HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-05-11 Committee of the Whole MinutesPROCLAMATION:
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL
May 11, 1998; 7:00 p.m.
Tukwila City Hall Council Chambers
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER: Council President Linder called the Committee of the Whole Meeting to order and led the
audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Council President Pamela Linder, Councilmembers Joe Duffie, Joan
Hernandez, Dave Fenton, Pam Carter, Steve Mullet, and Jim Haggerton.
OFFICIALS: John Rants, Mayor; John McFarland, City Administrator; Steve Lancaster, Director of
Community Development; Moira Bradshaw, Associate Planner; Graham Black, City Attorney; and Lucy
Lauterbach, Legislative Coordinator.
A Proclamation naming May 15, 1998, as Peace Officer's Memorial Day was read into record by Mayor Rants.
The Proclamation urges all citizens to remember those officers who gave their lives serving the public.
CITIZEN'S COMMENTS:
There were no citizen comments.
SPECIAL ISSUES:
Draft Highway 99 Revitalization Plans: Director Lancaster said the purpose of the review is to reach
consensus on what strategies the City would carry forward into the final plan. The draft was issued several
months ago. The plan should include concise and specific descriptions of the strategies the community and the
City believes are important in moving forward to revitalize Highway 99.
Over the last few months, staff has been meeting with numerous community groups to gain community
feedback.
Director Lancaster clarified the difference between the Draft Highway 99 Revitalization Plan and the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment process. The draft plan provides for future direction and recommends actions
to be considered. Some of those actions involve budgetary impacts in which subsequent actions would allocate
funding. Some of the specific proposals and policies relating to land use in the draft plan would provide
direction to both staff and the Planning Commission to further evaluate the options and provide specific
recommendations to adopt as a Comp Plan Amendment and/or development regulation.
None of the draft plan's recommendations will be implemented until they are reviewed by the Planning
Commission and formalized as recommendations by the Commission to City Council.
1
Director Lancaster urged the Council to reach consensus on as many of the strategies as possible so staff could
finalize the plan. The plan would become an important element for decisions made by the City and regionally in
the near future.
Councilmember Carter suggested the strategies should be listed together for easier reading and review. Council
President Linder suggested including a summary regarding the community's input for the suggested strategies.
Planner Bradshaw reviewed the status of the strategies based on the community review and comments. The
review included the following:
Strategy #1:
Task Force:
Community:
Staff:
Discussion:
Consensus:
Strategy:
Task Force:
Community:
Staff:
Discussion:
Consensus:
Strategy:
Task Force:
Community:
2
Combine rigorous code enforcement with partnerships with housing agencies and/or others to
rehabilitate housing.
Supports the strategy.
Favors this strategy.
Reiterates the need for this strategy based on discussion on the real estate economics of the area's
housing market.
Councilmember Duffie supports the strategy. Councilmember Hernandez said she was not able
to attend some of the community input meetings. Overall, she supports the strategy but wanted
some feedback regarding some negative comments made at the community meeting.
Councilmember Carter said there was some confusion regarding a change in standards for the
City's code enforcement. Once that issue was clarified, most of the comments from the public
were positive. Council President Linder recommended rephrasing the Obstacles column to
Obstacles /Comments and moving Obstacle comment #5 below Obstacles /Comments #1.
Council President Linder supports the strategy. Councilmember Carter suggested applying the
strategy to business as well as residential. She indicated she notices the lack of upkeep of some
businesses. Planner Bradshaw said that some of those businesses were approved while in the
county. However, strategy #2 does attempt to resolve the issues by incorporating incentives to
businesses. Director Lancaster said new businesses would be subject to new requirements and
established businesses would not be subject. Councilmembers Mullet, Fenton, and Haggerton
support the strategy.
Councilmembers approved strategy #1.
Concentrate rehabilitation funds in the Pacific Highway area (p. 48)
allocate Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) money for a 6 -year period for
housing repair
establish a grant program for site rehabilitation of multi family and commercial properties
begin by sponsoring a demonstration project
Recommended maintaining CDBG funds to support low income single family homeowners
throughout the City and focus on a grant program for site and exterior building rehabilitation of
multi family and commercial properties and that some contribution by property owners be
required in order to qualify for the program.
