Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-01-21 Regular MinutesTUKWILA CITY COUNCIL January 21, 1985 Tukwila City Hall 7:00 P.M. Council Chambers CALL TO ORDER and PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL REPORTS Reappointment of Ann Altmayer to Board of Adjustment Presentation of Employee Service Pins Confirmation of Council Legislative Coordinator Election of Council President Staff Metro Transit Center plans abandoned (Discussed on Pg. 3) Valley View Estates Regular Meeting M I N U T E S Mayor Van Dusen called the Regular Meeting of the Tukwila City Council to order and led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. LIONEL C. BOHRER, DORIS E. PHELPS, Council President, JOE H. DUFFIE, EDGAR D. BAUCH, WENDY A. MORGAN, CHARLES E. SIMPSON. MOVED BY PHELPS, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT COUNCIL MEMBER HARRIS, BE EXCUSED. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY PHELPS, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT COUNCIL APPROVE THE MAYOR'S CONFIRMATION OF ANN ALTMAYER TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Van Dusen thanked the following employees for their service to the City and presented them with Employee Service Pins: Mike Back, Public Works Dept. 5 years Bob Conner, Police Dept. 15 years Ralph Trepanier, Public Works 15 years Council President Phelps reported that an extensive hiring process has been completed for the first full time Council Legislative Coordinator position. There were several excellent candidates interviewed in making the selection. MOVED BY PHELPS, SECONDED BY BAUCH, THAT LUCY LAUTERBACH BE CONFIRMED AS THE COUNCIL LEGISLATIVE COORDINATOR. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY PHELPS, SECONDED BY MORGAN, THAT COUNCILMAN BAUCH BE NOMINATED FOR THE POSITION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR 1985.* *MOVED BY PHELPS, SECONDED BY BOHRER, THAT NOMINATIONS BE CLOSED AND THAT COUNCIL CAST A UNANIMOUS BALLOT. MOTION CARRIED. The Council was reseated to their respective locations. Councilman Bohrer expressed appreciation to outgoing President Phelps for a job well done. Council Member Phelps thanked everyone for their assistance and patience in her year as Council President. Councilman Duffie welcomed Council President Bauch and said he was looking forward to a busy year. Brad Collins, Planning Director, reported that the Metro Capital Facilities Subcommittee met last Wednesday and, by resolution, abandoned the Transit Center Process. A public hearing will be held before the Planning Commission on the proposed development called Valley View Estates (Allenbach Project) Tuesday night. Council President Bauch asked the attorney how a Council Person, as a citizen, can make a comment on errors or omissions in the draft EIS. Attorney Haney said that if the TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING January 21, 1985 Page 2 REPORTS Valley View Estates (cont.) Mayor's Report CONSENT AGENDA Vouchers OLD BUSINESS Fire District #1 Annexation Council Person did comment, they would risk being disquali- fied if that matter came before Council as an appeal. He recommended that Council not comment. Mayor Van Dusen commented that Don Morrison, City Administrator, has gained his full confidence in his knowledge of the City, his ability to manage and he has full authority of the Mayor's office to conduct himself as City Administrator. The City now has a full time manager on board. a. Approval of Minutes: January 7, 1985 b. Approval of Vouchers Claims Fund Vouchers #20633 #20701 Current Fund Golf Course Spec. Rev. Street Fund Water Fund Sewer Fund Equipment Rental 403 Water /Sewer Const. Claims Fund Vouchers #20704 #20792 Current Fund Street Fund Sewer Fund Firemen's Pension 34,915.94 12,737.62 26,012.11 17,958.13 1,740.20 16,816.30 9,582.50 $119,762.80 34,936.90 78,876.11 34,426.48 186.55 $148,426.04 c. Final Acceptance of Grass tees at Foster Golf Course. MOVED BY BAUCH, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT THE CONSENT AGENDA BE APPROVED. MOTION CARRIED. Council President Bauch commented that the City Attorney invoice includes additional charges for review of agenda items that should come under the retainer. MOVED BY BAUCH, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY BILLINGS FOR SPECIAL ITEMS BE SUBMITTED TO THE FINANCE AND PERSONNEL COMMITTEE FOR REVIEW ALONG WITH THE CONTRACT. MOTION CARRIED. Attorney Haney reviewed his legal opinion for Council con- cerning the proposed Fire District No. 1 annexation in light of the Washington Supreme Court's decision in the case of City of Seattle vs. State. During his investigation he found that Seattle has an active annexation proposal filed with the Boundary Review Board which would affect the proposed annexa- tion of Fire District No. 1 by Tukwila. He concluded that the City of Tukwila may not take action at this time on any annexation proposal which encompasses all or any portion of the area proposed to be annexed to Seattle. TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING January 21, 1985 Page 3 OLD BUSINESS Fire District #1 Annexation (cont. NEW BUSINESS Tukwila Transit Center NEW BUSINESS Ordinance #1341 Relating to grading excavation Mayor Van Dusen said the City would continue their study on the proposed annexation and what effect it would have on the City if completed. Brad Collins, Planning Director, gave the following infor- mation in a status report on the Fire District No. 1 area: Population No. of Housing Units Area Total Assessed Valuation Per Capita Assessed Value 2,200 2,500 1,000 4i square miles $314,106,451 $141,000 Councilman Bohrer asked to have the information divided into the part included in the proposed Seattle annexation and the part remaining. He asked to have the Administration keep track of the matter before the Boundary Review Board. MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY BAUCH, TO AMEND THE AGENDA TO DISCUSS THE TUKWILA TRANSIT CENTER. