LUTC MINS 11-15-2010City of Federal Way
City Council
Land Use/Transportation Committee
November 15, 2010 City Hall
5:30 PM City Council Chambers
MEETING SUMMARY
Committee Members in Attendance: Committee Chair Dini Duclos, Committee Member Jack Dovey and Committee
Member Jim Ferrell.
Council Members in Attendance: Mayor Linda Kochmar and Council Member Burbidge
Staff Members in Attendance: Director of Parks, Public Works and Emergency Management Cary Roe, Director of
Community Development Services Greg Fewins, Planning Manager Isaac Conlen, City Traffic Engineer Rick Perez,
Principal Planner Margaret Clark, Senior Planner Deb Barker, Associate Planner Matt Herrera, Assistant City Attorney Peter
Beckwith, and Administrative Assistant II Darlene LeMaster.
1. CALL TO ORDER
Committee Chair Duclos called the meeting to order at 5:39 PM.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
3. BUSINESS ITEMS
Forward
Topic Title/Description to Council
A.
Approval of the November 1, 2010, LUTC Minutes
Committee approved November 1, 2010, LUTC minutes as presented.
Moved: Dovey Seconded: Ferrell Passed: Unanimously, 3-0
N/A
B.
Zoning and Development Code Text Amendments Related to Keeping Chicken and Ducks
Associate Planner Matt Herrera presented information on this item. There was one public
comment:
Elbert Fields, 30412 11th Ave S – Mr. Fields stated that chicken grain and feed is attractive to
mice and rats. Chickens are also vulnerable to coyotes.
Committee Member Dovey asked where Suburban Estates (SE) zones existed inside City limits.
Mr. Herrera replied that there is a small area near Dumas Bay/Camp Kilworth as well as in the
Spring Valley area. Roosters have and will be allowed in the SE zone because farming is a
permitted use in the SE zone and roosters conform to that use. Committee Member Dovey
commented that the SE zone near Dumas Bay is surrounded by smaller parcels and wondered if
crowing roosters might be a problem to neighboring residents. Mr. Herrera noted that roosters
in the SE zone of the Dumas Bay area have not been addressed as a concern.
In an effort to standardize the types of coops that residents build, Committee Member Dovey
supports requiring three alternatives for chicken coop design. Mr. Herrera responded that the
City’s existing nuisance regulations don’t allow for chickens to roam off of their owner’s
property; it would be considered out of compliance. Mr. Herrera noted that the City of Seattle
has a great resource handout available to residents that offers suggested designs and materials
for chicken coops as well as lots of advice on caring for urban chickens. The pamphlet also lists
a variety of resources available to residents that have additional questions.
Dec. 7, 2010
Ordinance
First Reading
Land Use/Transportation Committee Page 2 November 15, 2010
G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2010\11-15-10 Minutes.doc
Committee Member Dovey stated that he has strong feelings on having regulations/required
plans for chicken coops. He wants more than a reference pamphlet with suggestions. Chair
Duclos and Committee Member Ferrell were also in agreement.
Council Member Burbidge commented that chickens won’t always be in their coops. How will
“coop” be defined? It will be important to have resources available on raising chickens and
ducks as well as how to protect them from predators.
Committee Member Dovey asked about the ten foot setback. Mr. Herrera stated that the setback
is for the structure only. Best practices say that four chickens require between 24 to 48 square
feet.
Committee Member Dovey also would like to see roosters banned immediately. After
discussion between committee and council members, the consensus was to allow residents six
months to get rid of their roosters.
Committee Member Dovey moved to adopt the Planning Commission’s recommendation
as amended to codify language in the Code that allows for three (3) alternatives for chicken
coops and to reduce the time for owners to comply with no roosters to six months from the
date of enactment.
Moved: Dovey Seconded: Ferrell Passed: Unanimously, 3-0
C.
Portable Signs in Street Side Planter Strips Code Amendment
Senior Planner Deb Barker presented information on this item. There was no public comment:
Sam Pace – Seattle/King Co. Association of Realtors, 29839 154th Ave SE, Kent – Mr. Pace
wanted to thank the Committee for their consideration of this code amendment.
Committee Member Dovey asked Mr. Pace if he approves of the drafted language. Mr. Pace
responded that he is not sure the language regarding a sight distance triangle reserve area would
hold up in court, however, he did not see that as an issue. Mr. Pace feels the proposed code
language may be a viable solution for portable signs in street side planter strips.
Committee Member Dovey commented further that the sight distance triangle reserve area
serves as a sight distance safety area. Chair Duclos confirmed with Mr. Herrera that a portable
sign placed outside of the sight distance triangle reserve area would be acceptable. Chair Duclos
commented in favor of the enhanced photo depicting the sight distance triangle reserve area,
saying it helped her understand the portable sign language.
City Traffic Engineer Perez addressed the Committee and offered some further explanation of
the code language. Explaining that the existing City Code allows for a larger sign that could
cause a sight distance issue, staff felt the better option was to propose the sight distance triangle
reserve area with the existing sign size versus reducing the sign size for this permitted use.
Enforcing the code would become complicated with varying sign sizes.
Committee Member Dovey suggested distributing a handout/brochure for realtors to have on this
code amendment. There was brief discussion on how to do that… potentially by emailing a .pdf
of the brochure to area real estate offices and having them print and distribute to their
colleagues.
Mayor Kochmar was concerned over the possibility that someone could sue the City on this
issue. Asst. City Atty. Beckwith stated that worst scenario is that the court may rule our code
language non-constitutional and the code would revert to its former language, thereby making
the language more restrictive.
Dec. 7, 2010
Ordinance
First Reading
Land Use/Transportation Committee Page 3 November 15, 2010
G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2010\11-15-10 Minutes.doc
Mr. Pace reiterated that he did not foresee anyone taking the City to court on this issue. Also, he
would volunteer to help distribute any educational materials on sight distance triangle reserve
area to area brokers. Mr. Pace and the Committee discussed the sketched diagram and the
enhanced photo diagram of the sight distance triangle reserve area and concluded that both
depictions should be included in the code amendment.
Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented.
Moved: Dovey Seconded: Ferrell Passed: Unanimously, 3-0
4. OTHER
Committee Member Ferrell requested the next LUTC meeting be scheduled for 6:00 PM.
5. FUTURE MEETING
The next LUTC meeting will be held Monday, 12/6/10 at 6:00 PM in City Hall Council Chambers.
6. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 6:13 PM.
Attest:
Darlene LeMaster, Administrative Assistant II
COMMITTEE APPROVAL:
Dini Duclos, Chair Jim Ferrell, Member Jack Dovey, Member