Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-03-07 Regular MinutesMarch 7, 1994 7:00 p.m. TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 1VIINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Rants called the Regular Meeting to order and led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. Tukwila City Hall Council Chambers ROLL CALL JOE DUFFIE; JOAN HERNANDEZ; STEVE MULLET, Council President; DENNIS ROBERTSON; JOYCE CRAFT; DOROTHY DeRODAS. MOVED BY DUFFIE, SECONDED BY ROBERTSON, TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER EKBERG. MOTION CARRIED OJ HCIALS JOHN McFARLAND, City Administrator; RICK BEELER, DCD Director; RON CAMERON, City Engineer; ROSS EARNST, Public Works Director; DENNI SHEFRIN, Associate Planner; CRAIG WESTI3Y, Acting Asst. Chief of Police. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS Acting Assistant Chief Craig Westby introduced the City's new Transport Officer, Lisa Mills. Mayor Rants administered the Oath of Office to new Police Officers Grady Peeler, Eric Dreyer, and Ric Mitchell. CITIZEN COMMENTS Nadine Morgan, 5190 So. 166th Street; Connie Hoffman, 3924 So. 144th Street; and Dan Aragon, 4610 So. 124th Street, Duwamish Valley Neighborhood Preservation Coalition representatives, expressed their unhappiness with the way the proposed Beaver Bend housing project has been handled to date. All voiced their concern that consideration for King County funding of this project is dependent upon the support of the City Council. The group requested Council's signatures on a letter theDVNPC prepared and planned to send to King County indicating Council's support of the project subject to the conditions Council previously imposed upon *See amendment on page .5 it. A lengthy discussion followed. *The majority of the Council felt t D -VNPC- Arad -rat -t folkxved proper discussicnr and presentation _pracs xbis.tt -They favored sending the issue back to a sub committee prior to coming before the full council for discussion and a public hearing. MOVED BY CRAFT, SECONDED BY DeRODAS, THAT THE ENTIRE SUBJECT BE FORWARDED TO THE COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND PARKS COMMITTEE ON MARCH 14TH AND Tukwila City Council Regular Meeting March 7, 1994 Page 2 Citizens Comments (con't) SUBSEQUENTLY COME BEFORE THE FULL COUNCIL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING. *Following further discussion Council decided that the DVMPC letter should not be addressed in committee. MOVED BY EKBERG, SECONDED BY ROBERTSON, THAT THE LETTER FROM DVNPC NOT BE SENT TO THE COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND PARKS COMMITTEE AND IN ITS PLACE, COUNCIL SEND A LETTER TOMORROW TO KING COUNTY PARKS THAT STATES THAT THEIR ORIGINAL POSITION ON THIS PROJECT HAS NOT CHANGED. ROLL CALL VOTE: (on the amendment) Duffle No Hernandez Yes Mullet Yes Robertson Yes Ekberg Yes Craft No DeRodas No *Motion carried 4 -3. The letter prepared by the DVNPC will not be forwarded to committee. ROLL CALL VOTE: (Original Motion) Duffle No Hernandez Yes Mullet Yes Robertson Yes Ekberg Yes Craft No DeRodas No *Motion carried as amended 4 -3. Mr. Duffle asked that his opposition to the letter be made part of the record. Ms. Morgan clarified that the letter DVNPC requested states that Council approves the application. It does not say that Council Tukwila City Council Regular Meeting March 7, 1994 Page 3 Citizens Comments (con't) CONSENT AGENDA PUBLIC HEARING Appeal of Approval of CUP to Becker Trucking (continued from 2/18) approves the project. Morgan said the DVNPC could not go through with a public hearing until they have their funding. On another issue, Mr. Aragon stated his concern that there are not enough extra curricular activities for Tukwila youth. He asked Council's help in looking into this issue. Councilmember Robertson asked that the issue be forwarded to the March 28th Community Affairs and Parks Committee a. b. Approval of Minutes: 2/7/94 Approval of Vouchers: Nos. 69865 through 70073 in the amount of $269,464.08 MOVED BY HERNANDEZ, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS SUBMITTED. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Rants explained that Council's motion last week was to leave the hearing open to accept no new testimony except for the material that had been presented that Councilmember Robertson had requested. The material has been given to the applicant, the applicant and the City Council. Councilmembers Duffle and Ekberg asked to be excused from the proceedings as they had not been present as the last meeting. Council concurred. Mayor Rants announced that the City Attorney would not be present at the meeting. Mike Kenyon was scheduled to be present but had not arrived due to an emergency situation at the City of Burien. Councilmember Robertson said he was not comfortable proceeding without an attorney present. McFarland suggested Council continue through the agenda until he could contact Kenyon. MOVED BY ROBERTSON, SECONDED BY MULLET, TO MOVE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO FOLLOW NEW BUSINESS. MOTION CARRIED. Tukwila City Council Regular Meeting March 7, 1994 Page 4 OLD BUSINESS McLeod Exhibition Center Developer' s Agreement NEW BUSINESS City Hardship Assistance Program (CHAP) East Marginal Way Drainage Agreement Minkler Property Dedications Accepted as Rights of -Way Recess Meeting Back to Order Public Hearine (con't) Appeal of Approval of CUP to Becker Trucking REPORTS Mayor Councilmember Robertson explained the revisions that were made to the developer's agreement following a lengthy review by the Utilities Committee on March 1st. MOVED BY ROBERTSON, SECONDED BY EKBERG, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE EXHIBITION CENTER DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT. MOTION CARRIED MOVED BY MULLET, SECONDED BY HERNANDEZ, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE CITY HARDSHIP ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (CHAP) GRANT APPLICATION FOR MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. WAY SO. IMPROVEMENTS. