Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-28-2002MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE JANUARY 28, 2007 The regular meeting of the Planning and Community Development Committee was held January 28, 2002 in Conference Room 1. Those members in attendance were as follows: MEMBERS PRESENT: Trish Borden, Sue Singer, and Stacey Brothers STAFF PRESENT: Paul Krauss, Lynn Rued, Dick Deal, Al Hicks, Shirley Aird, Brian Petty, Cheryl Sallee and Patti Zook The meeting was called to order by Committee Chair Borden at 5:00 p.m. ACTION: 1. ANX00-0004 - Holt/Cobble Creek Planning Director Krauss provided background information on the annexation which was processed through King Comity Boundary Review Board in 2000. City Council placed final action on the annexation in abeyance pending a financial study. The person hired to do the study became seriously ill and was unable to finish. BRB's approval allows the annexation to be sent to the Mayor and Council for action at any time. Mayor Lewis wanted to accelerate the process on Cobble Creek. Residents want conclusion by being annexed to Auburn. He spoke of discussions with the Fire District regarding frre service. The City has terminated the contract with the Fire District in service to southwest Lea Hill area. Aubarn's Fire Department says it can service Cobble without any difficult. However, they are uncomfortable about the providing service to the proposed Miller annexation at this time. Mayor Lewis has asked staffto take action to conclude the Cobble annexation. Planner Aird commented that the ordinance for zoning for Cobble must be approved at the same time. The ordinances for annexation and zoning will be forwarded to Council at the same time. The annexation area is approximately 90 acres in size with population of 200. Planning Director Krauss reminded Committee that Mr. Koffal had objected to annexation and his suit was dismissed. WCIA reviewed the suit although we has the right to refile should annexation proceed. The residents of Cobble want to be part of the City. Councilmember Brothers asked why the City is proceeding now with the annexation before the financial report is fmisbed. Planning Director Krauss remarked that staffwas directed by Mayor Lewis to proceed. The annexation area is small, with higher income homes, infrastructure is in place, and there is sufficient tax revenue. Cobble was being processed with the Miller annexation last year. One individual in each annexation area objected to the annexations even though City had sufficient percentage to proceed. Miller annexation area raised some questions regarding a need for new fire station as well as what happens with Green River Community College since they are not included in Miller annexation. Councilmember Brothers inquired about low income housing development in Miller annexation area. He wondered iftbe Police Department commented on the annexation. Planning Director Krauss said the project is Lea Hill homes which is getting to be owner occupied, but it is still a concern. Chief Kelly is aware of the annexation. In fact, two officers were added at the time oftbe southwest Lea Hill annexation. Counciimember Singer wondered what trips six percent of Fire District to allow the City to receive their assets. Planning Director Krauss said the Fire District is in discussion over contract and City has heard from their attorney. This is in discussion with the Mayor and City Attorney. C0uncilmember Brothers raised questions about proceeding with the fmancial study. Planning Director Krauss said that the rest of annexatian of Lea Hill is being held in abeyance pending finance study and its review by City Council. Chairman Borden inquired about the issue with Mr. Koffal and if he thought he was vested for multi family through King County. Planning Director Krauss commented that Mr. Koffal thought he was vested by King County for townhouse development. King County was unable to provide any reference to his project being vested. Mr. Koffal also was unable to provide any paperwork from King County demonstrating the vesting of his property. PAGEI MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE JANUARY 2g 2002 Councilmember Singer commented that Cobble residents want to be in the City and want to vote as residents. Councilmember Brothers wondered about Mr. Koffal being excluded from the annexation. Assistant Planning Director Rued said this cannot be done because it would create an island. Chairman Borden believes the annexation should be approved because the residents want it and the area is small in size. Councilmember Brothers said the City made the determination to have financial study done for future annexations and had a contract for this. It makes sense to continue work on the financial study. Planning Director Krauss mentioned that Randy Young, Henderson and Young, is preparing a proposal to continue work on the study. Councilmember Singer does not have a problem with Cobble annexation and she agrees with waiting on annexation the rest of Lea Hill. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Chairman Borden, to recommend approval. 2. Resolution 3409 - EDC Contract Economic Development Manager Hicks commented this is the renewal of annual contract which is the same as in previous years. EDC provided a list of companies referred to Auburn. Councilmember Singer referred to page 2 item G and asked about the roundtablc forum. Economic Development Manager Hicks said that this will be done this year by talking about Auburn and giving Auburn a chance to reach out. Councilmember Brothers wanted to know what is represented by the list. Economic Development Manager Hicks said it is companies referred by EDC to Auburn or King County. Sometimes the EDC is the go-between and protects anonymity of clients, and sometimes there is direct contact. He explained the same list is presented to south King County cities. The client list is presented to EDC member cities. The cities can follow up directly or through EDC. Some EDC clients specify a certain area they are interested in such as east King County or Seattle. Planning Director Krauss remarked that EDC's value to the area goes beyond just referring clients. They conduct conferences also. Council had requested that EDC provide information that they are actually referring clients to Auburn. