CITY OF NEWCASTLE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 12835 NEWCASTLE WAY, SUITE 200 JANUARY 27, 2016 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. FLAG SALUTE 4. ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS Individuals may speak for three minutes, and representatives of organizations for five minutes. Please approach the podium and state your name and city of residence prior to comment. 6. COMMISSION COMMENTS 7. REPORTS a. Commission Chair b. Commission Subcommittee c. Community Development Director 8. APPROVAL OF FINAL AGENDA 9. REVIEW OF MINUTES a. December 17, 2015 10. GENERAL BUSINESS a. Energize Eastside Presentation Coalition of Eastside Neighborhoods for Sensible Energy (CENSE) and Citizens for Sane Eastside Energy (CSEE) Twenty (20) minute presentation by CENSE and CSEE on the proposed Energize Eastside project. Followed by ten (10) minutes of questions and answers from the Commission.
b. Comprehensive Plan Amendments to Land Use and Transportation Elements Staff Conduct a public hearing, review, discuss and forward a recommendation to City Council on the Comprehensive Plan amendments. Note: Staff is recommending that the Comprehensive Plan Amendments public hearing be continued to February 24. c. Briefing: Introduction of Critical Areas Ordinance Update Staff Review and discuss an introduction to the Newcastle Critical Areas Regulations and the proposed process to complete the required update. 11. PUBLIC COMMENT 12. PLANNING CALENDAR a. Regular Planning Commission Meeting Wednesday, February 24, 2016, 7 p.m. 12. COMMISSION COMMENTS 13. ADJOURNMENT The City of Newcastle strives to accommodate persons with disabilities and City Hall is ADA accessible. Please contact the City Clerk s Office by Noon on any meeting date for assistance at 425.649.4444 X-102. City Council Meetings are audio recorded. Tim McHarg COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Charlie Gadzik Orville McDonald Stacy Lynch Karin Blakley Jackie Stone Tom Magers Jessica Sellers COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 27, 2016 COMMISSION ELECTION TOTAL PAGES: 2 EXHIBITS: TITLE: Election of Chair and Vice Chair ORIGINATING DEPT: City Clerk SUMMARY: Commissioners will elect a Chair and Vice Chair to serve for the next two years. Election Procedure The following procedure is from pages two and three of the Newcastle City Council Rules of Procedure approved May 19, 2015, by Council Resolution 2015-615. 1. The City Clerk presides over the first part of the meeting as the Chair Pro Tempore. 2. The Chair Pro Tempore will call for nominations for Chair. Nominate someone by raising your hand, and after recognized, state I nominate. No second required. 3. If two or more people raise their hands at the same time, nominations will be taken in reverse position number. For example, if Commissioner Position 1 and Commissioner Position 7 raise their hands at the same time, Commissioner Position 7 goes first. 4. A Commissioner cannot nominate more than one person until every Commissioner who wants to nominate someone has had a chance to. 5. If a Commissioner is nominated and doesn t want to serve, please decline the nomination immediately by raising your hand, being recognized to speak, and stating your declination. 6. The Chair Pro Tempore will call for nominations until it appears nominations have ceased and then twice more. Then the Chair Pro Tempore will officially close the nominations. 7. Each candidate has three minutes to speak if he or she wishes, in the order nominated. The Chair Pro Tempore will recognize each Commissioner prior to their time for speaking. The speeches will be timed. 8. The Chair Pro Tempore will conduct a vote by a showing of hands. Abstentions are not permitted. A tie vote results in a failed candidacy.
9. When a simple majority votes in favor of a nominee, the Chair Pro Tempore will declare him or her elected and voting ceases. 10. This procedure is then used to elect the Vice Chair. 11. The new Chair may choose to preside over the election of the Vice Chair, or may choose to direct the City Clerk to conduct it. Additional Situations 1. If none of the nominees receives a majority, the whole process starts over. 2. A tie vote results in a failed candidacy. 3. If after three rounds of voting, nobody is elected, the previous Vice Chair will be acting Chair. 4. An election will be held at each subsequent meeting until someone is elected.
