Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-09-07 Regular MinutesSeptember 7, 1982 7:00 P.M. EXECUTIVE SESSION 7:00 P.M. TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting M I N U T E S Council met in the Council Workroom to discuss the appeal of the proposed City of Highline incorporation. Executive Session closed at 7:15 p.m. Tukwila City Hall Council Chambers FLAG SALUTE AND Mayor Van Dusen led the Pledge of Allegiance and called the CALL TO ORDER regular meeting of the Tukwila City Council to order at 7:20 p.m. ROLL CALL OF GEORGE D. HILL, MABEL J. HARRIS, LIONEL C. BOHRER, Council President, COUNCIL MEMBERS DORIS E. PHELPS, JOE H. DUFFIE, EDGAR D. BAUCH, WENDY A. MORGAN. OFFICIALS IN LAWRENCE E. HARD, City Attorney; MAXINE ANDERSON, City Clerk; ATTENDANCE BRAD COLLINS, Planning Director; ALAN DOERSCHEL, Finance Director; BYRON SNEVA, Public Works Director. REPORTS Mayor Mayor Van Dusen reported that he has formed a committee of staff members to review City Attorney services. He asked that input be presented to the committee. He reported that he has signed the agreement on the reconstruction of the 56th Avenue Bridge. City Attorney CONSENT AGENDA Attorney Hard reported that the Allenbach lawsuit will be held on September 21, 1982. They have filed a second suit seeking the issuance of a building permit. a. Approval of Minutes: August 16, 1982 b. Approval of Vouchers Claims Fund Vouchers #12648 #12776 Current Fund Golf Course Special Rev. Street Fund Federal Shared Revenue Land Acq, Bldg, Dev. Revenue Bond Fund Water Fund Sewer Fund Firemen's Pension #12646 #12647 Void 20,867.56 16,979.39 23,999.27 2,044.63 18,206.77 33.00 26,141.75 1,217.43 472.26 $109,962.06 c. Budget Transfer Motion No. (82 -03): To pay wages of Youth Services Counselor, September December, 1982. d. An ordinance of the City of Tukwila amending the 1982 Budget to transfer funds for repair of the Fire Station roof. e. An ordinance of the City of Tukwila amending the 1982 Budget to provide funds for City Hall Improvement Project and ad- ditional parking area. f. (1) An ordinance of the City of Tukwila amending Ordinance No. 989, Section 1, relating to adoption of certain criminal statutes. (2) An ordinance of the City of Tukwila amending Ordinance No. 570, Section 15, resisting officers, relating to re- sisting, obstructing or delaying officers. (3) An ordinance of the City of Tukwila amending Ordinance No. 1171, Section 9.16.020, adoption by reference, relating to certain vehicle traffic statutes. g. Approve expenditure for design study on the "T" Line Bridge Relocation Project. MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA BE APPROVED AS SUBMITTED. MOTION CARRIED. TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING September 7, 1982 Page 2 BID AWARDS Traffic Signal Project -So. 180th Andover Park East Community Center Roof Repair PUBLIC HEARINGS Proposed Annexation of 1.78 acres be- tween South 134th Macadam Road MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT THE BID FOR THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROJECT AT SOUTH 180TH AND ANDOVER PARK EAST BE AWARDED TO TOTEM ELECTRIC, THE LOW BIDDER, IN THE AMOUNT OF $68,513.10. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY HILL THAT THE BID FOR REPAIR OF THE COMMUNITY CENTER ROOF BE AWARDED TO PACIFIC SHEET METAL, INC. THE LOW BIDDER, IN THE AMOUNT OF $18,281.79. MOTION CARRIED. Western Pacific Properties has petitioned the City, on behalf of the property owners, to annex 1.78 acres adjacent to the existing City limits between South 134th and Macadam Road. Attorney Hard told Council that there are three things they have to advise the petitioner of: (1) The zoning under the proposed annexation; (2) If they will be subject to the bonded indebtedness of the City; (3) If Council will accept the peti- tion for annexation. Brad Collins, Planning Director, reported that the Planning Com- mission discussed this item and held a public hearing but were unable to arrive at a decision on the zoning. They have tabled the item to the next meeting. Mayor Van Dusen declared the Public Hearing open. Bill Turner, 13435 48th Ave. So., said he lives within the boundaries of the proposed annexation. He presented Council with a petition signed by citizens living in the area asking Council to deny the request for rezoning the subject property. He said he would like to be in the City of Tukwila but does not want his residential zoning changed. When the City annexed the industrial area some years ago, they did not provide a buffer zone for the single family area. They now have warehouses next to their residence. He would like to be in the City as there are more benefits than remaining in the County. He invited Council to visit the site. 3 )3 Elmer Manning, P.O. BOX 6232, Federal Way, said he owns property within the proposed annexation and would like it annexed to the City with M -1 or CM zoning. The property is currently zoned S.R.andfies adjacent to the City boundary. Elaine Unzeitig, 