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