Loading...
Planning Comm MINS 03-07-2001 City of Federal Way PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Meeting March 7, 2001 City Hall 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers MEETING SUMMARY Commissioners present: Karen Kirkpatrick Hope Elder, Nesbia Lopes, John Caulfield, Dini Duclos, and Dave Osaki. Commissioners absent: Bill Drake. Staff present: Community Development Services Deputy Director Greg Fewins, Senior Planner Margaret Clark, Consultant David Graves; City Attorney Bob Sterbank; Traffic Engineer Rick Perez; and Administrative Assistant E. Tina Piety. Chairwoman Kirkpatrick called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. It was m/s/c to amend the agenda to include an Executive Session just before the Public Hearing. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The February 21, 2001, meeting minutes were approved as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENT None. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT None. COMMISSION BUSINESS Commissioner Lopes excused herself from this portion of the meeting due to a possible conflict of interest. Executive Session At 7:05 p.m., the Planning Commission recessed to Executive Session to discuss potential litigation under RCW 42.30.110(l)(i) for seven minutes. At 7:12, the commission announced they would take another five minutes. The meeting resumed at 7:20 p.m. Public Hearing Continued – Mega-Churches Code Amendments David Graves presented the staff report. He went over the material given to the commission at the meeting. He then reviewed the staff report, which is a response to questions raised at the last meeting. The commission questioned whether the city can legally allow a private school where public schools are not allowed and whether the city can limit the number of students at said school. Staff replied that the school would not be there without the church, and hence, is an accessory use. As such, the city can correlate the size of the school to the size of the church. Planning Commission Page 2 March 7, 2001 K:\Planning Commission\2001\Meeting Summary 03-07-01.doc/Last printed 1/10/2005 5:01 PM The commission asked if the city has considered other zoning districts. Staff replied that they have not considered any other zoning district in depth. However, many districts do not have many large parcels, some are intended for smaller “Mom & Pop” type businesses, and because traffic is such an issue, the city chose a zone in which much of the land is near arterials. The commission requested the staff provided employee information and size from Overlake Christian Church as a comparison. They also requested information on which zones is development occurring along SR 99. Staff will provide this information. Chairwoman Kirkpatrick opened the Public Testimony. Gil Hulsman, 1001 Shaw Road, Puyallup – He presented the commission with a chart comparing normal uses allowed in Business Park (BP) zones to a Mega-Church. The chart compared the traffic, permit process, storm requirements, minimum lot size, set backs, parking, landscape requirements, lot coverage, and building heights associated with each use. He remarked that the developer is responsible to mitigate for any impacts, and a school/church would have more stringent requirements than a business. Morgan Llewellyn, 603 West Gowe Street, Kent – He thanked the commission and staff for their work. He spoke to the market study. Currently, there is four million square feet of BP area available in the city, which could provide for 4,900 jobs. Yet the market study shows that only 500 BP jobs will be generated in the near future. The growth is in retail, finance, and real estate. Tim Babcock, 30424 8th Avenue SW – Due to the problems this area has had with young people (drugs, gangs, loitering, cruising, etc.) having a safe place they could go would be a benefit to the community. The proposed church would provide such a place. Gary Robertson, 2100 South 336th, #H3 – He lives in the Forest Lane Townhomes. He is against the proposed code amendment. This would not be an appropriate place for a church. He is concerned with the traffic. The area is already congested, and this would just add more. He is not convinced the church could develop a traffic plan that could deal with the problem. He is concerned that traffic from the church’s first service would compete with that of the second service. He feels the congestion would lower property values. Mary Sawyer, 2005 South 331st – If we open up to one large church, how can we stop another? We would be facing the same problems all over again. She is concerned with traffic and depressed property values. This proposed code amendment disregards three comprehensive plan goals. It would lead to more pollution, loss of tax revenue, and be a heavy impact on public services. Walter Vadai, 1830 South 336th, #E101 – He has been a homeowner since 1991 and is associated with the church. He would rather have a church on the property than a business. He feels a business would cause bigger problems. What the church would bring to the community is worth any problems. It would bring an economic boom to the area. Rick Brassfield, 5590 Bevery Avenue, Tacoma – He commented that the Federal Way business community supports the amendment. It would create a healthy environment for business. He asked the audience members to stand if they support the amendment (many stood). Planning Commission Page 3 March 7, 2001 K:\Planning Commission\2001\Meeting Summary 03-07-01.doc/Last printed 1/10/2005 5:01 PM Elizabeth Kari, 2012 South 331st Street – She presented a letter to the commission opposed to the amendment. She commented that it has been stated that people have a right to religion; hence the city has to allow the church. She disagrees. The church would have a negative impact on the community. She feels the commission (and city) is just looking for reasons to approve the amendment. Why is the church more important then our quality of life? Don Putman, 2656 SW 343rd Street – He asked, since the school enrollment is limited to 50 percent of the size of the church, what do you base the size of the church on? Is it the number of members, or how many attend? He attends a church where the membership is about 400, but the number who attends each weekend is closer to 2,000. He expressed concern that since this will be a private school, many parents will be driving their children to and from school, adding to the traffic congestion. He also questions whether the city can legally restrict the number of school attendees. Martin Durkan, 330 SW 43rd Street, Renton – He commented that both sides of this issue have gotten off track. The Planning Commission should consider the possible impacts of the code amendment. He believes Abbey Road [Gil Hulsmann] has done a good job of laying out the possible impacts. There is a 20-year supply of BP land in Federal Way. We have seen an increase in that demand, but the economy is now slower, so that demand will probably slow down. The Market Study shows that the growth isn’t in the BP zone. There is very little land 25+ acres in size available in Federal Way. As far as the loss of taxes goes, there would be mitigation fees and ongoing utility taxes. There would be intangible benefits associated with a church. Jodi Putman, 2656 SW 343rd Street – She is worried about this property being taken off the tax rolls. It would hurt schools, which depend on taxes. Federal Way is trying to build up our city and therefore, we need to increase the tax roll, which would help schools. How much land is available and how much would potentially be taken off the tax rolls? Chairwoman Kirkpatrick closed the Public Testimony. The commission requested a copy of the Market Study because it is referred to so often. Staff will provide them with a copy, and noted that it is also available on the city’s web page. The commission asked about Don Putman’s question of what would the size of the church be based upon and how that would effect the school enrollment. Staff remarked that development capacity also plays a role in determining the school enrollment number. The commission asked for clarification of Note #3 on the BP use chart that discusses using the parking lot as a Park & Ride lot. Has this been taken into account in the traffic information the commission has received? Rick Perez, Traffic Engineer, replied that the city has not assumed a Park & Ride in the traffic information given. He noted that many jurisdictions use churches for Park & Ride lots because of their availability during the week. Also, a Park & Ride depends on the transit use in that area. The area in question is not a major transit route. The commission asked for clarification of Note #2 on the BP use chart that discusses the use of church facilities by the public for such things as community meetings, public performances, etc. Is this enforceable and would it apply to other churches that are not mega-churches? Staff replied that this note would not apply to non-mega-churches. In addition, it is not enforceable. It was placed here so that mega-church projects would consider allowing public use of their facilities. Planning Commission Page 4 March 7, 2001 K:\Planning Commission\2001\Meeting Summary 03-07-01.doc/Last printed 1/10/2005 5:01 PM It was m/s/c to continue the Public Hearing to April 4, 2001, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS None. AUDIENCE COMMENT None. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m.