Loading...
LUTC MINS 05-21-2007 G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2007\05-21-07 LUTC Minutes.doc City of Federal Way City Council Land Use/Transportation Committee May 21, 2007 City Hall 5:30 pm City Council Chambers MEETING MINUTES In attendance: Committee Chair Jack Dovey and Committee Member Linda Kochmar; Council Member Jeanne Burbidge, Mayor Michael Park, Deputy Public Works Director Ken Miller; Deputy City Attorney Aaron Walls, Development Services Manager William Appleton, Street Systems Manager/Deputy Public Works Director Marwan Salloum, Street Systems Project Engineer Brian Roberts, Senior Planner Margaret Clark, Senior Planner Lori Michaelson, Senior Planner Isaac Conlen, Deputy Community Development Services Director Greg Fewins, Community Development Services Director Kathy McClung and Administrative Assistant II Darlene LeMaster 1. CALL TO ORDER Committee Chair Dovey called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. Committee Member Dean McColgan was excused. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The May 7, 2007 LUTC meeting minutes were approved. Moved: Kochmar Seconded: Dovey Passed: Unanimously 3. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. 4. BUSINESS ITEMS A. Pacific Highway S HOV Lanes Phase III – Qwest Agreement for Joint Construction and Statement of Work Brian Roberts provided the background information on this item. There was no discussion. B. Pacific Highway S HOV Lanes Phase III – Lease of City Property for Construction Field Office Brian Roberts provided the background information on this item. There was no discussion. C. Public Storage Easement Use Agreement William Appleton provided the background information on this item. There was no discussion. Moved: Kochmar Seconded: Dovey Passed: Unanimously Committee PASSED Option 1 for items A, B, and C on to the June 5, 2007, City Council Consent Agenda for approval. D. Aspen Properties Street Frontage Improvement Development Agreement William Appleton provided the background information on this item. There was no discussion. Moved: Kochmar Seconded: Dovey Passed: Unanimously Committee PASSED Option 1 as amended by staff to the June 5, 2007 City Council Consent Agenda for approval. Staff revised the construction costs to $109,420 plus a 10% contingency of $10,940 for a total amount of $120,360. E. Request to Amend the Rezone Conditions for the Village at Federal Way (Kitts Corner) Margaret Clark provided the background information on this item. There was no public comment on this item. Committee Member Kochmar asked for confirmation on the size of the anchor buildings as well as an example of who may be an anchor business. Ms. Clark answered that the recommendation is to increase the total size of the anchor buildings from 100,000 square feet to 140,000 square feet. The maximum footprint of the anchor buildings will be increased from 50,000 square feet to 80,000 square feet. An anchor building can be up to two stories, thus making it possible to reach the 140,000 square foot maximum with just one anchor building. Possible anchors could be a grocery store; there have been no potential anchors identified at this time. Committee Chair Dovey asked about the width to depth ratios of the buildings. Ms. Clark responded that under existing conditions, buildings may not exceed a 1.5:1 width to depth ratio. Those buildings that are 1.25:1 are also satisfied through this requirement. Council Member Burbidge asked for clarification of “non-integrated parking”. Ms. Clark explained that integrated parking would be part of the building and that the footprint of the parking could exceed the footprint of the building and also took the opportunity to remind Land Use/Transportation Committee Page 2 May 21, 2007 G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2007\05-21-07 LUTC Minutes.doc staff and Council Members that the illustrations in her presentation were conceptual in nature only. Council Member Kochmar asked if the development to the “Kitt’s Corner” area to the west of Pacific Highway S will be low-income housing. Ms. Clark responded that the developer is looking at an up-scale zero-lot-line development. Moved: Dovey Seconded: Kochmar Passed: Unanimously Committee PASSED Option 1 to the June 5, 2007, City Council Agenda for first reading of the Ordinance as amended back to staff’s recommendation of the anchor facades not to exceed a width to depth ratio of 1.25:1. F. Shoreline Master Program Update Isaac Conlen provided the background information on this item. A PowerPoint presentation was given by Kent Hale and Teresa Vanderberg from ESA Adolfson, the consultant on this project. The presentation highlights the changes being proposed to the Shoreline Master Program Update. If approved by Council, the revisions will go to the Department of Ecology for review, and then come back to the City Council adoption. Public Comment: Chris Holden, Lakota Beach area, Federal Way. Ms. Holden wanted to point out a discrepancy in Lakota Beach area of the map. Ms. Holden thought that “urban conservancy” was to be changed to “residential shoreline”; however, the map did not reflect that change. Mr. Hale responded, apologizing for the maps small print and poor detail, but that the map should reflect this change from urban conservancy to residential shoreline. Mr. Conlen also concurred that a short section of the Lakota waterfront was changed to residential shoreline, but the remainder of the shoreline is unchanged per the