Loading...
LUTC MINS 01-21-2005G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2005\01-24-05, LUTC Minutes.doc MEETING MINUTES In attendance: Committee members Jack Dovey, Chair, and Council Members Eric Faison and Michael Park; Deputy Mayor Linda Kochmar; Council Member Jeanne Burbidge; City Manager David Moseley; Director of Community Development Services Kathy McClung; Director of Public Works Cary Roe; Deputy City Attorney Karen Kirkpatrick; Deputy Community Development Director Greg Fewins; Senior Planner Margaret Clark; Deputy Public Works Director Ken Miller; Surface Water Manager Paul Bucich; Traffic Engineer Rick Perez; Senior Traffic Engineer Maryanne Zukowski; SWM Project Engineer Fei Tang; and Administrative Assistant E. Tina Piety. 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Dovey called the meeting to order at 4:30 pm. He informed everyone that Council Member Faison will be late. 2. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES The minutes of the January 10, 2005, meeting were approved as presented. 3. PUBLIC COMMENT None. 4. BUSINESS ITEMS A. City Center Access Study – Briefing #5 – Ms. Zukowski informed the Committee the accomplishments of the study to date. A public open house will be held February 3, 2005, where the preferred options will be presented. In March, staff will present the Committee their recommendation. B. Sound Transit Long-Range Plan Updates Draft Supplemental EIS – Ms. Michaelson informed the Committee that Sound Transit is seeking comments on the Draft Supplemental EIS by January 31, 2005. For this reason, she requested that all Council Members present be allowed to vote on this issue since there will not be time to send it to the full Council. Chair Dovey agreed that all Council Members present may vote on this issue. Ms. Michaelson stated that this is the first step in a phased environmental review process. This first step is a board overview of the environmental issues. A more comprehensive specific project environmental review will occur later. The Committee would like the comments left vague regarding whether the route would follow the SR-99 or I-5 corridor. It was m/s/c to authorize staff to prepare written comments on the Draft SEIS as outlined in the staff report; leaving room to modify the comments if a significant issue arises at tonight’s Sound Transit Open House and leaving open whether the route should follow the SR-99 or I-5 corridor. C. 2004 Comprehensive Plan Selection Process – Ms. Clark informed the Committee that the City received only one site-specific request for a change to the comprehensive plan designation and zoning. Specifically, the request is from Puget Center Partnership to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 4.03 acres located north of South 312th Street and east of 1st Avenue South from Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood Business (BN). Chair Dovey asked if there was any public testimony. Paul Benton – He is the owner of the property and stated he supports the staff report. He asked the Committee to accept the request. City of Federal Way City Council Land Use/Transportation Committee January 24, 2005 City Hall 4:30 p.m. Council Chambers G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2005\01-24-05, LUTC Minutes.doc Don Barker – He responded to a question, he informed the Committee that they have prepared a conceptual analysis and anticipate (and have interest from) they will place a grocery store and drug store on the site. They intend to work with the neighborhood on the site plan for the project. It was m/s/c to recommend that the Puget Center Partnership site-specific request be considered further and that it be forwarded to the full City Council for consideration during a public hearing on February 15, 2005. D. Planning Commission Work Program – Ms. McClung informed the Committee that she has made a few changes to the recommendation. She has moved traffic concurrency to the third quarter because staff has concluded the issue is more complex than originally thought. As a result, cottage housing has been moved to the second quarter and neighborhood business to the third. It was m/s/c to recommend the staff’s proposed Planning Commission Work Program prioritization to the full City Council for approval on February 15, 2005. E. King County Interlocal Agreement – This interlocal agreement deals with permitting and code enforcement issues in the recently annexed areas. The general intent of the agreement is that the county will maintain primary review authority for vested permits, but will allow the City to assume review authority for individual permits on a case-by-case basis. King County cannot approve any vested permits until an agreement is reached. This interlocal agreement must be approved by the City of Federal Way and King County to be valid. It was m/s/c to recommend that the City Council approve the interlocal agreement regarding vested building and land use permitting and code enforcement in the North Lake, Parkway, and Redondo East annexation areas, and that the issue be moved forward to the February 15, 2005, Council meeting. F. Commercial Vehicles in Right-of-Way – The purpose of this item is to seek Council direction as to whether the City should further restrict on-street parking of commercial vehicles in residential zones. Chair Dovey asked if there was any public testimony. Marie Sciacqua – She has lived in Federal Way for over 20 years and asked the Committee what is their vision of the City’s future? She stated that she hoped that vision includes making the City a better place to live. Further restricting on-street parking of commercial vehicles in residential zones would help attain