HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-09-15 Regular MinutesTUKWILA CITY COUNCIL
September 15, 1980 Tukwila City Hall
7:00 P.M. Council Chambers
FLAG SALUTE AND
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL OF
COUNCIL MEMBERS
OFFICIALS IN
ATTENDANCE
MINUTE APPROVAL
VOUCHER APPROVAL
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Revenue Sharing
Proposed Use
Hearing
LID #29: Public
Hearing on the
Assessment Roll
(>2• 9z 7
Regular Meeting
M I N U T E S
Mayor Todd, presiding, led the Pledge of Allegiance and called
the Regular Meeting of the Tukwila City Council to order.
LIONEL C. BOHRER, MABEL J. HARRIS, GEORGE D. HILL, J. REID
JOHANSON, DORIS E. PHELPS, DANIEL J. SAUL, Council President.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT COUNCILMAN VAN DUSEN BE
EXCUSED FROM THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED.
LAWRENCE E. HARD, City Attorney; SHIRLEY KRISTOFFERSON, Acting
Finance Director; JOHN MCFARLAND, Administrative Assistant; TED
UOMOTO, Public Works Director; DON WILLIAMS, Recreation Super-
visor; MAXINE ANDERSON, City Clerk
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT THE MINUTES OF THE
REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 2, 1980, BE APPROVED AS PUBLISHED.
MOTION CARRIED.
MOVED BY PHELPS, SECONDED BY HARRIS, THAT THE VOUCHERS, APPROVED
BY THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, BE ACCEPTED AND WARRANTS BE DRAWN IN
THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS. MOTION CARRIED.
Current Fund
Street Fund
Water Fund
Sewer Fund
Claims Fund Vouchers #7716 #7719
7716 7,526.33
7717 455.17
7718 319.31
7719 286.09
8,586.90
Claims Fund Vouchers #7720 #7870
Current Fund
Golf Crse. Spec. Rev.
Street Fund
Federal Shared Rev.
Land Acq, Bldg, Dev.
Water Fund
Sewer Fund
Firemen's Pension
7720 -7811
7812 -7813
7814 -7833
7834 -7837
7838-
7839 -7850
7851 -7868
7869 -7870
LID 30 C2/ #7871; C3/ #7872 -7874 $215.50
52,752.24
20,250.75
43,235.99
609.22
74.70
8,179.11
19,370.08
168.80
$144,640.89
Mayor Todd declared the Public Hearing open on the proposed
use of the Revenue Sharing Funds for 1981. He invited anyone
wishing to comment to come forward and give their suggestions
for the use of this money. There being no input from the
audience, Mayor Todd closed the Public Hearing.
Mayor Todd declared the Public Hearing open on the final
Assessment Roll for LID #29.
Ted Uomoto, Public Works Director, introduced the consulting
engineer on the project, Mr. Garth Anderson. Mr. Anderson,
Vice President of Operations for Jones Associates, said they
did the engineering and construction management on the street
project. He explained that the project consisted of the con-
struction of 62nd Avenue South from Southcenter Blvd., to South
153rd and construction of South 153rd from 62nd to 65th Ave.
South. 62nd Avenue was constructed with a turn lane. South
153rd was constructed as a normal residential street. There
was also a water main installed to provide adequate fire flow
to the multi family developments. Storm drains and sanitary
sewers were installed to serve a portion of the area. The LID
was assessed on the Zone and Termini Method. The formula assesses
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING
September 15, 1980
Page 2
PUBLIC HEARINGS Cont.
LID #29: Public
Hearing on the
Assessment Roll
(cont.)
property based on the area of the property being served and
the location with respect to the improvements. Mr. Anderson
explained the boundaries of the Local Improvement District.
He explained that only 3 or 4 of the parcels of property were
assessed for sewer and storm drain; whereas, everybody included
in the LID was assessed for water and street. The cost of the
improvements was considerably higher than the assessment roll
as it was originally sent out. There were a number of changes
made during construction; the project was done during the very
worst time. Midwinter, the native material, wet weather and
the hill caused a great deal of problems. The assessment roll
is about 30% higher than the original. As a result of this
increase, the City paid an additional $50,000. The City also
has an assessment of $56,256.
The main question raised in the protests was concerning the
Cottage Creek Condominiums. When this project was started,
it was a single piece of property. Affiliated American owned
the property and received a single assessment. Between that
time and the completion of the street project, the condominiums
were completed, sold, and filed with the King County Assessor.
Consequently, the final assessment roll is distributed equally
to the new owners. The City is not involved in the commitment
made by Affiliated American to the new property owners to pay
$40,000 against the total assessment. This would reduce each
of their assessments by $833.00. The logical time for them to
pay these funds to the City would be during the 30 day pre-
payment period.
