Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-22-1999MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 22, 1999 The regular meeting of the Planning and Community Development Committee was held November 22, 1999 in the Council Work Area. Those members in attendance were as follows: MEMBERS PRESENT: Trish Borden, Sue Singer, and Pete LeWis STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Shirley Aird, Al Hicks, Dick Deal, and Patti Zook ALSO PRESENT: Mayor Booth; Bob Poldevart, Deputy Superintendent, Auburn School District; Fred High, Finance Manager, Kent School District The meeting was called to order 15y Committee Chair Borden at 6:30 p.m. ACTION ITEMS: Auburn School District Impact Fees Kent School District Impact Fees Planning Director Krauss presented the staff report. The City adopted an impact fee program fOr Derringer Schools. It was modified to incorporate the Auburn and Kent School Districts. The Capital Facilities Plans(CFP) are in place for both districts. Last month, the Council adopted these updated CFPs for both districts with the Comprehensive Plan amendments. City Council adopted impact fees for both districts at a somewhat lower level than the districts requested. He was approached by Linda Cowan, Superintendent for Auburn School District, last week about taking the revised impact fees back to City Council. Auburn Deputy Superintendent Poldevart advised that the fees were recalculated based on new information regarding student generation. This raises the amount slightly more for single family than what had before and slightly less for multi family. Councilmember Lewis asked who decided to recommend approval in the staff report. Planning Director Krauss commented that staff did not take a position on the fees in the past, but acts as a conduit. City Council makes a decision and it is enacted. He was not provided direction on the matter. Information was provided previously on the school impact fees throughout the region. He said that adoption of the CFP each year is an obligation and the fee evaluation is upon request of the school district. Councilmember Lewis asked if there are specific dates of the request such as the end of the year or beginning of the year. Kent Finance Manager High mentioned the time line. Normally plans prepared in the spring and reviewed by County staff. The district explains the plan and answers any questions they have which usually occurs in June. The County adopts the plan in late fall. The updated schedule was adopted in the past six weeks: Auburn Deputy Superintendent Poldevart said that the plan adopts a fee schedule as part of the plan process. Their plan is updated by January 1't for the subsequent year. Fees are in effect from January 1st for the calendar year. PAGE 1 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 22, 1999 Councilmember Lewis asked when current agreement runs out. Planning Director Krauss believes the agreement is in place. The annual review for the CFP is part of the City's Comprehensive Plan process. Councilmember Lewis is bothered by the appearance and timing of this request to increase impact fees in relation to the passage of 1-695. Chairman Borden said the schools can come back each year to increase the level to what was originally requested or ask for an adjustment. She is not concerned about the request's timing in relation to 1-695. Councilmember Lewis believes the request of the schools does have the appearance of trying to increase fees before the adoption of I- 695. He mentioned the recent passing of the increase in water rates and its perception to the public. Councilmember Singer asked what amount sh°uld be passed on to the voters. She wondered about going to the voters at the same time the School Districts do, She is in favor of increasing the fee for single family development. Chairman Borden wanted to confirm that the Committee was saying no to Council acting on the request and yes to getting the request on the ballot. Councilmember Singer remarked that staff could prepare an argument for the increase. Councilmember Lewis sees the need to have a Council discussion aboUt on what is appearing on the ballot. Chairman Borden said for the ballot, state that the request is based on data received from the schools. Auburn Deputy Superintendent Poldevart talked of submitting a bond in February. He is concerned about spin off to the School Board election. The recent election and outcomo of 695 changed normal activities. He does not want to place Council in a difficult position and create a backlash. The course of action outlined tonight, by placing on the ballot, seems appropriate. Chairman Borden thinks that impact fees being on the same ballot in addition to school bond could have a negative effect. Councilmember Singer said it would be separate ballot items for parks, impact fees, etc. Councilmember Lewis said that decisions need to be made if this should be done separately or together. He did not have a personal feeling if. it should be done jointly or separately; just what is best for everyone. Councilmember Singer spoke of the need to educate the public. It should be done jointly for explanation purposes. Councilmember Lewis wondered if it is a good idea to have large tax issue