4534 So. 135th, said she and her husband own three pieces of property within the proposed annexation. Their house, which is a duplex, is located on property adjacent to Tukwila and that property is zoned M -1. They would like to be annexed to the City and would like M -1 or CM zoning. Matt Little, Western Pacific Properties, said they are representing the property owners. Some time ago, he was asked by the City to see if the property owners along 48th Avenue South would be inter- ested in joining the annexation. They were all in favor except that Mr. Turner wants his property to remain single family. Forty eighth Avenue is a natural boundary. Originally, they asked for M -1 zoning, but CM would be satisfactory to the property owners. The CM zoning is recommended by the Planning Staff, and he said this is what should be acted upon. It is compatible use for the area. Mr. Turner noted that others would be interested in annexing to the City, but do not want the zoning changed. Richard Kirsop, Chairman of the Planning Commission, reported that the Planning Commission tabled action on the zoning in order to visit the site. There are definite advantages to the City to proceed with the annexation. This would give better control of the storm drainage, would straighten the boundary and become more, TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING September 7, 1982 Page 3 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Proposed Annexation of 1.78 acres be- tween South 134th Macadam Road (cont.) Proposed Annexation of 4.11 acres conti- guous to the north boundary of the City (Southgate) in part, commercial property in the near future. The residents will get better Police protection, street maintenance and have better access to the people who make the land use decisions. The slope of the land is such that the residential area could be preserved. The Planning Commission will discuss this further on September 23. There being no further discussion, Mayor Van Dusen closed the Public Hearing. Councilman Harris asked Mr. Little if his clients would still like to come into the City if the zoning is R -l. He felt they would, but they still want the CM zoning. Councilman Hill noted that to change the zoning will raise the tax on the property. He does not want to see anyone forced out of their home by high taxes. It is a nice piece of property, but he would like to see it brought in as R -l; then, let the property owner request rezone. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY BAUCH, THAT THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION BE TABLED UNTIL COUNCIL RECEIVES A FULL REPORT FROM THE PLAN- NING COMMISSION. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Van Dusen declared the public hearing open on a proposed annexation of 4.11 acres to the north of the City containing the Community Center. Elizabeth Springer, 13325 42nd Avenue South, said she is adjacent to the proposed annexation. Less than two years ago, this area was included in a much larger proposal to annex. At that time, the citizens of the area voted not to annex to Tukwila. We could never understand why Tukwila selected the Southgate site for a Community Center. It is too far from the residential area. This present move to annex this area makes a mockery of the Democratic process. The feeling of the neighborhood has not changed. Tukwila is not a good neighbor. Council President Bohrer noted that Tukwila has not initiated this annexation. Prior to the last major annexation attempt, the City was already considering annexation of the Community Center site. The City got a good price on the old school site. Councilman Hill noted that all of the people within the area proposed to be annexed signed the petition. 3)3 a Mrs. James G. McKenna, 4126 South 131st, said she lives right across the street from the Southgate School and also owns the property at 4116 South 131st. She said the people of their community do not take part in what goes on in Tukwila Community Center because they are not permitted to. The area around River- ton was referred to as a "Otto" by a City employee. This is the way our children are treated; they are not permitted to play on the school grounds. We are not a part of the Community Center; it caters to special groups outside of our area. The Center is rented out constantly to wild parties. I have called the Tukwila Police and they aren't interested. If Tukwila comes in we are going to be required to put in sewers, roads and underground lights, and we can't afford it. We turned this down before, and I don't feel you have a right to come in and take part of our area. We read, in the paper, about the bickering and fighting that goes on in Tukwila. In my opinion, you aren't capable of handling the property you already have. Why don't you leave us alone and move your Community Center to another location? Mayor Van Dusen said the Community Center is open for County and City citizens. All of the parties require one staff person in attendance. The Tukwila