Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5253 ORDINANCE NO. 5 2 5 3 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO PLANNING; ADOPTING EMERGENCY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF R.C.W. CHAPTERS 36.70A AND 35A.63 OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON; DESIGNATING THESE AMENDMENTS AS GUIDELINES FOR EXERCISING THE CITY'S AUTHORITY UNDER THE WASHINGTON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA); DIRECTING THAT THIS ORDINANCE AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS IT ADOPTS AND APPROVES BE FILED WITH THE AUBURN CITY CLERK AND BE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION. WHEREAS, the City of Auburn on August 18, 1986 adopted a Comprehensive Plan by Resolution NO. 1703 which includes a Map establishing the location of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations throughout the City; and WHEREAS, the City of Auburn on April 17, 1995 adopted Comprehensive Plan Amendment by Resolution No. 2635 to comply with the Washington State Growth Management Act; and WHEREAS, the City of Auburn on September 5, 1995 reaffirmed that action by Ordinance No. 4788; and WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A. 130 states that "a city may adopt... revisions to its comprehensive plan. ..whenever an emergency exists"; and Ordinance No. 5253 June 16, 1999 Page ] WHEREAS, the Planning Director and the City Attorney have determined that the rapid increases in traffic due to growth outside the City that threaten the City's ability to meet its growth targets established in the King County Countywide Planning Policies and the need to develop an initial response to the Endangered Species Act constitute such an emergency; and WHEREAS, the proposed emergency Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendments were transmitted to the Auburn City Planning Commission in June, 1999; and WHEREAS, after proper notice published in the City's official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the date of hearing, the Auburn Planning Commission of June 8, 1999, conducted public hearings on the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, at the hearing, the Auburn City Planning Commission heard public testimony on the said proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, thereafter the Auburn City Planning Commission recommended approval of the Draft Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments, and transmitted a copy of its recommendation to the Auburn City Council through the Mayor; and Ordinance No. 5253 June 16, 1999 Page 2 WHEREAS, within sixty (60) days from the receipt of the Auburn City Planning Commission recommendation for the proposed amendments the Auburn City Council, at a public meeting, held after proper notice published in the City's official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the date of hearing on June 21,1999, considered and voted on the proposed amendments as recommended the Auburn City Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Emergency Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments, attached as Exhibit "A", and based upon traffic impact studies required by SEPA, any development that impacts the 41st Street SE and "A" Street SE intersection shall Day its pro rata share of the intersection improvements at the intersection of Lakeland Hills Way and the East Valley Highway and the City of Auburn will collect any such fees for the exclusive purpose of sharing the total costs of these intersection improvements with the City of Pacific, are herewith adopted and approved and it is herewith directed that they be filed along with this Ordinance with the Auburn City Clerk and be available for public inspection. Section 2. The Emergency Comprehensive Plan amendments modify the Comprehensive Plan adopted on August 18, 1986 by Resolution 1703 and adopted by Ordinance No. 4788 on September 5, 1995. Section 3. The Comprehensive Plan and amendments is herewith designated as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act by the City's responsible environmental official in accordance with R.C.W. 43.21C.060. Ordinance No. 5253 June 16, 1999 Page 3 Section 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance or any of the Comprehensive Plan amendments adopted herein, is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any Court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5. The Mayor is hereby authorized to implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directions of this legislation to include incorporating into one document the adopted Emergency Comprehensive Plan Text amendments, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and preparing and publishing the amended Comprehensive Plan. Section 6. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force five days from and after its passage, approval, and publication as provided by law INTRODUCED: June 21, 1999 PASSED: Junc 21, 19-99 AR"ROVED: Vetoed July 1, 1999 CHARLES A. BOOTH RECX~SIDERE~ AND PASSED: July 6, 1999 MAYOR Ordinance No. 5253 June 16, 1999 Page 4 Attest: Danielle E. Daskam, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Michael J. Reynolds, City Attorney PUBLISHED: ~//~ <~ Ordinance No. 5253 June 16, 1999 Page 5 Transportationl Threshold or Standard It is necessary to define a LOS standard for transportation facilities to enforce the concurrency requirements of this Comprehensive Plan. If development results in a given facility's service falling below a deftfled LOS standard, concurrency requires that the development causing the deficiency be revised or that the permit for that development be denied. Auburn defines below LOS as: an unacceptable increase in hazard or safety on a roadway; an increase in congestion which constitutes an unacceptable, adverse environmental impact under the State Environmental Policy Act; a significant reduction in any of the four level of service criteria as defined within the policies below. Objective 16.5. To ensure that new development does not degrade transportation facilities to below LOS standards. TR-17 New development shall not be allowed if an LOS is below the LOS standard before development or when the impacts of the :' : : : -:-'. -::'::::' - ':- new development on the transportation system degrades the LOS :-:::: ' to below the LOS standard, unless the condition is remedied concurrent with the development as described in Chapter Six of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan. TR- 18 The term "below the level of service standard" shall apply to situations where traffic attributed to a development results in any of the following: a. An unacceptable increase in hazard or safety on a roadway. b. An increase in congestion which constitutes an unacceptable adverse environmental impact under the State Environmental Policy Act. c. A reduction of any of the three levels of service below the following level of service standards: 1. Arterial Corridor LOS: The Level of Service standard for each arterial corridor is "D" . 2.a. Signalized Intersection LOS: The level of service standard for signalized intersections is LOS "D" , except for those intersections currently below LOS "D" per Figure 7.1 a where their existing LOS as shown in Figure 7.1 is the adopted standard. For the following intersections, the LOS standard is also -' listed below: ] A St./41" St. SE LOS E LOS F Auburn Way S/M St. SE LOS F (75 sec of delay) Auburn Way S/6th St. SE LOS F (75 sees of delay) Auburn Way N/15th St. NE LOS E Harvey Rd. NE/8'h St. NE LOS F (120 sees &delay) W. Valley Hwy/Peasley Cyn Rd LOS E Page 7-13 CHAPTER - I Transportation Goals & Policies corresponding Levels of Service are XV. 8th Street NE: Harvey Rd./"M" presented in Table 1,1, Street to Auburn Way North I_ Auburn Way North: 15th Street NE to northern City limits Intersection LOS I1__, Auburn Way North/South: 4th Signalized Intersections: Street SE to 15th Street NE The City's signalized intersection LOS is "D", except II1~ Auburn Way South: SR18 to "M" for those intersections Street SE currontly below LOS "D" per Table 1.2. In addition, if an IV. Auburn Way South: Howard intersection is listed in Road to Dogwood Table 1.2 A its LOS Standard is shown in that V~ "M" Street/Harvey: Auburn Way table. whorc thoir cxisting_ North to East Main LOS at thc timc of thc adoption of thic plan ic thc VI. "M" Street/Harvey: East Main adoptod standard. :i~ -' :::'-- Auburn Way North :::: -:: -- - :-!.:::::. -.!i!:: :-.. Unsignalized Intersections: VII. South 277th Street: Auburn Way The unsignalized intersection North to West Valley Highway LOS standard shall be LOS "D", calculated as if the VIII. 37th Street NE: West Valley intersection was signalized. A Highway to Auburn Way North traffic signal warrant analysis will be conducted, as needed, IX. 15th Street NW: West Valley to determine if a signal should Highway to Auburn Way North be installed. Table 1.2. shows existing LOS for signalized & X_ Auburn Avenue/"A" Street:Auburn major unsignalized Avenue to southern City limit intersections in Auburn. XI. Main Street: West Valley Highway to "R" Street Arterial Link (Capacity) LOS XII. 15th Street SW: West Valley Road capacity is a function of the Highway to "C" Street SW design of the roadway, particularly the number of lanes. The arterial XIII. "C" Street SW: Ellingson to 15th link (Capacity) LOS will be calculated Street NW by considering the volume-to- capacity ratio for each arterial link. It XIV. West Valley Highway:Northern may be measured in terms of City limits to southern City limits average daily traffic or peak