The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPermit L96-0051 - CITY OF TUKWILA - COTTONWOOD TREES CODE AMENDMENTL96 -0051 CITY OF TUKWILA COTTONWOOD TREES CODE AMENDMENT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ZONING CODE AMENDMENT John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director 1908 STAFF REPORT TO THE TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION Prepared August 14,1996 HEARING DATE: August 29, 1996 NOTIFICATION: August 16, 1996 FILE NUMBER: L96 -0051 APPLICANT: City of Tukwila REQUEST: Amend Title 18, Tukwila. Municipal Code (Zoning Code) to make removal of Black Cottonwood trees four (4) inches or greater in diameter, located in the River and Low Impact Shoreline environments, subject to the permit and replacement requirements of Chapter 18.54 TMC, Tree Regulations. SEPA STATUS: Pending RECOMMENDATION: Approval STAFF: Jack Pace Gary Schulz ATTACHMENTS: A. Shoreline environments B: Comparison of tree ordinance regulations 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 z w J CU: UO W w w 0 g as w w w; D o: N, o I-I w w.. z H U_ iz: =j o f-; Staff Report to the L96 -0051 Planning Commission Code Amendment FINDINGS BACKGROUND: The new Tukwila Comprehensive Plan contains policies that emphasize the importance of vegetation along the river. For example, shoreline policies direct staff to ensure that "significant vegetation" is maintained, and that shoreline development protects "riverbank vegetation." Policies in the Natural Environment element reflect the community's concern for quality fish habitat, and the need to preserve and restore appropriate vegetation" in fish habitat areas. DCD is currently working toward implementing these policies in a new Shoreline Master Program. It is anticipated that the new Master Program will be completed during 1997. In the meantime, shoreline development will be evaluated under regulations dating from 1974. These shoreline regulations have virtually no provisions for review of tree clearing or for tree replacement. Our tree regulations (TMC 18.54) protect important shoreline vegetation except black cottonwood trees. However, black cottonwood trees are protected in sensitive areas which are not part of the Shoreline Zone. Out of this regulatory gap, there arises a scenario in which shoreline trees can be cleared without a permit. Where no shoreline permit is required, there is no mechanism to evaluate impacts, and no tree replacement requirements for the removal of any size black cottonwood trees. Cottonwoods are one of the most significant natural habitat features along the river but are excluded from protection or replacement. Smaller understory and groundcover plants, which provide cover and erosion control along the river, may be cleared without a Tree Permit if the only trees being removed are black cottonwood. "Small- scale" projects, such as single family, may remove a relatively large amount of vegetation and still fall below land - altering or shoreline permit thresholds. As a result, the community is likely to see the continued loss of shoreline vegetation associated with cottonwood trees. Because of the importance and vulnerability of the river environment, indiscriminate and unmitigated tree clearing in the shoreline could have significant long -term impacts. The cumulative impact of many small clearing projects is of particular concern. Alternative solutions to this issue will be explored during the development of Tukwila's new Shoreline Master Program. In the interim, a simple code revision can address this clearing impact to the shoreline. GAPS IN EXISTING CODES: The Tukwila Zoning Code contains some provisions for clearing or protecting trees. However, as noted below, many do not apply to certain areas or vegetation in the shoreline. 2 Staff Report to the L96 -0051 Planning Commission Code Amendment Shoreline Regulations (TMC 18.44) Tukwila's shoreline regulations exempt tree clearing and minor development from a shoreline permit (TMC 18.44.080). At the same time, another section of our shoreline regulations prohibits the "disruption of vegetation" within the 40 -foot River Environment, unless necessary for safety or done in conjunction with a shoreline permit (see attached diagram of 40 -foot, 60 -foot, 100 -foot environments) (TMC 18.44.110(4)). Even where a shoreline permit is required, there are no requirements either to maintain or replace trees. Thus, beyond the narrow strip of the riverbank itself, there are virtually no provisions in our shoreline regulations that prevent, limit, or mitigate shoreline clearing. Tree Regulations (TMC 18.54) Tukwila's tree regulations include a tree clearing permit process and replacement standards. A tree clearing permit is usually one of several permits for large developments or projects involving sensitive areas. The permit fee is currently $25.00. 1995 revisions to the Zoning Code excluded cottonwood as a "significant tree, " such that tree regulations no longer apply to cottonwoods (TMC 18.06.775). This means that most of the larger trees in the shoreline area are not protected, and there are no requirements to plant new or alternate trees. Smaller understory vegetation (< 4" diameter) is also impacted by the removal of overstory cottonwood trees. It is difficult to regulated just the removal of understory vegetation which provides vegetative cover and erosion control along the river (TMC 18.06.775). Sensitive Areas Regulations (TMC 18.45) Tukwila's sensitive areas regulations address clearing of vegetation around wetlands, streams and steep slopes. They establish protective vegetation buffers (TMC 18.45.040) and provide standards for mitigation (e.g. replanting of slopes) (TMC 18.45.080). These regulations do not apply to the river (TMC 18.06.920). In prohibiting clearing within designated buffer areas, our sensitive areas regulations recognize the importance of vegetation to the health of stream corridors. Type 1 watercourses, for example, are given a 70 -foot vegetation buffer (compared to the 40 -foot setback for vegetation in the river environment) (TMC 18.45.040(c)). While cottonwoods and smaller understory vegetation are protected along small streams, the same vegetation along the river- -the only significant salmonid "stream" in Tukwila - -is not protected. 3 ror. ��aa: aYJna. nWWl Y'. eN+. xtrt* MtB+ A. M.!1HIMIttatANNI'R4.+nT-nn{rYMS. Ipj0./..ers.w,,,,W /:W".541, gn4 M/1 .1?AitWh49..Hf.iN 4W1.L:!tfNW.'PPIAMMYMtt: z E=-Z mow; -J (); U0 (/)0:, mow. CO LLi w o:" u- Q. 1- W. z Z o; 111 uj: •U • o-- --. w .z U; ~p z UOC N': 0 z Staff Report to the L96 -0051 Planning Commission Code Amendment RECOMMENDED CODE REVISIONS: During a discussion of this issue, the Planning Commission expressed interest in having a larger tree size threshold for cottonwoods along the river than for other regulated trees. While a twelve (12) inch diameter was discussed, staff continues to believe that a four (4) inch threshold is more appropriate. We are concerned that having a different size threshold for one species of tree will cause confusion for property owners, as well as code enforcement and administrative difficulties. Staff recommends a revision to the Zoning Code, as follows: z ~ w. ct 2 00. co w =. Option 1: P cn u. 0 Add a subsection 15 to section 18.44.110, General Shoreline Regulations, as follows: g u. d "(15) Notwithstanding any provisions of this Code to the contrary, removal of any tree within the river environment or the low impact environment, which tree is four (4) inches or F- _ greater in diameter as measured four and one half (4.5) feet above grade, regardless of species, ? shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.54 TMC, Tree Regulations." w o � o uj o— cn I-- Alternatively, should a different tree size threshold be desired for cottonwoods in the shoreline w area than for other regulated trees, Section 18.44.110 of the Zoning Code could be amended by adding the following: — 0 wz U co. "(15) Notwithstanding any provisions of this Code to the contrary, removal of any cottonwood tree within the river environment or the low impact environment, which tree is z (__) inches or greater in diameter as measured four and one half (4.5) feet above grade, shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.54 TMC, Tree Regulations." Option: 2 In this case, the Planning Commission may wish to refer to the attached Comparison of Tree Ordinances to determine the appropriate diameter. Additional Recommended Amendment: Finally, as a housekeeping matter, staff recommends the defmition of "significant tree" at TMC 18.06.775 be amended as follows: "A 'significant tree' means a tree (cottonwood excluded) which is 4 inches or more in diameter as measured N 4.5 feet above grade." This change brings our significant tree definition into consistency with both the definition of "diameter /diameter - breast- height (d.b.h.)" at TMC 18.06.222, and with industry standards. 