Loading...
Planning Commission MINS 03-20-2019CITY OF FEDERAL WAY PLANNING COMMISSION March 20, 2019 City Hall 6:30 p.m. City Council Chambers MEETING MINUTES Commissioners present: Wayne Carlson, Lawson Bronson, Hope Elder, Tim O'Neil, Diana Noble- Gulliford, Dawn Meader McCausland, Dale Couture, and Eric Olsen. Commissioners absent: Tom Medhurst (ex). City Council Members present: Deputy Mayor Susan Honda, Mark Koppang, and Martin Moore. City Staff present: Planning Manager Robert "Doc" Hansen, Principal Planner Margaret Clark, Deputy City Attorney Mark Orthmann, and Administrative Assistant E. Tina Piety. CALL TO ORDER Chair Carlson called the meeting to order at 6:30 P.M. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The February 6, 2019, minutes were approved as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENT I Deputy Mayor Honda thanked the Commissioners for their work. She appreciates the time they put into it. She encouraged them to plan to attend the special Land Use and Transportation Committee (LUTC) planned for Monday evening (more about this later). ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Planning Manager Hansen stated that staff (as directed by the City Council) will be presenting a number of issues regarding housing in Federal Way. There are a number of "tools" that are available to assists jurisdictions with housing issues and staff will be addressing these. Topics will include homelessness and housing affordability. He encouraged the Commissioners to review Puget Sound Regional Council's (PSRC) Vision 2050 report, which may be found online at https:/./www.psrc.orr/vision. He then introduced Council Member Koppang who will speak about the LUTC special meeting. Council Member Koppang thanked the Commissioners for their work. At last night's City Council meeting, the Council spent over an hour discussing the proposed realignment of the South 320' extension. During the course of that discussion, it came to the Council's attention that some of the Planning Commissioners may have felt pressured to make a decision on this issue at their February 20`x' public hearing. This is an important and complicated issue, and the Council is concerned that Commissioners may have reservations about the decision they reached. For this reason, Commissioners are invited to a special meeting with the LUTC to discuss this on Monday, March 25th at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. K.Tlanning Commission\2016Weeting Summary 03-20-10.doc Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 March 20, 2019 COMMISSION BUSINESS STUDY SESSION: Potential Sign Amendment Manager Hansen led the discussion on a potential sign amendment. Staff is examining the potential of creating a "building identification" sign definition, which would permit the development of signs that identify the building and not the particular businesses inside. It is to identify the function of the building. This issue came to staff's attention because the Performing Arts and Entertainment Center (PAEC) is in process of designing signs to be placed upon the building that meet the intent of the sign code; but do not meet the criteria listed in the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC). The proposed signs would likely exceed seven percent of the total surface and thereby, may not meet the code. The code is being examined to determine what amendments may be necessary to allow the sign while still maintaining the intent of the current code. The intent of the potential sign amendment of a "building identifier" is so that any party searching for a particular building would identify the building from a point within blocks of the site. This particular sign could exceed seven percent of the building face and still meet the intent of the sign code. Manager Hansen showed the Commissioners the plans for PAEC's proposed signs to aid this discussion. The purpose of this discussion is to obtain feedback and suggestions from the Commissioners; what do you think about allowing a building identification sign?� It was noted that any building will be allowed a building identification sign to identify the type of businesses/ uses; but not a specific business per se. For example, PAEC holds meetings and conventions in addition to performing arts. Discussion was held on sign size in the current code and what the PAEC is requesting: Commissioner Meader McCausland expressed concern over the number of business likely to want a larger sign through a building identification. Are we likely to end up with a large sign for say "Starbuck Plaza"? Manager Hansen responded that this' is the type of issue/question staff is looking for by bringing this issue to the Commission. He stated that the city could have a regulation that the identification of a particular business is not allowed on the sign. Commissioner Meader McCausland commented is not the PAEC a business. Manager Hansen stated that the PAEC is considered a location, not a business. Commissioner Elder expressed concern that the only reason this issue is coming before the Commission so quickly is because the city wants it, but if it were for a private business, it would not have been presented so quickly. Manager Hansen commented that one reason it is quick is because it would be a small change to the sign code and the PAEC is in the midst