hour traffic or other such measures as Auburn Transportation Plan Page 1.9 CHAPTER - I Transportation Goals & Policies b. A reduction in any of three LOS All roads within Auburn are classified standards as follows: according to their "functional classification". These classifications 1. Arterial Corridor LOS: The describe the character of service that Level of Service standard for a road is intended to provide, as well each arterial corridor is "D". as establish minimum design standards to meet the expected 2.a. Signalized Intersection LOS: performance standards. Roadways The level of c, ervic, c standard forwithin the Auburn Urban Growth signalized intcrsoctions is LOS Area will be designated consistent "D". cxoc, pt for c, crtain with the 1994 edition of "A Policy on intcrsoctions below LOS D. Geometric Design of Highways and Streets" Published by the American The City's signalized Association of State Highway and intersection LOS is "D", except Transportation Officials (AASHTO), for those intersections below the guidelines of the Washington LOS "D" per Table 1.2. In State Department of Transportatie+q · addition, if an intersection is as mandated by RCW 47.05.021, listed in Table 1.2 A its LOS and King County. Roadway Standard is shown in that classifications in Auburn are: ':" :: :table. · Arterial Streets 2.b. Unsignalized Intersection Principal Arterial LOS: The level of service Minor Arterial standard for these intersections, Collector Arterial measured as if it were signalized, shall be level of service "D". A · Rural Roads traffic signal warrant analysis will Rural Collectors be conducted, as necessary, to Rural Residential determine if a signal should be installed. ° Local Streets Local Residential 3. Roadway Link (Capacity) LOS: Local Non-Residential The arterial link (capacity) LOS standard for each arterial link is LOS "D", except for collector Objective: residential arterials. The link To provide an integrated LOS standards for collector street network of appropriate residential arterials is "C". classes of streets designed to facilitate different types of traffic flows and access needs. Functional Classification TR3. Policies: Auburn Transportation Plan Page 1.13 LEVEL OF SERVICE · A ~ COMPREHENSIVE · B TRANSPORTATION 'PLAN n~E 2.7 ,_ IJ · E SmNxUZ~.D m'rm{sEcTxoN Proposed City Comprehensive Plan Policies which can be used for Protection of Endangered Species ENo29 The City will continue to participate and support the various State, Federal and local programs including the Tri-County Endangered Species Act Response and the Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) No. 9 (Green River) and Water Resource Inventory Area (White-Stuck River) to protect and restore endangered species. ENo30 The City shall seek to minimize surface water quality and aquatic habitat degradation of creeks. streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and other water bodies; to preserve and enhance the suitability of such water bodies as habitat for restoration of endangered species. EN-31 The City shall adopt regulations and review development proposals in a manner which employs best management practices and best available science as these become available from Endangered Species Act (ESA) response efforts. ~ PC\CPA1-99EX MEMORANDUM DATE: July 1, 1999 JIlL TO: Council members ' I 1999 FROM: Mayor Sooth CITY CL RK8 OFFICE SUBJECT: Ordinance # 5253 Pursuant to RCW 35A.12.1301 hereby veto ordinance # 5253. I have asked the City Clerk to place the ordinance on the agenda of the July 6, 1999 council meeting for reconsideration of the ordinance. My objection to the ordinance is that it essentially establishes an impact fee schedule without complying with the requirements of RCW 82.02.050(3) which is the state law governing the establishment of impact fees. In addition, mitigation fees, pursuant to WAC 197-11-660, can only be exacted through the use of SEPA if the city has adopted policies that support the exaction, the exaction is directly related to the impact of the development, and the development is only required to pay its proportionate share of its impact. In my opinion the fees established by ordinance # 5253 do not meet these tests. I would offer as an alternative, to the fees the council proposed as part of he emergency comprehensive plan amendments, the following policy be adopted as part of the comprehensive plan. "Based upon traffic impact studies required by SEPA, any development that impacts the 41 st St. SE and "A" ST. SE intersection shall pay its pro rata share of intersection improvements at the intersection of Lakeland Hills Way and the East Valley Highway. The City of Auburn will collect any such fees for the exclusive purpose of sharing the total costs of these intersection improvements with the City of Pacific."