4 200' Urban nvirament 100' 60' 40' Nigh Impact nvIronment LW/ Impact rnvircn rent PIver nvirontnent Mean High — Waler Mark kIver t 200' Urban nvIrcrrnent 40' 60' 100' Low mo menr Nigh Impact environment 111 111 111 11 111 u um m iu 111 11 111 11 m11 111 111 111 11 Not fa Scale 1995 Tukwila Zoning Code Gifu of Tukwila 5horellne: Management nviraments fiqure'I8 -I ATTACHMENT A Z • H Z` • 5w Ucp . co o:- W =. WO. LLQ co = • I- Z�. Z° wo 0 -. W W' H U IL f': -O Lid N. Z COMPARISON OF TREE ORDINANCE REGULATIONS �� '�� ''�'��.�. ��"""��"~ UUU��U��U�� ~°~°"^"~~~~"~°" " ~~"~~~ 0� ATTACHMENT �� Kant 6 in. d.b.h. All undeveloped land No. May not be o Yes - 2:1 and up to 61 Bellevue Evergreens - 8 in d.b.h. Deciduous - 12 in d.b.h. All land clearing over 1,000 sq.ft. Yes - clearing & grading penniL 15Y6 slopes & other sens. areas • Yes Mt. Lk. Terrace 15 ft height, excl. Alder & wild cherry Undeveloped greater than 9,000 sq.ft. parcels Yes - grading permit Yes - no specific criteria Administrative Edmonds 6 in. d.b.h. . Not single family. Undeveloped tots that can't be divided, exo.S|opaa greater than 25%&sona. areas. Yan - |and deohngpernlit Yea - onaaks. wetlands, slope over 25% (only enhancement . allowed) Not specific. Case- by-case administrative. Kirkland Evergreens - 8 in. d.b.h. Deciduous - 12 in. d.b.h. All undeveloped land No - p|anUDg plan required Yes - 15% slopes retention & replacement required 1:1 of significant trees. Replace trees 3 in. to 5 in. at 1 ft above grade. Fed. Way 12 in. D.b.h., exc. Alder, oottonmood, 'maple & poplar General landscaping requirements & required retention plan (25%) No Development discouraged on steep slopes Yes - replace 25% of total trees 12in. greater, with 10 ft height and 3 in caliper trees Renton 6 in. d.b.h. All • undeveloped land Yes - routine vegetation management permit Yes - shoreline, creeks, wetlands- no development on stopes over 40%. Enhancement possible No - case-by-case administrative Seatac ' Evergreen - 8 in. d.b.h. Deciduous - 12 in. d.b.h. All undeveloped land. Retain 12% of significant trees. No Yes - vegetation management plan & no removal on 4OY6slopes Not specific. Case- by-case administrative. Bothell Tree retention ptan required for alt trees over 8 in. d.b.h. No distinction. All new development on slopes No. Yes -limited development on slopes over 15Y6 No - required retention 0� ATTACHMENT �� City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director PLANNING COMMISSION BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW AGENDA AUGUST 29, 1996 6:00 P.M. - Work Session 7:00 P.M. - Public Hearing City Hall Council Chambers, 6200 Southcenter Blvd. CALL TO ORDER. ATTENDANCE WORK SESSION - 6:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - 7:00 P.M. CITIZEN COMMENTS: VI. MINUTES: VII. OLD BUSINESS (BAR): CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: * Update on Parking Study * Update on research regarding health affects of cellular antennas At this time you are invited to comment on items which are NOT included on the agenda. June 27, 1996; July 25, 1996; August 8, 1996 L96 -0010: Proposed Hotel Johnny Cheng, Cheng and Associates Continuation of design review for a 43 unit hotel. 4006 S. 139 Street, Tukwila. VIII. NEW BUSINESS (PLANNING COMMISSION): CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: ‘19.64)051:, Code Amendment City of Tukwila Amending the Zoning Code regarding the removal of trees within the River and Low Impact Shoreline environment. City -wide 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 Planning Commission Agenda August 29, 1996 Page 2 CASE NUMBER: L96 -0052: Code Amendment APPLICANT: City of Tukwila REQUEST: Amending the Sign Code to include an amortization ordinance for non - conforming signs and changes to the planned shopping center and office sections. LOCATION: City -wide CASE NUMBER: L96 -0053: Code Amendment APPLICANT: City of Tukwila REQUEST: Amending the Zoning Code to allow fermenting and distilling in Industrial zones. LOCATION: City -wide DIRECTOR'S REPORT Status of Tukwila Community Center project. ADJOURN { A F F I D A V I T O F D I S T R I B U T I O N hereby declare that: /1Notice of Public Hearing ❑Determination of Non - significance 0 Notice of Public Meeting 0 Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance O Board of Adjustment Agenda ❑Determination of Significance Packet and Scoping Notice Board of Appeals Agenda fl Notice of Action Packet fl Planning Commission Agenda. fl Official Notice Packet D Short Subdivision Agenda E Other Packet Notice of Application for ❑Other Shoreline Management Permit fl Shoreline Management Permit was � to each of the following addresses on I S _' Cl c0 4 k1A cam. L.:. %-(1[q(0, Name of Project File Number L ho s( Signature •Z E- Z 0: 0 0: WI lJJ 0 L Q, D. Ia w; • i-.0. • •:z U ` . o� w.W. Z:: U N; •z.._, City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development PUBLIC NOTICE City of Tukwila Steve Lancaster, Director Notice is hereby given that the City of Tukwila Board of Architectural Review and Planning Commission will be holding a public hearing at 7:00 p.m. on August 29,1996, in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 6200 Southcenter Blvd. to discuss the following: OLD BUSINESS: I. CASE NUMBER: L96 -0010: Proposed Hotel APPLICANT: Johnny Cheng, Cheng and Associates REQUEST: Continuation of design review for a 43 unit hotel. LOCATION: 4006 S. 139 Street, Tukwila. NEW BUSINESS: II. CASE NUMBER: L96 -0051: Code Amendment APPLICANT: City of Tukwila REQUEST: Amending the Zoning Code to change the definition of "Significant Trees" to include Cottonwood trees. LOCATION: City -wide CASE NUMBER: L96 -0052: Code Amendment APPLICANT: City of Tukwila REQUEST: Amending the Sign Code to include an amortization ordinance for non - conforming signs and changes to the planned shopping center and office sections. LOCATION: City -wide CASE NUMBER: L96 -0053: Code Amendment APPLICANT: City of Tukwila REQUEST: Amending the Zoning Code to allow fermenting and distilleries in Industrial zones. LOCATION: City -wide Persons wishing to comment on the above cases may do so by written statement, or by appearing at the public hearing. Information on the above cases may be obtained at the Tukwila Planning Division at 431 -3670. The City encourages you to notify your neighbors and other persons you believe would be affected by the above items. Published: Seattle Times August 16, 1996 Distribution: Mayor, City Clerk, Property Owners/ Applicants, Adjacent Property Owners, File. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 ..