No specific comments.
No additional comments.
Councilmembers agreed with the recommendation of the Task Force.
Councilmembers approved strategy #2.
Encourage redevelopment of existing multi family housing by adopting a "redevelopment
incentive period
Allow redevelopment of existing housing at current densities (see Table 11, p. 110 of Draft Plan)
(versus allowable densities) or as office but only for a limited time))
Does not support this strategy. Comments from the Real Estate Panel indicate that a substantial
increase in density would be required to cause renovation.
No specific comment
Staff:
Discussion:
Consensus:
Strategy #4a:
3
Strategy deemed not worth pursuing at this time based upon feedback, current real estate market,
and the variety of other strategies with higher priorities.
Councilmembers agreed with Task Force recommendation
Councilmembers did not approve strategy #3.
Allow commercial use of residential sites when combined with development of parcels fronting
on Pacific Highway (p. 50) thereby increasing potential for redevelopment and infill at specific
sites (see Fig. 11, p. 53) subject to specific conditions:
1. frontage and access on Pacific Highway (or commercial local access or collector
arterial)
2. parcel aggregation and collective development
3. BAR review and approval of development
Planner Bradshaw said five sites have been identified and reiterated the purpose of the overall
strategy is to encourage redevelopment of existing commercial areas within the RC and NCC
districts between South 137` and Highway 518. The five sites are based on existing land uses.
The concept is to establish perimeters during the Comp Plan and Zoning Code Amendment
process so that even when someone wants to use these multi family sites as part of their overall
commercial redevelopment, they would proceed through the normal development process that
includes the BAR review and normal building permit processes.
Issues to be determined include either increasing or decreasing the number of sites or modifying
the boundaries of the identified sites. The question relates to whether the City wants to
implement the redevelopment policy to only those identified sites or should a minimum size be
established, or should it be based on a performance standard whereby redevelopment should meet
certain requirements based on the BAR review.
Another issue identified with this concept that has received comment both from the Task Force
and the community is whether there should be a medium high residential density buffer between
the commercial and the low density residential or should a landscape buffer be required.
Planner Bradshaw suggested that staff could prepare alternatives and submit a recommendation
to the Planning Commission for a public hearing. From there, the recommendation would be
referred back to City Council for consideration as a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and
Zoning Code amendment.
Council President Linder said the issue is much more complicated and deserves more discussion
between Councilmembers.
Councilmember Mullet said he has some concerns with the five sites identified as being the
perfect solution. He would prefer considering a philosophy of allowing some conversion of
single family residential to commercial because a developer is building on the highway and needs
a little more and that it should be allowed to occur anywhere on the corridor. He considers the
five sites as examples only and he doesn't concur that the redevelopment policy should only
apply to specific sites.
Director Lancaster indicated the five sites were specifically targeted for the redevelopment
concept since it looked like they had the most potential. However, he noted that
Councilmembers seemed to be uncomfortable with targeting five sites only. The five sites were
4
not selected by accident but evaluated based on the redevelopment concept. They seemed to be
the most reasonable ones to target for this policy.
Council President Linder suggested that defining how each site would qualify for redevelopment
would reassure citizens what the intent of the policy is and that the City was not trying to target
certain areas and buy them out.
Councilmember Carter said just by reviewing this she could understand how people might feel in
terms of fearing the City is forcing them out. She asked if the policy would be more attractive to
developers if it were more specific or if a more general definition would suffice that would let
developers know that they could purchase property behind their existing property to
accommodate their development plans.
Director Lancaster said developers always want predictability along with flexibility. The idea
was to provide predictability. A number of developers have approached staff with development
ideas that are creative but unfortunately do not fit with current development policy. Under the
Growth Management Act, Comprehensive Plan Amendments are a yearly process and most
developers do not want to wait up to a year and a half to see if their great idea could work. What
staff tried to do was to identify policy options that would encourage significant redevelopment
along the narrow commercial strip. Through proper planning, staff believes these five sites could
be developed commercially.
Councilmember Mullet asked why rezoning could not also be applied to areas other than the
initial five sites. Director Lancaster replied that it's a balancing act the Council needs to
consider. Once the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendments have been processed, under
most cases, development proposals for these types of scenarios would not come before the
Council for review but would be reviewed by the Board of Architectural Review. Staff decided
to identify specific areas where such redevelopment could successfully occur and not consider
other areas along the corridor where such redevelopment might damage neighboring properties.
