Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-09-14 Committee of the Whole MinutesSeptember 14, 1992 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER COUNCILMEMBERS OFFICIALS CITIZEN'S COMMENTS PUBLIC HEARING Baker Commodities unclassified use permit application. Vernon Umetsu: TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING MINUTES Tukwila City Hall Council Chambers Council President Ekberg called the Committee of The Whole meeting of the Tukwila City Council to order and led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. ALLAN EKBERG, Council President; JOE DUFFIE, JOAN HERNANDEZ, DENNIS ROBERTSON, CHARLIE SIMPSON, STEVE LAWRENCE, STEVE MULLET. JOHN MCFARLAND, City Administrator; MIKE KENYON, City Attorney; RON CAMERON, City Engineer; DOUG MICHEAU, Public Works Coordinator; RICK BEELER, DCD Director; KEITH HAYNES, Assistant Police Chief; DON WILLIAMS, Parks Recreation Director; LYNN DEVOIR, Recreation Superintendent; ALAN DOERSCHEL, Finance Director; LUCY LAUTERBACH, Council Analyst. The following citizens commented on Crestview Park Development: Tod Byquist, 16211 45th Avenue South Lyle Wilson, 16203 45th Avenue South Leonard Hicks, 16043 42nd Avenue South Sherrie Huntz, 16037 45th Avenue South The citizens' concerns centered on the lack of notification and opportunity to give input during the development stage; displeasure with the 10 foot high embankment; and they were informed that only modest improvements would occur, instead, major changes were performed. The hill has been heavily excavated, fill material has been brought in, and old trees have been disturbed and probably killed. The residents have been left with a steep embankment (some 6 to 10 feet high). The development has taken away the privacy of their back yard, cut off the view into the park and has forced the neighbors to live with the dust blowing off the field. They are concerned about the run- off into the yards and the erosion of the steep bank. They think (even at this late date) the City should call for a planning meeting so that all concerned about the Park's development may attend. Mayor Rants responded that he understands the residents' concerns and that their concerns are valid. He assured the residents that measures would be taken to address the problems. The Mayor explained the City did mail a flyer to residents announcing the meeting date of January 8. Fifteen people were in attendance. Finally, the Mayor distributed a copy of the petition submitted by the those citizens impacted by the development at Crestview Park. The Council agreed that the enforcement of hours, gates and limited vehicle access, parking and traffic, lighting, dust control and police patrolling of the park appear to be doable; however, the field height might present a dilemma Don Williams extended an invitation to citizens to attend the next Parks Commission meeting at City Hall next Tuesday night, 7:00 p.m. At that time the drawings will be available for viewing and discussion. The Public Hearing opened at 7:42 p.m. Vern Umetsu, DCD, stated this hearing is a quasi judicial hearing, and the Mayor is a participant in these proceedings. No position is being presented on this issue on behalf of the Mayor's office. Umetsu stated that Baker Tallow Tanks is File #L92 -0010. He said the proposal is from Baker Commodities to install nine tallow tanks at the Baker Plant. These tanks are integral to increasing the operational efficiency of the plant and will not affect the level of odors generated or significantly affect the truck traffic generated from the site. As such, these tanks will be the first improvements since 1982 when the plant became legal non conforming to deal solely with operations and not with decreasing level of odor non conformity. Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes September 14, 1992 Page 2 Public Hearing Baker Commodities (Con't) Umetsu: Improvements since 1982 have been approved by the City, but they've all been related to reducing the level of nuisance odors. The key, initial question to reviewing the proposal is whether the plant continues to be a non conforming use which generates nuisance levels of odors. If yes, then the expansion would not be allowed since it would violate the zoning code, which requires that "No such non- conforming use shall be enlarged, or increased, or extended to occupy a greater use than was occupied at the effective date of adoption of this title," -1982. If it is not nuisance operation, then the tallow tanks need to be reviewed for conformity with the unclassified use criteria. He stated that at the time of the Planning Commission review and public hearing, staff had had discussion with Foster Golf Course, maintenance staff, reviewed PSAPCA records for nuisance complaints /odor complaints, and discussed all data with the City Attorney regarding whether nuisance levels of odors or truck traffic existed. At that time, the data led staff to believe that there were no nuisances being generated at the site. This was reinforced by the absence of any residents' or business testimony at the Planning Commission Public Hearing after wide- spread notice had been given in the Hazelnut. Based on that information, the staff report and the testimony received at the public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended Council approval in April. Since that time additional information has been received. This additional information was initially presented at the City Council Public Hearing on July 13, at which time the Council continued the hearing to allow the best possible resolution of three general issues: 1) Enforcement of odor regulation after PSAPCA had been closed for the day (after the normal working hours). 