Planning Commission

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF BELLINGHAM, WASHINGTON Thursday 7:00 PM January 31, 2019 City Council Chambers Video Recorded www.cob.org Call to Order / Roll Call Present: Ali Taysi (Chair), Mike Estes (Vice Chair), Lisa Anderson (Commissioner), Steve Crooks (Commissioner), Iris Maute-Gibson (Commissioner), Garrett O'Brien (Commissioner) Absent: Phyllis McKee (Commissioner) Approval of Minutes There were no minutes submitted for approval. Public Comment Period JR spoke to the Commission about the Winter Haven temporary shelter model. He mentioned that good management and clear rules that everyone, including management, are required to follow must be in place in order for establishments like this to work. PUBLIC HEARING Interim Housing STAFF PRESENTATION Lisa Pool provided an overview of the interim housing process to date and spoke to some of the key issues that have been discussed over the past few months. She also briefly discussed the next steps. PUBLIC COMMENT Kevin Moore expressed his support for the ordinance and commented on the importance of balancing the need to both shelter the homeless and maintain the integrity of the land use code. He spoke to the work of the Lighthouse Mission and expressed his support for co-located structures; however, he did not feel this is the only way that the homeless issue can, or should, be addressed. He shared that although he supports the housing first model, he also believes that it should be dispersed throughout the city with a range of shelter sizes. Jim Peterson, HomesNOW! spoke to a few amendments he would like to see made to the Temporary Shelter Ordinance: 1) No active warrants - he believes that this restriction should only pertain to violent warrants. 2) 24/7 staffing requirement - he believes that this should not be mandated, as the residents are very invested and manage themselves well. 3) No onsite intakes - he suggested that this requirement be removed. Bridget Reeves, Lighthouse Mission Ministry addressed the comments in her written testimony and shared some of the things that the Lighthouse Mission Ministry values being able to do for the unsheltered residents of our community. Emily O'Conner, Lydia Place commented on the importance of putting regulations in place; however, cautioned against adding unnecessary barriers. She identified the active warrant restriction as one example and explained that this language in the ordinance could bring about unintended consequences. She encouraged that staff consider allowing each proposed project to be reviewed on its own merit to determine if it meets the criteria and write the components outlined in the ordinance so that they can be flexible. She emphasized that good working relationships with their neighbors is what every provider wants to have. Robin Meyer, Northwest Youth Services reiterated the importance of considering the rights of the unhoused individuals when deciding which regulations to include in the ordinance. She stated that the established agencies value good relationships with their neighbors and suggested that language in the ordinance regarding noticing continue to be recommended and not required. She suggested that staff consider putting some of the requirements outlined in the ordinance into the operations plan requirements, which would then allow for conversation and flexibility. Hans Erchinger-Davis, Lighthouse Mission Ministry expressed concern over the 250-beds per square mile restriction and shared some of his concerns about the growth of homelessness in our community and this cap limiting his agency's opportunities for expansion to address the need. He also shared some of the surrounding programs within a mile of the Lighthouse Mission not being able to provide the service any longer because of this cap. Karen Phillips expressed concern that as the ordinance is written, any expansion of the Lighthouse Mission’s programs would not be allowed. She discouraged the use of the term "unsightliness" in the ordinance. Kelly Owen spoke to the escalation of homelessness in our community. She noted that although smaller scattered shelters are necessary, they will not do enough to address the housing crisis Bellingham is facing. She commented on the cap of 250 beds per square mile and expressed her opposition for this regulation. She pointed out that the requirement to keep and share a log of residents with law enforcement upon request, would detour some unsheltered persons from seeking they agency's assistance. Elaine Woods stated that the larger establishments should be required to have the 24-hour monitoring; however, those with smaller numbers might be able to self-monitor. She suggested that the ordinance state the services are free. Staff responded to the public comments and stated that the ordinance covers a spectrum of shelters with various occupant levels in an effort to assess programs on a case-by-case basis, the ordinance allows for administrative departures from some of the stated regulations. Staff also explained that, in an effort to help ensure that there is dispersion of facilities throughout the community, the cap of 250 beds per square mile was included. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS / QUESTIONS It was clarified that programs offered via a church are accessory to the work of that establishment and would not be considered part of the 250 bed cap, nor would they be subject to the ordinance. It was also clarified that the ordinance allows for administrative departures, which could mean that a use, if deemed reasonable and appropriate, could be approved even though it exceeded the 250 bed cap. There was a discussion about how design standards could be used to help address some of the community's concerns surrounding the larger facilities, specifically those that allow for intake on site. There was opposition expressed related to the dispersion requirement. It was suggested that the intensity of the use be considered rather than a number of occupants. It was also pointed out that many of the shelter facilities do not have the same impact on the community as the drop-in center does, and the cap could be very restrictive and limiting. There was a brief discussion about the warrant regulations stated in the ordinance and some Commissioners stated they felt these were violations of privacy laws. It was also pointed out that it could cause mis-trust for the agencies who are trying to assist the individual. It was also pointed out that notification to the adjacent neighbors regarding those individuals with warrants or sex offender status that are obtaining shelter, should also be considered. The Commission requested additional information on: - What a felony warrant would encompass - Law enforcement input on the need for reporting and the level of involvement with existing agencies - Are current providers housing unregistered sex offenders, and if not, who are they working with to take care of that legal obligation? It was suggested that the requirement related to drug and alcohol use be clarified to say "on-site" use. Staff stated that the on-site behaviors and the safety of the other occupants also must be considered through this requirement. One solution stated would be to promote good management plans to address some of the issues that are listed under the regulations. There was a discussion on requirement Q and it was suggested that this be part of the management plan versus being listed separately in the ordinance. If it remains listed in the ordinance, it was suggested that the reference to " including all outdoor recreation areas" be removed. <BREAK> There was a discussion on the proposed changes to the use table that Commissioner Maute-Gibson submitted to the group. - She suggested that the "larger interim housing" be changed from not allowed to a Type III-A process in Residential Single zones. There was not general consensus for this change. - There was support for the proposed changes to not only separate out the Residential Transition Areas, but also for the proposed type indicators. - There was a brief discussion on the use types that would be appropriate in the Residential Multi areas; however, no general consensus was presented. Staff indicated that the direction they heard from the Commission was: 1) Consider differentiating smaller, less intensive facilities from the mid-range to larger facilities 2) Certain standards should not be applicable to all facilities 3) Include some of the separate requirements in the Operations Plan It was also pointed out that dispersion and warrant / ID requirements, as well as, the caution against unnecessary barriers creating unintended consequences were also discussed. Old/New Business Adjournment Minutes prepared by: ____________________________________________ Heather Aven, Recording Secretary Minutes edited by Planning Commission members and various Planning Staff.