Police will not respond to complaints because it is outside of the boundaries. Further, the citizens of Tukwila are not required to pay for streets and sidewalks. Highline water district intertie Water district 75 intertie Water district #75 intertie TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING September 7, 1982 Page 4 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Proposed Annexation of 4.11 acres conti- guous to the north boundary of the City (Southgate) (cont.) RECESS 8:25 P.M. 8:35 P.M. Proposed Compre- hensive Water Plan (Page II -4) Charles Deraldt, 12205 23rd Ave. South, said he is President of the Delta Masonic Lodge Temple Board. They have petitioned for annexation because Tukwila will provide improved Police and Fire protection, not only for the building, but also the parking area. The Temple has had a problem with vandals. They believe the property taxes will be used more effectively. They are agreeable to any bonded indebtedness required by the City. The Delta Lodge has been at that site for 73 years. We believe we will benefit by being annexed to the City. There being no further comment, Mayor Van Dusen closed the Public Hearing. 3 MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT COUNCIL RETURN THIS ITEM TO STAFF FOR PREPARATION OF AN ORDINANCE ACCEPTING A PETITION FOR ANNEXATION, DESIGNATING THE ZONING AS R -1 AND ASKING THAT THE CITY'S BONDED INDEBTEDNESS BE APPLIED TO THE PROPERTY. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT COUNCIL TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Van Dusen called the Regular Meeting back to order with all Council Members present. Byron Sneva, Public Works Director, reviewed the 15 major recom- mendations in the proposed Comprehensive Water Plan prepared by Horton Dennis Associates. Councilman Bauch wanted it made clear that if the City adopts this plan, each recommendation takes specific Council action; they are not adopted by adopting the plan. Mayor Van Dusen declared the Public Hearing open. Cris Crumbaugh, representing the Segale Businesses, said they will cooperate with the City to see that the water system is brought up to standards and that there is adequate water. He expressed sur- prise at a 200% increase in the cost of water and a 25 a square foot facility charge. They would like time to review the plan. Marty Penhallegren, Horton Dennis Associates, said that this rate increase will bring the rates in line or slightly higher than Water District #75 is charging. The City is probably half of what Water District #75 is now charging. There being no further comment, Mayor Van Dusen closed the Public Hearing. Councilman Harris asked if Water District #75 was willing to let the City take over the service to Segale Business Park. Mr. Penhallegren said the area is in the City and can be taken over by the City at any time. It is the City's option. Councilman Harris questioned how the law reads on this matter. Councilman Bauch said the Public Works Committee requested this hearing to make the public aware of this plan. Councilman Phelps said she would like to initiate some meetings with Water District #75 to discuss the plan and keep them informed of the City's actions. Cris Crumbaugh said they have extensive agreements with Water District #75 regarding the development of the water system within a great deal of the area discussed in the plan. They also have intertie agreements with Tukwila and the Water District. There are a lot of legal complications involved here. TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING September 7, 1982 Page 5 PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued Proposed Compre- hensive Water Plan (Page II -4) (cont.) NEW BUSINESS Ordinance #1272 Repealing Ord. #573 relating to applicants under Civil Service Denial of re- quest for City to take over the Riverview Plaza utilities Appeal of Plan- ning Commission decision con- cerning Center Place parking Councilman Phelps asked where the City stands with regard to water rights and how are they acquired if we don't have them. Mr. Penhallegren said the City has no water right at the present time. There seems to be some water potential in the valley. D.O.E. sees no problem as long as a water well is below the river so that water is not being drawn directly from the river. To acquire the rights an application must be made to the Department of Ecology. Mr. Sneva clarified that Item 8 is only if a reservoir is planned within the boundaries of Water District #75. Councilman Phelps asked to be excused from the discussion on this item since her husband is a member of the Civil Service Commission. MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY BAUCH THAT THE PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE ORDINANCE BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED. Deputy City Attorney Woo read an ordinance of the City of Tukwila, Wash., repealing Ordinance No. 573 relating to civil service applicants. MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1272 