwater pond. He requested that the consultants consider language that could be added to the code, as an intent statement, that would indicate when retrofitting an existing facility would make sense. There was a brief conversation about whether or not amendments related to street standards will be included in this code update.  Brent Baldwin explained that at this time, much of Title 13 pertaining to the street standards will remain the same. He stated that a separate process will occur in the future which will allow for staff to make the directives more clear and understandable to the public. The November 10th public hearing and open house were announced. Public Comment Linda Twitchell expressed her concern about impervious surfaces and how the aging population would be able to traverse those. She hoped there would be additional LID options. Bill Geyer stated there are some key components for those that have built a storm water facility. He encouraged the Commissioners to consider the following components when reviewing the proposed amendments in November: 1) priorities of watersheds; 2) ownership of the facility; 3) maintaining versus retrofitting given the fact that the citizens pay a drainage tax which provides 1/3 of the monies to education, 1/3 to new facilities and 1/3 to maintenance of existing facilities. Final Copy - 2 WORK SESSION #2 At this work session staff will provide the Planning Commission with a broad overview of the Key Issues Matrix and to request guidance as to which of those issues should be incorporated into the updated Subdivision Ordinance. STAFF PRESENTATION: Kathy Bell reviewed the topics listed on the Draft Key Issues Matrix and highlighted those that were discussed in the greatest detail during both the steering and subdivision committee meetings. The Commissioners offered comment and discussion for each one as they were introduced. There was general consensus to move forward as staff recommended on all the issues listed on the matrix, with additional comments on: Pipestems Lots: There was concern expressed that land-locked parcels would be created with the only access to those lots occurring via an easement. Staff clarified the roles of the property owners and the City as it relates to the easement agreement. Site Analysis: There was a brief discussion on what threshold needed to be reached before the site analysis would be required. Staff stated this idea is still being researched, and noted that these types of questions are what will be considered. It was suggested that it be totally acceptable for long plats and some short plats, but questioned its relevance for smaller development. There was concern expressed about the burdens potentially placed upon the property owners and having non-stakeholders making the decisions on what they can / cannot develop on their land. Lot Averaging: There was a suggestion to have a discussion about reducing the 90% of the required minimum lot size requirement to 80%, or a combination of the two. Preliminary Plats - Phasing: It was pointed out that maintaining the vested rights related to unit yield for the property owners are important. It was also mentioned that the capital facilities need to be identified early on in the planning process. Cluster Subdivisions / Minimum Cluster Provisions to include Infill Toolkit: There was support for this to be used in greenfield development and examples for this type of development were requested. It was suggested that parameters for this type of development be laid out as well. Public Comment Linda Twitchell, BIAWC noted that discretionary action by staff has always been a concern, and the Commission should be cautious of this when reviewing the ordinance. She commented on the interest for co-housing projects, and pointed out the barriers that they face. She questioned if the Subdivision Ordinance could address this.  Staff stated that typically co-housing is not a subdivision process, and although it would be allowed under the Ordinance - it is not a development.  Linda noted that the public is asking for the approach to be reversed, and have the projects be developer driven. She requested that this change be considered in the updates to the Ordinance. Final Copy - 3 GENERAL BUSINESS NEXT MEETING - November 10 ADJOURNED: p.m. Minutes prepared by: _____________________________ Heather Aven, Recording Secretary Minutes edited by Planning Commission members and various Planning Staff. Final Copy - 4