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Brothers, to recommend approval. Chairman Borden concurred. 3. ZOA01-0007 - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Regarding Height of Cell Towers in P- 1, Public Use Zone Assistant Planning Director Rued commented that as a result of last meeting's discussion, changes are now proposed. Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing on the proposed amendments. Chairman Borden said the changes incorporate a lot of her concerns and wanted clarification on how the abandonment process works. Assistant Planning Director Rued said that nine months would allow lessor to get out of its lease, fred another carrier to arrange lease on pole and this could take months. This has not been an issue. Chairman Borden asked for clarification of 3A tower which Assistant Planning Director Rued provided. It is now clear what height tower is allowed. He explained the difference between 3A and 3B towers. As for aesthetics, this depends on where the tower would be located. If the tower is in an industrial area not much aesthetics would be needed; if tower is near a residential area or public zone, this will be looked at more closely. Towers do not present much ora view blockage. This has not been an issue in Auburn. He spoke about the separation requirement. Councilmember Brothers wondered about 'attractive nuisance' justification for denial of request and fencing. Assistant Planning Director Rued replied that companies fence in the equipment so this has not been an issue. The tower equipment is usually next to the tower. PAGE 2 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE JANUARY 28, 200? Chairman Borden likes requirement of colocation and thanked Assistant Planning Director Rued for his work. Assistant Planning Director Rued said next step is to take to Planning Commission for public hearing and then back to Committee. 2002 General Fund Grants: 4. Resolution 3410 - ACAP Child & Family Services 5. Resolution 3411 - Auburn Food Bank 6. Resolution 3412 - King County Sexual Assault Resource Center 7. Resolminn 3413 - Commtmity Health Centers of King County 8. Resolution 3414 - Children's Home Society 9. Resolution 3415 - Auburn Youth Resources Planner Aird commented that the amount designated for agencies was decided upon during 2002 budget process. Any contract over $25,000 must go through City Council. Councilmember Brothers wondered about King County cutback and ifACAP amount is sufficient. Planner Aird replied that the cutback happened after Council decisions made for the 2002 budget. Planning Director Krauss said that all agencies are suffering because of the reduced funding. He heard that the County budget is worse now. He suggested leaving the funding as is because it incorporates thoughts of Human Services Committee and past funding practices. The agencies are counting on amounts indicated during the budget cycle. There is the issue of King County being more responsible for all its citizens. He spoke about the Joint Recommendations Committee. Councilmember Singer made a motion, seconded by Councilmember Brothers, to recommend approval. Chairman Borden concurred. DISCUSSION: 1. 2002 Committee Work Program Planning Director Krauss remarked that the Committee wanted to know what the work program for this year would entail. He spoke about the neighborhood planning process in Terminal Park. Some issues may come back to the Committee regarding changes to the Comprehensive Plan. He spoke about the gateways and marketing project. Auburn needs marketing expertise from a firm with landscape architect component. He spoke of the need to tie the gateways theme together and to look at 'branding' the City which has not yet been done. Staffis looking at updating the City logo also. The City needs to look at population and growth targets per GMA this year. Staff continues its work on the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. There will also be the annual Comprehensive Plan amendments. Parks and Recreation Director Deal spoke of the need to revisit park impact fees which the Mayor supports. He spoke of the need to dedicate revenue streams. Tree City USA designation is a possibility and would be good for Auburn. The City does not have anyone available to follow up to see if removed trees are replaced. He spoke of improving volumeer opportunities. 2. Urban Centers Principal Planner Osaki remarked that the Comprehensive Plan has strong policies, and some text is outdated but is tied to census and buildable lands. There will be release of census data later this year and next year is good time to completely redo text. Following up on questions from the last meeting, additional information is in the agenda packet. Each county has its own del'tuition of 'urban center'. The King County Countywide Planning Policies in 1992 and 1994 had quantitative requirements for urban centers. King County monitors number of new jobs created in urban centers and number of new homes permitted. Some cities designated as urban centers are not reaching criteria for housing units. There has been various degrees of success in implementing urban center goals. PAGE 3 MINUTES OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE JANUARY 28, 2007 Councilmember Brothers wondered if urban center planning is predicated on Federal funds available or where funds are available. Planning Director IC, h'auss explained that Puget Sound Regional Council has acted as the Federal pass through. PSRC is regional disperser of Federal/State dollars which wanted to fund urban centers disproportionately. Councilmember Singer said there is a push for money to go primarily to urban centers. Councilmember Singer referred to Destination 2020 booklet in which Auburn is conspicuously