- .,�... -,- a City of Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. / 7 7 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, APPLYING TUKWILA'S TREE REGULATIONS TO COTTONWOOD TREES 12 INCHES OR MORE IN DIAMETER; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that cottonwood trees provide significant wildlife habitat, and WHEREAS, the City Council seeks to extend the protection of the Tree Regulations to cover cottonwoods within the Shoreline Overlay, . z .NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, ~ z WASHINGTON HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: t Section 1. TMC 18.06.775 and Ordinance 1758 § 1(part) is amended to read as follows: 0 0 A "significant tree" means a tree (Cottonwood excluded) which is 4 inches or more in W diameter as measured 4.5 feet above grade. _I I' co LL Section 2. A new subsection (15) is hereby added to TMC 18.44.110 and Ordinance 1758 § w 0 1(part) to read as follows: _� (15) Notwithstanding any provisions of this Code to the contrary, removal of any N D cottonwood tree within the river environment or the low impact environment, which tree I w' is 12 inches or greater in diameter as measured four and one half (4.5) feet above grade, z = F--. shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.54 TMC, Tree Regulations. z O Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should 2 M! be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or V unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, o clause or phrase of this ordinance. 11.1 w H U Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five (5) days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF TH CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this g'`frA day of ,1996. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Jie E. Cantu, City Clerk APPR VED AS O F • RM: ;1 1 Ire Of ice of the C Ott FILED WITH THE CITY C /0/0 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: /0/7/ 7 6"' PUBLISHED: /(///7, EFFECTIVE DA E: / G 9 ORDINANCE NO. 7 �s W. Rants, Mayor October 7, 1996 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL Haggerton Excused OFFICIALS CITIZEN COMMENTS CONSENT AGENDA 9/9 Minutes Withdrawn " ■ HEM TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Tukwila City Hall Council Chambers Mayor Rants called the Regular Meeting to order and led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. JOE DUFFLE; JOAN HERNANDEZ; PAM CARTER, Council President; ALLAN EKBERG; S'I'EVE MULLET; PAM UNDER. MOVED BY MULLET, SECONDED BY CARTER, TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER HAGGERTON. MOTION CARRIED. JOHN McFARLAND, City Administrator; JIM HANEY, Interim City Attorney; RON CAMERON, City Engineer; ROSS EARNST, Public Works Director; KEITH HALL, Code Enforcement Officer; STEVE LANCASTER, DCD Director; LUCY LAUTERBACH, Council Analyst; JANE CANTU, City Clerk. Bill Arthur, 18000 Andover Park West, Suite 200, Tukwila, distributed first edition copies of the Highway 99 Action Committee newsletter. It is intended to be a quarterly publication. Arthur thanked Baker Commodities and Kinko's for their assistance in the publication and printing of the newsletter. a. Approval of Minutes: 1/22/96 (Sp. Mtg.); 9/9/96 (Sp. Mtg..) b. Approval of Vouchers: Nos. 99222 through 88498 in the amount of $1,451,868.97. c. Authorize the Mayor to accept a right -of -way donation for street improvements at 32nd Ave. S. /S. 135th St. d. Authorize Mayor to accept two easements for construction of sidewalks in the CBD. MOVED BY DUFFLE, SECONDED BY HERNANDEZ, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS SUBMITTED.* Council President Carter requested the minutes of 9/9/96 be withdrawn as they were approved previously. *MOTION CARRIED. 6 -0 Tukwila City Council - Regular Meeting October 7, 1996 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS Ord. #1773 - amending Sign Code to Include Amortization Schedule for Non - Conforming Signs & Changes to Planned Shopping Center and Office Sections Public Comment Mayor Rants declared the hearing open at 7:07 p.m. Steve Lancaster, DCD Director, explained that the purpose of the hearing is to take public input on proposed changes to the sign code. There are two types of changes reflected in the proposed ordinances contained in the agenda packet. The first set of changes, housekeeping in nature, are minor changes made to improve flexibility of the signage on office buildings and planned mall shopping centers. It is a clearer reflection of some of the changes that have taken place in the way the City looks at land use under the Zoning Code and the mixture of uses allowed in certain areas. The second ordinance is a proposal to establish a program that would require that all existing non - conforming business signs (grandfathered signs) be brought into conformance within the Tukwila Sign Code by a specific date. The proposed date is three years after the adoption of whatever ordinance the Council would chose to adopt. Lancaster clarified that the current ordinance allows signs that were legally erected but don't comply with current rules and regulations to remain in use indefinitely. These signs are found primarily in the annexation areas and enjoy grandfather or non - conforming use rights. They may remain under those grandfather rights until there is a substantial change in the use of the property or the buildings or the signs. Under the proposed sign ordinance amendments these signs that were legally erected but don't comply with the current regulations would have to be brought into compliance by the year 2000. At the end of the three year period, the grandfather rights would basically go away. This is one of the strategies Council has been looking at in its overall strategy of dealing with the issue of Highway 99 as well as other areas in the community. With regard to Highway 99, these regulations may be viewed as a strategy to improve the overall visual character and business climate in that area. The ordinance would apply equally throughout the entire community. Approximately 200 notices describing the proposed amortization program were sent to businesses in the areas most likely to, be affected (Highway 99, East Marginal Way, Military Road). Rick Davis, 14101 Pacific Highway So. (21 Club), commented that his business sits far back from the highway and is not readily seen from either direction due to neighboring businesses on either side that sit closer to the highway. The sign was placed on the highway in order to draw attention to his establishment. Davis said he fears his business would suffer without the highway sign. z _ �. W :6 s 00 • No, I: w • O. J u. a: = w: z� o- z I: o N w w� • • ~O Z; U �. z Tukwila City Council - Regular Meeting October 7, 1996 Page 3 Public Hearings (con't) Dwight McLean, 13015 - 38th Ave. S., said that if business owners could be persuaded to take down their signs, it would improve the quality and image of Highway 99. McLean presented a brief home video which showed sign codes in another community versus Tukwila's sign codes. The film showed the contrast between Highway 99 with its various signs and many billboards and the City of Burlington with its low profile signs and no billboards. McLean said he thought a three year amortization was too short. He suggested a 7 -10 year time span and some type of incentive given for early compliance such as granting a business license or waiving storm water /sewer assessments. McLean commented that if the goal of the City is to beautify the highway, the sign code provisions should include both business signs and billboards. Doug Sternberg, 14818 Pacific Highway So: (Douglas Printing), said his business also sits back from the road. He, too, relies upon a billboard sign to be seen among the competing signs. Most of his signs will be affected by the new codes and he expects it will be very expensive for him to bring his business into compliance with the new regulations. Sternberg has operated his business for 20 years and asked that business owners be considered as Council looks at the new provisions. Tim O'Brien, 14639 Pacific Highway So. (Appliance Distributors), stated that 95 percent of the signs on Highway 99 are non- conforming. The cost he will incur to convert his signs, which are all non - conforming, is approximately $35,000. O'Brian asked that Council be aware they are affecting a great number of people. Mike