BE ADOPTED AS READ. MOTION CARRIED WITH BAUCH VOTING NO AND PHELPS ABSTAINING. MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT COUNCIL DENY THE REQUEST OF TECTON CORPORATION (RIVERVIEW PLAZA) TO ACCEPT THE PRIVATE UTILITIES. MOTION CARRIED WITH HARRIS VOTING NO. 3" )yo Mayor Van Dusen explained that this is a complicated issue and is important to the Council and the City. This is a quasi judicial hearing. On behalf of the administration of the City of Tukwila, Mayor Van Dusen filed an appeal on the decision of the Planning Com- mission. They approved a cooperative parking agreement requiring the owner of the Center Place Facility (17001 -17195 Southcenter Parkway) to provide 224 parking stalls. The Tukwila Municipal Code requires 287 stalls. As the person filing the appeal, Mayor Van Dusen stepped down as Chairman and turned the meeting over to Council President Bohrer. Attorney Hard noted that the authority for this action is TMC 18.90.020. Mr. Collins said that TMC 18.56.070, Cooperative Parking Facility, is the section under question. It, in part, says that a cooperative parking facility agreement can be per- mitted for business uses that have different hours of operation. It also says the Planning Commission may modify a cooperative parking agreement as it deems necessary. The question tonight is whether, under that section, the minimum parking standards can be changed for the City of Tukwila. Attorney Hard explained that this appeal is something Council has never had to consider before. It is specifically authorized under the new zoning code. This is a matter Council can consider along with new material and statements presented tonight. Since this is a quasi judicial proceeding, each Councilman must be sure he or she is eligible to listen to it and to be sure there is no conflict of interest or appearance of fairness problem. The Mayor is the one that has filed the appeal. The code says that TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING September 7, 1982 Page 6 NEW BUSINESS Cont. Appeal of Plan- ning Commission decision con- cerning Center Place parking (cont.) 5 minute break 9:50 P.M. any person aggrieved by a decision of the Planning Commission may file a written appeal. There is some question as to whether the Mayor could file as an aggrieved party. Assuming that he is, Council should continue to hear the appeal. Attorney Hard asked that any Council Member with a financial interest or some pre- conceived notion on this appeal to remove themselves from the participation. This is a matter of great importance to the ap- plicant. Council President Bohrer asked if the intent is for Council to deal with this tonight. We have just received the information, and it is not a simple issue. Mr. Collins said that is the intent. It's crucial point is the parking standard for multi tenant commercial operations in the City of Tukwila and how this may be affected by the Planning Commission's decision. Council has to determine whether or not the standard is still intact or whether or not the policy has been changed and, if so, whether they concur with the policy. Attorney Hard urged Council to hear the testimony of the people in attendance. Council delcared a five minute break to allow staff time to furnish them a copy of TMC 18.56.070. Council President Bohrer said the first issue Council should ad- dress is the one raised by the City Attorney -is the appeal pro- perly placed before the Council and should they now consider it? MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY BAUCH, THAT COUNCIL HEAR THE APPEAL.* 3 2 y1 Charles R. Blumenfeld, law firm of Bogle Gates, is the attorney for Hayden Island. They have researched the question of "who is the person aggrieved" and have reached the conclusion that, unless there is a City ordinance stating otherwise, a City Official is not a person aggrieved. Historically, a person aggrieved was one with an economic interest in the matter. Second, there is a policy is- sue here. Was there a reason for making the Planning Commission the final arbiter in the code? If there was, then it should stay with the Planning Commission. If you want the parking agreements to come before Council, then the ordinance should provide for that. We entered this cooperative parking agreement process with the clear understanding that the Planning Commission was the final arbiter unless somebody (a citizen of the City impacted by the parking agreement) filed an appeal. Council President Bohrer recalled that, in discussing this ordi- nance at Council level, this issue came up. At the time, it was agreed that the aggrieved person could be a staff member. Attorney Hard said this is a question that people have disagreed on, but he feels it is properly before Council. Peter Van Dyke said he is an officer of Hayden Island Corporation who is the developer of the Center Place Shopping Center. He also has a problem on who is aggrieved and he asked the Mayor to speak on the grievance. Mayor Van Dusen explained that