2) Resolution of truck traffic using 56th Avenue; and, 3) Reviewing the magnitude and scope of odor impacts with special notice being given to Foster Commons. An agreement has been worked out with PSAPCA with regards to enforcement of odor regulations after PSAPCA is closed. The Tukwila Police Department, with the full support of the Administration, has agreed that 911 is the number that will be available for residents to call. Tukwila Police verification would be accepted by PSAPCA, and PSAPCA would use their enforcement personnel and attorneys to levy whatever fines that are appropriate in those cases. PSAPCA has extremely significant fines, much more than our nuisance ordinance would allowed. Umetsu stated DCD has already met with the Police Department, police staff, personnel, and patrol officers have been briefed. They've met with PSAPCA's inspectors regarding the forms that they need to see filled out and are pretty much ready to go with the program. Regarding truck traffic on 56th Avenue, the City Engineer has reviewed that issue and basically concluded that the voluntary system that is currently in effect, where Baker works with the independent haulers to let them know that 56th Avenue should not be used, has been very effective in keeping trucks off that roadway. However, the City Engineer is concerned that a system of signage really would not be effective. His experience has shown that in these types of situations they would have to, basically, make a turn around to go all the way up to 115th which is very, very difficult. Umetsu continued that the City Engineer thinks the existing situation (with additional reminders from Baker Commodities to the 20% truck traffic with independent haulers would be sufficient) is basically the best we can get in this matter. Umetsu said in reviewing the magnitude and scope of odor impacts of the operations and truck traffic, staff has made significant additional work in focusing on the odor issue. Umetsu said the information included in the packet tonight is basically information gotten from the July 13, 1992 Public Hearing, a public information meeting that the Planning Staff held for residents of Foster Point, and businesses in the same proximity along Interurban and in Skyway. Field interviews were also held with Tukwila residents who live on exposed property. This new information has led staff to conclude that findings were incomplete, and that nuisance levels of odors are currently being generated on a regular basis from Baker Commodities. As such, Baker operations continue to be legally non conforming and subject to TMC 18.70.040, Sub- Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes September 14, 1992 Page 3 Public Hearing Baker Commodities (Con't) Umetsu: PROPONENTS Rick Thompkins: Attorney Stephanie Arend: o1 Section 1 which says that "No such nonconforming use shall be enlarged or increased nor extended to occupy a greater use than was occupied at the effective date of adoption of this title." Therefore, staff reverses its previous recommendation and recommends denial of the proposed tallow tanks until such time as Baker is able to demonstrate no nuisance generated -no nuisance odors, truck traffic, etc. generated at their site. At this point, Council President Ekberg asked the City Attorney to elaborate on the term quasi-judicial. City Attorney Kenyon said it's very simple, just act as if you are judges with the black robes on. If you have had one -on -one conversation with anybody from the Planning Staff, or anybody from Baker since the last time we were here in July, disclose those now. If you haven't, stand mute and listen to Baker's presentation and any staff rebuttal and any citizens comments. Councilmember Hernandez stated she would like to clarify that she'd not had any discussion with Council, staff or Baker, but that she had discussions with citizens who have continued to complain to her about this issue. She believes those citizens are here tonight and will probably testify. Councilmember Robertson stated he would like to make the same disclosure. He stated citizens bring the topic up to him and in every case he has told them that it is a quasi-judicial item and that he cannot discuss it with them, and that they should come to the public hearing. The Council agreed they had suggested no offensive courses of action; and no discussions had taken place off the record with citizens or the like. Rick Thompkins of Pacific Engineering spoke on behalf of Baker Commodities. He commented that concerns were centered around problems from various sources. He said subsequent to the public hearing, an informational meeting was held where various members of the community came and voiced their concerns, but he said the amount of complaints he'd had in the past months had been very minor and was brought to their attention by PSAPCA. As a result of what was heard from the public information meeting, an additional review was done of the plans, and it was determined that there was a possibility that some improvement could be made. Additional air scrubbers were ordered and one is in the process of being installed and another one is in route. It is hoped that once those are installed that will mitigate some of the other episodes occurring. Mr. Thompkins said basically that's what they've done to date that's pro- active and made themselves available for questions from staff and from the community. They still, however, have some general questions regarding how the ordinance is being applied to Baker. He then introduced Baker Commodities' Counselor, Ms. Stephanie Arend. Attorney Stephanie Arend of the Law Firm- Gordon/Thomas/Honeywell -office address, 2200 First Interstate Plaza, Tacoma, 98401. Ms. Arend stated she was representing Baker Commodities. She said as Planning Staff has testified, this is an Unclassified Use Permit application to locate 9 tanks to store tallow on site; and currently on the site, as you all know, is a rendering plant. The Planning Department originally reviewed this application and recommended to the Planning Commission approval of the permit. A public hearing was held before the Planning Commission who analyzed the criteria of the Unclassified Use Permit Code for the City of Tukwila and also recommended approval of the permit. Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes September 14, 1992 Page 4 Public Hearing Baker Commodities (Con't) Attorney Arend: 0 d 1 Since that time, as was indicated on September 9, staff issued a new report changing their recommendation of approval. That report was faxed to her client at 4:45 p.m. on Friday, September 11. That report is very troubling to her for several reasons and certainly to her client. First of all because it's out of order with regards to the procedure that is set forth in the Tukwila Code for Unclassified Use Permits; but more importantly, because it deflects the discussion away from the substance of the permit application which is whether or not a permit should be issued for 9 storage tanks on this site. Ms. Arend stated she was sure the City was aware of the hearing process as set forth in the Code at Section 18.66.050, but proceeded summarizing that: "Upon completion of review of the proposed project by the Planning Department..." So clearly they are the first ones to review it. And when they are completed with their review, "The Planning Commission shall