Salle, 130th and Pacific Highway So. (Bernie and Boys), reminded Council that during the annexation process a few years ago, business owners were assured that conforming signs and buildings under King County codes and regulations would continue to be conforming under Tukwila's jurisdiction. Salle said felt it unfair that business owners would have to incur extra expenses in order to bring their existing signs up to code. John Welch, 11405 SE 196th, Renton, is involved with the City through the Tukwila Tomorrow Committee, Highway 99 Action Committee, and the Chamber of Commerce. Welch noted the theme the Chamber of Commerce has tried to stress is the relationship between the business community and the City. In Tukwila City Council - Regular Meeting October 7, 1996 Page 4 Public Hearings (con't) Hearing Closed Council Discussion other words, we're in this together. Welch said he feared the short duration in abating the non - conforming signs will work a hardship on many businesses and will hurt the relationship of the businesses on Highway 99. Business owners on the highway are pulling together to try to resolve the issues. Welch asked that Council reconsider the amortization schedule and focus on a 5, 7, or 9 year schedule. In its present form, the three year schedule will create hardships for business owners. Mayor Rants declared the hearing closed at 7:28 p.m. Councilmember Ekberg asked what other cities had done regarding the timeline issues. Lancaster responded that other cities typically give 7 -9 year time periods. More frequently, when a city decides to go through an amortization program it is usually when the city adopts a new sign. If Tukwila were adopting a new sign code it would be putting in new restrictions or changes to businesses who had possibly put up a new sign during the last year or two. In such cases a longer period of time is usually needed for people to recover their investment in those signs. Another three years would add some additional period to amortize the investment on those signs. Council President Carter asked what the staff had recommended to the Planning Commission. Lancaster responded that staff gave the commission a range of 3/5/7 years to consider. Councilmember Duffie remarked that the same problem with signs existed when the Interurban area was annexed several years ago. Responding to Ekberg's question regarding billboards, Lancaster explained that the issues involved with billboards are different that those involved with on -site business signage. Billboard issues will be considered at a later date. It was the consensus of the Council to forward the amortization ordinance to a future Committee of the Whole meeting for further discussion. MOVED BY MULLET, SECONDED BY LINDER, THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE BE READ BY TULE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED 5 -1 (Duffie dissenting; Haggerton absent) 7: ".ti r3t�_••:y:'i.c:. "•.aeike•�iG:�"ti'"�" ciatrii^•�*.'•r;F ..1u•",.aMGCm.3id 'id wl yiWCL•" `3'SbbsF.90F; :3 .tvifl'i:' Kme:stbstredais,•_ z •a Z` U O -J w0 • ga _1.. co =a w z �. :1-O`. . M • � o w 1-U u.i UN O.. • ;Z Tukwila City Council - Regular Meeting October 7, 1996 Page 5 Public Hearings (con't) Public Hearing - Amend Zoning Code to Allow Fermenting and Distilling in Industrial Zones - Ord. #1774 Public Comment Hearing Closed Attorney Haney read AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE SIGN CODE BY CHANGING THE ALLOCATION OF SIGNS TO OFFICE BUILDINGS, CLARIFYING PLANNED SHOPPING CENTER SIGN REGULATIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. MOVED BY MULLET, SECONDED BY CARTER, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO.1773 AS READ MOTION CARRIED 5 -1 (Duffie dissenting; Haggerton absent) Mayor Rants declared the public hearing open at 7:37 p.m. Steve Lancaster explained that the ordinance would amend the Tukwila Zoning Code to correct an inadvertent omission made at the time the new Zoning Code was adopted in December 1995. Under the . prior ordinance, manufacturing uses that involved distilling and fermentation were allowed in all of the industrial districts. When the new Zoning Code was adopted, the activity of brewing and distilling was dropped frcm the entire code so that it was not allowed anywhere. The Planning Commission recommended that Council put this activity back in all of the industrial districts. In the Tukwila Valley South district, the Planning Commission recommended the activity be put in as a conditional use as opposed to an outright permitted use. Discussions at CA &P Committee and . the last COW it appeared it was Council's direction to go ahead and allow distilling and fermenting in the TVS district as an outright permitted use as opposed as a conditionally permitted use. Lancaster explained that the ordinance in front of council contains both options. Council would need to make a minor change to the ordinance, deleting one of the options, if it chose to adopt the ordinance at this meeting. Bill Arthur,. 18000 Andover Park West, Suite 200, Tukwila, requested Council delete Section 18.40.040 in its entirety on the basis that the Tukwila Valley South district is in large part industrial in nature. Arthur asked that TVS permitted uses be treated'the same as other industrial areas in the City. Rants declared the hearing closed at 7:43 p.m. Tukwila City Council - Regular Meeting October 7, 1996 Page 6 Public Hearings (con't) Ord. #1774 "41, a...4 :c .'•A v�ti,EGi1' ��rJ".+iL-:4:4[6i S.t'?v1a'v1APJ1. °:41�u:�Ll'y°I MOVED BY HERNANDEZ, SECONDED BY DUFFLE, THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED. Attorney Haney read an ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING AND REPEALING PORTIONS OF ORDINANCE NO. 1274; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. MOVED BY DUFFIE, SECONDED BY MULLET, THAT ORDINANCE NO.1774 BE ADOPTED AS READ.* MOVED BY EKBERG, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, TO AMEND THE ORDINANCE AS FOLLOWS: DELETE ENTIRE SECTION 18.40.040 CONDITIONAL USES TUKWILA VALLEY SOUTH DISTRICT. THE PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT IS TO ALLOW DISTILLING AND FERMENTING TO OCCUR AS REGULAR USES IN THE TUKWILA VALLEY SOUTH DISTRICT. MOTION CARRIED 5 -1 (Carter dissenting). Opposing the motion Council President Carter said she preferred the uses be conditional because housing is allowed in the TVS district. Housing is not allowed in the other industrial zones. Councilmember Mullet said he supported the motion because housing is only allowed in two places: along Orillia Road, south of 200th street; and along the river where residential type mixed use houses are allowed. Mullet supported a permitted use without restriction other than the current ordinances in effect dealing with noise and odor. MOVED BY EKBERG, SECONDED BY DUFFLE, THAT THE FIRST SENTENCE IN SECTION 5 BE AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 5. A NEW SUBSECTION TMC 18.40.020 (29) IS HEREBY ADDED TO ORDINANCE NO. 1758 SS 1(PART) TO READ AS FOLLOWS: MOTION CARRIED. Attorney Haney explained the need to amend the title of the ordinance to correctly reflect the current Zoning Code ordinance. z • .1 w, . 