Deborah Paul, 15376 62nd Ave. So., asked about the prepayment
period. Mr. Anderson explained that once the final assessment
roll is approved, the Finance Director will publish a notice
that any portion of the assessment may be paid within thirty
days without penalty, interest or costs.
Ron Germeaux, 15378 62nd Ave. So., asked if bids were taken on
the LID. Mr. Anderson said, yes they were. Mr. Germeaux asked,
why the overruns. Didn't the contractor complete his work per
the original estimate. Mr. Anderson said it is not uncommon
to find something during construction that was not anticipated
in the original design. These are handled during the con-
struction process as Change Orders; also, the contractor was
required to keep the street passable and conditions were very
difficult. Mr. Germeaux asked if it is safe to say that when
you accept bids, you are going to fall within an approximate
range. Was there any major problem? Mr. Anderson said, no,
just problems.
Nancy Scharf, 15388 62nd Ave. So., submitted a letter for the
record. She asked why Tukwila has a policy of not assessing
single family residential property when they do street improve-
ments. Councilman Saul said that residential street improvement
is part of the 6 Year Comprehensive Street Program. Councilman
Johanson explained that this is a plan that is updated every
year and has been in effect for many years. Ms. Scharf asked
if, in the future, they will be considered for street improve-
ment without another LID.
Councilman Bohrer noted that the single family areas have been
part of the 6 Year Street Program. This is one of the first
times that we have had a street improvement program that was
not strictly a single family area. At the time the program was
started, all the residential areas included in the program were
either in the stage of development or they were apartment rentals.
Council drew a distinction between an area where the owner was
the individual residing in the City and a piece of property
where the owner did not reside there, but was engaged in a
profit- making enterprise. When the project was started,the City
had only the Developer to consult.
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING
September 15, 1980
Page 3
PUBLIC HEARINGS Cont.
LID #29: Public
Hearing on the
Assessment Roll
(cont.)
Councilman Harris added that it has always been the City's
policy that when a developer is constructing a project he is
obligated to install the streets and utilities. When this
project was started the developer of Cottage Creek was just
beginning. It was believed that it would be finished and he
would bear the cost of it. However, the project carried on
longer than anticipated and the condominiums were sold. Part
of the additional casts on this was due to inflation. In her
mind, the developer should have told everybody about the LID,
and since he was making the profit he should have allowed for
it
Ms. Scharf, president of the Cottage Creek Condominium Assoc.,
presented two letters for the record -one from San Juan South
Apartments supporting the protest made by the condominium
owners and the other from Pacific Townhouse Builders requesting
a thirty day delay in finalizing LID #29. She requested a 30
day tabling of this item so that a citizen's committee could
review the information that has been presented, and then come
back to a regular Council Meeting to address the total LID.
Attorney Hard noted that the packet for tonight contains the
ordinance approving and confirming the assessment roll. He
recommended that Council continue the Public Hearing if they
wish to put it off. This can be done legally.
Councilman Johanson reminded the audience that the LID will
increase at about $1,000 per week in interest. He asked if
they wanted to wait four weeks.
Councilman Johanson clarified that the easterly boundary of
the LID is the easterly boundary of the condominium property.
The cost to finish South 153rd down to 65th was not included
in the LID.
Don Crisp, Cottage Creek Condominiums, asked if the City knows
any reason why Affiliated American waited until about the time
they were ready to move into their units, close their loans,
and made many irrevocable decisions regarding the move before
they confronted them with the prospect of paying a share of
the LID. He said he wanted to enter into the official record
their protest regarding Affiliated American's involvement in
the matter whereas they used time and circumstances to coerce
us into signing the agreement,they signed under duress. He
said he felt it was wrong to discriminate against certain
property owners. For example, it is wrong to assess the people
living in the condominiums and not to assess the people who
live in single family dwellings. Frankly, I think Affiliated
American should pay everything.
Councilman Bohrer noted that if you were to purchase a home
in a new development where the developer had to put in the
street and utilities, you would pay for these improvements in
the cost of the home. This is the same process being applied
here. Had the street been completed before the condominiums
were sold the cost would have been added to the price of the unit.
Tom Morgan, 6235 South 153rd, commented on the LID versus the
single family development. This is one of the major complaints.
There are a number of single family homes that have received
street improvements the same as they have, and they don't pay
a dime for it, and we are paying, not only for the LID but for
theirs through taxes.
Councilman Saul asked if, without the improvements, would they
have been able to develop the property. Councilman Hill said
without the agreement to participate in the LID, they wouldn't
even have gotten the zoning.
