Planning Comm MINS 05-21-2003K:\Planning Commission\2003\Meeting Summary 05-21-03.doc
City of Federal Way
PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
May 21, 2003 City Hall
7:00 p.m. Council Chambers
MEETING SUMMARY
Commissioners present: John Caulfield, Hope Elder, Dave Osaki, Grant Newport, and Dini Duclos.
Commissioners absent (excused): Marta Justus Foldi and Bill Drake. Alternate Commissioners present:
Merle Pfeifer and Lawson Bronson. Alternate Commissioners absent (excused): Tony Moore and Christine
Nelson. Staff present: Community Development Services Director Kathy McClung, Senior Planner
Margaret Clark, Consultant Janet Shull, Deputy City Attorney Karen Kirkpatrick, Assistant City Attorney
Karen Jorgensen, and Administrative Assistant E. Tina Piety.
Chair Caulfield called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
APPROVAL OF SUMMARY
A question arose regarding a statement in the meeting summary and the Clerk of the Commission was asked
to review the tape and correct the statement if it is incorrect.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Moved to the end of the meeting.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
PUBLIC HEARING – Changes to Business Park Use Zone Charts Code Amendments
It was m/s/c to open the Public Hearing at 7:05 p.m. Ms. Clark introduced Janet Shull of Janet Shull
Designs who gave the staff presentation. The City received two requests from citizens to amend the
Business Park zone to:
1. Allow more office space per tenant.
2. Allow existing nonconforming single tenant office buildings to be permitted outright.
The requests went before the City Council and were deemed to have merit. Ms. Shull presented three
options for each request, which are outlined in the staff report. In order to eliminate confusion, staff
developed a new use zone chart for office in Business Park (BP) (Exhibit A in the staff report). Therefore,
Planning Commission Summary Page 2 May 21, 2003
K:\Planning Commission\2003\Meeting Summary 05-21-03.doc/Last printed 1/10/2005 2:51 PM
the notes pertaining to office use are to be removed from the other BP use zone charts (Exhibit B in the
staff report). Staff developed three options in response to each request (see the Staff Report). In response to
request #1, the staff recommendation is Option B:
Allow office use to utilize up to 50 percent of the total gross area of one or more buildings
located on the same parcel in the BP zone.
This is a change from emphasis on the tenant to the building/parcel. Meaning that a building/parcel could
have one or more tenants that are solely office, and others that are light industrial, so long as the office
tenant(s) occupy no more than 50 percent of the building/parcel.
In response to request #2, the staff recommendation is Option C:
Allow office use as a stand-alone use only on parcels in the BP zone that are less than 1.5
acres in size, were platted prior to incorporation, and are not under common ownership.
In their research, staff discovered that many parcels in the BP zone are less than 1.5 acres in size and many
of those are stand alone office use. They are currently legally nonconforming and this amendment would
make them conforming. Staff feels it is important to have some land in the City dedicated to light industrial
use, which is why they applied this amendment to parcels less than 1.5 acres in size.
The Commission asked how many parcels exist outside the BP zone for office and what input could this
have on them? Staff replied that they do not have this information, but they know that there is vacant office
space. If BP were to be fully opened up to office, this could have an impact on other office zones. The
Commission opened the hearing to Public Testimony.
Bob Hart, Fedway Associates II LP – He stated there would be design issues when converting a
building designed for industrial use to one for office use. The parking is less for industrial, there
are loading docks, and the buildings tend to be longer with fewer windows. He said the
staff/Commission should not designate a percentage for office use. The amount of office needed
is different for different buildings. Some may only need about 10 percent of their building for
office; others may need 70 percent for office.
Lawson Bronson, Alternate Planning Commissioner – He commented that all uses in place
before the City incorporated should be grandfathered. They should be considered conforming
and allowed to make any improvements they want and/or need. If the type of business changes,
then they should be required to conform to the current zoning code.
The Commission expressed concern that under the staff recommendation, there would still be
nonconforming office use in the BP zone. Staff responded that to their knowledge, there is only one parcel
that would remain nonconforming under this code amendment. Commissioner Elder commented that office
is our strength in this City. We should allow the market to dictate and therefore allow office without
restrictions in the BP zone and thereby, build upon our strength.
It was m/s/c (four yes, one no) to adopt the staff recommendation (Request #1, Option B), to allow office
use to utilize up to 50 percent of the total gross area of one or more buildings located on the same parcel in
the BP zone. It was m/s/c (four yes, one no) to adopt the staff recommendation (Request #2, Option C), to
allow office use as a stand-alone use only on parcels in the BP zone that are less than 1.5 acres in size,
were platted prior to incorporation, and are not under common ownership.
Planning Commission Summary Page 3 May 21, 2003
K:\Planning Commission\2003\Meeting Summary 05-21-03.doc/Last printed 1/10/2005 2:51 PM
The Public Hearing was closed at 8:12 p.m.
The Commission asked if there was intent to review the BP zone? Staff replied that the City Council has
approved a review of the BP zone that will look at such items as the mix of uses, traffic concerns/impacts,
economic development, and more. The Commission feels strongly that the BP zone needs to be reviewed
for intent, uses, and best interest for the City. They also feel the trigger for nonconforming needs to be
reviewed. Many of the issues they see deal with nonconforming and how the changes/improvements
owners want to make exceed the trigger. It may be that the trigger should be changed.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Ms. McClung introduced Karen Jorgensen, the City’s new Assistant City Attorney. Ms. Jorgensen will be
working with Community Development. Ms. McClung commented that the staff is in full agreement with
the Commission on reviewing the BP zone. The next Planning Commission meeting will be June 18 and
the topics will be oversized vehicles and a presentation on Robert’s Rules of Order. We will also meet July
2, unless there will not be a quorum. She asked Commissioners to let her know whether they will be in
attendance or not. We have completed the 2002 Comprehensive Plan updates and will be starting the 2003
very soon. At this point, the staff only has specific parcel requests to review, no changes to chapters.
Different City departments are working on aspects that if they are completed, we may have chapter updates
for the comprehensive plan. The PAA study continues and we hope to be done by the end of the year. We
have selected a consultant for the Downtown Planned Action SEPA. Improvements have been made to the
City’s Geographic Information System. We will let you know when a presentation on the improvements
will be given to the LUTC so you may come to the meeting, or watch it on TV. Kitt’s Corner is slowly
making process. Ms. McClung met with them last week. The City will begin to accept application for
Passports in June. The Volunteer Banquet is Friday, May 30.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
None.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None.
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m.