00 N0: . W I Jam: = a; .F—w; z� F-. o :z F— • ,0I w W° `z Vs uiz U - O~ ` z Tukwila City Council - Regular Meeting October 7, 1996 Page 7 Public Hearings (con't) Ord. #1774 Adopted Public Hearing - Ord. #1775 - Amending Zoning Code to Protect Cottonwood Trees in Shoreline Areas Hearing Closed MOVED BY LINDER, SECONDED BY DUFFLE, TO AMEND THE TITLE OF THE ORDINANCE TO READ AS FOLLOWS: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING AND REPEALING PORTIONS OF THE CITY'S ZONING CODE, ORDINANCE NO. 1758, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. MOTION CARRIED. *MOTION CARRIED AS AMENDED 6 -0. Mayor Rants declared the hearing open at 7:55 p.m. Steve Lancaster explained that at the time Council adopted the new Zoning Code they decided to not include cottonwood trees within the definition of "significant trees" and therefore made cottonwoods not subject to the permitting and replacement requirements of the Tree Ordinance. Staff has since asked the Planning Commission and Council to consider some level of protection for cottonwoods along the river because they provide some important habitat value there. The Planning Commission has recommended that within the river environment and the low impact environment as described in Tukwila's Zoning Code cottonwoods be provided essentially the same level of protection as other types of trees. Only those cottonwoods that are 12 inches in diameter or larger would be provided that protection. The proposed ordinance also contains a housekeeping amendment that deals with where you measure the circumference of a tree. Councilmember Mullet supported "re- instituting" them into the sensitive area along the river. There being no one from the public wishing to speak on this issue, the hearing was closed at 7:58 p.m. MOVED BY HERNANDEZ, SECONDED BY DUFFLE, THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED. Jim Haney read AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, APPLYING TUKWILA'S TREE REGULATIONS TO COTTONWOOD TREES 12 INCHES OR MORE IN DIAMETER; PROVIDING z w DL o O` cno cnw. w =. w o:• 2 g J' cn D' =a. • z�..; .t- O: Z F-: . :w u •uiZ, • coi �O ~ z Tukwila City Council - Regular Meeting October 7, 1996 Page 8 Public Hearings (con't) Ord. #1775 Adopted NEW BUSINESS Res. #1362 - Opposing Current RTA Plan Citizen Comment FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. MOVED BY HERNANDEZ, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1755 BE ADOPTED AS READ.* Councilmember Mullet clarified that the intent of the ordinance allows you to remove destructive or dangerous cottonwood trees; however, they must be replaced under the Tree Ordinance with the appropriate trees that will protect the river environment. *MOTION CARRIED 6 -0. MOVED BY DUFFIE, SECONDED BY CARTER, THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED. Attorney Handy read A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, OPPOSING THE CURRENT PROPOSED REGIONAL TRANSIT PLAN. MOVED BY DUFFLE, SECONDED BY CARTER, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO.1362 AS READ.* A.L. McDonald, 4246 S. 146th Street, Foster Community Club President, read a resolution of the membership formally opposing the current Regional Transit Plan and recommending a NO vote on November 5th. Michael J. West, 14864 Pacific Hwy. So., read from a petition that had been distributed to business people along Highway 99. The petition opposed the positioning of the RTA light rail on Highway 99 within the city limits of Tukwila. The petitioners recommend an alignment on Interurban ,Ave. with a stop in Southcenter. The petition contained 400 signatures. Councilmember Mullet distributed a revised resolution as asked for Council's consideration of this document. Mayor Rants asked that the revised resolution be read in its entirety. Councilmember Mullet read the resolution as requested. (See attached) - tiz,t,.cnbiw go'lll..14a,r°L.."= °`ial, ieat{gW,a. '- e,w,w • - .4,R1.. z < • w rte: ILI J U.. O 0. too:. co J • w w 0, g J. u. . co _ °. w z_ • 0. z • Lit O • n. i w: U_; Z- 0tni 0 Tukwila City Council - Regular Meeting October 7, 1996 Page 9 New Business (con't) Substitute Res. #1362 Substitute Res. #1362 Approved REPORTS Mayor Council Staff MOVED BY DUFFLE, SECONDED BY CARTER, TO AMEND THE MOTION AND APPROVE THE SUBSTITUTE RESOLUTION NO. 1362 AS READ. MOTION CARRIED. *APPROVED AS AMENDED. Council briefly reviewed the upcoming budget schedule. Mayor Rants commented on a Valley Daily News article regarding local tax breaks given to businesses coming into the state. Rants informed Council that the search for a staff attorney has been unsuccessful. The Mayor plans to continue contracting for legal services through the end of the year and will be presenting Council with a contract for their confirmation in the next few weeks. Rants plans to revisit the staff attorney issue at a later date. Councilmember Hernandez reported she attended the Equity Task Force meeting on October 3rd. A subcommittee is re- evaluating the designation of "task force" and reviewing the mission statement and purpose. Council President Carter reported she attended the last Foster Community Club meeting at which an RTA representative answered questions. Carter reported she spoke to the Federal Way Council in their executive session regarding the proposed revisions to the ACC. Carter announced she received formal notification from King County that the City's fireworks issue will be on the November 5th ballot. John McFarland, City Administrator, showed Council the "Adopt a Highway" signs. He reported that all the current signs have been spoken for. The businesses who have adopted space on the Highway will have their names engraved on the lower part of the sign. McFarland reported that video camera signs and drug /prostitution watch signs are also up along the highway. Mayor Rants called for volunteers to be trained on the television monitoring system at the Resource Center. It is anticipated that the cameras will be operational by the end of October. z 61-1; Tukwila City Council - Regular Meeting October 7, 1996 Page 10 Reports (con't) City Attorney ADJOURNMENT 8:41 p.m. McFarland announced that 56 of the 58 easements needed for sidewalks in the Central Business District (CBD) have been acquired. Councilmember Linder asked about the status of the Suncrest abatement process. McFarland said the issue had gone to court and the City had received a judgment in favor of the City. One judgment was received a month ago. The City went back to court on contempt and received an award of $15,000 for attorney fees and staff costs. There is still an opportunity to go back to court a third time for additional action by the court on a contempt order and the potential abatement of the entire structure, which is currently under consideration. Councilmember Linder noted that she has received multiple calls per day regarding the trash overflowing at the apartments. Mayor Rants commented that residents should be reminded to contact the Code Enforcement Officer with these complaints. MOVED BY EKBERG, SECONDED BY MULLET, THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED. MOTION CARRIED. John W. Rants, Mayor Jane E. Cantu, City Clerk BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW/PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES z AUGUST 29,1996 cc w (Approved 9/26/1996) . 6 JU 00 Mr. Marvin called the work session to order at 6:10 p.m. Members present were u) w Commissioners Marvin, Meryhew, Livermore, Gunnels and Malina. Commissioners -J 1: Neiss and Stetson were excused. Representing the staff were Jack Pace, Nora Gierloff, CO '_ w0 Michael Jenkins, Diana Painter, Hans Korve and Sylvia Schnug. 