CITY OF NEWCASTLE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 16, 2015 NEWCASTLE CITY HALL 12835 NEWCASTLE WAY, SUITE 200 NEWCASTLE, WA 98056 The following is not a verbatim transcript. An audio recording of the meeting is available. REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. Call to Order The Planning Commission of the City of Newcastle met in the Council Chambers in City Hall in Newcastle, Washington, on Wednesday, December 16, 2015. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m., with Chair Allen Dauterman presiding. Roll Call On roll call the following members were: Present Chair Dauterman, Vice Chair Tom Magers, and Commissioners Charlie Gadzik, Karin Blakley, Orville McDonald, Stacy Lynch and Jackie Stone. The meeting was quorate. Other Newcastle officials and staff present were: Community Development Director Tim McHarg, Senior Planner Thara Johnson, City Clerk Sara McMillon, Councilmember Gordon Bisset and Councilmember Rich Crispo. Pledge Commissioner Stone led the flag salute. Public Comment Sue Stronk, a resident of Newcastle, urged the Commission to keep the Puget Sound Energy (PSE) Energize Eastside project out of the city. Newcastle should adopt Bonneville Power Administration standards for colocation of power and gas lines, because safety is important, she said. Ms. Stronk requested that the Coalition of Eastside Neighborhoods for Sensible Energy (CENSE) be given time to present the results of an independent flow study to the commission at the January 27 meeting. She said power provided to Canada figures into the Energize Eastside project studies. PSE has been penalized by the Utilities and Transportation Commission for gas line safety issues. Mrs. Stronk said the City should keep its residents safe. Commissioner Comment Commissioner Blakley drew the Commission s attention to an article in the Puget Sound Business Journal about how suburbs are changing. Similar to Newcastle, many cities are looking at ways to enhance their downtown core areas. Newcastle Planning Commission January 27, 2016 1
Vice Chair Magers mentioned that this meeting is the last Planning Commission meeting for Chair Dauterman. He thanked Mr. Dauterman for his contributions. Mr. Magers said he participated in the selection of a Commissioner to serve in Mr. Dauterman s position. Jessica Sellers will serve on the Commission starting in January. He said the Council appointed his wife Patti Magers to the Community Activities Commission. Reports Chair Dauterman said an assessment of the Community Business Center (CBC) is moving forward well. He thanked Commissioners for their support and said he looks forward to serving on the Council. Community Development Director McHarg said he will provide information during the discussion of the Commission work plan and planning calendar later in the meeting. Final Agenda MOTION: Commissioner McDonald moved to approve the agenda. Commissioner Stone seconded. VOTE: 7 in favor, 0 against. Motion carried. Minutes Commissioner Gadzik said he has a correction to the minutes, found on page one of meeting materials. The minutes state he heard a presentation from developers of the Newcastle Commons, but he said he was referring to a presentation by the BERK consultant. Mr. Gadzik read a corrected statement: Mr. Gadzik also attended the November 4 meeting of the CBC Assessment Advisory Committee. He said the presentation from BERK consulting provided some very useful information about Newcastle. For example, the traffic on Coal Creek Parkway doesn t translate into sales to CBC businesses because most of the traffic is commuters trying to get home as quickly as possible. On the other hand, the grocery stores in Newcastle generate twice the amount of revenue per resident than you would expect given Newcastle s population. Revenue per resident in every other business category is less than average meaning Newcastle residents go elsewhere to meet those needs. MOTION: Vice Chair Magers moved to approve the minutes with modifications proposed by Commissioner Gadzik. Commissioner McDonald seconded. VOTE: 7 in favor, 0 against. Motion carried. General Business Puget Sound Energy Energize Eastside Presentation At 7:16 p.m., Commissioner Gadzik recused himself from the meeting because he is an employee of Puget Sound Energy (PSE). Newcastle Planning Commission January 27, 2016 2