The issue relates to Council giving up reviews of case by case development if all areas were
included in the Comp Plan and Zoning Amendment process. Director Lancaster stressed that
everyone, staff and Council, would have to be sure the process would work for all properties.
Discussion continued on the pros and cons of limiting the redevelopment concept to the five sites
or expanding to all sites along the corridor. Without doing more analysis, Director Lancaster
said applying the policy to other properties might end up with development that is not compatible
with adjacent properties. Councilmember Carter said it would be very difficult to write standards
that define which property would be eligible for the special policy. To do so, could result in
loopholes that staff and City Council did not contemplate or anticipate.
Mayor Rants said he is also uncomfortable designating just five sites, but that he could approve it
to insure development occurs properly. He would rather err on the side of more restrictions until
time and development has occurred to indicate the policy does work.
Council President Linder noted that it would become a moot issue if the property owner refused
to sell.
Councilmember Mullet said he is not willing to relinquish final review of projects to only a BAR
review and the other concept of allowing a very high density level without a site specific project
review is troublesome to him. He said he was under the impression that site specific reviews
would be conducted and that establishing some guidelines would allow the process to proceed.
He was not comfortable with just setting rules to guide the process.
Director Lancaster replied that there would be site specific reviews, as it occurs now, for any
project that goes before the Board of Architectural Review. The issue deals with establishing a
set of general parameters before the project goes before the BAR. Options to consider for this
particular concept would be to issue an unclassified use permit. The unclassified use process
would require a City Council review and not a BAR review.
Director Lancaster explained how the unclassified use permit process would affect City Council.
Councilmember Mullet responded and said it's not necessary for him to review the finer details
of a project only that he would want to know what properties were affected, what the proposal
would consist of, and if it fits with the overall goals of the City. Director Lancaster said two
separate hearings on one project would not be possible and that reviewing the level of detail
Councilmember Mullet is referring to would consist of a full fledged BAR review. He suggested
staff work more on the issue and bring some alternative options back to the Council to consider.
Discussion continued on the issue with Director Lancaster cautioning Council that decisions
cannot be based on a Councilmember's individual discretion. He understands Council's desire to
maintain some control over the process but emphasized that once the Comprehensive Plan and
Zoning Amendments have been adopted, Council can only make decisions based on the
applicable codes inherent in the process.
Council President Linder said Council seems to agree that the opportunity should not be passed
up. However, Council is also indicating they do not want to relinquish all control. She
suggested staff investigate other alternatives that might address Council's concerns.
Councilmembers and staff continued to discuss the five target sites. Councilmembers Duffie,
Mullet and Linder indicated they did not want site #3 included. Councilmember Carter said she
had some concerns with site #2, but was willing to discuss it further.
Director Lancaster cautioned that where more than one property owner is involved, the potential
to set up hostage situations is strong when you have one property as the hold out. He indicated
staff would need to define some criteria on how to avoid those types of situation, such as
establishing what standards the proposal would have to meet in order to gain approval.
Councilmember Carter said she agreed with him, however most of the lot sizes are too small for
buffering. She is concerned about buffering. That is why the back half of Site 2 was zoned as
residential. The City wanted some buffer because that is where Pacific Highway comes closest
to 42
5
Director Lancaster said the best way to do that is to establish criteria that such development is
less dense and buffering is employed the closer it gets to residential. He indicated he wasn't
necessarily suggesting that in every case a medium or high density zoning district was necessary
between the area and existing single family and that it may be ok to have these zones in some
cases abut single family as long as the criteria for their development was such that there had to be
a transition of density on the property itself.
Strategy #4b:
Task Force:
Community:
Staff:
Consensus:
Strategy #5:
Task Force:
Community:
Staff:
Discussion:
Consensus:
Strategy:
Task Force:
Community:
Staff:
Discussion:
Allow the BAR to waive landscape /setback standards during design review (p.50)
Encourage circulation between properties and shared driveways thereby improving safety for
pedestrian and motorists on Pacific Highway and increasing efficiency of small sites.