on the ballot and 30 days later do a levy. Should these be done together? The school districts should give their input into the process. Auburn Deputy Superintendent Poldevart advised that he is not ready to make this decision tonight and he will have to get back to the City. The district would be concerned about what other issues might be on the ballot at the same time as the c impact fees. It is possible that dozens of things could be on the ballot. It is hard to anticipate what the voters reaction will be to all this. Councilmember Lewis commented that voters do not always perceive the issues correctly as it relates to who pays for what. Chairman Borden asked the Committee how they feel about the fee schedule. Councilmember Singer thinks the matter should PAGE 2 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 22, 1999 be placed on the ballot. Councilmember Lewis agreed that the school impact fees need to be on .the ballot. Councilmember Singer wondered if 1-659 bypasses the way Council is working. It appears that Council cannot say what gets passed now; the voters decide. Councilmember Lewis recognizes what Councilmember Singer is saying and this goes back to last years discussion that Council has not responsibility; they are merely acting as a conduit. He is not interested in raising any fees until the City sees how 1-695 plays out in court. Councilmember Singer asked if Councilmember Lewis was speaking toward impact fees or fee increase. Councilmember Lewis said that impact fees are in lieu of fees being charged as was explained to him by Public Works and Planning. The fees put in place are at or below level of mitigation charged. It is not proper to increase any fees now. Chairman Borden believes she understands what Councilmember Lewis means. Councilmember Lewis said that he did not have a problem with going to Council for Council to decide what to do. Let the school districts decide what they want, commented Councilmember Singer. Councilmember Lewis said if the motion was to forward to Council to set impact fee, then he has a problem. Chairman Borden has gotten an idea of where the City is headed for future discussions. City will need to work with the school districts on timing. Chairman Borden stated that if the City is not raising the fee;she wants to see it on the ballot as soon as possible. However, it should not interfere with the school levy ballot. She wanted to get an idea of where the fellow Councilmembers were on the issue. Auburn Deputy Superintendent Poldevart said that the School Board approved the CFP on July 12 and it has been in process during 1-695. They are trying to decide what is politically and economically correct. Councilmember Lewis remarked that levies come in odd years between elections. A vote each year on fee increase with levy is probably not wise to do. What about having next year apart from the levy. Auburn Deputy Superintendent Poldevart commented that the GMA says the schools have to go through the municipalities and this is an oversight responsibility by the municipalities. There is a question about how to proceed. Chairman Borden thanked Kent Finance Manager High and Auburn Deputy Superintendent Poldevart for coming to the meeting and she hopes they continue to' work together. INFORMATION ITEMS: 1. Update on Lea Hill Annexation Planning Director Krauss reminded the Committee about the public hearing in two weeks. He then showed a map of the Lea Hill zoning districts. He wants the Committee to have a comfort level about the annexation. The City has been working on the PAGE 3 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 22, 1999 annexation for over 13 years. The annexation was mentioned in the 1986 Comprehensive Plan and again in the 1995 Comprehensive Plan. Interlocal agreements are in place with the City of Kent and King County. The City is in the process of negotiating an agreements with the Fire District. Also, storm utility and park agreements are being worked on. He mentioned the Lea Hill Task Force. The Lea Hill plan is in place and will not change the status quo. The City has come up with a plan and zoning ordinance that basically protects the Lea Hill property. However, all new development will come in under Auburn's zoning. There is concern about lack of parks on Lea Hill and inadequate roads. Some other services, such as police and fire come from Auburn. In fact, Auburn's Fire Department is often the first on the scene because the fire district is a volunteer force. The area's residents wanted to keep the fire district and the district is aware that the agreement is temporary and will be absorbed into the City. At this time, there is not a reason to change dramatically. They are the primary fire district and the City is secondary. The City is concerned about more development outside its jurisdiction and problems created by these developments. The streets are not connected, the storm facilities are not to City standards, and inadequate parks. He then mentioned many reasons for annexation of this area. The City can provide services and the citizens want the annexation. Auburn will be able to control development and can provide higher levels of service than currently provided by King County. The citizens want to better