Dan Koch, PSE s director of electric operations, and Mark Williamson, a PSE consultant, provided a presentation to the Commission on the PSE Energize Eastside project. The existing power line was last updated in the 1960s, Mr. Koch said. Since this time, a substantial amount of growth has occurred in Newcastle and on the eastside. He showed growth projections. Multiple studies have verified the need for electrical infrastructure improvements. Federal reliability standards must be met in the future, because the country relies on continuous power. Reliability means that when equipment fails, as it often does, the lights stay on, Mr. Koch said. Newcastle is an integral part of the network. The fundamental problem existing today is that the transformers on Talbot Hill in Renton, built in the 1960s, have reached their capacity. The eastside load is served peripherally. The project is designed to bring basic power delivery into the center of the eastside load with a new transformer and lines serving it. If the purpose of the project was to deliver power to Canada, as opponents believe, lines would be constructed around major population centers, Mr. Koch said. Power needs to be directed inside the eastside area. If Energize Eastside is not constructed, the corrective action plan would be rolling blackouts. Energize Eastside is a permanent solution, he said. Mr. Williamson said PSE has been conservative in waiting this long to move forward with Energize Eastside. Other communities might have started the project a few years ago. Even with improved energy infrastructure, the utility would keep all of its energy conservation goals. Rolling blackouts can have a devastating effect on communities by slowing economic growth, Mr. Williamson said. PSE has a very aggressive and successful conservation program, Mr. Koch said. The company meets its conservation goals every year and will continue to do so. PSE s motivation for the project is to satisfy the need for electricity on the eastside. A group of concerned citizens called CENSE filed a complaint with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) about Energize Eastside, but the complaint was dismissed, Mr. Williamson said. PSE has met FERC requirements for studies and planning. Mr. Koch said the ideal place for new power poles is in the corridor where existing power lines are located. Poles might be very tall in some areas, and in other areas they might be placed closer to the ground. If poles are taller, fewer poles are required. PSE will work with each community on what pole height is best in different areas. The utility has proceeded with fieldwork in Newcastle to determine design possibilities. Safety is always PSE s first priority, Mr. Koch said. PSE also is a gas pipeline operator and so understands the issues involved with collocation. The existing power line in Newcastle is in the same corridor as a gas pipeline. Electrical transmission lines are located in pipeline corridors throughout America, and the science and protocols are well established. Collocation is done every day and has been done for decades, Mr. Koch said. Mr. Koch provided a summary of the project schedule. Currently the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process is underway. PSE representatives then answered questions from Commissioners. In response to a question from Commissioner McDonald, Mr. Koch said local outages are often caused by trees disrupting power lines. PSE can underground power lines, but cities would be required to pay the difference between underground and overhead installation. Answering a question from Commissioner Lynch, Mr. Koch said if one jurisdiction doesn t issue permits for the project, the entire project would be on hold. It is a misconception that the lines, after 50 years, do not need to be replaced. Commissioner Blakley asked about mitigations in Newcastle, and Mr. Koch said the EIS process is designed to identify impacts and possible mitigations. PSE is required to mitigate impacts. In Newcastle, mitigation might involve changing a parcel of vacant land to ball fields. Vice Chair Magers asked if any one community would be benefitted more than a different community from the project. All communities on the eastside will benefit the same, Mr. Koch said. Newcastle Planning Commission January 27, 2016 3
Community Development Director McHarg asked Commissioners if they would like to hear a presentation from CENSE at the January 27 meeting. By unanimous consent, the Commission agreed a CENSE presentation would be beneficial. 2016 Planning Commission Work Plan Planning Director McHarg said the Council may not be able to finalize the Commission s work plan until after the presentation of the findings from the CBC analysis currently underway. He reviewed and discussed the work plan proposed by staff, which is as follows: 1. CBC Assessment High Priority Depending on the recommendations of the CBC Advisory Committee and the resulting direction from City Council, this item may include multiple components. For example, it could include an update of the CBC Plan, applicable zoning regulations, and/or design guidelines. The scope of this item will be determined after a joint meeting in February with City Council on the CBC Assessment recommendations. 2. Utility Transmission Facility Regulations High Priority Continue to develop revised zoning standards for utility transmission facilities. 