schedule a public hearing..." Which is what happened in this case. Jurisdiction is then with the Planning Commission who holds a public hearing after proper notice. And it goes on to state that "The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation regarding the proposed project which shall be forwarded to the City Council for its consideration..." And that has been done in this case. After completion of review by the Planning Department, it is no longer within their purview their jurisdiction -to go back and re- review the issue that had already been before them. A public hearing was held and the recommendation of the Planning Commission is what you are suppose to consider. Why is that important? That's important for at least two reasons: one is because it's important that we follow the processes that are set forth in the ordinance. There are constitutional reasons for doing that. The other reason is because the public hearing process before the Planning Commission and here before the Council creates a record for appeal. The decision that you make, and if it is appealed (either by the applicant or by another party--member of the general public) will be on the record that was formed before the Planning Commission and here tonight in this hearing process, not at any other time. And it is important that the process is properly followed for that reason. That's emphasized by the last portion of 18.66.050 which says--"The City Council need not hold a public hearing on the permit application but shall consider the Planning Commission recommendation at a Regular Council meeting..." In other words, simply on the evidence that was presented before the Planning Commission, you would have the authority, under your Code, to make a decision based on their recommendation. Ms. Arend continued that it is her position that the September 9 report, where they changed their recommendation, is out of order and shouldn't be considered. There are five criteria which were very thoroughly analyzed by the Planning Department initially and by the Planning Commission. The most telling evidence on this criteria was submitted in letter format. The one issue that was raised as a concern, is the odor; and, that is in the letter from Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency dated May 19, 1992. There are two sentences that I would like to read to you: The increase of tallow stored is coming from offsite and is not processed on site so there is no increase in rendering to the air in Tukwila. There were no complaints of air pollution or odor when these tanks were at the Port of Seattle. Now, to her knowledge, that is the best evidence that you have before you as to the impacts on air quality as a result of storage tanks for storing tallow. Ms. Arend said she was not aware of any other evidence before the Council with regards to air quality of the tanks. The September 9 Staff Report and a lot of the testimony from the public focused on the plant as it currently exits. She said that's an enforcement issue. That is not an issue that is properly considered under the criteria for the Unclassified Use Permit. What suggests even more to her that it is an enforcement issue is the last paragraph in the recommendation of the September 9 staff report, which says the Planning Staff recommends that the Council should find this improvement would be appropriate at such time as the use ceases to generate nuisance impacts, etc. What Planning is attempting to do is to enforce some other Code Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes September 14, 1992 Page 5 Public Hearing Baker Commodities (Con't) Attorney Arend: CITIZENS Ted Bear: Ruth Obrien: ocri provisions against the existing facility which is not properly considered as part of whether or not this Unclassified Use Permit should be granted or denied. If there's an enforcement action necessary because an ordinance or a nuisance or something is being violated, that's a separate issue that Code provides for that goes through enforcement channels but is not considered under the Unclassified Use Permit provision. That raises another issue that was raised tonight by Planning Staff stating that this became a non conforming use in 1982 and for that reason who are you to look at nuisance in this analysis. Ms. Arend directed the Council's attention to the Planning Commission minutes which state, in the Background Section- "Between 1976 to 1982, probably with the adoption of the 1982 Code, the Rendering Works became an Unclassified Use, with all further improvements requiring an Unclassified Use Permit." It did not suggest in there that it was a non conforming use. She has not had the opportunity to go back and research the history of the zoning on this particular piece of property. But it is zoned M- 1 -that is in light of the permitted uses in an M -1 zone, and that a rendering plant is specifically listed as an unclassified use -the most likely place for you to put these storage tanks. In summation, she stated there has been no evidence, no competent evidence, of any kind- -with regards to the storage tanks which is the issue before you -that would allow you to deny this permit. All of the five criteria for the Unclassified Use Permit have been thoroughly analyzed, they are in the Planning Commission minutes and the staff recommendation to the Planning Commission and we commend you to approve the permit. Ted Bear, 5703 Pamela Drive South, commented he purchased a home and moved in June 10. He commented that, literally, he cannot go outside of his home; the air makes him sick to his stomach. The odor comes from the plant, moving north up the Valley until the sun rises and the air stirs. He called 911 about a week ago and was surprised because the 911 people were appraised of the situation and said "Yes," we know what you are talking about. However, the young officer warned Mr. Bear that he had no ability to write a violation. The officer suggested Mr. Bear call Puget Sound Air Pollution Control. He said his quality of life is really affected by these odors. He says he sure the Attorney Arend is just doing her job, but he would love for her to visit his home one early morning around 5:00 and try to sit outside with him and have a cup of coffee. He says he truly believes that anything that would create an odor that strong (a sickening, sweet odor), it can't be good for your health. Ruth Obrien, 8429 5th Avenue Southwest, Seattle, stated the reason she was present tonight is because she frequently plays golf at Foster Golf Links. She had the