Council Moves to Retain Public Input, Set Design Standards

By Olin Ericksen
Staff Writer

May 20 -- The City Council Tuesday night directed staff to draft an ordinance that retains public input for all multi-family developments, but eliminates Planning Commission review of small condos that conform to prescribed design standards.

Under the proposed ordinance, the Architectural Review Board (ARB) would continue to review multifamily projects, but the scope of the review may be limited for projects that meet the standards. The decisions by the ARB can be appealed to the Planning Commission.

By directing staff to iron out the details of a proposed ordinance, the council likely ended months of public debate -- most of it between public officials on both sides of the dais -- over ways to curtail the Planning Department’s often arduous and pricey development process and provide incentives for developers to abide by standards City officials hope will improve design.

Rejecting a staff recommendation to transfer power from the ARB and Planning Commission directly to staff, the council streamlined the process for project that meet the standards, including those for set backs and side yards, design features and building materials.

While the council as a whole supported the prescribed standards for multifamily buildings, which critics have warned could stifle creativity, each of the five members present had problems with any loss of public input.

“I think the standards… in general they’re just fine and they offer a lot of latitude,” said Councilman Ken Genser. “But where I really differ is in the drastic alterations of the review process, since it would eliminate public review.”

“We’ve been presented with solutions to a problem that I’m not quite convinced we’ve defined,” said Mayor Pro Tem Kevin McKeown, who cast the lone opposing vote. “While the process has been taking too much time, I’m not convinced it’s because of the public input part.

The proposed ordinance, McKeown said, “significantly reduces the role of our planning commission, and its public hearings, particularly with respect to condos. I am not comfortable to a change in process which I feel is premature.”

The council also directed staff to explore an alternative option crafted by planning commissioners that would “frontload” the process by having developers hold meetings with the neighbors before submitting plans.

McKeown, however, worried that the suggested alternative would eliminate input from residents who live more than 300 feet from a project. (Residents must live within 300 feet of a proposed project in order to be notified and qualify for filing an appeal.)

“Historically we’ve had some situations in the community where people have done the community as a whole a great favor by being activists despite the fact that they lived more than 300 feet away,” McKeown said. “Three hundred feet in our City is half a block.”

The council’s direction came after public testimony -- much of it by appointed officials who had already weighed in on the topic -- urging the council to retain public input and warning of the stifling effects of imposing standards.

“The new policy will breed a uniformity and discourage experimentation,” said ARB member William Adams, an architect. “The applicant is faced with accepting the prototype standards or accepting the delay of going to the ARB and arguing their case.”

Eliminating “public process was a bombshell,” said Planning Chair Darrell Clarke, “but basically, there seems to be no reason to change public process right now. We have (an audit report of the planning department) due soon and appeals of multifamily units are quite rare.”

The council asked staff to return with the proposed ordinance as soon as possible, but noted that ideally the timing would coincide with an audit report of the planning department that will recommend ways of improving the City’s notoriously slow permitting process. The report by Matrix should be in by July, when the council could take up the ordinance.

The council also directed staff to return with standards that included green and sustainable features, as well as incentives for possible affordable housing.

City Manager Susan McCarthy dispelled the perception that the proposal to curb public input was done at the bidding of developers.

“Regardless of the more extreme ways those recommendations have been described, they’re practical and not diabolical,” she said. “They don’t arise out of any desire to stifle public input, and they were not defined in concert with the development community.”

In a separate action, the Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance restricting or eliminating curb cuts on developments fronting 5th, 6th and 7th streets in the Downtown. The proposed ordinance will enumerate exceptions for the council to consider.