HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-06-05 Special Minutes - Shoreline Master Program Public HearingJune 5, 1974
7:30 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL OF
COUNCIL MEMBERS
MEETING DISCUSSION
Shorelines Master
Program
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING
8:35 P.M.
Byron Sneva
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC HEARING
MINUTES
72
Tukwila City Hall
Council Chambers
Mayor Pro Tem Traynor called the meeting to order and explained
the purpose of the meeting to discuss the Tukwila Shorelines
Master Program.
TRAYNOR, DAVIS, SAUL, JOHANSON. MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY
DAVIS, THAT COUNCILMAN STERLING BE EXCUSED. CARRIED.
Councilwoman Harris arrived at 7:35 P.M.
Mayor Pro Tem Traynor turned the meeting over to the Planning staff
to enable the Council to ask questions before the meeting was open-
ed to the public.
Gary Crutchfield, Planning Technician, introduced Mike Sweeney from
Jones Et Jones, a firm hired by the City under Res. #379 to prepare
the Shorelines Master Program.
Mike Sweeney stated the State's Master Program and the Department
of Ecology's guidelines were followed in the preparation. It was
determined the Green River in the City of Tukwila would have a
highly developed urban environment. Mr. Sweeney then covered
each page briefly of the Tukwila Shorelines Master Program. He
stated it was determined that the characteristic of the land was
most important to preserve.
Councilman Johanson stated Mr. Sweeney had mentioned some changes
made at the Planning Commission level. Are these alterations re-
flected in the report we have before us now? Gary Crutchfield
replied yes.
Mayor Pro Tem Traynor stated the report indicates a 50 foot river
zone, and a 40 foot river zone. Which is proper? Mike Sweeney
stated both are proper and it is the choice of the developer ac-
cording to the requirements of each zone. The requirements of the
40 foot zone are more restrictive. He then went on to explain the
use of property in the 40 and 50 foot zones. Councilman Saul stat-
ed this idea came out of the Planning Commission and not from the
Shorelines Management Act.
Mayor Pro Tem Traynor thanked Mike Sweeney for the presentation
and asked for the recommendation of the Planning Department. Gary
Crutchfield stated it is the recommendation of the Planning Com-
mission to adopt the Program as amended by the Planning Commission.
He stated the Planning Commission has held several public hearings.
Mayor Pro Tem Traynor opened the Public Hearing for audience com-
ments.
Mr. By Sneva, Don Koll Northwest, stated at this time the City has
not adopted any ordinance implementing what the Shorelines Program
was instituted to do. In a letter written by John Biggs, dated
June 2, 1972 and which accompanied the final guidelines from the
Department of Ecology, stated the primary duty for implementing
the planning phase of the Shorelines Program is based on the direc-
tion set by the guidelines now rest with the cities and counties
of the State. We should now have an ordinance and be operating
under it. I would like to know what the status of my permit is
right now and how long will it be good for. The Master Program
here does not refer to any previous action on the permits.
Gary Kucinski, Planning Director, stated he had contacted the
Attorney General's Office and spoke to the person assigned to the
Department of Ecology. That person indicated any Shorelines per-
mit that was granted some time in the past would be valid at this
time even though a Master Program had not been adopted. The Shore-
lines Management permit will not be affected by this Program even
if the requirements differ. He stated the developer must build
within the two years after the date the permit is granted.
Councilman Saul stated there are builders operating under this
document now even though it is not officially enacted.
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING
June 5, 1974
Page 2
PUBLIC COMMENTS Cont.
Byron Sneva Cont.
Peter Buck
7ly
Mr. Sneva noted Page 1.3 regarding endangered species and stated
he wondered what they might be in the City of Tukwila. They are
not identified in the document. On Page 2.2, it states the Green
River qualifies as a state -wide significant stream. He stated all
the items that can make it significant state -wide do not all happen
on the same reach of the river. It should be up to the local com-
munities to identify the significance. He asked what are the state
wide significant items on the Green River as it flows through
Tukwila. He stated he could only think of two: fishing and flood
control. Also, regarding the preservation of natural characteris-
tics along the river, he stated there are now very few of these
left to preserve and those are not identified in the Program. He
stated the only natural lands left along the river are Helen Nel-
sen's farm and parts of the golf course. Regarding Page 6.1, he
stated he believed the general regulations are impossible to en-
force because they are not definitive enough. And on that Page
under Item #9, he stated he did not understand what was to be
done to protect the wildlife habitat. He stated the river zone
and low impact zone are far too specific in a number of areas.