unfortunate experience of playing there twice on Labor Day weekend. It was a much exaggerated experience of what she had experienced on many weekends this summer. The stench at 9:00 on Saturday morning from the rendering plant was so bad that one of the ladies in her group actually got physically ill on the second tee. The lady in her group has an allergy problem, she began coughing, she could not breathe. The entire group became sick. She played again on Monday, and had invited a group of fami'_y members out to have a little tournament. She was totally humiliated at the smell they had to put up with on the golf course. Her feeling about the plant is that they constantly violate on the weekend when they think no one will complain and no one will catch them. She really hopes that the City will not be held hostage to some high- powered attorney threats; and that the Council will do what's right for not only citizens of Tukwila, but for those of us who use Fort Dent Park and Foster Golf Links. Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes September 14, 1992 Page 6 Public Hearing Baker Commodities (Con't) CITIZENS Anna Bernhard: JoAnne McMannis: Ivory Davis: Rosemary Hersheff: City Attorney: Councilmember Robertson: City Attorney: Bill Haggard: REBUTTAL Ruth O'Brien: ocf Anna Bernhard, 14241 59th Avenue South, commented that the previous comments were her sentiments, exactly. She added the City needs to take care of this problem. If Baker can't guarantee the City that the tanks are not going to leak, forget it. The City is working on a new Comprehensive Plan trying to improve the City to make it more livable, more beautiful, etc. She said the City does not need Baker Commodities. JoAnne McMannis, 5610 South 133rd, commented that not only are the odors bad, but the other problem is the trucks coming down the one -way road. There are still some independent haulers that come down the one -way road. She's afraid there's going to be an accident, it is dangerous. Somebody is going to get hurt or killed. Ivory Davis, 13341 56th Avenue South, has lived in Tukwila over 30 years and the smell has been here equally as long. She says she's proud to be in Tukwila. She wishes only to keep it a beautiful place to live. Rosemary Hersheff, 13325 56th Avenue South, responding to comments made by Attorney Arend that all the time the tanks were at the Port of Seattle there were no complaints about odors; well, the Port of Seattle is not a residential area and people working in that area would not be apt to complain about things like noise and odors. Here in Tukwila the facility is completely and totally surrounded by residences. All Foster Point is residential with the exception of one or two lots. Up above, on the hill, there's a trailer park on Beacon Coal Mine Road. There's the Foster Commons Apartments, there's the golf course and there's a recreational facility. Up the hill on the other side of the golf course, to the south, is all residential apartments mostly. City Attorney Kenyon reminded the Council and the speakers that the issue is only the addition of the nine tanks. It is not Seattle Rendering Work or Baker Commodities as guaranteeing whether it is good or bad. It's just the addition of the nine tanks, and whether that addition is deserving (in the Council's judgement) of an Unclassified Use Permit. Kenyon encouraged future speakers to steer away from attacking the plant itself and ask the Council not to let the speakers' comments influence their decision. Robertson asked the City Attorney if past operations by Baker of their current facilities could be used as a basis for suspecting the future or concluding the future operations of the tallow of the new tanks would possibly be a nuisance? It may be possible that the addition of the new tanks would not conform to the comprehensive land use plan and zoning code as far as the permit use. Kenyon responded that this really can't be a yes or no answer. If you concluded hypothetically (as some have concluded) that past operations may have constituted a nuisance, then as Ms. Arend stated, that is probably an enforcement question. What you need to focus on, however, are the factors as noted in TMC 18.66.060 -the factors to determine whether or not an Unclassified Use Permit is appropriate. Bill Haggard, 11532 40th Avenue South, commented that Baker is a victim of urban sprawl. When Baker founded their location, they probably found a good spot, because 50 years ago when they moved there, it was hidden away in little corner of the City. Ruth O'Brien, commented that from a business standpoint, it seems unreasonable that a company that has a petition before the Council for a Use Permit at this time, should continue to violate Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes September 14, 1992 Page 7 Public Hearin$ Baker Commodities (Con't) Ruth O'Brien: Attorney Arend: Ted Bear Rosemary Hersheff: Eric Thompson: Vern Umetsu: Robertson: City Attorney: 091 3 while the process is pending. She feels this is an indication of how they are going to continue to conduct themselves. She said the worse violation she has seen this year occurred on the very weekend prior to the public hearing. Arend stated that she was brought into this today, so she doesn't have a whole lot of history with this plant, or quite candidly, the City's process. But, she said, she's lying heavily on the Planning Commission minutes which states that these tanks would not increase processing capacity. She believes that maybe somewhere the information has gotten muddled. There are no storage tanks existing on the site at the moment. These are not nine additional storage tanks, she said. They have been engineered so as to eliminate the odors or substantially protect against the emission of odors from what's being stored in the tanks. It doesn't increase the amount of trucks that are brought in and out. If anything, the same amount of material is going to be processed, raw materials are going to be processed, that is what's brought in with the trucks. The only difference now is that some of it will be stored on the site so instead of having to process it, take it off the site, bring it back onto the site for additional processing, it will just remain on the site. So you are not really adding anything, it's simply storing it. Thy: mitigation measures that have been recommended by Planning and the Planning Commission really go to the aesthetics in concealing this and addressing the odor concerns of the storage tanks. Bear stated he understands what Attorney Arend is saying