3. Comprehensive Plan Amendment: Employment and Population Forecast High Priority Based on the conditional approval of the Comprehensive Plan by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), amendments must be made to achieve consistency of the employment and population forecasts used in the Transportation and Land Use Elements. PSRC also suggested some minor edits to policies, which will be considered as part of the amendment process. 4. Update Critical Area Regulations High Priority As part of the GMA mandated Comprehensive Plan update process, the Critical Area regulations must be updated. The scope of the updates was presented to Planning Commission by Watershed Company as part of the Comprehensive Plan update. 5. Implement Low Impact Development (LID) Regulations Medium Priority In order to comply with the requirements of the City s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, the zoning code must be reviewed and amended to eliminate any regulatory barriers to LID. LID is a stormwater and land use management strategy that strives to mimic pre-disturbance hydrologic processes of infiltration, filtration, storage, evaporation and transpiration by emphasizing conservation, use of on-site natural features, site planning, and distributed stormwater management practices that are integrated into a project design. 6. Sign Code Update Medium Priority A recent United States Supreme Court decision in Reed v. Town of Gilbert established broad and sweeping interpretations the application of the First Amendment to sign regulations. As a result, cities across the country are amending their sign codes to comply with this new case law and avoid potential legal challenges. 7. Revise Short Plat Standards Low Priority Newcastle Planning Commission January 27, 2016 4
Staff frequently encounters problems with the application of zoning standards to new lots proposed to be created through the short plat process. While the intent of the zoning standards is sound, it is challenging to apply them to subdivision of small properties that have critical areas, access constraints, topographic variation, irregular configurations, or other unique attributes. A more flexible set of standards and a process that allows for alternative compliance is recommended to solve these issues. 8. Revise Grading and Retaining Wall Standards Low Priority Staff frequently encounters problems applying the grading and retaining wall standards to subdivisions and short plats. These standards appear to have been developed for existing platted lots in established neighborhoods, and they do not make sense for newly created lots on sites with topographic variation that will be extensively graded for infrastructure and development. Mr. McHarg said the good news is that most of the items, with the exception of the CBC Assessment, are well defined and focused. The work plan appears ambitious, since the CBC item alone could take the entire year, Vice Chair Magers said. He asked for more information on items 7 and 8. Mr. McHarg said many lots are constrained by critical areas or other topographical features, but there is no intended outcome in the City Code for how to handle these situations. The City s code should be based on built environment outcomes. Neighborhoods should be created in context of how things relate to each other. Due to critical areas, houses currently end up situated in ways that may not be harmonious with the surrounding neighborhood. Commissioner Blakley said in general, she would like more information on Avalon Bay s Newcastle Commons development and how it will affect the CBC. MOTION: Commissioner Gadzik moved that we adopt the work pan and move it to the Council for review. Commissioner Blakley seconded. VOTE: 7 in favor, 0 against. Motion carried. Update on the Community Business Center Assessment Process Community Development Director McHarg provided an update on the status of the CBC analysis currently underway. Commissioners discussed some of the preliminary analysis findings. The CBC advisory committee will meet in January. The final analysis and recommendations will be presented to the Council in February. Public Comment No public comment was available. Commissioner Comment Commissioners wished Chair Dauterman well in his new position on the City Council. Planning Calendar The next regular Planning Commission meeting will be held Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 7 p.m. Newcastle Planning Commission January 27, 2016 5
Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m. Sara McMillon, City Clerk Newcastle Planning Commission January 27, 2016 6
