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