but he wanted the Council to understand that he was a new resident in the City and that the Council will be seeing his face a lot. That plant, as far as he's concerned, is heading downhill and better be out of here somewhere down the line. Bear stated he wants quality of life and he's going to fight this issue all the way through even if he has to obtain an attorney. Rosemary Hersheff stated after attending a meeting this summer, she was given the impression that approval would be contingent on how well Baker Commodities conform to the odor compliance issue. She said she would assume they would have gone all out to make sure there were no odors between that day and this. But like several people have said, the very worst I've ever smelled was over Labor Day weekend. Eric Thompson said he realizes this is a very emotional issue and very telling testimonies, but the ladies who spoke earlier about somebody being very sick on Labor Day weekend -the plant was not operating on that weekend. The Plant was closed Saturday and Sunday and Monday. He said not to deflect the blame, but there could be other odor sources in the area. Umetsu asked the Council to continue to note that the odors may be found in non conforming use, clearly the purpose of the non- conforming use Chapter 18.70- -was to insure that there would be no increase in size of the nonconforming uses. The tallow tanks themselves do not increase tank capacity; however, they do increase operation efficiency by moving them on site. Robertson asked the City Attorney if he had heard or received the arguments presented by Attorney Arend (Baker's Attorney) prior to tonight's meeting. Kenyon responded, No. Reason being he was on vacation last week. He said it is important, though difficult, to separate the issues and really focus only on the addition of the tanks. Baker Commodities is there and it has a right to be there right now. He advised the Council not to let anything to the contrary affect their decision. He said Ms. Arend indicated (and correctly so) that the Code provides that there's not a need to have a public hearing on this issue after the Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes September 14, 1992 Page 8 Public Hearing Baker Commodities (Con't) City Attorney: Duffie: Bill Hammond: Lawrence: Hammond: Lawrence: City Attorney: Lawrence: City Attorney: Hernandez: Hammond: Council President Ekberg: Planning Commission has done so. You can, however, have one. It's your right, and it's a good idea. Kenyon said, with all due respect to Ms. Arend, he does not think there's a procedural problem. If there is, he thinks Baker waived it by agreeing to try to work with staff to come up with a solution. Duffie commented he has had no success in getting a response when he calls Puget Sound Air Pollution. He concurred with the other citizens that the smell is awful. Duffie is also concerned about spillage and that the nine tanks might eventually leak. He asked what quality steel the tanks are make of. Bill Hammond, General Manager, Baker Commodities, responded that the tanks are 3/16th steel, and they are impervious to tallow and will not rust. The tanks have been in Seattle at least since 1942 and when they were sounded, they are still 200th which would be 3 /16ths steel. Hammond said the tanks were sounded before they were brought to the Tukwila facility. He said there has never been a leak on record at the Port of Seattle. Councilmember Lawrence inquired at to the hours of operation. Hammond responded they operate almost almost 24 hours a day except start-up time on Sunday evening is around 2:00 and at 1:00 a.m. Monday morning. They work until approximately 2:00 or 3:00 on Saturday afternoons. Hammond stated it's about a 6- day -a -week operation. Lawrence was concerned about the statement Attorney Arend made that there might be a problem with having staff come back with a recommendation after the Planning Commission had already had a hearing on this issue. Lawrence asked City Attorney Kenyon to clarify this a bit more. Kenyon responded that to the extent there would have been a procedural problem, it would have been waived by Baker's agreement to continue the hearing and work with staff to find a solution, if one was possible. Lawrence continued that during a normal public hearing process the City Council would have, even though we have a recommendation from the Planning Commission, if additional information comes up after the Planning Commission meeting, is it allowed to be presented at that time? Kenyon responded, Yes, that's why you would have the public hearing, to take additional public testimony. Hernandez asked for clarification as to how the tallow gets in the tanks and if it's transported in the tanks or if it's permanently on the site and are they refilled. Hammond explained: you're taking water out of raw material and producing two substances which are oil or tallow, and meat meal. It's heated up to 265 to 275 degrees Fahrenheit to produce non communicable odors. That's why an incinerator and a high speed boiler were installed. The only way to get rid of hard gases is to burn them. They are burned at 1400 degrees. The tallow has no odors. The process is done on site and then we store it in tanks for shipment. The tanks are transported on and off the site by trucks and trailers. Ekberg asked Umetsu if staff was recommending a statement that it's a non conforming use; thus, stating that there should be no increase in the size of the non conformity. Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes September 14, 1992 Page 9 Public Hearing Baker Commodities (Con't) Umetsu: That is correct, Umetsu responded. Hernandez: Vernon, was there previous testimony that the truck traffic would increase with the storage of the tallow tanks? Umetsu: The traffic increase would be relatively minor. I believe Mr. Hammond can respond, I believe it's something like three trucks per day increase as a result of moving the tallow tanks on to the site. Duffle: How many trucks do they have going in there every day? Umetsu: I believe Mr Hammond can give you that information. Mr Hammond: I think it's nine tallow tanks that are allowed depending on the shipping and what schedule runs on weekend. Robertson: Mike, have you had a chance to review the staff report dated September 9 yet? City Attorney: I've read it once tonight, yes. Robertson: Do you believe that the recommendations in it are sound and defendable? Robertson: City Attorney Umetsu: Council President: City Attorney: Let me state that I trust the work that the DCD staff