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 27, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM TOTAL PAGES: 1 TITLE: Briefing: Newcastle 2035 Review of Comprehensive Plan Amendments to Land Use and Transportation Elements EXHIBITS: 1. None SUMMARY: Briefing & Discussion of an amendment to the Newcastle 2035 Comprehensive Plan. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission has been tasked with reviewing, and if needed, amending the City of Newcastle Comprehensive Plan. Per RCW 36.70A.130, Newcastle was required to update the Comprehensive Plan on or before June 30, 2015, and every eight years thereafter. The Comprehensive Plan was formally adopted by City Council on June 2, 2015. Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) conditionally certified the Newcastle 2035 Comprehensive Plan on September 24, 2015 with a condition to achieve consistency of the employment and population forecasts used in the Transportation and Land Use Elements. PSRC also recommended consideration of other policy changes as future amendments, which staff will undertake as part of an upcoming work plan. Staff is currently working with PSRC to review changes to the various elements in the Comprehensive Plan, related to the inconsistency that exists with population and employment target numbers. A public hearing had initially been noticed for January 27, 2016, in anticipation of the issues being resolved prior to the scheduled Planning Commission meeting. However, since there final revisions to address the inconsistencies have not been agreed with PSRC, staff is proposing that the public hearing for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Newcastle 2035 be continued to February 24, 2016. RECOMMENDATION Move to continue the public hearing for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Newcastle 2035 to February 24, 2016. Newcastle Planning Commission January 27, 2016 7
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 27, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA BILL TOTAL PAGES: 4 TITLE: Briefing: Introduction of Critical Areas Ordinance Update EXHIBITS: None SUMMARY: Introduction & Discussion of Newcastle Critical Areas Regulations BACKGROUND The State of Washington Growth Management Act (GMA) requires the City of Newcastle to periodically update its Comprehensive Plan, Master Plans, and development regulations. The Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) in Newcastle Municipal Code (NMC) Chapter 18.24 of the Development Code requires was last updated in 2005. The City is now required to update its policies and regulations by July 2015. The Critical Area policies were amended as part of the Comprehensive Plan 2035 periodic update. The next step in the update process is to amend Critical Area regulations. The GMA requires that the critical areas regulations be updated to be consistent with best available science for the respective critical areas that are regulated. In addition to state mandated changes City staff is also recommending changes to increase predictability and clarity in the existing regulations. The purpose of this discussion session is to: Provide the background for this CAO update process. Introduce the types of critical areas regulated and the code sections needing to be updated in the current CAO. Provide an overview of the changes currently being developed and the proposed timeline for this process. Respond to questions regarding the basis for this update process, the CAO as it currently is adopted, and the timeline and process for the CAO update. DISCUSSION Critical areas, as mandated in the GMA, include: Wetlands Streams Critical Aquifer Recharge areas Newcastle Planning Commission January 27, 2016 8
Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation areas Frequently Flooded areas, and Geologically Hazardous areas. All critical areas must be designated and their functions and values protected using the best available scientific information - known as best available science or BAS. As stated in NMC 2.30.070 Duties, the Planning Commission is tasked with the review of amendments to the Zoning Code, which includes the City s critical area regulations. Review of all existing critical areas regulations in Chapter 18.24, associated definitions, and other Zoning Code (Titles 14 and 18) provisions related to critical areas is being completed by City staff. The existing regulations have been reviewed by a City selected consultant during the Comprehensive Plan periodic update, as well as the Department of Ecology. Based on the recommendations from both the consultant and Department of Ecology, as well as review by city staff, there are no substantial changes being proposed. The majority of changes include revising regulations to meet Best Available Science criteria under GMA and updates to state wide amendments with regard to rating and classification systems for wetlands and streams. Two sections do not require any substantive updates at this time Flood Hazards and Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas. Substantive changes will be needed to the regulations for wetlands, streams, fish and wildlife habitat, and geologically hazardous areas. Staff is also proposing changes to general provisions that will add clarity to and specific standards for critical area report and plan submittal, requirements for monitoring and maintenance, and other