2 J Michael Jenkins provided a briefing regarding the Parking Study. The Parking Study N d fulfills the requirements of the CTR Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan and King w. County Countywide Planning Policies. The scope of the Study included inventorying ? �. the current parking supply, interviewing businesses regarding their perceptions of z o parking at their work sites, speaking with employee transportation coordinators at MI La those work sites who are affected by CTR, and the recommendations and evaluations of 0 o. U co the City's parking supply regulations and transit service. The two areas for the study o -!. were the MIC and the TUC. w uu: H V`; Mr. Malina said he would like to see the overall average parking ratio reduced to 2.5 per o` gross 1,000 sq. ft. Lii N Mr. Livermore said he would like a business to have the opportunity to have z administrative review to have lower parking requirements under unique conditions. The City should have minimum parking requirements, but not maximum parking requirements. The Commissioners expressed their appreciation for receiving the - additional information regarding cellular antennas and the cellular technology. Nora Gierloff provided a briefing regarding the proposed code amendments which would amortize non - conforming signs, excluding billboards. There are two areas in the City where billboards are allowed. The legal issues regarding off - premise signs are such that they will take longer to resolve, and could hold up the rest of the sign code amendments, so they were not included in these code changes. The Commission agreed to separate the on- premise signs and the off- premise signs when amending the Sign Code, and address the off - premise signs at a later date. Ms. Gierloff then reviewed clarifying the sign regulations for office buildings. Currently tenants in office buildings are not allowed exterior signage. This does not work for-retail businesses. Given that the City allows mixed uses in all the zones that Planning Commission Minutes August 29, 1996 Page 2 allow office and retail, these regulations are difficult to apply. The proposal is to treat them more like malls, where the amount of signage is based on the entire wall area and different tenants can negotiate to share that sign square footage. Mr. Meryhew noted that in some places Type 2 permits were referenced, and in other places Type 2 decisions. The language needs to be consistent. He also reminded staff that the Commission wanted an inventory of historical signs in the City. Mr. Marvin closed the work session and called for a ten minute recess. Mr. Marvin re- opened the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. With regard to the minutes of June 27, 1996, Mr. Meryhew asked that on page 10, "Vern" be changed to "Mr. Meryhew ". Also, delete the extra word, "continue" in the motion. MR. MERYHEW MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JUNE 27,1996 AS AMENDED. MS. GUNNELS SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. MR. LIVERMORE MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JULY 25, 1996. MR. MALINA SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. With regard to the minutes of August 8,1996, on page 2, the third paragraph from the bottom, the second sentence should be changed to read, "David Livermore felt that the City should have included a minimum overall % landscaping requirement. Also the sentence, "John Owen has recommended this distance be 70 feet." is not an accurate statement and should be looked into. MR. LIVERMORE MOVED TO APPROVE THE AUGUST 8,1996 MINUTES AS AMENDED. MR. MERYHEW SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. L96 -0010: Econolodge Mr. Pace presented the staff report. He handed out two letters from citizens regarding this project. Mr. Pace began by reviewing the ten changes that the Board recommended at their last hearing. 1. The revised plan reflects the Board's desire to have landscaping on the overhang of parking spaces along one property line. - z a �Z CC w U O' W (11 J 1.-, w0. LLQ co = d; I. w. Z I, �0 zI w uj 0: O • N; I U. r. "--O w z; U Z'. 0 Planning Commission Minutes August 29, 1996 Page 3 2. The revised plan shows that the additional parking spaces to be used in the existing Econolodge lot do meet Code requirements. The entire existing lot does not have to be upgraded, just the four spaces to be used by the new building. 3. The monument sign has been relocated to meet the clear vision triangle requirements. 4. To meet the handicapped parking requirements, the City will use the Zoning Code and the Uniform Building Code, which has even more stringent requirements. This issue will be looked at at the time of building permit issuance. 5. The loading zone has been modified, and the sidewalk has been relocated to meet the Board's requirement. 6. The dumpster area has been relocated, and will be screened with landscaping and a fence. 7. The easement is not required now, but will be required at the time of issuance of the building permit, and they will identify the four spaces to be used by the new hotel. 8. Columns have been relocated so they do not interfere with door openings and door access. 9. Evergreen trees have been added to the east property line. 10. An upper unit has been removed along,the east wall, so the roofline can slope continuously from the peak to the second floor. Detailing has been added to the wall to make it more interesting. Mr. Malina asked what size the evergreens would be. Mr. Pace said eight feet, as required by SEPA. Mr. Livermore asked if the sidewalks would be tapered down to the driveway level on both sides. Mr. Pace said that is typical of access requirements for commercial projects and would be reviewed by Public Works. Mr. Livermore asked if the Fire Department would require an outside access to the sprinkler control room. Mr. Pace said it depends on the size of the building and the number of units. We don't typically get into that level of detail during design review. The focus here is design review, not building permit issuance. We're not saying in this staff report that this project meets ALL City codes; the question is whether it meets the design review criteria. It will still need to meet Energy Codes, Fire Codes, and other codes. Mr. Malina asked if the monument sign would meet setback requirements. Ms. Gierloff indicated it does. ro•. Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 August 29, 1996 Mr. Malina asked if the loading zone would be used for just a loading zone and not storage. Mr. Pace said based upon the Board's decision and discussion in the staff report, that is a what staff is saying it should be designed for. , 1- z r4 2 Johnny Cheng, 2112 Third Av, Suite #201, Seattle, WA 98121: v o Mr. Cheng indicated that he has tried to work with staff to address all the concerns of w _ the Board. Several design alternatives were considered and all ten issues /concerns of N o, the Board were addressed. This is the design review stage, not the Building Code or w ° Energy Code review. Their drawings still have to be submitted for building permits. g 1 He said he plans to make every effort to make sure the City's minimum standards are ti. d` met. =w z1._. Mr. Livermore said there are two very large rooms in the middle of the first floor, z o towards the back, that are unlabeled and asked what the function of those rooms will w W: be. D o o Mr. Cheng said one is an exercise room and the other a multi- purpose room. w ~' = V' I- Mr. Livermore asked why there are two recycling rooms proposed. - p wz Mr. Cheng said one is not big enough and they wanted one close to the elevator.lobby r z o 1' z area. Mr. Meryhew asked if the hotel wouldn't periodically be replacing furniture due to wear and tear, and where would the trucks be loading and unloading that furniture. Mr. Cheng said the mattresses, etc. usually last approximately five years, so it would only occur once every 5 -10 years. Some things would be repaired on -site. They very . rarely use large trucks to bring in supplies. Mr. Meryhew said beds and other things should have to be replaced periodically. Mr. Cheng said most hotels store some mattresses on -site for emergency purposes. Nancy Lamb, 4251 S 139 St, Tukwila: Ms. Lamb passed out a summary of her comments. It's important to her family that the neighborhood be protected from adverse development proposals. 