after discussion with the Plan- ning Director on this issue, he was the only one that could ap- propriately do this. He appealed the Planning Commission deci- sion because of the possibility that they were setting policy that should lie with the City Council. In the future, if we allow this "excess relief" in the parking requirements, what is going to happen to the standards. TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING September 7, 1982 Page 7 NEW BUSINESS Cont. Appeal of Plan- ning Commission decision con- cerning Center Place parking (cont.) Robert H. Scofield, representing the Mikami and Shimatsu fami- lies, asked if anybody is really aggrieved. Nobody has really admitted they are over the action concerning their development. They would be aggrieved in the future. Now, the City has to decide how they will handle these in the future. The Planning Commission hearing on this was thorough and lasted several hours. There was much testimony and there was a 4 to 0 vote. Richard Kirsop, Chairman of the Planning Commission, clarified that the Planning Commission reviewed all the facts of this specific case in trying to arrive at a decision. They were not seeking to create new policy directions for the City nor set a precedent that others may want to see as an escape from the proper parking requirements. They felt that, in a development such as this, parking requirements seem to be somewhat self policing. If the parking lot is full, the customers aren't going to stop and management is going to have to find some other solu- tion to the parking problem. Deputy City Attorney Woo said that, regarding the question of aggrieved party, there is a rule of statutory construction that if a term is not clear, you can go back to the legislative intent. Mayor Van Dusen said he is acting in the best interest of the City in filing this appeal. Councilman Hill said Council's interest is making safe parking areas for all customers using those businesses. Councilman Phelps said if the Mayor's concern is who should be the proper policy setting body of the City as far as parking requirements and special provisions, then the zoning ordinance should be amended to provide for Council review of the Planning Commission's recommendation rather than to appeal their decision on this project. Councilman Morgan said she feels uncomfortable in considering this matter without the Planning Commission documentation. The Mayor's letter said "the decision is arbitrary and capricious and clearly erroneous." The actual grounds of the appeal are not here. Mayor Van Dusen said he is appealing the reduction of parking stalls for this development. Policy should lie with the Council. Councilman Harris said that Council gave the Planning Commission the right to decide the total requirements under the cooperative parking agreement. She said she didn't believe there was a grievance here. ROLL CALL VOTE: HILL YES HARRIS NO BOHRER YES PHELPS NO DUFFIE YES BAUCH YES MORGAN NO *MOTION CARRIED 4 YES; 3 NO. Council will hear the appeal. Council President Bohrer noted the staff report and applicant information refer to NEW Code and OLD Code. He asked if there was any necessity for Council to consider the Old Code. Mr. Collins said it would not be help- ful, but does add a bit of confusion. 3 ci,) TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING September 7, 1982 Page 8 NEW BUSINESS Cont. Appeal of Plan- ning Commission decision con- cerning Center Place parking (cont.) 3 7v3 Mr. Van Dyke explained that they started in January on the re- view process and got their building permit under the old code. The parking clearly says 1 for 400 square feet. They came in with 174 parking spaces, and it was approved unconditionally with one exception. It said "no building permits would be issued until final approval of the landscaping." This was done and they proceeded with the project. At no time did anyone ever mention that some uses call for a different amount of parking than other uses. Then Council decided 1 for 400 is not enough for restaurants so they were considered under "Places of Public Assembly." But, still no one said anything to them. Until 6 weeks ago, when Chuck E. Cheese came in for their building permit, did we find out about the parking. They were turned down because of inadequate parking. He said he believes that, legally, he is under the old code. After Chuck E. Cheese was shut down, we had a meeting with Tukwila and discussed alternatives. Under the old code, we needed 114; we got approval with 174 and now we are up to 225, and it is packed. Everyone knew we were discussing a lease with Chuck E. Cheese who will be a heavy night time use of the parking area. They have carefully picked the other tenants to have compatible parking usage. The first one to ever really listen to them was the Planning Commission. We are being hurt; we need to get the center open and operating. We went through all the requirements. Mr. Collins said that the objective analysis indicates that they do