did. What they have put forth on the report I think is defendable. I need to emphasize that it is only one portion of your decision. Your decision needs to be based on the factors in the Code for determining whether to grant the Unclassified Use Permit and whether there's a non- conforming aspect. But, yes, Baker and DCD staff tried to work out some identified problems. Apparently, that didn't happen, but the problems appear to be supported by enough data to overcome any arbitrary and capricious challenge. The second question I would have would be one of process tonight. This is a C.O.W. and of course we've had a public hearing on it. Would it be appropriate for us to render a decision tonight or should that be during a Regular Council meeting? Regular Council meeting. Certainly, Allan needs to close the public hearing when he is ready and you're free to discuss and even reach a consensus, but the official action in doing what you want to do is to be reserved for next Monday or some other Regular meeting. For clarification, the decision on any Unclassified Use Permit must be made by resolution of the Council. Are there anymore questions before we close the public hearing? Lawrence: One more for the City Attorney. If we were to appear to come to a decision or a consensus tonight, if it's informal, do you think the applicant would feel aggrieved if they did not get notice of new information until very late in the day Friday, is that inadequate time to prepare a response? City Attorney: If I were in her shoes (Attorney Arend), I would have been here asking for more time. They may well have their own reasons not to do that. Lawrence: So they need to actually ask that if they need it. City Attorney: I'm going to put the other attorney on the spot for awhile tonight. Attorney Arend: You have a reasonably good point because quite frankly my initial reaction to my client was, "You need to go in there and request a continuance because there's no way I can digest all of this material." But when I looked at it more carefully, we decided that since it had been continued a couple of times already it was likely that there O19 Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes September 14, 1992 Page 10 Public Hearing Baker Commodities (Con't) Attorney Arend: Robertson: Public Hearing Closed: Council President Ekberg: Robertson: Lawrence: Ekberg: Umetsu: Ekberg: City Attorney: Ekberg: Robertson: City Attorney: 0 cr l' were going to be neighbors here that it would be in everybody's best interest to move forward with this. The point I want to clarify is there seems to be a little bit of confusion of the point I was making, I must not have been very clear with regards to Planning's recommendation. I don't disagree with your City's Attorney with regards to the applicant and Planning's ability get together and try to resolve disputes or come up with mitigating measures or any of those kinds of things. My point was the legal significants of a recommendation. If a member of the Planning Staff or anybody else at a public hearing wishes to come and testify and submit evidence, and it's in the context of a public hearing, that is proper, I don't dispute that at all. What I do take issue with is a recommendation which the law recognizes a certain amount of deference to the recommendation of those people who are charged with enforcing ordinances. That's what I take issue with. The recommendation came at an improper time. The Council held a public hearing. During the public hearing the Council felt there was information not taken into consideration. Therefore, a continuation was recommended. I would presume the staff would make its recommendation to the Council based upon the best information available at the time. Ekberg officially closed the public hearing at 9:03 p.m. and asked the Council how they would like to proceed. I would like to request that the Council delay its action. I realize that most of the applicants and the citizens would like a decision as soon as possible. However, I personally would like time to review the material that was presented tonight in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan -I think that is a significant issue -and I would request that we delay debate on this topic until next week. I would like the chance just so that I could come prepared. I agree. Vern, you mentioned if we had chosen to (by resolution) to deny the Unclassified Use Permit, what would we need to do to approve the Unclassified Use Permit? In order to approve the Unclassified Use Permit, you would have to find that the use is not making sufficient progress and that you are sufficiently convince that it will not be a non conforming use. I suppose the question I'm really trying to get at is would you need that as a resolution? Resolution form would work. Again, we don't have to have it prepared Monday. You can reach your decision next Monday and then direct staff to get you the form of findings and conclusions or resolutions or whatever you want afterwards. I was thinking about saving the time and effort of doing a second phase of this and asking that draft resolutions for both issues be brought forth for our consideration. I would prefer not to do that because I think the argument should be in both resolutions; or, what you might want is choice -what will come from the debate. One other important point is (during this next week), do not discuss this. If citizens contact you tell them I forbid you to speak. I don't know if that will carry any weight, but don't talk to them. Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes September 14, 1992 Page 11 Public Hearing Baker Commodities (Con't) Council Action: Recess 9:06 9:20 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS Potential services/ projects funded by 1993 CDBG monies. SPECIAL ISSUES Designation of Seattle Times as City's Newspaper of record. Councilmember Robertson explained that the resolution originated in the Community Affairs and Parks Committee and was supported by the Administration. He said the financial impact is fairly minor. 