that vision. She feels the current code is not adequate. It allows on-street parking during the day until midnight. One must call after midnight to have the code enforced. She requested that the City not allow any commercial vehicles to park in residential zones. Larry Jackson – He asked, if the City outlaws commercial vehicles from residential zones, what about when you need a plumber or want to move? Jean Atwell – She commented that they are not asking that commercial vehicles never be allowed to park in residential zones, just that they not be allowed to park all day and/or all not with no activity. She said that in her neighborhood, the driver of a commercial vehicle is apparently aware of the code because he will park the vehicle until midnight and then move it, waking up his neighbors with the noise. Mr. Roe commented that the staff has spoken to the police about this issue and the police responded that do not have many infractions of this code and it does not appear to be a big problem. The police stated that they are willing to perform emphasis patrols in neighborhoods that perceive a problem. The Committee discussed that there can also be a problem with the number of vehicles parked by one property owner in a neighborhood. The Committee requested staff return with a matrix of what is done in other cities and a recommendation. G. Code Compliance Presentation – Ms. Martin delivered a presentation on the Code Compliance program. Currently, the City has two Code Compliance Officers, both of whom have been with the City for at least 12 years. The number of cases has steadily increased (not including sing code issues) from 260 per year in 1990 to 450 per year in 2004. The City handles cases on a complaint basis only. Obstacles faced by the program included uncollected fines, legal constraints, procedural constraints, and practical constraints. G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2005\01-24-05, LUTC Minutes.doc The Department has worked to improve the program and the following improvements are either in place or in process: improvements to the process; utilizing volunteers; proactive neighborhood emphasis; and improvements to the abatement process. H. East Branch Lakota Creek Restoration/100% Design Authority to Bid – When staff first designed this project it was decided to disconnect a R/D. Upon further review, the staff concluded that the R/D was useful for a safety valve and decided it would stay. The property owners of the land the R/D is on want the R/D to be removed. The water for this R/D goes in and than directly out, so depending on the amount of the flow, sometimes there is no water in the R/D. In the past, the question had been raised about who is responsible to maintain the R/D. Staff had researched the issue and found that the R/D was created with the plat in 1974 and was marked as a drainage easement. The staff concluded that the easement is a private easement, and therefore, the property owners are responsible for maintaining the R/D. Chair Dovey asked if there was any public testimony. Mark Anderson – He is the lawyer for the property owners. He wonders why the City calls the area a R/D when it is referred to as a drainage easement on the original plat. He noted that the original plans called for the removal of the drainage easement and then the City decided to use it as a back-up. He asked; why not just use the street? There is no need to use the Zurilgen’s property. He stated that having water on the property was a concern because many junior high school students use the property as a short-cut. In addition, sanitary issues, water flow rate, maintenance, liability, and erosion are all a concern. They would like the conduit be cut-off and place the back-up further downstream. Judy Zurilgen – She is the property owner. She stated that a title search does not show an easement on the property. She is concerned for the safety of the kids who play in the area. The pipe will flow with water even if it is not raining. Sometimes the water that comes through the pipe is milky. She feels the grate is just an invitation to kids to toss items into it. She asked the City to research alternative. Steve Zurilgen – He is the property owner. He feels this is a liability issue. His insurance agent told him he should have a lot of insurance coverage in case something happens. Slim Slater – He lives in the house across the street. No one in the community wants the pond. It is a safety issue because of all of the kids in the neighborhood. The Committee discussed the safety and liability issues. Mr. Roe commented the City should ask if a new overflow (meaning spending more money) should be done when one already exists. It was m/s/c to move that the staff’s recommendation for approval of the 100% design and to authorize the Surface Water Management Division staff to advertise the project for bid, returning to the Council for authorization to award the contract to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder to the February 15, 2005, City Council meeting, but do not place it on the Consent Agenda so further discussion can be held. I. Lakota Wetland RSF Project Acceptance – It was m/s/c to authorize final acceptance of the completed Lakota Wetland Regional Stormwater Facility Improvements Project, constructed by Lloyd Enterprises, Inc., in the amount of $215,132.26 as complete and place this issue on the February 15, 2005, City Council Consent Agenda. 5. FUTURE MEETINGS The next scheduled meeting will be February 7, 2005, and the Committee decided that because February 21st is a holiday, the second meeting in February will be held February 28, 2005. 6. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 6:40 p.m.