administrative provisions. The following overview outlines what the possible changes may be. Flood Hazards - NMC 18.24.220 through 18.24.260 The Critical Areas code relating to flood hazards restricts development within a floodplain. However, a substantial update to this section is required to bring the code into compliance with implementation of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The Code could be updated to include a model ordinance, or require a habitat assessment for any development occurring within a floodplain. An additional option is to develop floodplain regulations that protect floodplain functions on a programmatic basis. Since the majority of properties within the City of Newcastle that are located within a floodplain are City owned and within May Creek Park, adoption of a model ordinance or developing floodplain regulations appear to be unnecessary. Therefore, it is staff s recommendation that a habitat unit assessment should be required for any development located within a flood hazard area. Geologic Hazard Areas NMC 18.24.200 18.24.215, 18.24.270, 18.24.280, and 18.24.300 Geologically hazardous areas addressed in the Code include coal mine hazard areas, erosion hazard areas, landslide hazard areas, seismic hazard areas, and steep slope hazard areas. The Code addresses geologic hazards as defined under RCW and WAC, which are present within the City. Anticipated changes include: Classifying erosion hazard areas on the basis of their potential for erosion Requiring replanting when vegetation removal is allowed on steep slopes Amend seismic hazard areas to comply with the 2012 International Building Code Newcastle Planning Commission January 27, 2016 9
Wetlands NMC 18.24.310 through 18.24.330 The Washington State Department of Ecology compiled a broad review and synthesis of best available science for wetlands in 2005 and updated that best available science review in 2014. This documentation is the primary source of information guiding the anticipated changes to the wetlands provisions in the CAO. The wetlands section of the Critical Areas Code should be updated to align more closely with Best Available Science. Anticipated changes include: Replacing the State wetlands delineation manual with the Federal manual and regional supplement Changing wetland rating standards to be consistent with DOE 2014 Update of the Wetland Rating System for Western Washington Specifying requirements for mitigation, monitoring and maintenance Fish & Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas NMC 18.24.302 through 18.24.306 Currently, Fish & Wildlife Conservation Areas have a separate section and set of regulations from Streams in the CAO. The State model code and many other jurisdictions combine these two sections. Anticipated changes include: Possibly combining Streams with Fish & Wildlife Habitat section based on State model code provisions Specify when a critical areas study and/or habitat management plan is required Add requirements and performance standards for a habitat management plan Streams NMC 18.24.340 through 18.24.370 To standardize stream classifications across the State, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) recommends adopting the Permanent Water Typing System (WAC 222-16-030). The Permanent Water Typing System is more descriptive and inclusive than the stream classification system defined in the current Code. Anticipated changes include: Updating standards based on state recommendations, including adoption of state water type classification and Combining the Streams section with Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas. Public Comment Comments and suggestions received at the public hearings, email, and phone during the development of the draft CAO update will be compiled and provided with future staff reports on the CAO. Staff will review these comments and present them to the Planning Commission for discussion. Newcastle Planning Commission January 27, 2016 10
Timing and Schedule The tentative schedule for Planning Commission study sessions and public hearing is: January 27 Introduction and Overview February 24 General Critical Areas Review and reorganization March 23 Study Session April 27 Public Hearing and Recommendation June Council Review and adoption City Council review and adoption is tentatively scheduled for May-June 2016, with staff update to forms and processes to follow thereafter. This legislative action is subject to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and notification of the proposed changes must go to the Washington State Department of Commerce and Department of Ecology. RECOMMENDATION No action is required of the Planning Commission at this time. This meeting is to introduce the CAO periodic update process and provide an overview of the next four meetings in which the specific code change recommendations will be presented and discussed. Newcastle Planning Commission January 27, 2016 11