not have enough parking; subjectively, when you look at the mix, perhaps, the Shopping Center will work. Our main concern is if we don't have an objective standard we can apply we are going to create a great parking problem. We need the objective standard in review of other projects. Councilman Hill noted Item #5 of the Planning Commission's recommendations. "It is understood that the cooperative parking facility is approved under this application upon finding by the Planning Commission that such action is taken in the public interest. The Commission reserves the right to review this cooperative parking facility agreement annually and may require cancellation thereof or modification of its terms upon finding of adverse impacts to public safety or health." Mr. Van Dyke said they agreed to this. The Planning Commission also left in No. 1. "Total on -site arrangement of parking spaces shall be as described on Exhibit A 1st Revision of this appli- cation." Mr. David Poe, Donut Shop, said that another business like his does all their business with 12 parking stalls. Mr. Van Dyke said, if he has to, he can back out of the agreements with two tenants. Staff recommended to Planning Commission that they go with Taco Time and Chuck E. Cheese, but the rest has to be re- tail at 1 to 400. This is unfair and unreasonable; we have a project that will work. Mr. Kirsop said the Planning Commission felt it was unfair to put the Donut Shop and Icecream Parlor in the drive -in restaurant category. Basically, the developers had demonstrated through their own study that they have a good tenant mix. There was a substantial moral obligation on the part of the Planning Com- mission to approve this in view of the several previous hearings. The increase of parking spaces is from 174 to 224. Councilman Phelps asked Mr. Collins if he was aware of any time that the developer was cautioned about requirements for parking stalls. Mr. Collins could not recall any time. The minute staff knew there was a problem, it was brought to their attention. Councilman Phelps said the applicant has met all of the City TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING September 7, 1982 Page 9 NEW BUSINESS Cont. Appeal of Plan- ning Commission decision con- cerning Center Place parking (cont.) ADJOURNMENT 11:25 P.M. requirements in putting this development together. Chapter 18.56.070 is very significant here. Council gave the authority to the Planning Commission to make the decision on the cooperative parking facility. Mr. Collins said he believes the Planning Commission and the applicant have followed the proper steps. The only thing that is a question is, did it change the City's policy on parking? Council President Bohrer said that there is an issue of policy here. There is also a real issue of public safety and health and whether we are providing adequately. The City did not have enough information to realize there was a problem until the very end. MOVED BY HARRIS, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT COUNCIL ABIDE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION.* Councilman Hill said Council gave the Planning Commission the right to alter the parking. Councilman Bauch asked what would happen if Council changed the requirement; in the annual review would they have to come under the new requirement. Attorney Hard said this should be clarified in the written coopera- tive parking agreement. Councilman Bauch said the basis for this whole cooperative parking agreement is based on the assumption that Chuck E. Cheese will be an evening operation. Can Council regulate the opening hours? Attorney Hard said he believed that an agreement could be reached on that. Mr. Collins said the Planning Commission approved the application creating a cooperative parking facility at Center Place subject to the following conditions: 1. Total on -site arrangement of parking spaces shall be as described on Exhibit A 1st Revision of this application. 2. It is understood that the cooperative parking facility is approved under this application upon finding by the Plan- ning Commission that such action is taken in the public interest. The Commission reserves the right to review this cooperative parking facility agreement annually and may require cancellation thereof or modification of its terms upon finding of adverse impacts to public safety or health. 3. In the event of a change in the complimentary tenant mix that adversely affects the parking, staff may send the ap- plication to the Planning Commission for review of the coopera- tive parking facility agreement and the Commission may re- quire cancellation thereof or modification of its terms upon finding of adverse impact on public safety or health. Council Presdient Bohrer noted that he cannot support the Plan- ning Commission decision. *MOTION CARRIED WITH BOHRER AND BAUCH VOTING NO. MOVED BY HARRIS, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT HE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL CA N(ay6 r City Clerk