HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUTC MINS 09-11-2006G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2006\09-11-06 LUTC Minutes.doc
City of Federal Way
City Council
Land Use/Transportation Committee
September 11, 2006 City Hall
5:00 pm City Council Chambers
MEETING MINUTES
In attendance: Committee Chair Jack Dovey; Committee Member Dean McColgan; Committee Member Eric Faison
(arrived 5:20); Council Member Linda Kochmar; Council Member Jeanne Burbidge, Community Development Services
Director Kathy McClung; Community Development Services Deputy Director Greg Fewins; Contract Planner Janet
Shull; Public Works Director Cary Roe; Deputy Director Ken Miller; Streets Project Engineer Al Emter; Streets System
Engineer John Mulkey; City Traffic Engineer Rick Perez; Deputy City Attorney Karen Kirkpatrick; Administrative
Assistant II Tina Piety; City Manager Neal Beets; Assistant City Manager Derek Matherson
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Dovey called the meeting to order at 5:07 pm. Chairman Dovey stated that Council Member Eric Faison
is probably stuck in traffic and is excused until he arrives.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The August 21, 2006, minutes were approved.
Moved: McColgan Seconded: Dovey Passed: Unanimously
3. PUBLIC COMMENT
None
4. BUSINESS ITEMS
A. Acceptance of Grant Funding for Transportation Improvement Project.
Al Emter provided the background information on this item. Chairman Dovey recused himself and this item
was placed on hold until Committee Member Eric Faison could arrive. Council Member Eric Faison arrived at
5:20 p.m. and the vote was held.
Moved: McColgan Seconded: Faison Passed: Unanimously
Committee PASSED Option 1 on to the September 19, 2006, City Council Consent Agenda.
B. South 356th Street at SR 99 Intersection Improvements Project – 85% Design Status Report
Al Emter provided the background information on this item. Council Member McColgan asked when is the
city likely to know if the we have been awarded the grants. Mr. Emter replied the city should know by the end
of the year. Council Member McColgan then asked where the funds will come from for the anticipated
shortfall. Cary Roe replied that city will not know until a decision is made on the grants whether there is an
actually shortfall or not, and will research the funding issue at that time.
Moved: McColgan Seconded: Dovey Passed: Unanimously
Committee PASSED Option 1 on to the September 19, 2006, City Council Consent Agenda.
C. 2006 Asphalt Overlay Project – Project Acceptance
John Mulkey provided the background information on this item. Council Member Burbidge noted that
Schedule E was added back in and asked if the funding is available. Mr. Mulkey replied that the funding is
available and stated that the anticipated cost is below the proposed budget.
Land Use/Transportation Committee Page 2 September 11, 2006
G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2006\09-11-06 LUTC Minutes.doc
Moved: McColgan Seconded: Dovey Passed: Unanimously
Committee PASSED Option 1 on to the September 19, 2006, City Council Consent Agenda.
D. Cottage at Hoyt Road – Final Plat
Janet Shull provided the background on this item. She noted that the name of the plat has changed to Grande
Vista.
Moved: McColgan Seconded: Faison Passed: Unanimously
Committee PASSED the staff recommendation to forward the final plat on to the September 19, 2006, City
Council Consent Agenda.
E. PAA Update – Store Creek and Von Doenhoff
Kathy McClung provided the background on this item. She noted that the city may be required to separate the
two annexation areas for voting purposes. The Boundary Review Board determined that the areas must connect
in some fashion in order to hold one vote. If they do not connect (which is currently the case) a vote must be
done for each area. The staff is researching this issue and possible ways of connecting the areas. This is an
issue for the city because a separate vote may not meet our population requirements per the state tax incentive
and will not meet the requirements for the King County agreement. The City of Milton has not made any
decisions on the Stone Creek subdivision area, but Federal Way staff is proceeding with the Federal Way City
Council’s position to prepare an annexation resolution for the area completely within our PAA.
F. Road Connectivity – Comp Plan Policy & Codes
Rick Perez provided the background on this item. Chairman Dovey commented that no decision will be made
on this issue this evening. This item is to inform Council Members of the policies provided in the current city
code and comprehensive plan.
Public Testimony
Jan Mauritz, 31219 36th Avenue SW. He lives close to the double cul-de-sac. He feels the overall policy
for connectivity would destroy his neighborhood. It isn’t proactive. An attempt to solve a problem in
one neighborhood would cause a problem in another neighborhood.
Mary Wendt, resident of Bayview Country Estates, on 36th Avenue SW. She understands the need for
roads, but it makes no sense to open up arterials in established neighborhoods. Those who live in the
neighborhood know where to look for children and where to slow down, someone passing through will
not. She doesn’t believe the argument that more access is needed for police and fire because she
doesn’t believe they would travel such a convoluted route.
James Church, 3620 SW 309th Street. Was on the homeowners association a few years ago and work to
ensure police and fire had keys to the gate. He likes his neighborhood the way it is. Opening the gate
would not benefit Bayview or Twin Lakes and would cause deterioration of the neighborhoods. The
streets are narrow and he sees no reason to open the gate.
Robert Hankinson, 3628 SW 309th Street. He stated that it seems the impetus for this issue didn’t come
from the developer, or even the city, in that it has to do with policy. So he reviewed the policies and
feels the following comprehensive plan policies seem to mandate against opening the gate: TP23,
TP25, and TP37. One consequence of opening the gate is that some traffic will pass through
neighborhoods that are not use to that traffic. This would bring congestion and diminish the security
and safety of the neighborhoods. He is strongly opposed to opening the gate on a permanent basis.
