Loading...
Planning Comm MINS 02-21-2007 K:\Planning Commission\2007\Meeting Summary 02-21-07.doc CITY OF FEDERAL WAY PLANNING COMMISSION February 21, 2007 City Hall 7:00 p.m. Council Chambers MEETING MINUTES Commissioners present: Hope Elder, Dave Osaki, Dini Duclos, , Merle Pfeifer, Lawson Bronson, and Wayne Carlson. Commissioners absent: Bill Drake (excused). Alternate Commissioners present: Richard Agnew, Kevin King and Caleb Allen. Alternate Commissioners absent: none. Staff present: Community Development Services Director Kathy McClung, City Attorney Patricia Richardson, and Administrative Assistant E. Tina Piety. Chairwoman Elder called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES None AUDIENCE COMMENT None ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT None COMMISSION BUSINESS TRAINING SESSION Ms. Richardson delivered a legal orientation and gave the Commissioners a handout on the same. The basic function of the Planning Commission is to hold public hearings and obtain public testimony. This is the legislative history for an item that comes to the Commission and is the basis for decisions. Comments made at a public hearing can be used to challenge a decision. For this reason, Commissioners comments while officially acting on the Commission should be limited to the business at hand. The Commission is an advisory body to the City Council, which means the final decision rests with the City Council. Ms. Richardson discussed the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine, which says that Commissioners should be impartial and not base his or her decision upon prejudgment or personal interest. The doctrine also states that ex parte contact should be disclosed. Commissioner Duclos asked what if a Commissioner just invites or encourages someone to attend a meeting. Ms. Richardson replied that it would be best to disclose such a conversation. Ms. Richardson discussed the Open Public Meetings Act and stated that if four or members meet, even if it is just to have coffee, if they discuss business that is before the Commission, then it is an official public meeting. If a Commissioner should send an email regarding business that is before the Commission and if other Commissioners reply to that email, that is an official public meeting. If other Commissioners do not reply, then it is not a meeting. She also discussed public records. Currently, everything is a public document, that includes the email mentioned above, whether other Commissioners respond or not. Commissioner Osaki asked for clarification on what items does the Commission deal with that are quasi-judicial (quasi-judicial are subject to the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine and contacts must be disclosed) as opposed to legislative (for which contacts do not have to be disclosed). Ms. Richardson replied that the simple answer (and code definition) is that if and item originated with an individual it is quasi-judicial. If an item originated with city staff, it is a legislative issue. Ms. McClung commented that comprehensive plan map changes and comprehensive Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 February 14, 2007 K:\Planning Commission\2007\Meeting Summary 02-21-07.doc plan site-specific requests are quasi-judicial. Ms. Richardson encouraged the Commission to err on the side of caution and treat items as quasi-judicial. Commissioner Duclos stated that she is concerned that if an item is quasi- judicial, it keeps the Commissioners from discussing the issue with concerned citizens. Ms. McClung continued the training; she also had a handout for the Commissioners. The Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) is the city’s vision for what the citizens want Federal Way to be. Many of the policies in FWCP come from the state’s Growth Management Act (GMA). The Federal Way City Code (FWCC) is how the FWCP is implemented. Among other regulations, the FWCC contains zoning, subdivision, and environmental codes. Commissioner Pfeifer asked what triggers an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), as opposed to a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) checklist. Ms. McClung replied that if a development will have major impacts, an EIS may be required. Commissioner Pfeifer asked if impacts cannot be mitigated, will a project be turned down. Ms. McClung replied that yes it will, but be aware that with enough money, most impacts can be mitigated. Ms. McClung stated that SEPA has been in place since 1970. Many cities’ zoning codes, including Federal Way’s, have regulations that cover the SEPA issues. Because of this, Federal Way and other cities are researching the possibility of using their codes and not SEPA. Commissioner Carlson commented how would impacts to other jurisdictions be mitigated. Ms. McClung stated that is a good point and something that would have to be answered. Ms. McClung discussed the issue of nonconformance. She stated that if the city never created a nonconformance, we would never change. Not all change is bad. She encouraged the Commissioners to consider the bigger picture. The city works to minimize the impact of any proposed changes. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS AUDIENCE COMMENT None ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m.