of their process of designing the signs. C Commissioner Meader McCausland asked why can't this be done as a variance, or perhaps apply only to public buildings. Manager Hansen responded that staff is also researching doing this as a variance. Commissioner Noble-Gulliford asked how the size for the signs would be calculated if an applicant wants signs with a business name and a building identification sign. Manager Hansen responded they would be considered separately. Commissioner Noble-Gulliford stated so a building could have three signs, two business signs and one building identification sign. Chair Carlson asked in regards to the recent federal mandate that jurisdictions must be content neutral when regulating signs, how is a building identification content neutral? Deputy City Attorney Orthmann commented that staff will have to research this question. I Commissioner O'Neil asked how a sign for a sponsor for the PAEC would fit. Manager Hansen replied that staff has not considered that. Commissioner Bronson would like to know how far away one could see the proposed signs, as opposed to signs that meet the current standards. K:\Planning Comm ission\2016\Meeting Summary 03-20-19.doc Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 March 20, 2019 Deputy City Attorney Orthmann commented that the content neutral standards are different for commercial vs political speech and jurisdictions do have some regulatory authority over commercial content. Commissioner Meader McCausland'asked for a briefing on the legal issues when this subject comes back to the Commission. Commissioner Couture encouraged staff to consider the definition of sign "face" as the way it is defined/ determined can have a large impact on the size of the font. Manager Hansen responded that staff is reviewing the definition of face. Commissioner Olsen commented that if there is a need in the city for building identification signs, then we should consider the amendment, but not if there is only one business seeking the change. Dana Halloway — She commented that staff needs to address the use of lighting (i.e. back -lighting, etc.) as part of this potential amendment. Commissioner Noble-Gulliford commented that discussions have been held in the past regarding sign lighting and specifically neon lighting. In the past, the Council had expressed a.desire for neon lighting downtown. She would like to see more creative requirements/regulations for signs in our downtown that would include such things as neon lighting for visual stimulation. She,then asked' iChe',PAEC Signs hauZ' ee�a bordered and Manager 1=lansen�replied they have not: m Housekeeping Code Amendments , Principal Planner Clark delivered the staff presentation. The City Council approved the Planning Commission Work Program at last night's meeting. She went over the housekeeping items. A few _- changes were made to the housekeeping items. Item number one relating to the time for the city to issue a threshold determination pursuant to the State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA) was moved to the non -housekeeping list. Amending this language will take more time and effort than intended for a housekeeping code amendment and so it was moved to the non -housekeeping list. The second item is item number two relating to the market value'threshold to require a substantial development permit. This is being done as part of the Shoreline Master Program Update, and therefore, was removed from the housekeeping list. Two items were added to the list. The first is number four, allowing roof top open spaces in a number of different zones, and the second is number eleven, allowing second-hand merchandise sales in the City Center -Core (CC -C) zone as a primary or accessory use. Commissioner Noble-Gulliford asked in regards to second-hand merchandise, will that include antiques? Principal Planner Clark replied that it will include antiques. Commissioner Meader McCausland expressed concern regarding number 10, wherein the urban agriculture use is being removed from commercial zones. Manager Hansen replied4hat urban agriculture ,is more a wholesale use as opposed to a retail use. The change will allow greenhouse/nursery uses as they are retail. Commissioner Meader McCausland asked if it would preclude instances where the agriculture use is an accessory use, such has a restaurant with a rooftop garden. Manager Hansen replied that accessory uses would be allowed, such as the aforementioned rooftop garden. Commissioner Meader McCausland asked 'if the garden could be operated by an owner different from the restaurant owner. What if the garden is a wholesale use? She raises the question because innovative things are being done to bring urban agriculture to cities and she wants the city to be able to allow them. Manager Hansen replied that staff will need to study this issue when they work on this code amendment. Attorney Orthmann noted that the housekeeping list is a work in process. None have been closely studied as yet. Items may be removed if further study shows that is appropriate. K.\Planning Commission\2016\Meeting Summary 03-20-19. doc ' 1 'i Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 March 20, 2019 ADDITIONAL BUSINESS j None J ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 7:30 P.M. KAPlanning Commission\2016\Meeting Summary 03-20-19.doc