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY ROBERTSON, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE EAST MARGINAL WAY DRAINAGE AGREEMENT. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY HERNANDEZ, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE MINKLER PROPERTY DEDICATION, ACCEPTING IT AS RIGHT -OF- WAY. MOTION CARRIED Mayor Rants called for a 5 minute break at 8:38 p.m. Mayor Rants called the meeting back to order at 8:45 p.m. with Councilmembers present as listed above. Councilmembers Duffle and Ekberg were excused and adjourned to the lobby until after the public hearing. Following a brief discussion, the hearing was continued to March 14th. Verbatim transcript attached (6 pages). Councilmembers Duffle and Ekberg returned to the meeting at 9:20 p.m. Mayor Rants announced that two Metro -King County councilmembers would be here on March 14th to meet with i�� Tukwila City Council Regular Meeting March 7, 1994 Pages Reports (con't) Council Councilmember Duffle spoke of a report of an attempted abduction at Tukwila Elementary School. The report is being investigated. EXECUTIVE SESSION 9:30 p.m. 9:47 p.m. ADJOURNMENT 9:47 p.m. *Citizens Comments Amended on 4/4/94 Council to discuss several issues of concern to Tukwila. Council agreed on the following topics: increased air traffic at Boeing field; regional committees for Suburban Cities Metropolitan, and the Duwamish Coalition. Councilmember DeRodas reported she attended the Airport Cities Coalition (ACC) meeting at Normandy Park on March 1st. Discussion focused on the strategies being used by lobbyists in Washington D.C. DeRodas also attended the first presentation on earthquake preparedness by Partners in Preparedness (HP). MOVED BY MULLET, SECONDED BY EKBERG, TO ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR 20 MINUTES TO DISCUSS A POSSIBLE LAND PURCHASE. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY DUFFIE, SECONDED BY EKBERG, TO ADJOURN TO THE REGULAR MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY EKBERG, SECONDED BY ROBERTSON, THAT THE REGULAR MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT 9:47 P.M.. MOTION CARRIED. Rants, Mayor E. Cantu, City Clerk MOVED BY ROBERTSON, SECONDED BY HERNANDEZ, TO AMEND THE MINUTES OF 3/7/94 AS FOLLOWS: UNDER CITIZEN COMMENTS ON THE DVNPC ISSUE, DELETE THE SENTENCE THAT READS "THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL FELT THE DVNPC HAD NOT FOLLOWED PROPE! DISCUSSION AND PRESENTATION PROCEDURES IN THIS MATTER. AND REPLACE IT WITH THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE: "THERE WAS CONCERN ON THE COUNCIL "S PART THAT THE DVNPC HAD NOT FOLLOWED PROPER DISCUSSION AND PRESENTATION PROCEDURES IN THIS MATTER MOTION CARRIED. Verbatim Transcript Public Hearing Appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to approve a Condition Use Permit with conditions to Becker Trucking Tukwila City Council March 7, 1994 Mayor Rants: As I stated earlier, it was the Council's desire in the continuation of this public hearing to only take testimony on the material that was presented this week at the request of Mr. Robertson. So is the appellant here that would wish to speak on the material that's been provided? (No response) Does staff wish to speak on the material provided? (No response) Does the applicant wish to speak on the material provided. Mr. Mann? Councilmember Dennis Robertson: Wally, can I ask a quick question? There is nobody here from the appellant. Do they know the meeting's.... John McFarland. City Administrator: They're being told. (Appellants were in the lobby awaiting the start of the hearing) Jeff Mann. Pac Tech Ensineering renresenting the Applicant Do you want me to go ahead? Rants: No, the appellant should go first. Denni Shefrin. Associate Planner: Excuse me if I may, we ought to enter into the record the information that was provided at Dennis' request last week as Exhibit Number 8. For the record. Mayor: Thank you, Denni. I was told to do that. Did the appellant wish to speak on the material that was provided this week? We don't have a time limit, but I'd appreciate it if we'd limit this so I don't have to impose a time limit. Shirley Robinson. representing the Annellant: 13422- 40th Ave. So., 98168. This is a considerable packet and I -it went to Jackie and not to anyone else. So if I'm asking questions about something that seems to be perfectly obvious, please excuse me. If you would look at the alphabetically listed.... Rants: Shirley, excuse me, you are representing the appellant. This is not citizens comments on this,because we've said no more citizen comments on this issue. Now, you are representing the appellant? Robinson: Jackie? Rants: Yes. 1 Robinson: She asked me to speak for her. Rants: Thank you. I wanted that said. Robinson: all right. In this group of material, (referencing Exhibit #8) which are alphabetically numbered, she had a question about "0", transmittal sheet from Jeff Mann, dated 9 -14 -93 regarding the site plan for Becker office area. A revised site plan for conditional use area. There is a memo, but there's no site plan for the office area, and she was uncertain what the revised site plan for conditional use area was -which it was, or what it looked like. Can you give us any information about that? Robertson: From reading the material, it was my understanding the purpose of that was- that site plan -was to place the building in the existing site on the north side of 128th so they could look at the proposed two entrances to the new park -or the new parking area. That was the purpose of that site plan and I assumed when I read the material, that that's all it was for and that that had been accomplished to make sure they were -where they were placed when staff looked at the logistics of crossing the street and the traffic analysis. Is that correct, Denni? Shefrin: Yes, that's correct. Council President Steve Mullet: Shirley, you need to look at the typed list where Dennis requested the information from. And on that list, for Item "0" you'll see all he requested was a transmittal sheet. So, it did not include the plans. Why Dennis requested the transmittal sheet, Dennis will have to explain to you, but that's all that was requested. So, whether it needs to be explained or not, I don't know. Robertson: That you've never seen a transmittal sheet before and was curious Mullet: No. Robertson: I was trying to understand what the purpose was. Yea, I didn't clearly understand what it was, and what I didn't want was a whole lot more drawings that had to be copied and everything else, and the great big ones. I didn't want to do that. I had enough drawings to look at, and I was really only worried about what I was going to see, not everybody else. Robinson: May I please ask the question now? Does this mean there will be changes to the office building? Rants: No. 2 Robertson: The purpose of that again was of trying to understand where that office building was -was to understand the placement of the driveways and the proposed parking lot. It had nothing to do with any changes that may or may not occur on the existing site. Robinson: O.K., then there's a Page "h point #3. "Most of the vehicular traffic accessing the proposed parking lot will be traveling north, approximately 82 percent on East Marginal Way So. by allowing access to the parking lot directly from East Marginal Way South. Both passenger vehicles and trucks can avoid the intersection of East Marginal Way South and South 128th Street and thereby utilize safer site distance conditions And then it goes on discussing this on the next page. "There is the possibility of increased traffic volumes at the intersection of East Marginal Way South and South 128th Street. Because of the complex geometry of this intersection and in order to promote a safer environment, it is desirable to limit the number of turning vehicles at this intersection. The installation of the driveway access on East Marginal Way South will help to accomplish this And then it continues in the next paragraph. "With the development of the proposed driveway access this is all underlined, "on East Marginal Way South on- street parking will need to be restricted on the west side of the street between the proposed driveway location and the southern intersection of East Marginal Way South and South 128th There's confusion in Jackie's mind, and in mine also, about where parking will be allowed. This is still a residential area where parking is needed. Where's that parking going to be is her question. Is it going to be allowed on 128th Street? Rants: We will hold that for answer by the City Engineer when you're through. O.K.? That's one question that they can give you an answer for I'm sure. Robinson: O.K. Those are the things that she had marked. Rants: All right. Then I will request that Mr. Cameron comes to the microphone and answers that question. Thank you, Shirley. Mr. Cameron, the citizens we didn't put time limits on, but you we will. (laughter) Ron Cameron. City Engineer: The parking would be restricted on the west side of East Marginal Way between the driveway, the new proposed driveway going north to So. 128th, along the frontage of their property, and Mr. Mitchell, you can correct me, but I think then 200 feet north of 128th, again along the frontage of the applicant. Both on the west side of the street. So it's essentially north and south of the 128th intersection, but on the Becker property frontage. Rants: Thank you, Mr. Cameron. All right, if that concludes questions from the appellant, and staff has answered their questions I believe. Is there any further presentation of staff, Rick? No? All right, Mr. Mann. Mann: Obviously, it's the prerogative of the Council to develop information as part of its decision making process. I just had one concern regarding the exhibits that were -that have been submitted here, Exhibit 8. Now the exhibits themselves while perhaps appropriate in the sense of this hearing, I trust that it is not being done in order to independently supply facts or evidences that have not been brought forth by the applicant. 3 However, excuse me, by the appellant. If we were to have new facts or evidences brought forth that are over and above what the appellant has brought forth, then that would constitute new testimony which we would need to then have the opportunity to rebut and to respond to and would request that if there is new evidence that has not been brought forth by the appellant. It is my understanding that we're here to consider the merits of the appeal based on what has been presented by the appellant, and the burden of proof in an appeal hearing is on the appellant to show that the facts and evidences supporting their claims. And while there has -been many issues raised, there are few facts or evidences that support. And we would again ask that we stay with the present information that has been presented by the appellant or else have the opportunity to respond to or rebut any new