connect with their government. For land use issues, citizens have to go to Renton, and to Seattle for other issues. Lea Hill residents were pleased that staff, the Council, and Mayor were at the meetings held in the area. The City's Finance Department put together a spreadsheet on the economics of the annexation which he distributed to the Committee. Residential annexations typically did not cash flow. The area does not have any commercial sales tax, but does cash flow. He .then reviewed the revenue column and then reviewed the expenditure column. Currently, revenues from Lea Hill flow to King County and will flow to the City after annexation. The net affect is $120,000 to the good, but there will be unknowns. Staff is trying to minimize exposure to the unknowns. King County has disinvested in this area. The County is taking fees, but few services are being provided by the County. All revenues in this area would redirect to the City. Councilmember Lewis acknowledged the long time assumption that the'annexation should take place. The annexation will make a significant change to the City. He believes that the benefits and possibilities are not figured out yet. Planner I Aird mentioned that many residents of Lea Hill already think they live in Auburn. Mayor commented that the area is under County zoning, and in the City's Potential Annexation Area. The City will have to accept these people into the City in 20 years. This is a mandate of the Growth Management Act (GMA). The City has managed to have some influence in this area and has managed to enforce certain standards of development. He then commented on two projects that did not address the City's concerns. Parks and Recreation Director Deal spoke about the parks acreage and location. He is awaiting information from King County about what they pay to maintain parks. Chairman Borden stated that she is supportive of the Lea Hill annexation. Planning Director Krauss advised that the streets in Lea Hill are not built to City standards and PAGE 4 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 22, 1999 improvements will be done through an LID. Planner I Aird explained the differences in the zoning designatiOns. Liquor License Applications .Planning Director Krauss asked Economic Development Manager Hicks to come and talk with Committee about these applications. He mentioned a recent liquor license application for a building on Main Street. In addition to Planning Director Krauss, the applicant met with Economic Development Manager Hicks and someone from the Police Department. Economic Development Manager Hicks spoke about discussions with applicant who was going to do the building renovations as a do-it-yourself project. Applicant was informed of the various renovations and improvements that would be required. The applicant was inexperienced and unprepared for these types of improvements and renovations. Planning Director Krauss then discussed the City's concerns. The Liquor Control Board is generallY unresponsive to cities' concerns. There needs to be a policy'to guide what the City's responses should be. He wondered if it is now time to resurrect the work on preparing such a policy. The Liquor Control Board has rejected licenses in Seattle based on the number of such businesses already in the area. He then referred to a map showing radius around the businesses. Staff's purpose in coming tonight is to address the longer term issue of how to deal with these types of applications'~nd to develop a program to deal with them in the future. Councilmember Lewis expressed his interest in such a program. Chairman Borden believed the reason that the program did not go forward was because the City did not want to give the illusion that it has control over something that it does not. Mayor offered that the City Attorney had concerns about litigation. Planning Director Krauss said that could explore the City's ability to restrict taverns and this might be accomplished through zoning. Economic Development Manager Hicks is conducting research on this matter. Economic Development Manager Hicks is also on committee dealing with chronic public inebriates. Economic Development Manager Hicks asked the applicant how he would deal with difficult people because the applicant did not have any experience. Chairman Borden asked if Planning Director Krauss plans for Economic Development Manager Hicks to continue research. Planning Director Krauss replied yes; the research may yield some ideas as to a set of policies or perhaps possible zoning code amendments. Economic Development Manager Hicks remarked that the impetus with the Liquor Control Board comes with what they have done in Seattle. It puts renewed pressure on the State for solution to their problem. One solution for is the elimination of the sale of certain kinds and sizes of beverages. The Board enacted a neighborhood visibility standard to prevent the sale of fortified wines. The Liquor Control Board was looking at the number of outlets and their impact. He then referred to a map which showed the PAGE 5 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 22, 1999 500 foot radius of the proposed business and the one-quarter mile radius is the area for transit oriented development that will officially occur. This radius is used for possible grant money for such development. Planning Director Krauss explained that transit oriented development benefits from and capitalizes from the rail Station. OTHER BUSINESS: 1. Proposed Resolution relating to Pipeline Safety Planning Director Krauss distributed a proposed resolution about this. It is anticipated that a number of cities under the National League of Cities auspices will adopt the resolution. He added that this is in microcosm the railroad issue all over again. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Lewis, to recommend approval of the resolution. Chairman Borden concurred. 2. Status of Auburn Response Team Councilmember Singer asked for an update on this. Economic Development Manager Hicks remarked that an event was held at Continental Village recently and another is planned in February. The Health Department distributed information, bike helmets were given away, and food served. Chairman Borden asked about the purpose of such an event. Economic Development Manager Hicks said that right now, the City is working just with this complex, but in the future five may be involved. Staff has collaborated with the Health Department to try to resolve issues. Chairman Borden asked about code enforcement. Economic Development Manager Hicks commented that his has not actually been done. The Fire Department visited the complex. Mayor spoke about two meetings held with the residents. Chairman Borden asked again about code enforcement help. Economic Development Manager Hicks remarked that the State is involved in fire code issues such as wiring and outlets. The Health Department has had its concerns. 3. Soroptomist Millennium Project Councilmember Singer provided information on this project and asked if the City has funds available for such a project. This idea is similar to an idea that Parks and Recreation Director Deal expressed. The project would be placing a millennium sundial in a City park. The dial would contain plaques from various international service organizations. They would contact the organizations to see who is interested. The project would also be interactive. Parks and Recreation Director Deal confirmed that it would be an interactive art piece. Councilmember Singer commented that the project sounds fairly simple. She wondered how amenable the City is to helping the project. The 'service organizations would pay for the cost of their logo. She anticipates more help with the project's engineering. PAGE 6 NOVEMBER 22, 1999 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Chairman Borden asked how much a project like this would cost. Parks and Recreation Director Deal believes the cost would be in the $10,000 range. Parks and Recreation Director Deal said that the are looking at Les Gove Park as the site of the project.' Another opportunity for art work is the small parcel between the White River and Stuck River bridge. This would be a good location for a gateway project. An artist is working on a layout of the transit plaza and how art could be incorporated there. Councilmember Singer proposed to charge the service clubs $1,000 and offer to every international service club in town. An instructional plaque would also be needed. Chairman Borden wondered if the City could get into trouble if a club is excluded. Mayor remarked that staff would double check this. 4. Multi Family Development Councilmember Lewis spoke about a senior multi family project in Puyallup that he recently visited. It is very similar to the senior center project proposed by Henderson for Lakeland. He referred to a recently statement of Planning Director Krauss' relating to the senior housing by Fred Meyer. The City should stop worrying about the GMA and start soliciting senior centers similar to the project in Puyallup. Senior centers are in Renton, Kent, Federal Way and Puyallup. Many communities solicit these types of senior housing. One group he spoke with said that Auburn did not have numbers to support, and the Henderson project was planned for Lakeland. Councilmember Lewis stressed that the City should solicit this type of housing to fulfill its high density quota because it is more desirable. The facility he visited in Puyallup was very nice. If the City must target high density, then it should solicit this type of development. Mayor commented that seniors should not have to leave Auburn to find housing. Councilmember Lewis said if there are types of multi family housing that the City wants to have, it should see what it can do to bring this type of housing to the City. He asked if there any communities in Washington that use incentives to bring in certain types of housing they want and to keep others out. The City should look at trying to do this. Planning Director Krauss advised that the City of Kent is not doing incentives. Kent does have a new zoning district, but it is not used very much. If the project is owner- occupied it might have an easier time getting through. Councilmember Lewis commented that if Auburn has to have high density project, then pick projects that are desirable and the City would still meet its GMA mandates. With no further items to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. PCDC\I 1 B-99 PAGE 7