Supports the strategy
No specific comment
Supports the strategy
Councilmembers approved the strategy as recommended by the Task Force.
6
Engage in brokering development in the Pacific Highway Corridor (p.55).
Use "99 specific site selection criteria" developed for the area to promote redevelopment:
sites with current undesirable uses, such as adult entertainment
sites at key locations
sites that are constrained, i.e., by size
sites needed for public projects
Use a variety of purchase /financing methods to assist in acquisition.
Supports the strategy.
Favors the strategy.
No additional comment.
Discussion ensued on different acquisition methods by the City of particular properties that
constitute an eyesore and the legality of how those transactions could occur. To acquire property,
the City has to have a specific intent for its use, such as a park, a City resource center, etc.
Councilmember Duffie said the strategy has strong community support and he prefers leaving it
up to the citizens to affect desired improvement. He strongly opposes the City buying property
and assuming a landlord position.
Mayor Rants indicated that the selection criteria is currently being used with a developer.
Councilmembers approved the strategy.
Discuss market opportunities for competing commercial areas with the affected cities such as
Burien and SeaTac.
strategize methods of improving the health of commercial areas, partner with the
Southwest King County chamber; market the areas
fund and direct a market analysis and market options analysis
Does not support this strategy.
No specific comment.
No additional comment.
Planner Bradshaw said the Task Force did not support the strategy. A mitigation study
completed by Burien was reviewed to see what mitigations should be funded within adjacent
communities as a result of the airport expansion. One of the issues raised in the study was that
no analysis of the economic impacts had been completed in association with the Port and its
improvements in the area. In addition, there are concerns about the economic impact on the
character of households in the area. The question is what does this do to the net spending power
and boundaries and designations for land uses because of changes in household size as well as
character. These issues should be studied which might result in recommendations that may relate
to changes in commercial or residential district designations.
Councilmembers Haggerton, Duffie, and Hernandez agreed with the Task Force
recommendation.
Consensus:
Strategy:
Task Force:
Community:
Staff:
Discussion:
Councilmember Carter said she's not fond of a market analysis but likes the idea of working
together with other cities as far as marketing the entire area.
Planner Bradshaw noted that strategy number 11 addresses that issue.
Councilmember Mullet suggested deleting strategy #6 but retaining the first bulleted item and
moving it to strategy #11.
Councilmembers concurred to retain the second bulleted item and move it to strategy
number 11.
Allow new housing in the RC Zone. Modify code to allow housing in this zone.
Supports this strategy subject to the residential being high density residential.
No specific comments.
No additional comment.
The RC zone is unique to the Highway 99 area. Multi- family is not allowed in the RC zone. The
issue relates to some areas off of Pacific Highway that are not prime commercial properties They
don't front on a high traffic arterial. There may be some opportunities to redevelop at high
density residential The Task Force supported this strategy but only at a high enough density to
afford adequate noise insulation. The community had no specific comment. Staff has done some
additional research on densities and how other jurisdictions have incorporated high density
residential within commercial zones.
In many commercial zones in other jurisdictions, density levels are determined by setback,
height, and parking standards. The current 14 units per acre in the NCC zone is quite low and
Council's could consider establishing a high density level in the NCC and RC districts.
Discussion continued between staff and Councilmembers on the issue of increasing residential
density and concerns with current conditions of some apartment complexes in the area and the
fear that just adding more would only further reduce the quality of the area. Councilmember
Mullet said he's not comfortable with increasing density until the quality of the existing area can
be improved. Mayor Rants cautioned that improving the quality of the area relates to
development and developers will not develop at density levels of 14 or 22 units per acre. New
development equates to conforming to the City's design standards which would increase the
overall quality of the area.
Council President said existing developments do not have the option of increasing density. If
density remains the same, fewer developers will be interested in building and improving the area.
Councilmember Carter said she could support some of the RC area as high density residential but
would not support housing fronting Pacific Highway.
Discussion continued on how density levels would relate to height restrictions, parking
requirements, and design review guidelines. Planner Bradshaw indicated the City has drafted a
design manual for the corridor in the NCC, RC and MUO zones.