Planning Commission recommendation. Committee Chair Dovey asked about the specific changes being made to the Shoreline Master Program. Mr. Conlen reiterated that a brief synopsis of these changes were addressed in the PowerPoint presentation and that he and the consultants would answer any further questions he or the other Council members have. Committee Member Kochmar asked about non-conforming uses. Mr. Conlen stated that if a non-conforming structure is destroyed, the current Shoreline Plan states that the structure may only be re-built to its original size at its original location if the replacement costs are less than 75% of the existing value of the structure. This requirement is very restrictive. The Planning Commission proposes that this be changed to eliminate the value stipulation thereby allowing a non-conforming structure may be replaced if destroyed to its original size at the original location, regardless of reconstruction costs vs. original value. Public Comment: Peter Townsend, 29508 12th Avenue SW, Federal Way. Mr. Townsend questions the definitions of “streams” and “wetlands”, claiming the definitions are not consistent with each other. He would like the City to address the four types of streams and the four types of wetlands. Under State guidelines, if the City doesn’t conform to these definitions, then it is Mr. Townsend’s opinion that the City needs to give an explanation as to why we are not conforming. Ms. Vanderberg clarified that the State has a four-tiered rating system and that the City is only required to bring current critical areas into the Shoreline Master Program. The City’s definition for “wetland” is consistent with the State’s definition. The City does not have any streams which quality as shoreline. If wetlands are associated with a lake or larger body of water, the wetlands qualify as shoreline. Mayor Park asked if Camp Kilworth is designated as natural shoreline. Mr. Conlen responded that Camp Kilworth is defined as urban conservancy. Committee Chair Dovey asked about what changed would be made to the stringline setback. Mr. Conlen explained that there is currently a 50-foot setback. Example: a home could be built on a vacant lot where there exists a home on either lot adjacent to the vacant lot. A stringline would be made between the two existing homes. The new home on the vacant parcel could be built to the same setback as the stringline. The standard 50-foot setback, however, could be reduced to no more than a 35-foot minimum. On the other extreme, if two existing homes on either side of a vacant parcel were set back a greater amount (ie. 150 feet), the new home would not have to follow the stringline theory and meet a setback of 150 feet. The proposed language eliminates the requirement to meet the stringline setback when adjacent structures are set back more than 50 feet. Council Member Burbidge wanted to clarify that the minimum setback is 30 feet, not 35 feet. Mr. Conlen concurred that the correct minimum setback is 30 feet. Council Member Burbidge also wondered what kind of accessory structures can lie within the 50-foot setback. Mr. Conlen stated that accessory structures, such as a garden shed, boat house, etc. may not exceed 300 square feet combined. Larger structures need to be located outside of the setback area. Moved: Kochmar Seconded: Dovey Passed: Unanimously Committee PASSED Option 1 to the June 5, 2007, City Council Agenda for adoption of the Resolution with the understanding that the minimal setback is corrected from 35 ft. to 30 ft. Land Use/Transportation Committee Page 3 May 21, 2007 G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2007\05-21-07 LUTC Minutes.doc G. 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments – Chapter Two and Area Rezone Related to Changing Boundaries of BP/CE and BC Zones Margaret Clark provided the background information on this item. There was no public comment. Committee Member Kochmar asked if action would or wouldn’t be taken at this time. Ms. Clark confirmed that action will be delayed until it can be taken on all of the Comprehensive Plan. Committee Chair Dovey asked for explanation on the BP/CE zone and what will now be included/excluded in this zone from what it was up to this point. Ms. Clark answered that Ms. Michaelson will be answering that question directly in her presentation of the next item. The remaining 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendments will be presented at the June 4, 2007 Land Use Transportation Committee meeting with all recommendations being forwarded to the June 19, 2007 City Council Agenda. No action taken. H. Zoning Text Amendments: BP/CE and BC Lori Michaelson provided the background information on this item. Public Comment: Jesse Cherian, ST Fabrication, Federal Way. Mr. Cherian stated that he has appeared at every meeting on this zoning issue since March 14, 2007. He is requesting a text amendment to the proposed CE zone to allow mixed-use residential/commercial for all properties south of S 356th Street, between SR 99 and SR 161, which also abut a residential zone. Mr. Cherian realizes that with the proposed Comp Plan amendments, ST Fabrication would become a nonconforming use. As a businessman, Mr. Cherian would not be able to grow his company. Because of the restrictions that would now be imposed, selling his parcels to another developer would be extremely difficult. Amending the text of the CE zone to allow mixed-use residential would provide more options for