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING
September 15, 1980
Page 4
PUBLIC HEARINGS Cont.
LID #29: Public
Hearing on the
Assessment Roll
(cont.)
Kris Lanning, 15364 62nd Ave. So., referred to the cost summary
shown by Mr. Anderson and asked for an explanation of the difference
between actual contract cost and total final cost. There is a
substantial difference, almost $100,000. Mr. Anderson explained
that the actual contract cost is the contractor's estimate received
at the time of bidding. The final cost is the actual construction
cost. The difference between the two is the increased costs
that occurred.
Ron Germeaux referred to the cost overruns and asked if the
contractor was given a free hand. Who gave the final approval
for the additional costs? Mr. Anderson said it was a combination
of approval by both the City and the consulting engineer. The
contractor did not have the right to do what he wanted to do.
He was guided by inspection provided by their staff and looked
over by the City. All change orders were approved by the project
engineer, City's representative and the contractor's representative.
Mr. Germeaux said, since homeowners are involved in an LID of
this nature with a substantial increase in cost, it seems like we
should have some participation in approval or disapproval of
increases. We were led to believe the LID would cost "x" dollars
and it is almost three time that much. Council disagreed with
this statement. Mr. Anderson explained that the assessment roll
is about 30% higher, not three times. What is misleading is that
the condominium owners did not receive a preliminary assessment
notice; Affiliated American did, as the owner at that time.
They notified you of the LID and notified you of their intent
to participate in the project by letter which states: "The
improvements provided by the LID have reduced our on -site
development cost by $40,000. We are passing this savings on
to you in the form of a lump sum payment applied against the
total assessment." When they make this $40,000 payment, your
assessment will come down. This is an agreement between the
Developer of the property and the buyers.
Mayor Todd asked if anyone knew where the $40,000 is. No one
could answer this.
Mr. Anderson proceeded to explain to the audience how the
assessments were computed. He noted that the cost of the
8" water line doubled from the time of estimate to the time of
purchase. He noted that the condominium property was assessed
for street and water only -not for drainage or sewer. The
Cottage Creek property was assessed as follows:
Preliminary Final
Assessment Assessment
Street $64,761 $80,661
Water 11,284 18,801
Total $76,045 $99,461
Increase
24.6
66.6
30.8
c2ga
Mr. Germeaux said the sidewalk and street lights are on the
opposite side of 62nd and he wondered if they are paying the
same proportion as those with the utility on their side. Mr.
Anderson said yes. Mr. Germeaux asked why the left hand turn
lane is necessary. Mr. Anderson said it was discussed and felt
that the traffic density would justify the left turn lane.
Councilman Harris said she feels for the condominium owners.
Their complaint is with the developer. Certainly a lien
against the property should have been told to everyone.
Debby Paul said she made the request in writing, signed by 20
home owners, that they be granted a 30 day delay in the final
decision on this LID.
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING
September 15, 1980
Page 5
PUBLIC HEARINGS Cont.
LID #29: Public
Hearing on the
Assessment Roll
(cont.)
Councilman Phelps said they will consider the request after they
hear all the comments from the audience. She pointed out that
when Sunwood is fully developed you will be able to see that
the left hand turn lane is justified.
Tom Morgan said he believes the City knew Sunwood and Cottage
Creek were going to be multi- family and they should have been
given the same treatment as the single family dwellings were in
the funding of the street. He noted that Nancy Scharf, President
of the Condominium Association, would like to be a member of a
citizens committee to work on this during the next 30 days. She
can be reached at 15388 62nd Ave. So.; phone 455 -2900 or 244 -1251.
Sandra Breslich, 6283 South 153rd, asked what percentage, if
any, of the street increase, particularly on 62nd, was borne
by the firm that did the work. I noticed that they had to redo
part of the road to level it up to the sewer drain. This did not
seem to be a change but rather a correction of faulty construction
work. Mr. Anderson said there were a number of things that
occurred; if it was a contractor error he was not paid. Ms.
Breslich said she was referring to the cost overrun. Mr. Anderson
said the costs paid to the contractor were documented. Ms.
Breslich said it would have been helpful to have those costs prior
to this meeting.
Mayor Todd assured her something would be prepared if the
meeting is extended.
Nancy Paul commented that it was stated that the City has not
had condominium projects before and that the single family versus
occupancy for profit, such as apartments, were assessed differently.
She asked if they are being assessed at the same tax rate as
single family homeowners. Mayor Todd said it is the same millage
rate based on the valuation of the property. Ms. Paul said when
the City made the arrangements for this LID with the contractor
the City knew in advance that they would be single family dwellings.