7
Mayor Rants countered that as long as the discussion relates only to density level, densities will
never be increased. He suggested that everyone needs to consider all the factors relating to high
density multi residential development, such as the height and architecture of the development and
Consensus:
Strategy #8:
Task Force:
Community:
Staff:
Discussion:
Consensus:
Strategy #9:
Task Force:
Community:
Staff:
Discussion:
Consensus:
Strategy #10:
8
referred to Vancouver's successful high density residential neighborhoods as a good example of
how high density can work if all the other components are included.
Council President Linder suggested staff develop some examples of high density residential
developments that Council can review and can get an idea on how they would look and fit into
the redevelopment scheme.
Councilmembers concurred to have staff provide different examples of high density
development scenairos based on design standards.
Build community partnerships between neighbors and between the City government and
neighborhoods.
Neighborhood Signage Programs
support efforts to improve neighborhood identity
Urban Forestry Plan Planting Program
use tree planting and stewardship to enhance area and build a sense of community
Supports this strategy.
No specific comment.
No additional comment.
Bradshaw this reiterates the importance of following through on some of the policies because it
continues the bridge building that has been going on and the support between neighborhoods.
Councilmembers generally agreed with the suggested items. Councilmember Carter said taking
care of streams is as important as the forestry plan and should be added. Stream work is just as
unifying as planting trees.
Councilmembers agreed with strategy recommended by the Task Force and including
stream enhancement activities as a bulleted item.
Develop a Public Art Program
Use public projects as opportunities to involve members in creating memorable and fun places
identify applications (i.e. transit zones, sculpture, murals) sites and funding sources
identify capital projects that should incorporate art
identify projects that should include an artist in project development
Supports this strategy and adds that incorporation and design of public art should be visually
prominent and located to receive maximum exposure and enjoyment.
No specific comment.
No additional comment.
Councilmember Carter suggested not including the comment from the Task Force as the Arts
Commission considers those factors when considering art selections.
Planner Bradshaw said this would provide policy direction to the Arts Commission.
Councilmembers agreed with the strategy recommendation by the Task Force with an
addition to include community members in the art review and selection process.
Modify existing code to improve the appearance of the Pacific Highway area
adopt the Pacific Highway Design Manual to improve the quality of future development
require design review of all new development in the RC zone (current review threshold is
5,000 square feet)
amend the landscape chapter of the Zoning Code to increase quality and quantity of
landscaping along streets (current work program item for DCD)
Task Force:
Community:
Staff:
Discussion:
Consensus:
Strategy #11:
Task Force:
Community:
Staff:
Discussion:
Consensus:
modify setback standard to improve transition between commercial and residential
districts
develop a sign amortization program to improve the appearance of business signs and the
streetscape.
Supports this strategy.
No specific comment.
No additional comment.
Planner Bradshaw said Councilmembers would receive the Design Manual and any legislative
ordinances that would be required to change any of the City's codes.
Councilmember Carter suggested that a new sign code should be implemented before
redevelopment along Pacific Highway.
Councilmember Haggerton suggested targeting specific design construction materials to targeted
areas to enhance or promote an identity of an area. If quality materials were utilized for high
density residential, more people would accept increased density levels. Director Lancaster said
that typically design review does not require certain building materials for projects unless they
involve historic restoration.
Councilmembers agreed with the strategy as recommended by the Task Force.
Create a public information, involvement and Pacific Highway Marketing Program
Change the impression the region has of the area and expand efforts to involve and communicate
with property owners and businesses.
Supports this strategy.
No specific comment.
No additional comment.
Planner Bradshaw noted that the strategy is a two -step process and would involve
communicating and informing property owners regarding the street improvements and code
enforcements, etc. Once changes begin to occur on Pacific Highway it's important to increase
marketing efforts announcing the changes. Planner Bradshaw noted that the first bulleted item
from Strategy 6 is also included in Strategy 11.
Councilmembers concurred to the strategy recommended by the Task Force.
Strategy #12: Develop a pedestrian/bicycle plan. Create an area -wide network for bikes and pedestrians;
identify bike routes, facility standards and the connection between bikes, paths and transit;
engage in safety programs for cyclists, pedestrian and motorists.
Task Force: Supports designing streets that allow adequate accommodation for bicyclists; however, the City
should be encouraging cycling on identified routes. Therefore the city should follow through by
creating a Pedestrian/bicycle Plan that identifies routes and make appropriate accommodations
for such.
