Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity/County Planning Board Minutes 07.10.2014 Minutes of the City /County Planning Board July 10, 2014 6:00 pm Council Chambers Members Present: Kathy Siegrist, Chairman Dan Koch, City Rep. Dick Fritzler, County Rep. Judy Goldsby, County Rep. Lee Richardson, County Rep. Greg Nelson, Member -at -Large Others Present: Monica Plecker, Planning Director Chairman Siegrist opened the meeting at 6:04. Roll Call: Members present were: Koch, Fritzler, Goldsby, Richardson, Nelson and Siegrist. Approval of Minutes: A motion was made by Dan Koch to approve the minutes of June 5, 2014 as submitted. The motion was seconded by Judy Goldsby. The motion carried by a vote of 6 - 0. New business: Figgins Zone Change Chairman Siegrist opened the public hearing and asked staff to introduce the topic. Monica stated that George Figgins has submitted an application for a zone change. The affected property is located along Figgins Circle. The property currently has two zoning designations, Residential Manufactured Homes and Highway Commercial. The applicant is requesting the RMH zoned portion be zoned Highway Commercial. The staff findings were presented: 1. LMC 17.72.030 requires a preapplication conference for persons or parties interested in submitting an application for zone change. A preapplication meeting was held prior to submission of the application. 2. A portion of the property is zoned Residential Manufactured Homes and the remaining portion is zoned Highway Commercial. The application is seeking to change the Residential Manufactured Homes zoning designation to Highway Commercial. A map is attached. 3. The property is 1.27 acres. 4. The lot is currently vacant and the proposed use would be for a multi - purpose shop facility. 5. As per the requirements of LMC 17.72.070, a public hearing on the matter shall be held before the zoning commission before being heard by the Laurel City Council. As per B. of the section, public notice was published in the Laurel Outlook and adjacent property owners were notified by certified mail more than 15 days prior to the public hearing. 1 Chairman Siegrist invited the applicant to present the action sought. Proponents: Patsy Hutsell of 1306 Old Highway 10 presented on behalf of the applicant, George Figgins. She said the neighboring property owner was interested in purchasing the property to place a shop or garage on the one acre he is interested in buying. She presented a plat of the property. Chairman Siegrist opened the public comment portion of the public hearing. She presented the procedure for commenting and asked three times for proponents supporting this item. George Figgins, 50 Figgins Circle, stated that he intended to sell the property to Dan Hughes who would use the property for a shop. Joan Torres, 40 Figgins Circle, stated she does not see a problem with a commercial shop building on the property. Kathy also stated that there were two written statements being submitted by the proponents identified earlier that were being added to the record. Opponents: Chairman Siegrist asked 3 times if there were any opponents not in support of the application. There were none. Chairman Siegrist asked the Planning Board members if they had any questions for the applicant or staff. Dick Fritzler asked how the property was accessed. It looks like it is close to 1 -90 on ramp. Monica stated that the access to the property is off of Figgins Circle and the Interstate has no bearing to this application. The public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Judy Goldsby to approve the zone change request. The motion was seconded by Lee Richardson. Chairman Siegrist asked if there was any discussion. Greg Nelson stated that because the lot is further back on the property and is not on a paved road he assumes the proposed shop built onto the property will not bring in traffic and will always be a private hobby shop for the property owner. Dan asked if the proposed shop could be called a garage instead of a shop and still be allowed. Monica stated that he is not allowed to just build a garage because it is considered an accessory building and cannot be built without a primary residence being built. In order for a garage to be built for 2 automotive work the zone would have to be something that allows automotive shops and Highway Commercial zone allows automotive shops. There was brief discussion on the uses allowed in LMC 17.10.020. After discussion it was noted by the Planning Board that the zone change will not make a noticeable impact to the neighborhood. The motion was voted on and passed by a vote of 6 -0. Design Standards: At the last Planning Board meeting Monica handed out a draft document titled "City of Laurel Urban Renewal District Downtown and SE 4 Overlay District Design Standard?' for the boards review and comments. Monica did receive a few comments and listed them out on a Memo that was sent to the Planning Board in their July agenda packets. Monica stated that the Tax Increment Finance District (TIFD) program was started in the city a few years ago. TIFD funds can be used for the betterment of the business districts. Laurel Urban Renewal Agency (LURA) is in charge of making recommendations for how TIFD money gets distributed back into the district. If the amount is over $5,000 the City Council steps in to approve LURA's recommendation. There are 2 members of LURA, Judy Goldsby and Shirley McDermott that are on the Planning Board. While that does not create a conflict of interest it does need to be known to the group that there are 2 members that are behind the development of this document. Steve Zeier from Zeier Consultants was hired to work on a Design Standards draft within the TIFD. Through working with LURA and also city staff this is the draft Steve has come up with. Monica would like the board to consider the staff recommendations. Steve Zeier spoke. He stated the Overlay District has two distinctively different districts; the Downtown District and the SE 4t Street District. To enhance and protect the needs of both of these two different geographic areas the regulations have been tailored for each district. The regulations are designed to be flexible so as not to discourage business owners but to promote growth of the area. Steve went through the questions that the Board members had. 1. For an existing property, what is the threshold that would trigger conforming to the overlay district? Steve stated that this is not in the code language and it will be up to the discretion of the Planning Board and the City Council to set the threshold. Monica stated that there is a code that states in the event of a catastrophe the threshold is based off of the value of the property and the value of the improvement. Monica believes there is language in Laurel code that talks about catastrophes that is based off the value of the property and the value of the improvement. Monica suggested that further research be done on this and the percentage in the design standard should match what is in the International building code and zoning. 3 After more discussion it was suggested that the trigger be based on the value of the improvement. 2. How do these standards apply to apartment buildings or dwellings in the district? These standards would apply to buildings or dwellings in the district except for 1 and 2 family dwellings which are exempt from this. At this time any 1 or 2 family dwellings that are built within a commercial district are required to follow the guidelines set for the Residential Limited Multi - Family zone. After more discussion Monica suggested that the trigger be based on the value of the improvements. 3. Light and Heavy Industrial Businesses — How do these standards apply to the nature of these businesses. The nature of a commercial business is very different from that of a heavy industrial business. As it is written the design standards would apply to Light and Heavy Industrial businesses. Because the two zones differ highly from the downtown business and SE 4 District the question is how to separate them from each other. Monica stated she is contemplating the idea of giving Light and Heavy Industrial their own sections because they do differ from other businesses. The possibility of so many requirements being placed on these types of businesses could keep them from establishing businesses in Laurel. There was also discussion on transparency and how it would fit within a building such as Thomae Lumber that is located in the downtown commercial district and has both a store front and a warehouse. This is where Monica feels that Light and Heavy Industrial businesses need their own section with fewer requirements. 4. Language regarding facades — all facades? Only front? Side adjacent to street? All sides? Language should be consistent as it relates to expression lines, design elements and transparency requirements. The definition of facade on page 9 was questioned and discussed. The definition of facade states that it is the exterior of the building. That could be interpreted as being all four sides of the building. Steve Zeier stated that the intent of the definition was never to consider the facade as all four sides. Monica stated everywhere the word facade is mentioned the intent needs to be clarified. Chairman Siegrist stated that the definition for expression line needs to be better clarified as well. 5. Transparency requirements — How does this work for industrial businesses. This was discussed under Question number 3. 4 6. Shared Parking — how does this work and who enforces it? How to avoid the City being involved in civil issues between property owners. Steve stated that there is language within the document that talks about shared parking between property owners. The property owners will be required to create their own agreement with each other as the city cannot get involved in civil matters. Steve and Monica thanked the board for all of the time they spent on this important document. There will be another draft of this that will be reviewed at the August 7, 2014 Planning Board meeting. New Business: Bylaws Discussion Monica does not have a completed draft of the Bylaws yet but did state one of the proposals is to lower the board from 11 members to 9 members. This will be discussed at the October 2, 2014 meeting. Old Business: None Miscellaneous: The next meeting will be August 7, 2014. There are several major items on the agenda that will require a quorum. Public Comment on non - agenda items: None The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 pm. Respectfully submitted, Cheryl) Lund, Secretary 5