developers, thus making his land more attractive to potential buyers. Committee Member Kochmar asked if Mr. Cherian had thought to request a code amendment this coming year that would allow him to continue operating in this location. Mr. Cherian explained that he has acquired adjacent land to expand his current business. Without expanding and generating more business, he will be unable to afford his current mortgage. With the proposed text change, he would be unable to expand. Stan Brown, S 359th Street, Federal Way. Mr. Brown has resided in Federal Way for 35 years on property that abuts the ST Fabrication site. ST Fabrication has had a huge impact on his quality of life. The fabrication business is extremely noisy. Mr. Brown compared it to the sound of a mortar round. He has met twice with Kathy McClung, however, not much could be done as Mr. Cherian was within his right to operate his business as the current land use zones allow. A neighbor was so overwhelmed with the noise that he actually abandoned his home without selling it. The home is still on the market as no one will purchase it due to the close vicinity of the fabrication business. Mr. Brown would like to see Mr. Cherian’s request granted for mixed-use residential to be allowed in this specific location of the proposed CE zone. Committee Chair Dovey then summarized what he heard both Mr. Brown and Mr. Cherian say. There appears to not be a buffer zone between the residential neighborhood and the CE zone. If this area south of S 356th were mixed-use residential, it would serve as a buffer zone. Council Member Burbidge commented on whether “live-work” projects for artists had been thought of as a way to develop this particular area. Mr. Cherian has considered this option; if mixed-use residential were allowed, he could decide to relocate his fabrication business to an appropriate location and re-develop this land himself. Council Member Burbidge is interested in comments from staff on “live-work” projects. Committee Chair Dovey inquired on the amendment regarding parking lot spaces for medical and dental offices. At this time, medical and dental offices are not distinguished from general office. The current requirement for general office is one parking stall per 300 square feet of building gross floor area. The text amendments would increase the number of stalls for medical and dental offices to one stall per 225 square feet. Committee Chair Dovey asks how much more this would cost the developer to increase the number of stalls, for example, for a building 10,000 square feet. Discussion on this question followed, and staff will bring information to the next LUTC meeting. Committee Chair Dovey also asked about building height for mixed use. The height for mixed use will go from 35 feet to 55 feet with the proposed text amendments. Is 55 feet high enough and why don’t we go higher? Ms. Michaelson explains that the thought behind the amendment is to encourage mixed-use but not distract from development of the “downtown” city center. The highest buildings should be in the downtown core. Committee Chair Dovey would like to see the limits increased where allowed. Ms. Michaelson stated that a significant height increase would be subject to view corridor analysis, Comp Plan amendments and SEPA; not that the City would not like to go there, but there a lot of factors to look at. Chair Dovey feels that more “view corridor” results in increased tax revenues. How high can the City allow without a study as he does not want to see the City set its standard too low. Ms. Michaelson stated that staff will come back later to revise this when necessary. Committee Member Burbidge is also interested in what is the “right” height. She wants to make sure that whatever the height, there is also space between buildings, open spaces and “public” view. Land Use/Transportation Committee Page 4 May 21, 2007 G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2007\05-21-07 LUTC Minutes.doc Committee Chair Dovey feels that Mr. Cherian and Mr. Brown’s comments have merit and he would like to see consideration given to their request. Ms. Michaelson stated that it could be considered for the limited properties mentioned but is not recommended for all of the CE zone. Between SR 99 and SR 161, south of S 356th Street is close to residential, critical areas, etc. Ms. McClung added that mixed-use residential in this area is not objectionable, however, within the entire CE zone would not work. Up until the present, staff has not been considering individual sites in this city-wide project. Coimmittee Member Kochmar suggests that text be amended in the CE zone to allow for the parcels shaded in green on the map shown in Ms. Michaelson’s presentation (west of SR 99 and south of S 356th St, between SR 99 and SR 161) to have mixed-use residential/commercial. How would it be shown in the Comp Plan? Ms. Michaelson explained that language in the Comp Plan would be modified to set the policy framework for this use. All text amendments would be contingent of adoption of the plan amendments. Moved: Kochmar Seconded: Dovey Passed: Unanimously Committee PASSED Option 1 to a future City Council Agenda for first reading of the Ordinance as amended to include mixed-use residential/commercial for property south of S 356th Street, between SR 99 and SR 161, contingent on approval of the Comprehensive Plan.. 5. FUTURE MEETING The next regular meeting is June 4, 2007. 6. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m.