Community: No specific comment.
Staff: No additional comment.
Discussion: Planner Bradshaw said in terms of traffic use on Pacific Highway, bicycles are number three on
the list of preferred travel modes. The strategy will accommodate bike use along the highway,
however the bike facility will not be marked or striped.
Councilmember Duffie expressed concern that the bicycle lane would not be designated (striped)
and said it was a safety issue. Planner Bradshaw said most bicycle commuters prefer not having
9
Consensus:
Strategy #13:
Task Force:
Community:
Staff:
Consensus:
Strategy #14:
Task Force:
a striped area since more cars use a wide outside lane and are not as prone to littering on the
portion of the road that they are traveling on.
Councilmember Haggerton didn't agree with that assessment and said most of the designated
bicycle lanes he has seen are clean and free of litter. Planner Bradshaw said the Task Force
preferred not to have bikes on the highway and it was more of an issue when on- street parking
was allowed. Additionally, if bike lanes are striped they are required to be at least five feet in
width.
Planner Bradshaw reiterated the Council has two options; include a striped bicycle lane that will
have to conform to regulatory requirements; or provide additional space for bicyclists without
designating a bicycle lane.
Director Lancaster said bicyclists were among the representatives in attendance during the
WSDOT public input sessions. Councilmember Fenton concurred that bicyclists at the meeting
stated their preference was with not having designated bicycle lanes.
Councilmember Carter said an additional requirement should be that bicycle facilities are
included at all transit facilities. Mayor Rants said the issue would be dealt with through RTA.
Discussion ensued on whether the bicycle lane should be marked or unmarked and how traffic
lane widths would be reduced if a striped lane is the recommended strategy.
Councilmembers agreed with the strategy recommended by the Task Force.
Collaborate with the Tukwila School District on implementation of their Strategic Plan. Assist
where appropriate with the school district in enhancing skill building opportunities for City
residents.
off (school)site learning facilities
assistance in providing sports recreation for students
a joint newsletter b/w Chamber, School and City
mentoring involving seniors and others
human support needs services
teen center on highway
Supports the strategy subject to modification of the list of items to include only the following:
off (school)site learning facilities
assistance in providing sports recreation for students
Teen center on highway
Supports this strategy
No additional comment.
Councilmembers agreed to the strategy as recommended by the Task Force with the
addition that the strategy applies only to Pacific Highway.
Improve safety, function, and appearance of Pacific Highway.
reduce speeds
limit and consolidate access driveways
install streetscape improvements
mitigate impacts associated with improvements (known impacts to date are parking;
potential undergrounding cost impacts)
Supports this strategy.
10
Community: Favors this strategy.
Staff: No additional comment.
Discussion: Councilmember Mullet recommended establishing criteria for who is eligible for funding
assistance with undergrounding of utilities for both residential and business.
Consensus: Councilmembers agreed to the strategy as recommended by the Task Force.
Strategy #15:
Task Force:
Community:
Staff:
Discussion:
Consensus:
Strategy #16:
Task Force:
Community:
Staff:
Discussion:
Consensus:
Strategy #17:
Task Force:
Community:
Staff:
Discussion:
11
Extend and upgrade utilities. Provide minimum required levels of utility improvements (hydrant
spacing and water line sizes are substandard) for development and coordinate state of the art
installation (or accommodation) of telecommunications equipment with street improvements in
order to attract business development.
Supports this strategy.
No specific comment.
No additional comment.
Planner Bradshaw said telecommunication improvements were also identified if the goal is to
attract high quality development. Most computer use requires telecommunication services and
installing transmission conduit would be an incentive.
Councilmember Haggerton suggested including a reference to the City's surveillance cameras for
accountability purposes.
Councilmembers agreed to the strategy as recommended by the Task Force.
Improve cross streets one block east and generally west of Pacific Highway from S. 154 to 139
Streets
create a street design and streetscape plan, identify opportunities and criteria for street
vacation if possible and prioritize improvements
construct improvements.
Supports this strategy.
No specific comments.
No additional comments.
Planner Bradshaw said the draft and the final plan would be an excellent documentation of
legislative support and design direction which is important when applying for grants.