01 i The Council agreed to forward the application for Unclassified Use Permit by Baker Commodities (Seattle Rendering Works) to the Next Regular Council for discussion, approval and /or denial. Council President Ekberg called the Committee of the Whole meeting back to order with those present as noted above. Council President Ekberg opened the public hearing at 9:22 p.m. Lynn Devoir, Parks and Recreation Superintendent, requested authorization to disperse the remaining CDBG funds amounting to $58,711 as follows: $2,000 for Dead Bolt Smoke Detectors; $24,150 for Utility Assistance Connection Program; and, $32,561 for Playground Accessibility. Devoir continued that the funds will be used in conjunction with the he CIP project at Duwamish Park in 1993. The playground equipment is currently not accessible nor does it meet safety standards for playground equipment. She said that all projects must serve a 51% low to moderate income level or benefit handicap or senior adult populations. She informed the Council that the contracts are due to the King County Planning Community Development Department by Friday, October 2nd. Discussion ensued. Council President closed the public hearing at 9:27 p.m. Councilmember Robertson commented that Hernandez had raised an issue about using some of the funds to purchase play grounds equipment to be used basically at apartment houses, trailer courts, etc. His concern was the legal ramifications this could entail and asked Devoir to research the matter and get back to the Council. The Mayor added there were five issues presently working through Karen Wright, Human Services; and through Lora Fowler, Vision Tukwila, where they've gotten businesses' and residents' support to fund said areas with playground equipment and to cover the labor costs. Most of the funds will be taken from Vision Tukwila Project Fund, however. Councilmember Robertson commented that discussions of possible discrepancy came up in a recent Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting and requested an update on the activities in question prior to Council approval. Councilmember Ekberg requested the program be expanded to include fire extinguishers or other fire protection devices such as second story escape ladders for kids' bedrooms. Devoir agreed to check into this matter and report back to the Council as soon as possible. The Council agreed to forward the potential services /projects funded by 1993 Community Development Block Grant monies to the next Regular Council (Consent Agenda) for approval. Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes September 14, 1992 Page 12 City's Newspaper of record (Con't). A resolution approving the establishment of SKCATB, designating an elected official as Board Member. U 9 1 The Mayor said it's going to cost the City approximately $15,000 dollars more per year; therefore, he'd rather not refer to the financial impact as "fairly minor." The council agreed to forward the resolution designating the Seattle Times as the City's newspaper to the next Regular Council (Consent Agenda). Councilmember Hernandez informed the Council this issue had appeared on the Transportation Committee's agenda and the committee's recommendation was to appoint Councilmember Dennis Robertson as the City's representative to the South King County Area Transportation Board. Councilmember Lawrence asked for clarification as to who will represent the City because he had seen both Robertson's and the Mayor's names listed as wanting to serve. Councilmember Hernandez responded they will have to fight it out as to who gets to be the representative and who gets to be the alternate. However, it was agreed at a previous Council meeting that Robertson would be the City's representative (to which he agreed), she said. The Mayor stated the Council cannot appoint a representative, that's the Mayor's job. He said he understands why Robertson did it when VanDusen was Mayor it was because VanDusen had another job commitment. The Mayor said he would like to assume the responsibilities of the Mayor's job of being the official City representative. He stated he has no objections to Robertson accompanying him. The Mayor continued that he is going to retain, and not delegate the position. Robertson requested the Mayor provide the Code he was quoting from because if he (Robertson) is to go, he would like go as the official delegate. The Mayor responded he was quoting the Washington Administrative Code 35A. Robertson responded that it is his understanding from the WAC Code that the Mayor can bring an appointee to the Council but the Council confirms. The Mayor asked the City Attorney to respond to Robertson. City Attorney Kenyon commented that 35A certainly gives the Mayor the power to make appointments of employees, members of panels, boards and commissions. He said the answer is going to be a combination of both what the statute says and what the enabling documents for the organization say as well. He said it does not strike him as any reason why the Mayor can't appoint himself to be that person. Kenyon said he hesitates giving an answer without first reviewing the state statute. Councilmember Robertson requested a written, legal brief quoting the statute and explaining both sides to the issue and the attorney's recommendation prior to making a decision on this issues. Councilmember Duffie suggested the Mayor represent the City on the South King County Area Transportation Board. He stated it's the Mayor's function. Let the Mayor resume his mayoral duties and let the Council be about Council business. Duffie said the Council has enough work to do without assuming the Mayor's duties too. Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes September 14, 1992 Page 13 SKCATB elected official as Board Member (Con't). 09 'I 7 Councilmember Hernandez commented that the problem can be solved by amending the last paragraph of the resolution to read and the City Council will designate an elected official..." Hernandez said she did not expect a conflict to arise on this issue; however, it is her understanding, from reading the resolution, that a representative should be appointed, not who that representative should be. She continued that the person representing the Council should also represent the opinions of the Council. She said she would like to amend the resolution to say that the Council will designate an elected official representative. Lawrence asked the Mayor was it terribly important that he serve as representative. Mayor responded he thinks it's important for the City that the Mayor serves as representative in regional affairs; and, that the Council starts trusting the Mayor and the Administration to communicate any necessary information gained from that experience. The Council continued the discussion for a short while then concluded by agreeing with Hernandez to amend the resolution as follows with Duffie voting no. "The City of Tukwila will join tosether with Kin County and the other cities of South King County that may choose to do so to form