Scott Glasgow, 31503 36th Avenue SW. He lives on the north side looking down the cul-de-sac. There is
already a lot of traffic on 36th Avenue SW and the width of the street is a problem. If cars are parked
on both sides of the street, it wouldn’t be safe for two cars to pass between them because there isn’t
enough room. There is also a dip in the road.
Land Use/Transportation Committee Page 3 September 11, 2006
G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2006\09-11-06 LUTC Minutes.doc
Christian Jeager, 313th Street SW (near Dumas Bay Park). His home has a direct view of the proposed
connection. He would be directly affected by increased traffic, noise, and light pollution. His folks live
in Twin Lakes near the proposed connection and are opposed to another access to Twin Lakes. There
is no need for additional access. Concerned that while it would provide access for emergency vehicles;
others would use it and would create the need for another traffic light. It would destroy the peace of a
long-standing neighborhood. The question is who would really benefit? He is also concerned about the
land clearing. Who would benefit other than the developer? Developers have been giving carte
blanche to develop what ever pristine land is left within the city limits. Further development degrades
the quality of life in Federal Way. The road connectivity issue seems to be a smoke screen for cutting
down the trees to make room for another development we don’t need or want. He asked the city to
consider dealing with the on-going traffic problems at 21st and 22nd Avenues SW at 356th Street.
Ken Wilson, 30908 36th Avenue SW. He is the president of the Bayview Estates HOA. There was an
agreement between King County, Bayview Estates, and Twin Lakes for the crash gate. He asked the
City of Federal Way to maintain that agreement.
Council Member Kochmar asked how does the block perimeter standards apply in this instance. Mr. Perez
replied that first it is difficult to be specific on this issue, since the city does not have an application for
Soundview Manor. However, to extend 314th without creating a connection to Dash Point Road could create
two nonconforming issues: one to the block perimeter standard and the other to the maximum cul-de-sac length.
Council Member Faison commented that it is important to have policies in place and the ones we have are
good. However, they should not be applied blindly. Projects should be considered on a case-by-case basis and
what is best for the city and the neighborhood considered.
Council Member Faison commented that there is a project planned for the intersection at 21st and 356th to deal
with the traffic problems. In regards to development and not caring about the trees, through the comprehensive
plan, the city is trying to maintain its neighborhood character and concentrate growth in the downtown area. As
long as a developer meets the code, it is not up to the city to tell them they cannot develop their property.
Council Member McColgan commented that the City Council must look at the city as a whole. The city is
mandated by the Growth Management Act to have a certain amount of housing growth. The city is researching
a tree retention plan, but that would mean more of a cost for developers, who most likely will pass that extra
cost on to the buyer.
Council Member Burbidge commented that the city has established policies and this discussion has uncovered
some challenges to those policies. Many of the challenges are due to decisions made before the city incorporated.
Chairman Dovey asked if the staff has held any discussions about opening the gate at Bayview Estates. Mr.
Roe replied no discussions have been held by staff on this issue. This is not an issue that has been raised by
staff. Currently, the city does not have an application for development in the area and staff has had no reason to
discuss this issue. The opening of the gate is a concern raised by those living in the neighborhood.
Chairman Dovey commented that he asked that this issue be placed on the agenda so that the Committee could
gain understanding of the policies and give staff guidance. Mr. Roe commented that the general policy does
make sense. Staff may need guidance on where it is most important to implement these policies. Mr. Perez
commented that another area of guidance is how much traffic is acceptable on a particular street. Is there an
acceptable range on the ideal number of lots on a cul-de-sac?
Chairman Dovey asked if the fire department has been included in discussions of the issue. Mr. Perez replied
that the fire department is asked to review proposed developments. In addition, he has discussed this issue with
them and the fire department responded that since they include areas outside of the city, they follow King
County policy. Chairman Dovey asked that the fire department be keep appraised of this issue.
Land Use/Transportation Committee Page 4 September 11, 2006
G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2006\09-11-06 LUTC Minutes.doc
Council Member Faison commented that it is important to emphasis connectivity closer to the downtown and
not so much in outlying areas.
Council Member Kochmar commented that the city has a system of streets build on poor previous policies. The
city must take into account what exists when looking at connectivity, rather than insist on following a policy.
In addition, she suggested that topography be taken into account.
Public Testimony
George Adams. He asked Mr. Perez if he had measured the street, and if so, from where to where. Mr.
Perez commented that he had measured the street and the measurement was from gutter line to gutter
line. Mr. Adams then commented he had spoken to another engineer who had measured the street from
asphalt to asphalt. Mr. Perez replied that measurements for asphalt overlays are to a different
standard (namely asphalt to asphalt). Mr. Adams then stated that while the street meets code, it barely
meets the code width and this should be taken into account when making decisions regarding the street.
Ann Ransome, 314th Street. She commented that soon after the city incorporated an application was
made to develop condominiums in this area. At that time, the City Council the development should be
denied because of the steepness of the road. Is the city changing their decision?
Chairman Dovey commented that the current City Council makes it decisions on current developments based
on the current city code and comprehensive plan. Because of this, a current City Council decision on a current
development could be different than a previous City Council decision on a previous development.
5. FUTURE MEETINGS
The next scheduled meeting will be September 18, 2006.
6. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 6:26 p.m.