Councilmembers agreed to the strategy as recommended by the Task Force.
Site and construct a neighborhood resource center.
use "Pacific Highway site selection criteria:"
sites whose use is undesirable
sites at key locations
sites that are constrained, i.e., due to size
site that are needed for City projects
develop a site to serve the needs of the community and that would be a model for
expected future development
Supports this strategy.
Favors this strategy.
No additional comment.
Councilmember Carter said the City has not designated a resource center on Pacific Highway.
Although there has been some general discussion involving the concept, no specific plans or
actions have been developed. She would support the concept of a community resource center
without committing the City to a specific type of facility.
Consensus:
Strategy #18
Task Force:
Community:
Staff:
Discussion:
Consensus:
12
Councilmembers concurred that there had been general discussion on some type of a community
resource center in the past with no action taken.
Councilmembers discussed the type of facility and potential uses. Councilmember Mullet said
he wouldn't support a City standalone facility on the highway and that it has to be incorporated
into another project, such as a leased space.
Mayor Rants said previous discussions included the option of the City leasing space within a
development as a way to encourage development. The leased space would be used as a
community resource center.
Councilmember Hernandez says she supports the Task Force recommendation.
Mayor Rants indicated that the City is working with a developer to provide some incentive for
development that would involve the City leasing some space for use as a community resource
center.
Discussion continued on what the Task Force perceived for the strategy and previous discussions
on a community resource center. Councilmembers differed on the wording of the strategy.
Council President Linder reiterated that the strategy was to provide direction and guidance for the
project and that it wasn't cast in concrete that the City or anyone else would site and construct a
community resource center.
Councilmembers agreed with the strategy recommended by the Task Force and
recommended striking the first sentence of the strategy and replacing it with: "Work with
developer to lease space for a neighborhood resource center."
Site and construct a neighborhood park west of Pacific Highway "Cascade View Park"
use "Pacific Highway site selection criteria" to assist in locating property(ies)
improve the residential amenities of the area and provide recreation opportunities
Supports this strategy.
Favors this strategy.
No additional comment.
Councilmember Mullet suggested including another bulleted item that states, "explore
opportunities with private development."
Councilmembers agreed with the strategy recommended by the Task Force with the
additional bulleted item suggested by Councilmember Mullet.
Strategy #19: Improve Southgate Park. Improve city property and provide trail linkage between corridor,
recreation opportunities and neighborhoods.
Task Force: Supports this strategy.
Community: No specific comment.
Staff: No additional comments.
Discussion: Councilmember Mullet stressed that a stormwater retention pond would be needed in the area if
the area were to improve.
Consensus: Councilmembers agreed with the strategy recommended by the Task Force.
An Ordinance Amending the Makeup of the Sister Cities Committee Position #5: Mayor Rants said the
item was referred by the Committee to a regular Council meeting for action. However, an issue related to the
process emerged and he subsequently removed it from the Regular Council meeting agenda and placed it as a
discussion item for the May 4 COW meeting.
Councilmember Haggerton said the Finance and Safety Committee agreed unanimously to change the position
from a business position to an at -large position to accommodate more diversity of people. Councilmember
Carter also suggested adding a sentence that states, The at -large member does not require residency or a
business affiliation." The sentence would be added after the first sentence under the Section 2.31.010 Created.
Additionally, President Linder suggested changing the second WHEREAS of the ordinance to read,
"WHEREAS, the City Council desires to restructure the committee to allow for a broader and more flexible
representation for our community.
Two Ordinances Amending the Sign Requirements Found in TMC 5.56 and 5.10 Relating to Adult
Entertainment Establishments: Administrator McFarland referred to the Memorandum dated May 6,
regarding the proposed ordinance to revise signage language in TMC 5.10 and TMC 5.56. Based on testimony
by Deja vu Airport, they have agreed to comply with the proposed change.
Councilmembers discussed the sizing requirements and concurred with Administrator McFarland's
recommendation to adopt the ordinance to affect changes in sign language in TMC 5.10 and TMC 5.56.
ADJOURNMENT
Council President Linder adjourned the meeting to conduct a Special Meeting at 9:57 p.m.
Pamela Linder, Council President
Valerie Gow, Recording Secretary
13