Councilman Harris explained whether the development was going to
be apartments or condominiums made no difference. The company
that was developing them was doing it for profit. When the
land was rezoned, the condition of the LID was part of the
rezoning and they agreed to it. They would participate; they
would be willing to pay so long as they were able to develop
the property. They could not have developed the project and
made the money. To the City, there was no single family involved;
it was the developer who was making a profit. Ms. Paul asked about
Sunwood Condominiums' largest section of property lying in
Zone 5. They will be assessed at a much lower rate per unit
than Cottage Creek. Mr. Anderson said that's true. Sunwood
only has a small road frontage. Ms. Paul asked about the clearing
being done on the north section of the Sunwood property. She
asked how that area would be assessed. Mr. Anderson said it
would not affect this LID at all. Once the ordinance is passed
confirming the assessment roll, the LID is closed.
Russell Olin, 6287 South 153rd, said it bothers him that there
is talk about the agreement between the City and Affiliated
American; now, when it comes time to pay the bill, it is no
longer the City and Affiliated American; it is the City and the
homeowners. There is an inconsistency here. I hope, from now
on, those in Cottage Creek are looked at as individual homeowners.
I feel just as much a homeowner in Cottage Creek as if I had a
single unit dwelling. It is my home; I pay taxes like everybody
else; I want to be treated fairly like everybody else. Right
now, I feel very discriminated against.
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING
September 15, 1980
Page 6
PUBLIC HEARINGS Cont.
LID #29: Public
Hearing on the
Assessment Roll
(cont.)
Councilman Phelps commented that during the process of an LID,
the City deals with the owner of record. The owner in the
beginning was the developer. That changed as you purchased your
units.
Michio Kato, 9316 39th So., said he feels he should be taken out
of the LID. his property is on the west side of Tract 11 and
has no way to get access to 62nd Ave. South. Is it possible to
be assessed when you can never use the street? Attorney Hard
explained that there was a public hearing for the formation of
the LID. At that time the boundaries of the LID were established.
Mr. Kato said he wrote a letter of protest. Attorney Hard noted
that the protests were not sufficient to defeat the formation.
The power of the Council at this hearing is to hear the comments
on the final assessments and decide whether or not the dollar
amounts are fair. Mr. Kato said it seems to him that an assess-
ment of $17,000 for something you don't use is pretty steep.
He said he was protesting on that amount.
Councilman Johanson asked if property could be landlocked.
Atty.Hard said a property owner has to have access to his property.
Orin Kato, 15419 62nd Avenue South, said an LID is to benefit
those using the street, however, some homeowners had their street
improved at no cost. How can you discriminate by saying that
people who are benefiting by the improvement will have to pay
when some are getting it for nothing? There are some people
like the person that spoke before me, who has to pay a high
assessment for no benefit at all. Attorney Hard explained the
process of forming an LID. Now, construction is complete and
Council has to decide whether the property within the boundaries
is being specially benefited by the dollar amount of the assess-
ment. Council has the right to make adjustments. Once the
ordinance, approving and confirming the assessment roll, is
adopted there is a ten day period in which a protesting property
owner may file his appeal in the King County Superior Court.
If there is a lawsuit and the Court agrees, the City Council
will have to reduce the dollar amount of the assessment. He
said he wanted everyone in the audience to understand that this
is their legal right.
Barbara Clark, 15346 62nd Ave. So., commented that the Sunwood
Condominiums wouldn't survive without 62nd Av. So. There is no
difference in the usage of that street for Cottage Creek as
opposed to Sunwood.
Bruce Morgan, 6000 6100 Southcenter Blvd., presented Council
with a letter of protest. He addressed the additional assess-
ment against parcel 7. The work required Change Orders and
involved adjusting existing driveways to the new improvements.
Neither of these were properly addressed as Change Work Orders.
The upper access was established by the time the contract was
let. It should have been part of the contract. There was no
excuse to have it come in as a Change Work Order, nor any
excuse to have it as a Special Assessment charge. The property
could not have been used without changing the existing grade.
The $3,500 for upgrading the driveway to meet the new grade of
62nd is an improper charge against the property. Perhaps this
is why the costs overran on this project. The lower driveway
again was established before the grades were cut on 62nd Avenue.
The charge is excessive. There are also other specific things
he will be working with the engineering staff on to determine
other discrepancies.
Mr. Anderson explained to the condominium owners the dis-
crepancy between their assessments as stated by Affiliated
American and the final notice charge mailed to them by the City.
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING
September 15, 1980
Page 7
PUBLIC HEARINGS Cont.
LID #29: Public
Hearing on the
Assessment Roll
(cont.)
Mr. Germeaux noted that there are 48 homeowners participating
in an LID which they had nothing to say about. They are paying
approximately 20% of the total costs involved. He asked Council
to take this into consideration when deciding to extend the period.
