Planning Commission

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF BELLINGHAM, WASHINGTON Thursday 7:00 PM February 21, 2019 City Council Chambers Video Recorded www.cob.org Call to Order / Roll Call Present: Ali Taysi, Garrett O’Brien, Steve Crooks, Phyllis McKee, Lisa Anderson and Mike Estes Absent: Iris Maute-Gibson Approval of Minutes MOTION: The minutes for January 24, January 31 and February 7, 2019 were submitted for consideration and approved by general consensus. Public Comment Period Opportunity for citizens to speak informally to the Planning Commissioners on any subject not listed on the agenda. Speakers are allowed a MAXIMUM of three (3) minutes to address the Commission. Speakers will not be required to disclose their address. No public testimony given. PUBLIC HEARING Waterfront District Subarea Plan Amendments STAFF PRESENTATION Brian Gouran, Port of Bellingham spoke to the existing Waterfront District conditions and shared some of the progress that has occurred over the past 10 years, as well as the ongoing efforts. He shared some of the rationale for minor road alignment modifications that have already occurred and presented some of the information that was gleaned from the charrette that was held in October, 2017. He explained that the plan amendments are really focused on layout changes for roads, parks and view corridors, the amendments are not intended to change policy goals. Greg Aucutt explained that many parts of the existing Subarea Plan will remain the same and reiterated that the proposed amendments are focused on the downtown waterfront area. He stated that staff does believe the proposed amendments support and address the goals included in the Comprehensive Plan and meets the review criteria. He reviewed the two policy statements that staff propose be included in the subarea plan. PUBLIC COMMENT Betsy Pernotto, Jobs with Justice stated that the agency she is representing is interested in a developed waterfront that is clean, prosperous and equitable. She encouraged staff to strengthen the Waterfront Subarea Plan with regard to labor standards and affordable housing. She stated that a requirement that 15% of jobs be allocated to apprenticeships in the construction trade be included in plan, in an effort to create additional living-wage jobs. She also noted that steps should be taken to ensure that the required 10% affordable housing units be developed sooner rather than later to help address the housing crisis. George Dyson pointed out that this plan is proposing major changes to the view corridors. He spoke to the importance of having an infrastructure plan in place prior to development, not only for multi-model uses, but waterway and rail transportation as well. Todd Lagestee spoke to the lack of reference related to public safety in the subarea plan. He specifically called out the lack of information regarding tsunamis, and commented on the importance of future development considering this when building along the waterfront. He also pointed out that this development will be occurring on fill and expressed concern as to how this type of ground will handle an earthquake. He suggested that additional language be included in the plan that speaks to these threats, as well as the measures necessary to keep the public safe. Stephanie Celt, BlueGreen Alliance provided the following suggestions for the plan: 1) with regard to the proposed regulatory changes related to the adaptive reuse of the Board Mill building - those amendments should include provisions to ensure that work is done in accordance with high-energy efficiency standards, and a skilled work force should be utilized. 2) She also encouraged the inclusion of language placing emphasis on the importance of using clean and healthy building materials, in an effort to reduce the carbon footprint and help to keep the workers safe. 3) She commented on the benefits of work force standards in general. Eddie Ury, Resource for Sustainable Communities commented on the development regulations. He noted that although there is an affordable housing component, the existing regulations are not sufficient to achieve the goals that are set in the plan. He pointed out that the regulations do not go far enough to reach a high standard of sustainable building. He encouraged staff to revisit the different documents in an effort to make sure future development is built to the highest standard. Darcie Nielsen, Nielsen Brothers expressed concern related to the current configuration of Cornwall Avenue. She stated that at the point where the road ends near the Nielsen Brothers business, the road is eroding and the shoreline is getting closer and closer. Steve Walker spoke to the language in the plan regarding the site, that the Port’s maintenance shop currently sits on, redeveloping in the future. He noted that the maintenance shop sits on State aquatic land, owned by the citizens of WA, and explained the different purposes the land should be used for. He noted that a maritime center could be a great addition to this area of suggested that the "if" be changed to "when", so that it is recognized what the future could hold. Tim Johnson, Cascadia Weekly pointed out that setback requirements are being proposed for deletion from this plan. He stated that the City Council was concerned that there would be stepbacks, and this plan seems to be different from that direction. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS / QUESTIONS There was a discussion about the proposed modifications to the required stepbacks. Staff explained that the stepbacks were for aesthetic purposes, and as development standards have been updated for the urban villages, it has been realized that the same end result can occur through architectural design, which also allows for more creativity and flexibility. There was a brief conversation on the rationale for the changes in the road orientation. Brian explained that the main reason the roads were reconfigured was for the proposed reuse of the Board Mill Building. He also pointed out that it was done in an effort to utilize the space without the constraints of the previous layout, and be able to meet the intended goal of mixed-use re-development found in the original plan. The Commission would like additional discussion on the following topics: 1) FAR bonuses 2) Ways to ensure the affordable housing will be built as the units are developed, rather than all at the end. 3) Include an affordable housing definition 4) Changes to infrastructure - how does it impact the rest of the site 5) Docks - who will be responsible and what will they be used for 6) Water accessibility 7) Landscape - native vegetation be less suggestive and more regulatory 8) Public safety - what will be required of the future development 9) Public safety - what does the support services for the future development look like (police, fire, etc...) 10) Access/connectivity to the Log Pond 11) Trails and connections 12) Recreational marijuana - will it be an allowed use 13) Rail transportation / station Old/New Business Adjournment Minutes prepared by: ____________________________________________ Heather Aven, Recording Secretary Minutes edited by Planning Commission members and various Planning Staff.