evidence that's been provided from these exhibits. Thank you. Mann: Could I just respond to that briefly. My understanding is that de novo means that the appellant is not constrained by the record established in the Planning Commission hearing, that she could bring forth any and all issues and which she has, any and all issues that she so desires to bring forth. But that the decision of the Council Rants: Mr. Mann, the city attorney did approve the issuance of this material both by the Council, as long as everyone had one. Your comments maybe will need to be addressed a city attorney rather than to a council, because the Council is following a process that they were told they could do that with. I'm not even going to ask Mr. Beeler to make a judgment, because the City Attorney has already said as I stated. Mann: O.K., if that is the case then I would ask that this information be removed from the record and un- allowed from the proceding in that it's use in this process has not been established. Your use of the information or the facts, motions, or recommendations based 4 Robertson: O.K., two issues here. One, I believe that this -and that's why we need a city attorney present, is -but I did ask the question at the previous meeting, this is de novo? I don't know if I said that word right, but what that means is that the City Council is sitting as the Planning Commission. And we are not limited to anything, or to just what is brought forth by the appellant. But we are sitting in place of the Planning Commission, and we're -we have the full range of investigating, asking for data, -the full range of decision making that has to do that. Now, we have to follow the same TMC laws that the Planning Commission has followed, because that's the law, but we are not limited to what the appellant brings forward in this situation. At least that's my understanding. So that's the first part of it, and I want to make that real clear. Could I ask Rick if he Robertson: There's a second part of his statement that if this is new information and we're going to use it, I believe you said that you wanted the opportunity to discuss and debate it and I believe that that's the opportunity that you have right now, is the chance to elaborate or add to or challenge the information that was presented. Isn't that the purpose of that right now? on this information have not been brought forth, and we have not been able to respond to you. Rants: I believe that your opinion needs to be stated to the city attorney who will be in her office tomorrow, and she will make a determination in your favor or not in your favor and then we'll go forward. If you wish to comment on these though, this evening you probably don't, because of what you've just said. Mann: That's correct. Because we do not know what is being brought forth from the materials -or other material that might be utilized. Rants: All right. I'm kind of warning you, I guess, that it might be that there will be not comments from anyone after this evening. Mann: I guess that that's where my concern is that if', from this information, there is new facts and new evidences brought forth that were not part of the record of the Planning Commission, or brought forth by the appellant, that we need to have the opportunity to respond to those issues, and I think that's only fair in this process to allow us to do that. Because that would not be facts and evidences that would be part of the whole process to -date. Rants: Well, you're more than welcomed to comment right now while you have the microphone. Mann: Well, I'm in a difficult position, you understand, because I do not know what might be brought forth by Mr. Robertson who's brought forth the exhibit and how -what information he has and how he might utilize that information. And that's my whole point about the issue of the appeal hearing is that if we have new testimony, we basically have a third party appellant here, and we have new testimony that has to be responded to and so forth. And that's why I feel like this needs to be constrained to the appeal and the issues that are presented before you and the evidences and facts that are before you. Rants: I understand the position you're coming from. I know exactly what you're talking about. I have to say, though, that the city attorney has approved the material to the Council and that should be a clue that if you talk to her tomorrow, she's not going to say well, we'll take this material off the table, and that's why I'm telling you if you wish to address it this evening, I don't know that there will be an opportunity next Monday. Mann: O.K. -thank you. Rants: Thank you, Mr. Mann. Council's pleasure on continuing or what you wish to do. Robertson: Could I -if the city attorney one, decides changes the process saying perhaps that this material is allowed, however, that the applicant should be allowed to 5 discuss it, and we do that, then I would request that if that happens tomorrow, that the appellants be given (unclear) Rants: They would have to be given the same for the appearness of fairness. Robertson: Yes, as quickly as possible. And that more than one be contacted and more than one set of information be given out if, indeed, we're going to hear more testimony next week. Rants: All right. Can I have a motion here for the continuance of this? Mullet: I move that we continue this public hearing until next Monday night when we will have an attorney present to answer legal questions. Rants: Is there a second? Robertson: Second. Rants: Moved and seconded. All in favor say "aye" (unanimous response); those opposed (no response). END OF VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT 6 I V(t,,,)