There are potential conflicts of uses within the river zone and low
impact zone. These could be combined or else have alternatives
specified. The document has unique circumstances in it and these
are hard to define. Regarding Page 6.3, where is the outside top
of the dike and what is it? Mike Sweeney drew illustrations of
the outside top of the dike on the board and read the definitions
of dike and dike road. A discussion on these items followed.
Peter L. Buck of the firm Hillis, Schell, Phillips, Cairncross,
Clark Martin representing M. A. Segale asked when does the Coun-
cil anticipate taking action on this Program. Mayor Pro Tem Tray-
nor stated the Council cannot take action at a Public Hearing but
probably will have some decision to discuss at the Monday night
regular meeting. Mr. Buck stated he has attended the meetings on
the Shorelines Program and wanted to say the staff has done a
very good job, spent a lot of time on it and always listened to
the input. All of you should be aware of the effort spent by many
people. He stated the major issue now as in the past is the ex-
tent of the river zone. We have asked that it be reduced to 30
feet and this is easy to understand. There have been efforts made
to encourage development in the area by the City in the past. We
have a heavy density of industrial property there and many long
range plans have been made. We think it is possible to accomplish
the necessary goals with a 30 foot zone. It is absolutely wrong
to use 40 or 50 feet. A serious study should be made on this
point. Mr. Biggs' statement is very important and this document
we are considering is necessary and should be very carefully re-
viewed. He stated there are some tremendous costs involved in
this river zone concept and there will be a tremendous impact on
the property owners. We are not talking about a small, insignifi-
cant program, this will involve millions of dollars. Some property
rights and values will be taken away. He referred to Page C -13.
Then referring to Page E -4, he stated the Program can accomplish
all the same benefits listed here by having a 30 foot river zone.
It is written to suggest we are considering only the intangible
benefits and that we can only achieve these benefits by having the
severe regulations. The seriousness of taking an extra 20 feet if
it is not needed is pointed out by the letter included here by
Daryl Bastion which states there is a serious constitutional ques-
tion about having that much river zone. Another constitutional
question is raised in the environmental impact statement's equal
protection clause. And on Page C -14, a strong argument is raised
for the 30 foot river zone by the consultants themselves.
Beyond this most important consideration, there are a few techni-
cal ramifications he wished to point out. First, on Page 6.3,
different types of live ground covers are suggested. We would like
to see possibly a fourth type which would be some type of aggregate
on the steep slopes which would decrease the problem of mainten-
ance and give some flexibility. The review board should also have
more flexibility to make decisions in this particular consideration.
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING
June 5, 1974
Page 3
PUBLIC COMMENTS Cont.
Peter Buck Cont.
Byron Sneva
Peter Buck
Byron Sneva
RECESS
9:20 P.M. 9:30 P.M.
730
Mr. Buck referred to Page 6.4, Item #2, and stated the requirements
there were probably intended to mean only those roads that are par-
allel to the river. If so, language should be added to suggest
that access roads which are perpendicular to the river could come
in closer to the loading facility. Gary Crutchfield stated that
situation is covered in Item #3.
Mr. Sneva stated the Fiorito site where there are 30 foot openings
between the buildings and they exit from this interior court to
the access road and it is not possible to have 15 feet of landscap-
ing within that low impact zone.