Councilman Saul asked what they expect to happen at the end of
the 30 days. Mr. Germeaux said they need the 30 days to look at
the cost overruns to see if they are fair. If they aren't fair,
the City should answer some questions.
Mr. Tom Morgan said the increase to the condominiums is 65
The original plan by the City was to put $39,000 into this as a
part of their share and now they are willing to put in $50,000-
this is a 28% increase. The City is asking Cottage Crrek to help
pay a part of the City's share also. There are a number of home-
owners that are not paying. There were a number of curbs that
were replaced and I couldn't see anything wrong with them. It
looks like there were costs that could have been avoided.
Councilman Hill noted that the cracked curbs were all replaced
at the expense of the contractor.
Councilman Harris said the fact is being overlooked that the City
also has an assessment and it went up in the same proportion as
Cottage Creek. The $50,000 is in addition to the City's assessment.
Ms. Paul said the addition also includes the single family
dwellings that were waived from any increase.
Council said no, they were not included in the LID.
Councilman Johanson explained that when the single family
homes were built, the water lines and streets were installed so
the improvements were all made at one time. For the past 8
years upgrading residential streets has been on the 6 Year Street
Program. We have a history of improving all the streets at no
cost to the homeowner. You will receive the same now that your
street is in. You will be involved in the 6 Year Street Plan.
The citizens are aware of this and have encouraged it. The City
has grown faster than its income. We had to let a lot of things
go for a lot of years with nothing in the way of improvements
to support the building that has gone on with the development of
apartments as well as industry.
We have had to do lots of things on a catch up basis. We finally
reached the point where we could start improving the City streets
on a maintenance basis; that is the 6 Year Street Program. I
paid for the improvements when I bought my house. I paid for the
sewer under an LID. The single family area is not a cost to this
LID.
Councilman Bohrer said the thing that is bothering a lot of
you is that you feel, as condominium owners, you are not being
dealt with fairly by the City in comparison to the single
family residences. We have another development; it was a plat
and all single family, that involved 14 separate lots. As part
of this development, the developer was told he had to install the
streets, curbs and gutters, storm drains, sewers -the City will
not do that. Who do you suppose is going to pay for this? It
isn't the City. It is the people who buy the homes. Those are
single family residences and they are going to buy all the
improvements that are currently encompassed in this LID. You
can expect, in the future, that as a resident of the City, you
will be given exactly the same respect as everybody else. The
manner in which this assessment has come to you is a very unusual
one. We understand that. It is your responsibility to go back
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING
September 15, 1980
Page 8
PUBLIC HEARINGS Cont.
LID #29: Public
Hearing on the
Assessment Roll
(cont.)
to the developer. We have to deal with the property owner of
record. We are trying to deal with you as fairly as we can.
If you were buying a new single family residence in a new
development you would pay the same sort of charges; you would
simply be assessed for them in a different manner.
Attorney Hard explained that at the time the City became aware
that these costs were going up,the Council gave direction to the
staff to ascertain what the problems were. In the summer the
City was involved in active negotiations. If the City had not
gone to bat for the property owners, the actual costs would have
been greater than what you are being assessed for. The negotiations
resulted in a reduction of the cost to the contractor and others.
The City was concerned and they did take action. The figures
could have been substantially higher if we had paid the contractor
and others exactly what they billed the City for.
Don Crisp, Cottage Creek Condominiums, asked who will decide if
the assessment, as proposed, will be confirmed. Mayor Todd said
the members of the City Council will decide. Mr. Crisp said he
understands the assessment goes to the property owners and they
are the property owners and that they should address their problem
to Affiliated American. However, it is not right to charge one
person for an improvement and not another. This is his objection
to the proceedings.
Isaco Kato, 9316 39th So., said the letter from the City said
"Estimated Assessment for Special Benefits $17,000." Can Council
tell her what the Special Benefits are? They are assessed in
Zone 5. How was the figure arrived at? Mr. Anderson said the
formula in the State Law was used. Your property is within the
LID boundaries and the law does not require that you have access.
This method has been tested and proven and defended. It says
that you benefit, not whether you have direct access, but by being
in the proximity of. Mrs. Kato asked if it was possible to get a
breakdown of how the figure was arrived at. Mr. Anderson assured
her it was. Mrs. Kato said they protested earlier and it was
useless. Attorney Hard explained the protest process.
Tom Morgan said it is even more unfair because, at the same time
the LID was done, the rest of South 153rd was done and done free
of charge, so there are a lot of people going to use the street,
and the condominium owners are going to have to pay for it. He
said he would also like to participate in the Citizens Committee.