the South County Area Transportation Board as described in Exhibit A and the City Council will designate an elected official representative and an alternate to represent the City on the Board." The Council agreed to forward the resolution with amendment to the next Regular Council for approval. Councilmember Robertson explained the significance of representation on said Board stating that it is a major move on the part of local governments' jurisdictions on the south end to try to coordinate not only on transportation plans, but how to deal with regional transportation issues and to share resources. He said King County Councilmembers are funding the first year with their funds. In future years the cities will have to pay their fair share with Tukwila's amounting to approximately $30,000 or $40,000 per year. Mayor Rants explained many of the issues that will be discussed are technical, will require a great deal of staff analysis and staff time. He said Ross Earnst is one of the main engineers working on developing a criteria. He said it just seems logical that the Mayor's office would be the place to coordinate that kind of staff time. The Mayor concluded his remarks by stating he will support SCATB whether he's the representative or not. The Council agreed to elect Councilmember Dennis Robertson as the official representative to SCATB with Duffie voting no. Councilmember Simpson suggested Mayor Wally Rants serve as alternate representative. Councilmember Hernandez and Robertson agreed. Councilmember Duffie spoke against the motion because he felt it was the Mayor's role to serve as official representative. He also said by suggesting the Mayor serves as alternate gives credence to the fact there's little trust shown by the Council that the Mayor will impart information fairly. Duffie stated the City is paying the Mayor to do these types of jobs. If he has the time to represent the City, lu him. Duffie said the Mayor is also owed some courtesy. Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes September 14, 1992 Page 14 SKCATB elected official as Board Member (Con't) Urban Centers Commute Trip REPORTS Mayor Staff oo Councilmember Mullet asked the Mayor if he would like to serve as alternate should something come up to prevent Robertson from attending. The Mayor said he will consider Mullet's request but will not give an answer tonight. The Council agreed to forward to next Regular Council to discuss under Old Business as to whether the Mayor will accept to serve as alternate. Robertson commented if something should happen to prevent him from being the representative, he would be proud to be the alternate. Rick Beeler, DCD, presented a map (at the request of the Council) designating the Urban Centers and stated he would provide more detail if the Council so desired; and will provide information on what some of the other cities are doing and /or have done relative to the Centers issue at next week's Council. Ross Earnst, Public Works, gave an overview of the Interlocal Agreement with King County for the distribution of Washington State Energy Office grant funds to provide local implementation of the Commute Trip Reduction Act. He stated the Interlocal is a product of several lengthy discussions between Metro, local jurisdictions, Seattle, and King County. Tukwila will receive $61,197 from the County to implement CTR. Metro is proposing to accomplish most of this work, including development of our own City program for 74% ($45,431) of this allocation. The funds from the Interlocal would probably be sufficient to hire in -house staff support to complete a basic CTR Plan for Tukwila. However, Metro has the resources and trained personnel to implement this program with greater effectiveness. Earnst encouraged the Council to proceed with signing the Interlocal so that the funds can be disbursed appropriately. Earnst also distributed two attachments: a disbursement table and cost chart that had been omitted from the agenda packet. After a brief discussion the Council agreed to forward the Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Interlocal Agreement with King County to the next Regular Council (Consent Agenda) for approval. Ross Earnst /for McFarland reported that the water surcharge will expire on September 15. However, water restrictions are still in effect and customers will be notified accordingly on their next water bill. McFarland reported the clean -up on Saturday was very successful. He said hundreds of tires were removed from the creek at Southgate Park. There were forty -six participants and cooperation from King County and Puget Power. Several members of the community including the Boy and Cub Scout groups helped to demonstrate that the community really cares about some of their park areas. The Mayor read a letter written to him from Engineered Systems commending the City of Tukwila and the staff for being helpful, accessible, and responsive, especially Penny Hanson and Vernon Umetsu. Alan Doerschel, Finance Director, reported on the CIP, the Planning Model and the Budget and the Facilities Plan. He said the Proposed Budget document is scheduled to be completed by October 15. The CIP and the Planning Model is scheduled to be completed by October 5. He said the Facilities Plan will be on the agenda for discussion at the October 5 meeting to allow for an overall picture and the financial impacts of the complete package. Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes September 14, 1992 Page 15 REPORTS (Con't) City Council Council Work Plan. ADJOURNMENT 11:00 p.m. Council President Ekberg reported he had attended the Chamber of Commerce luncheon at Longacres this past Friday and it brought to his attention that the Council might want to consider having a representative on the Puget Sound Regional Council (formally PSCOG) to continue being represented in local and regional affairs. The Council briefly discussed the Council Work Plan and the Administrative Work Plan and how to merge the two to allow for better budget planning. The Mayor encouraged the Council to consider prioritizing the most urgent items. The Council also reviewed the City's need for a Hearing Examiner. MOVED BY ROBERTSON, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING ADJOURN TO THE SPECIAL MEETING FOR ONE HOUR FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING LABOR MATTERS. MOTION CARRIED. EXECUTIVE SESSION MOVED BY DUFFIE, SECONDED BY LAWRENCE, THAT THE 12:30 p.m. SPECIAL MEETING BE ADJOURNED. MOTION CARRIED. an Ekberg, Council Presid Celia Square, Depu ;City Clerk