'The size of this proposal in relation to the property was overwhelming to begin with. Similar concerns have been expressed by the Board and the Board has asked that all zoning and access regulations be strictly adhered to. Her memos have taken issue with how the Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 August 29, 1996 regulations have been applied, or not applied. So far the three -story building has been reduced by only one guest room, and yet in some ways the basic over - crowding of the site has gotten even worse because the impervious surface area has increased. The Board's decision will convey a very important message to the community and she urged the Board to continue keeping the goals of the Comprehensive Plan foremost in their decision - making process. She added she would be turning in some additional comments and exhibits for the record. Issue #1 has been covered in her 8 -21 -96 memo. With regard to Issue #2, she indicated she is providing additional responses in writing to the off -site parking issue. This is in memorandums dated 8- 19 -96, 8- 20 -96, 8- 24 -96, and 8- 26 -96, which will be handed out later. These describe the parking lot in more detail and tell what King County's parking lot standards were when the motel opened. They describe how the ADA requirements alone which eventually must be met, will reduce the parking lot to 50 stalls and the Board will need to decide whether the difference of one stall will come out of the four -stall easement requested, or out of the seven stalls needed to maintain compliance for the Econolodge itself. Staff's comments regarding Issue #2 may be based on the assumption that at the time of annexation there may have been 51 stalls on the lot. Ms. Lamb presented photographs of the Econolodge site today. Some show how the easement area relates to the proposed motel in terms of line -of -site compared with the streetscape that guests would need to use in passing between the four off -site stalls and the proposed motel. Other photos show how the supposedly accessible stalls now have no delineated route to the entrance, and 'others show how the restriping of the site has removed what was formerly an access area to a dumpster enclosure. The Board.should also look at four aerial photos of the site because from what the applicant has submitted, there doesn't seem to be proof that there were ever actually 51 stalls complying with King County's standards, only 47. The plans undoubtedly changed between approval to construct the building and the time the building opened forbusiness. The first photo was contained in a 1995 packet related to the emergency moratorium. It was taken at about the time the facility was opened, and it shows a dumpster enclosure and a large access area with a "No Parking Sign" at the back of it. The second photo was taken by Walker and Associates on 10- 13 -86, and it clearly shows .a configuration of 47 stalls, with 11 parking stalls located in the row along the eastern property. line. The third photo is dated 10- 20 -94, was taken by Walker and Associates and shows 49 stalls. At that time, there were still only eight stalls in the row just west of the building, but the eastern row had 13, cutting down on some of the dumpster access and • maneuvering room for cars. When did this two -stall increase occur ?' The last aerial photo was ordered by Ms. Lamb from Aerolist Photographers to answer that question. A copy of that photo is included in the packet. This photo shows there is no stripe dividing the wide area in the southeast corner into two stalls, so only 11 stalls were in that row at the time of annexation. The use of the lot has been intensified from Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 August 29, 1996 47 to 51 parking stalls under. Tukwila's jurisdiction, even though the reconfigured parking areas did not include Tukwila's safer standards. Ms. Lamb's attorney, Rand Koler, says that the 47 stalls in existence in 1989 were non - conforming to Tukwila's standards, but they had been legally established under King County standards. When the use of the lot was increased to 49 stalls, in approximately 1992, that was apparently an illegal increase because it was not done in conformance to Tukwila's standards. It is Mr. Koler's contention that at that point,, the parking area became illegally used and with the recent increase to 51 stalls, the degree of illegality was increased. How can there be an easement for four stalls in an illegally intensified parking lot? Which motel, the proposed or the existing is going to lose the use of four illegally created spaces? Issue #3 is fine. With regard to issue #4, the secondary entrance to the proposed building doe not comply with the WAC. Also, Ms. Lamb received a fax from the Washington Building Code Council that they have issued the State's opinion that there should be no ramps at all in an access aisle between cars. Ms. Lamb indicated her opinion regarding Issue #5 was given onpage one of her 8 -21- 96 memo. With regard to Issue #6, Ms. Lamb's comments on page five or her 8 -21 -96 memo still apply. With regard to Issue #7, this off -site parking situation does not uphold the high standards sought for a redevelopment of the Highway 99 corridor. Furthermore, there is no basis for concluding that the applicants have any right to avoid the parking requirements of the Tukwila Code, the ADA and the WAC. King County granted no waiver to increase the number of installed spaces from 47 to 51 after the motel opened. With regard to Issue #8, the northern columns still would interfere with car doors. With regard to Issue #9, the trees may not do the screening job that they need to do. With regard to Issue #10, the design is inharmonious with its location because of its bulk, scale and its aesthetics, particularly, of the eastern -most section. This design does not address the need for high- quality design adjacent to a single- family neighborhood whose stability is threatened by the very presence of a big motel. She asked that the Board please continue to send everyone the message that the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Regulations will be used effectively so that any development is of high quality. The community cannot afford less than this in the long run. Mr. Pace clarified there are two sections of non - conformity under. the Zoning Code, Use and Standards. Parking is not defined as anon- conforming use. The City of Tukwila's Code has specific provisions regarding non - conforming parking lots. Section 18.70.080 states that if an existing parking lot is expanded less than 100 %, only the new portion needs to comply with the Code. As noted in the staff report, the four spaces need to Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 August 29, 1996 comply with regard to dimensional and access requirements. This is not an issue of non - conforming use on the existing lot, but non - conforming standards. The way the Code reads, we cannot make the existing lot comply. Only the additional expansion needs to comply. With regard to ADA requirements, the City is using the Uniform Building Code for a new development. The City does not enforce existing or prior Z development from the County. _ F-- w: Mr. Livermore asked what the City's stance is on the garbage issue. He added that he 6 D understood from some testimony, that Econolodge no longer has a dumpster and is it o legal to dispose of their garbage on another piece of property? co 0 ' U)w -J_' Mr. Pace said whether they took out the dumpster or not, is not germane to this u) o application. The key is does the new hotel meet the design guidelines that are currently 2 enforced? 7 �a co D Mr. Marvin closed the public hearing. i. w Ms. Gunnels stated she sympathizes with the residents. She added that she does not E- o like the size of the proposed building, or the process that they have had to go through w w. over the past few months. However, she said that based on what she has heard from D o staff, this complies with everything that has to be met. If they have met the criteria, then o P- o Board does not have any choice. ~ S U. Mr. Malina indicated that the applicant has addressed and met the ten concerns the Board had at their last hearing. At this point, the applicant meets the design review w N criteria. The residents will have the opportunity to discuss this further at the City 1 m, Council level. He added that he still has concerns with the loading zone area. z Mr. Livermore agreed. He added that he thought the project is too big for the lot. However, the project meets all the requirements. Judgment can't be based on personal feelings, it has to be based on the approved documentation that controls land usage in the City of Tukwila, and they have met that. Some of the residents, if they have any . ideas on how the design requirements should be changed in the future, should show up at the public hearings where these documents are looked at and open for revision. Mr. Meryhew noted that the Highway 99 Design Guidelines are in the process of being revised now and a hearing is coming up. MR. MALINA MOVED TO APPROVE L96 -0010 BASED UPON STAFF'S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND THAT THE PROJECT MEETS THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW CRITERIA. MS. GUNNELS SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Mr. Pace.stated that there is a 21 -day appeal period. Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 August 29, 1996 L96 -0051: Cottonwood Trees code amendment Gary Schulz presented the staff report. This amendment is to regulate the removal of Black Cottonwood Trees. Staff is proposing to regulate Cottonwood Trees with a four inch or greater diameter. It would make it easier for regulation purposes and for the applicants. Everything within the shoreline zone is regulated by the Tree Ordinance, with the exception of Black Cottonwood Trees. The starting point of that regulation is four inches. This code amendment would apply only to Cottonwoods within 100 feet of the shoreline. The current Tree Ordinance regulates other trees to the 200 foot point. To be consistent with that Ordinance and its guidelines, it would be easier to'stay with the four inch diameter. Mr. Meryhew said he surveyed the area. Between the Kent boundaries, up to Pacific Highway there are approximately 302 Cottonwood Trees that are 12 inches or greater within 40 feet of the river. Approximately 40 of these are 40 feet or more away from the river. Trees smaller than 12 inches within 40 feet of the river, there are only 12 of these Cottonwood Trees. More than 40 feet away from the river, there are 13 of these trees. Therefore, only 25 Cottonwood Trees in the area of 4 -12 inches are along approximately 8 miles of river. There's about 340 Cottonwood Trees that are 12 inches and greater, excluding three groves of Cottonwoods. Mr. Schulz said staff thought it would be easier on applicants if the Cottonwoods were included. He added that if you don't make room to save the younger trees within a certain zone, then you will not have reproduction. Perhaps the older, larger trees could be pruned and made healthier. - Mr. Meryhew said if the trees are more than 40 feet away from the river, then they don't serve a purpose. He suggested leaving them as a non - significant tree. Mr. Livermore. agreed. He added that other jurisdictions use 6 to 12 inches that they are controlling. He asked why staff is suggesting four inches. Mr. Schulz clarified that four inches is the current regulation. Every other tree that is in a sensitive area or the shoreline, the regulation is four inches. He continued by saying that the cottonwood provides alot to the river environment. If it is totally removed, wildlife, and food for fish would be lost. L96 -0052: Sign Code amendment Nora Gierloff presented the staff report. She noted that the amendments do not include off - premise signs, they do include amendments to the Planned Shopping Center and Office Building sections. The new definitions are to implement the amortization ordinance. All sign permits must have a final inspection. There is also language implementing an amortization ordinance that would require that all non - conforming Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 August 29, 1996 signs be brought into conformance by January 1, 2000. There is an exemption for subsequent sign code changes. Staff has developed a landmark sign ordinance. The Commissioners decided to strike the landmark ordinance because it was too vague and would apply to an unknown number of signs. L96 -0053: Fermenting and Distilling code amendment Jack Pace presented the staff report. Prior to the revision of the Zoning Code, distilleries and breweries were allowed in the heavy and light industrial zones. The light industrial areas have additional air quality requirements. The only recorded situations where odors from distilleries have been a problem in other cities is where people live above a distillery /brewery. Staff feels that distilling and fermenting do not need to be made a conditional use because light industrial areas have additional air quality standards and heavy industrial areas are far enough away from residences where there would not be a problem. Staff is recommending they be permitted outright in the light and heavy industrial areas. Mr. Malina expressed a concern about the discharging these types of facilities do. Mr. Pace said those would be managed by the applicable sewer utility. Ann Nichols, Segale Ms. Nichols said Segale owns properties in the Tukwila Valley South area that is comprised of light and heavy industry. Therefore, they would like to have fermenting and distilling allowed in the Tukwila Valley South area as well. Mr. Marvin closed the public hearing. Mr. Livermore said he agreed with the outright permitted use in the heavy and light industrial uses, but the TVS area should allow fermenting and distilling on a. conditional use basis since a number of other uses in that area are permitted on a conditional basis. MR. LIVERMORE MOVED TO APPROVE L96 -0053: CODE AMENDMENT FOR FERMENTING AND DISTILLING BASED UPON STAFF'S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION MAKING THEM A PERMITTED USE IN THE MIC /L AND MIC/H ZONES, AND MAKE THEM A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE TVS ZONE. MR. MALINA SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. MR. MALINA MOVED TO APPROVE L96 -0052: CODE AMENDMENT FOR NON- CONFORMING SIGNS BASED UPON STAFF'S FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS, AND WITH THE CHANGE TO ELIMINATE THE LANDMARK SIGN DEFINITION SECTION DUE TO THE FACT THAT THERE IS NOT SUFFICIENT • z Z. 00 moo• cn w =. J H LL. w� u_ d F- w zF �-0 Z w uj 0 w w Y-1 0 ..z w _. 0~ z Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 August 29,1996 MATERIAL TO SUPPORT THAT DEFINITION. MR. MERYHEW SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. MR. MERYHEW MOVED TO APPROVE L96 -0051: CODE AMENDMENT FOR COTTONWOOD TREES BASED UPON STAFF'S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION #2, WHICH READS:, "(15) NOTWITHSTANDING ANY PROVISIONS OF THIS CODE TO THE CONTRARY, REMOVAL OF ANY COTTONWOOD TREE WITHIN THE RIVER ENVIRONMENT OR THE LOW IMPACT ENVIRONMENT, WHICH TREE IS 12 INCHES OR GREATER IN DIAMETER AS MEASURED FOUR AND ONE HALF (4.5) FEET ABOVE GRADE, SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 18.54 TMC, TREE REGULATIONS." ADDITIONAL AMENDMENT WHICH READS, "A 'SIGNIFICANT TREE' MEANS A TREE (COTTONWOOD EXCLUDED) WHICH IS 4 INCHES OR MORE IN DIAMETER AS MEASURED [5] 4.5 FEET ABOVE GRADE." MR. MALINA SECONDED THE MOTION AND THE MOTION WAS PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4-1, WITH MR. MARVIN OPPOSED. Mr. Pace provided a status report on the Tukwila Community Center. Mr. Marvin adjourned the meeting. Prepared By, Sylvia Schnug Project Tracking Form (Pend on left side of file) Date, Action Completed By Initial, . Accepted at Counter File made - To Senior Plnr. Senior Planner assigns. Planner routes to depts. Notice of Incomplete Application Notice of Complete Application Public Meeting. Scheduled (Type V Only) Y- Pstg Notice of Application Made Notice of Application Mailed Affidavit of Posting Returned -DS August 13, 1996 Initial SEPA Determination Posted Mailed Final SEPA Notice Posted Mailed Draft Staff Report to Sr. Plnr. Final Staff Report to Adm Scy. :_ L Staff Report Mailed Action on Permit Notice of Decision Mailed • 1/(101(,, .S a z 1- mow; 6 JU, c� 0 CO W='' H N LL; wO. g J' LL cpDa Z F-- 0` Z F—; U 0; 0. —; 0 F.'• w uj Z co iu