He noted there were a number of protests received and asked what
process would be followed in reviewing and commenting on them.
Attorney Hard explained that the protests are on file with the
City Clerk for anyone to look at. They are a public record. The
City Council, tonight, can make their decision to confirm the
assessment roll as proposed and that is an assessment roll in
the amount of $536,562.31. This ordinance is before them tonight.
If they decide to continue it, there are interest charges ac-
cruing at about $1,000 a week that will be added on. All of
the individual assessments will be increased proportionately.
If Council acts tonight, you have the right to file an appeal
in King County Superior Court. If no appeal is filed, there is
a 30 day prepayment period during which property owners may pay
off their assessments. Attorney Hard said he would hope Affiliated
American would take the opportunity during that period of time
to pay their $40,000. After that period, the City sells bonds
to pay for the LID. The property owners make payments once a
year against their unpaid balance.
Tom Morgan asked how Council responds to the formal written
protests. Attorney Hard said they have been reviewed by Council.
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING
September 15, 1980
Page 9
PUBLIC HEARINGS Cont.
LID #29: Public
Hearing on the
Assessment Roll
(cont.)
RECESS:
9:22 P.M.-
9:32 P.M.
Amenda Agenda
Proposed Ordinance
Approving Con-
firming the assess-
ment roll for LID 29
Tommy Wells, Cottage Creek Condominiums, asked how the $59,810
preliminary engineering figure was arrived at. Mr. Anderson
said it provided for the design of the project. It does not
include construction inspection and administration. Mr. Wells
asked if there is a rule of thumb for engineering costs compared
to project costs. Mr. Anderson said it depends on circumstances.
Mr. Wells said 18.6% is ridiculous. Mr. Anderson did not agree.
Mr. Wells said it was pretty cut and dried engineering. Are
there any pollution permits required, any soils testing or any-
thing like that? Mr. Anderson said there was soil testing; there
was right -of -way acquisition; there was an environmental analysis;
there was the LID assessment roll. Sir, 18% is not unreal.
The physical design was about $25,000. The fee was negotiated
ahead of time. There were also extra services required at the
preliminary phase. It includes the LID services, design services;
it does not include the time and expense of baby- sitting the
construction contract. That is the difference in the $59,810
and the $108,500. Mr. Wells asked if the engineering firm was
an advisor to the City. Mr. Anderson said yes. Mr. Wells said
18.6% is entirely too much for engineering. Are the figures
available to the public? Mr. Anderson said the City staff has
them. Mr. Wells asked if they could have the name of the City
Official that approved the Change Orders. Mayor Todd noted
that all records are available to the public.
Jeanette Stiers, 15372 62nd Ave. So., told Council that each
condominium has just 22 feet across.
There being no further comment on the final assessment for LID
#29, Mayor Todd closed the Public Hearing.
COUNCIL DECLARED A TEN MINUTE RECESS.
Mayor Todd called the meeting back to order with Council Members
present as previously reported.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT COUNCIL AMEND THE AGENDA
TO DISCUSS ITEM 8A AT THIS TIME. MOTION CARRIED.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE
BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOITON CARRIED.
City Attorney Hard read an ordinance approving and confirming
the assessments and assessment roll of Local Improvement Dis-
trict No. 29 which has been created and established for the pur-
pose of the improvement of property within the City of Tukwila,
Washington, along portions of 62nd Ave. So. and So. 153rd St.
by acquisition of additional public right -of -way, grading,
widening and paving the street surface, installing sidewalks,
curbs and gutters, installing storm drainage, storm sewers and
sanitary sewers, water facilities, underground utilities and
street illumination, as provided by ordinance No. 1098, and
levying and assessing the amount thereof against the several
lots, tracts, parcels of land and other property shown on the
roll.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE
BE ADOPTED AS READ.*
Councilman Saul asked Attorney Hard to discuss the advantages
or disadvantages of delaying the adoption of the ordinance for
30 days. Attorney Hard said whether to postpone this or not
is a matter Council has to decide. The advantages of adding
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING
September 15, 1980
Page 10
ORDINANCES
Proposed Ordinance
Approving Con-
firming the assess-
ment roll for LID 29
Budget Transfer
Motion No. 80 -33
and No. 80 -34:
FICA
thirty more days would be to provide the public with an opportunity
to review the records. These are public records. Thirty days
should be ample time. This may answer some of the questions
raised this evening. This would be a good move on the part of the
Council. The disadvantages are: 1. It could involve a greater
cost. 2. The thirty day period will give people an opportunity
to look at this but there is no legal requirement of the City
Council to anything at all at the end of that time. The City
is not legally obligated to recognize a citizen's group. It is
not legally obligated to do anything at all in response to
additional comments. 3. If the interest rates continue to rise
the bonds might not be saleable.