Mr. Buck stated perhaps this problem could be solved by applying
Item #2 to those roads parallel to the river. Then referring to
Page 6.5, he stated Items #4a. and #4b. are both required but not
needed, just one or the other. And in Figure 6.1, he stated if
you are going to require these things, then there should be a good
purpose. Is there a need for this double buffer? Gary Crutchfield
stated as it reads, both 4a. and 4b. are required. Mr. Buck agreed
there should be the buffer at the dike, but with the Segale proper-
ty, there are two railroad tracks and spur track to the loading
area. There is no logical place to comply with the requirements in
Item 4b. Discussion followed on the requirements of access roads
and loading areas. Mayor Pro Tem Traynor stated if the area is
for the purpose of parking, loading or storage, then both the re-
quirements would apply. Mr. Buck stated there may be some trouble
with the railroad easements and this landscaping. Mr. Buck refer-
red to Page 6.4, Item #3, and stated this also applied to the rail-
road tracks by reference later in the report. The problem arises
because there is a 25 foot requirement between the river and an
access road. Then there is the requirement to landscape to a depth
of 15 feet from the river. The average width of the access road
is 14 feet. Add these all together and you will find a conflict
in requirements, it is over 25 feet. Councilman Johanson asked if
the problem is with the variable sizes of dike and stated the dikes
are controlled by other agencies. He stated the outside top of
the dike is going to be a constant thing and the only point to wor-
ry about. Peter Buck stated the language to solve this would then
require landscaping to the river or to the outside top of the dike
or 15 feet.
Councilman Saul asked if anything about gravel had been considered
by the Planning Commission relating to Page 6.3, Item #3b. Gary
Crutchfield stated the Planning Commission could discuss this, but
it probably will be the responsibility of some approval authority
as to what will be allowed. At the time this was discussed, the
live ground covers were stipulated.
Mr. Sneva stated this is an urban setting and we should bear that
in mind when we are talking about all this landscaping and the use
of the property. Landscaping can add a lot, but lets keep it nice
and urban. We do not have the natural woods down there and this
is a point of the Master Plan. The area should be well developed
and urban.
MOVED BY HARRIS TO RECESS FOR TEN MINUTES, SECONDED BY JOHANSON.
Mayor Pro Tem Traynor called the meeting to order with all Council
Members present as previously listed.
Councilman Johanson stated at this point, he would like to encour-
age the thought of another work session to consider the comments
made at this Public Hearing and meet with the staff and their recom-
mendations.
Councilman Saul stated there is a deadline for this Program of
June 20, 1974.
Councilman Johanson stated he was concerned about those items, such
as Items 4a. and 4b. on Page 6.5. There may be cases where both
apply or only one would apply. We don't know what document will
implement the Program and what the language of it will be. He
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING
June 5, 1974
Page 4
PUBLIC COMMENTS Cont.
9:42 P.M.
ADJOURNMENT
9:43 P.M.
ATTEST:
731
stated some of this should be left up to the Planning Commission.
There should be some alternatives given to them by the Council and
we would need to have a work session.
Mayor Pro Tem Traynor stated, on that suggestion, we will then have
this Master Program on the Agenda for Monday night for the staff
and the Council to discuss. The next few days should be enough
time for the staff to prepare their recommendations on the ques-
tions raised tonight.
Councilwoman Davis asked that the taped transcription of this
Public Hearing not be erased.
Councilwoman Harris stated she had many questions, but the most
important point is that there is no implementation section. And
rather than define unique circumstances, it would seem more reason-
able to catagorize these as conditional uses and include those
sections regarding variances and non conforming use. Procedures,
policies, qualifications, etc. should be specifically spelled out.
We need to clarify to the administrators and applicants what is
expected of them. We need a standard set of policies and criteria.
She stated she has a great deal of respect for Mr. Bastion and
agrees with the statement in his letter regarding government taking
land for public use which is actually an exercise in eminent do-
main. She then read from the letter on this point. With this
very rigid zoning system on the river, she stated she feels we
could run into trouble. It is contrary to the intent of the Shore-
lines Management Act which approaches the shorelines management
situation in the 200 foot management zone with the philosophy of
enhancing and developing the shorelines in a managed, properly
coordinated manner rather than restricting uses. We should serious.
ly take a second look at this because we can achieve the same
things by setting up policies, regulations and criteria and having
more flexibility of the use of the land in the 200 foot area.
We need proper guidelines and an implementation program. She
stated she supported Councilman Johanson's suggestion for more
work sessions.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Mayor Pro Tem Traynor closed the Public Hearing for audience com-
ments.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY JOHANSON, THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING BE
ADJOURNED. CARRIED.
ice
Dwayne T #aynor, Mayor Pro Tem
2
R ckey ji. Greer, Deputy City Clerk