absent. Mary McCumber, Director of the Puget Sound Regional Council, says that Auburn meets the criteria as urban center. Councilmember Singer stressed the need for Auburn to be designated as an urban center. The City determines its density. There is no reason to leave money on the table; Auburn should get its fair share. Planning Director Kranss said that human services funding is also directed towards urban centers. Chairman Borden expressed concerned about density requirements in the future with urban center designation and not meeting the requirement. Principal Planner Osaki said the geographic area of urban center needs to be clearly clef'med. Planning Director Krauss said that staffcan adjust the boundaries of the proposed urban center area and see how close Auburn is. He said that City Council decided there should be an emphasis on downtown. The density amounts are unattainable since no one ha~ met them. 3. Alcohol Consumption in Public Facilities Senior Center Supervisor Sallee presented a background on this topic. Cities similar to Auburn allow alcohol at their facilities. The use of alcohol is requested by renters of City facilities. The new Senior Center is being used for receptions and allowing alcohol will increase rentals. She described the City of Kent's approach to alcohol consumption at their facilities. She then described City of Renton's process. Auburn's approach would be a Park Board policy. She distributed draf~ policies and WCIA information and reviewed them. She mentioned how cities determine damage deposit an that there are higher deposits for events serving alcohol. A discussion occurred about the insurance fees and damage deposits. Parks and Recreation Director Deal advised that a supervisor is always present during rental functions. Counciimember Brothers wondered if the Liquor Control Board requires anything and Senior Center Supervisor Sallee said that a permit is required. Renter cannot charge for the liquor. She is unsure about donations and will have to ask about this. Counciimember Brothers believes this is a good item for Parks Board consideration and this should go through them as a policy matter. Chairman Borden agrees with Councilmember Brothers. Renters must be in compliance with State regulations and some additional information is needed from the Liquor Board. Parks and Recreation Director Deal will forward this to the Park Board for review and will provide reques~d information to the Committee at another me~ing. He expects the process to be effective in March. PAGE4 MINUTES OF PLANNlNG AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE JANUARY 28, 2002 4. Teen Program Funding Parks and Recreation Director Deal commented that in 1995 the City of Kent enacted a tax on the utilities tax to fund teen programs. Kent enacted 3/10 of 1% tax. Mayor Lewis has requested staffto look into enacting something similar for Auburn. Recreation Manager Petty gave a background on Kent's policy. He distributed a fact sheet from Kent. There is legislation pending related to increasing utility taxes to cities. Auburn could tack on percentage for funding teen/youth programs. He met with Finance Director to determine what could be generated. Parks and Recreation Director Deal said the increase could be done without legislation as the City is not charging the maximum at present. A survey indicated priority should be programs for youth/teens. There is no dedicated revenue stream or staff for the program. Chairman Borden said it appears Kent increased toward maximum. Councilmember Brothers expressed support for the idea. Chairman Borden spoke of the positive effect of after school programs for children. Counciimember Brothers spoke of the need for elememary school programs also which could be greater need than teen programs because younger kids should not be excluded. Chairman Borden requested information regarding the kinds of additiunal programs to be offered if tax is increased. She also wants to know how Auburn compares with other cities in the amount of utility tax. Councilmember Singer wants to know about the restrictions on using the utility tax. Parks and Recreation Director Deal spoke again about not having a dedicated revenue stream. Chairman Borden believes this is a good topic for School Board meeting. INFORMATION: 1. Island Annexation This item will be discussed at another meeting. 2. LIHI Contract for the JC Penney Buildin?. Plan~. er Aird mentioned that the Committee wanted to see construction drawings. A more recent set is commg from the architect. LIHI wants to close on the project at the end of Febraary. The issue is property management and tenant selection. She reviewed the minutes and determined that there is to be someone on the board and it is clear that retail is in the hands of the Mayor and LIHI director. Planning Director Krauss said that ev¢~'one agrees there should be retail, but what is considered retail. There is the need to have traffic generator retail. Councilmember Singer said that her recollection was that City wanted LIHI to work with City to get the kind of retail the City wanted. Planner Aird replied yes; and that LIHI should work with Al Hicks to recruit businesses. Issue is 'retail' definition and what exactly to put in contractual language. Councilmember Brothers asked about a Goodwill store. Planning Director Krauss said no to another used clothing store in downtown. The LIHI space will be atUactive with quality renovation. Councilmember Singer said City is not asking for anything in contract that was not previously agreed upon. Planning Director Krauss commented that City agreed to partially fund the project and LIHI is willing to have conditions beyond the norm, but the problem is how to do the language. Planner Aird said retail portion is what is in question, and where to place language that LIHI understands their responsibility. There was discussion of the contract's appendix, particularly exhibit 3. With no further items to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 7:25 pm PCDChMIN~01B-2002 PAGE5