Mayor Todd said he is uncomfortable that the title does not
include the interest rate being set at 12% and he wanted everyone
to know this.
Councilman Bohrer said Council should grant the delay to give
the citizens a chance to study this and to give Council a chance
to get some items clarified.
Councilman Harris said she would like a chance to review the new
protests. One advantage to living in a small town is your voice
is heard at the City Council meetings.
*MOTION FAILED
MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY HARRIS, THAT THIS ITEM BE PLACED BACK
ON THE AGENDA FOR THE OCTOBER 13TH COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING.
Attorney Hard asked if Council intends to have a Public Hearing.
Mayor Todd noted that the Public Hearing is closed but the audience
can still speak on the matter.
*MOTION CARRIED
Councilman Hill noted that the citizens should set their own
committee.
PETITIONS, COMMUNICATIONS, APPEALS AND SIMILAR MATTERS
Budget Transfer Motions No. 80 -33 and No. 80 -34 are to provide
funding for three additional months of FICA for 1980 as required
by changes in the statute. No. 80 -33 is in the amount of $2,780
and No. 80 -34 is in the amount of $19,625.
X9/.3
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT THE PROPOSED BUDGET TRANSFER
MOTION BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED.
Attorney Hard read Budget Transfer Motion No. 80 -33, Authorization
for Transfer of Funds.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT BUDGET TRANSFER MOTION NO.
80 -33 BE ADOPTED AS READ. MOTION CARRIED.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT THE PROPOSED BUDGET TRANSFER
MOTION BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED.
Attorney Hard read Budget Transfer Motion No. 80 -34, Authorization
for Transfer of Funds.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT BUDGET TRANSFER MOTION NO.
80 -34 BE ADOPTED AS READ. MOTION CARRIED.
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING
September 15, 1980
Page 11
PETITIONS, COMMUNICATIONS, APPEALS AND SIMILAR MATTERS Cont.
Budget Transfer
Motion No. 80 -35:
Allow funding for
2 board system
for Public Works
Department
RESOLUTIONS
Resolution #760
Interfund loan
between Street Fund
Golf Course Un-
limited 1978 G.O.
Bond Debt Service
Fund.
Resolution #761
Fixing the time
when the petition
will be heard on the
vacation of a
street.
Resolution #762
Accepting a grant
of easement for
public access to,
and use of, a
portion of the
Green River Shore-
line Trail System.
Recess:
9:55 P.M.
10:00 P.M.
Budget Transfer Motion No. 80 -35,in the amount of $1,250,is to
allow funding for two board systems. This system will provide
more efficient service to the public in locating utilities within
the City.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT THE PROPOSED BUDGET TRANSFER
MOTION BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED.
Attorney Hard read Budget Transfer Motion No. 80 -35, Authorization
for Transfer of Funds.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT BUDGET TRANSFER MOTION
NO. 80 -35 BE ADOPTED AS READ. MOTION CARRIED.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION BE
READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED.
Attorney Hard read a resolution of the City of Tukwila for an
Interfund Loan between the Street Fund and the Golf Course
Unlimited 1978 G.O. Bond Debt Service Fund.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT RESOLUTION NO. 760 BE
ADOPTED AS READ. MOTION CARRIED.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION BE
READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED.
Attorney Hard read a resolution of the City of Tukwila, Washington,
fixing the time when the petition will be heard on the vacation
of a street.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT RESOLUTION NO. 761 BE ADOPTED
AS READ. MOTION CARRIED WITH PHELPS VOTING NO.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION BE
READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED.
Attorney Hard read a resolution of the City of Tukwila, Washington,
accepting a grant of easement for public access to, and use of,
a portion of the Green River Shoreline Trail System.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT RESOLUTION NO. 762 BE ADOPTED
AS READ.
Attorney Hard noted that this resolution accepts an easement. There
is also a resolution accepting an agreement allowing Tecton to
construct a fire lane in the City right -of -way. He reported that
Don Williams has negotiated the easement and the agreement with
Tecton. These two documents accomplish the objectives required
by the City.
Councilman Bohrer suggested a five minute recess to allow Council
time to examine both documents.
Mayor Todd called the regular meeting back to order with Council
Members present as previously reported.
Don Williams, Recreation Supervisor, explained that the City
wanted a trail developed on top of the dike, not in the lower area.
The dike area is owned by the Tecton Company. They applied for
a Building Permit for the northeast corner of the site. The Fire
Department required that a fire lane must go around the building.
Tecton had two choices: move the building or ask the City for
joint usage of property to the north through an easement. This
would allow them to use this easement as a fire lane and allow the
City to construct a park trail in the same easement area. It was
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING
September 15, 1980
Page 12
RESOLUTIONS Cont.
Resolution #762
Accepting a grant
of easement for
public access to,
and use of, a
portion of the
Green River Shore-
line Trail System.
Continued.
New Agenda Item
Proposed Resolution
Allowing Tecton to
construct a fire
lane on City
property
Resolution #763
In support of con-
tinuing the use of
the Tukwila Elem-
entary School
a9/5
agreed to develop joint use. The City has a grant from I.A.C.
to develop a park trail. An eight foot wide, black top trail has
to have a substantial gravel base. By mutual agreement Tecton
would provide the gravel base. It would be the base for the
fire lane. Tecton signed an easement for joint use. They gave
us an easement for a trail and they have the right to use it as
a fire lane. This satisfied the Fire Department and the Public
Works Department. The attached map indicates the area for the
fire lane and the trail. It was agreed that the City will
maintain the area from the south edge of the trail northward to
the park area. Tecton will develop the landscaping and permanently
maintain the property up to the edge of the recreational trail.
This is a good deal for the City in that Tecton will provide the
base material for construction of the trail. They will maintain
up to the edge of the recreational trail and the developer is
getting a recreational trail and firelane along the edge of the
property. If the trail is damaged by emergency vehicles, it is
up to Tecton (Owners) to repair the damage.
Council spent considerable time reviewing the maps and the wording
of both the easement and the agreement.
Mr. Williams explained that in the first document, the City is
receiving an easement from the owner for a parcel of land on
the north end. Along with this is the agreement. This parcel
runs along the eastern boundary of the Tecton property. The
City owns this 20 foot wide strip of land. Again, Tecton wishes
to build a firelane on this property. They would provide the
gravel for the recreation trail and repair any damage done by
emergency vehicles. In this case, we are the owner granting
them an easement.
Mr. Williams asked Council to approve both documents this evening.
*MOTION CARRIED WITH BOHRER AND JOHANSON VOTING NO.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT THE RESOLUTION ALLOWING
TECTON COMPANY TO CONSTRUCT A FIRELANE ON CITY OWNED RIGHT -OF-
WAY BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED WITH HILL AND BOHRER
VOTING NO.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION
BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED.
City Attorney Hard read a resolution of the City of Tukwila,
Washington, allowing the Tecton Company to construct a fire
lane on City owned right -of -way in a portion of the Green River
Shoreline Trail System.
MOVED BY PHELPS, SECONDED BY SAUL, THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION
BE ADOPTED AS READ.*
*MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT THIS ITEM BE TABLED
TO THE NEXT COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING.*
Mayor Todd asked if these two documents go together and Attorney
Hard agreed they do. Mr. Williams said either benefits the City.
Right now, the City has to inform I.A.C. that the easement has
to be secured. Councilman Johanson questioned who is going to
build the firelane. Attorney Hard said the agreement clearly says
the developer will construct the firelane up to City specifications
at their own expense.
*MOTION CARRIED WITH PHELPS VOTING NO.
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION
BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED WITH HILL VOTING NO.
City Attorney Hard read a resolution of the City of Tukwila,
Wash., in support of continuing the use of the Tukwila
Elementary School as a primary school.
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING
September 15, 1980
Page 13
RESOLUTIONS Cont.
Resolution #763
In support of con-
tinuing the use of
the Tukwila Elem-
entary School
DEPARTMENT REPORTS
King County Rape
Relief
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT RESOLUTION NO. 763 BE
ADOPTED AS READ.*
Mayor Todd noted that this resolution is sponsored by Council-
man Van Dusen.
Councilman Phelps said there is an advantage to the City in
having a school within its City Limits.
*MOTION CARRIED WITH HILL VOTING NO.
Mayor's Report Mayor Todd noted that all Departments are busy preparing their
annual budget requests.
MISCELLANEOUS AND FURTHER AUDIENCE COMMENTS
He called attention to the Acting Finance Director's monthly
report of investments. Interest income for the month of August,
1980, amounted to $40,060.01 from the following activity:
Investments Sold $3,453,000
Investments Purchased $3,359,000
Councilman Saul referred to a letter from Victoria L. Vreeland,
President of the Board of Trustees, King County Rape Relief.
She explains that they have increased their request this year to
all agencies that contract for service. Through small increases
they can maintain their present services and expand into their
short and long term goals in spite of inflationary problems.
10:55 p.m. MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL ADJOURN. MOTION CARRIED.
Ma or
Ci t'y C"l erk
c2 9/Z