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Bohrer quoted from a resolution paced at the Metro's C.S.F. meeting where the proposed Transit Center was discussed. The first paragraph says, the recommendation is to defer "because there is currently no site available that is satisfactory to both Metro and the local community." He noted that at no time has this City or the Task Force ever given its specific approval or recommendation to any site. In a memo written by Martin Baker, he says, "There is no political support within Tukwila for Site E or F or for any other permanent site that satisfies Metro's market /transfer objectives. The Tukwila Task Force, as have Tukwila Council Members Bauch, Bohrer, and Phelps, has expressed its opposi- tion to Sites E and F." Councilman Bohrer said he has never expressed his opposition to any site and doesn't think the other members of the Task Force have either. They have opposed the process which Metro has taken. They tried to make the answer to the site selection process come out to be the Southcenter Site. He expressed objection to what evolved and said the Council and City need to take action. There should be another meeting of the Tukwila Transit Center Task Force to discuss this. The City's position needs to be clearly expounded. The City is being held as the reason why this project is not proceeding. Council President Bauch suggested the Mayor poll the members of the Task Force and see if they would like to reply to this. Council Member Morgan suggested that the problem is far larger than just a Transit Center in Tukwila. She requested that Administration consider the drafting of a letter to the Cities of Kent, Auburn, Renton and Randy Revelle representing Unincorporated King County respectfully requesting that we all group together and ask for answers to some questions related to sufficient public transportation services in the South County. MOVED BY DUFFIE, SECONDED BY SIMPSON, THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED. TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING January 21, 1985 Page 4 NEW BUSINESS Ordinance #1341 (cont.) Fire Pumper Re- furbishment Proposal City Attorney Haney read an ordinance of the City of Tukwila, Washington, relating to grading and excavation within the City, amending Section 11.08.060 of the Tukwila Municipal Code to define "Public Place," amending Section 11.12.010 of the Tukwila Municipal Code to require permits for any use of any public place, adding a new Chapter 11.22 to the Tukwila Municipal Code relating to excavations in, over, under and along City streets, requiring permits therefor and estab- lishing rules and regulations for such excavations, and adding a new Chapter 16.54 to the Tukwila Municipal Code relating to excavation permits for other excavations requiring environmental review. MOVED BY SIMPSON, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1341 BE ADOPTED AS READ.* Councilman Bauch noted that this ordinance makes reference to only the Municipal Code. It does not indicate the ordinances being revised. How do we know what we are revising? This could create loopholes and we need to look at what could happen. Attorney Haney said the State Statute says you are allowed to modify your code and you do not have to set forth specifi- cally the ordinances which are being revised. Setting forth code sections are sufficient. *MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY BUHRER, SECONDED BY BAUCH, THAT THE POLICY OF THE COUNCIL BE TO CLEARLY REPEAL SECTIONS OF ORDINANCES THAT HAVE BEEN SUPERCEDED AND THAT ADMINISTRATION BRING FORWARD AN ORDINANCE THAT REPEALS THE APPROPRIATE SECTIONS OF ORDINANCES THAT HAVE BEEN SUPERCEDED BY ORDINANCE NO. 1341, JUST PASSED. MOTION CARRIED. Fire Chief Crawley discussed his proposal on establishing a program approach to the rebuilding of the Fire Pumper. The City may be able to purchase a used mid -60's Kenworth for around $30,000. For the present, it would serve as a reserve pumper to be used when the Crown or LaFrance are in for major repairs. It will allow for surplussing the LaFrance once the new truck, to be bid this year, arrives. Once the new truck is delivered, they will start a major rebuilding of the mid -60's Kenworth. The project would be completed over an 18 month period. Cost of total rebuilding would be around $75,000; this added to the original cost of $30,000 would be a 50% savings over buying a new truck. MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT ADMINISTRATIN BE AUTHORIZED TO CALL FOR BIDS ON A MID -60'S KENWuRTH /HEISER 1500 GPM FIRE PUMPER. MOTION CARRIED WITH BAUCH VOTING NO. Council President Bauch noted that the Capital Improvement Plan does not include this piece of equipment. Council Member Morgan asked that Administration revise the fire equipment section of the C.I.P. to reflect a new trend of rebuilding equipment. She asked for documentation showing the progress toward the adoption of the C.I.P. and that Administration notify Council when changes are proposed. There needs to be flexibility in the language to provide these kinds of things. TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING January 21, 1985 Page 5 NEW BUSINESS Ordinance #1342- MOVED BY BAUCH, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT THE PROPOSED Setting the Mayor's ORDINANCE BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED. Salary MISCELLANEOUS Park Ride Lot ADJOURNMENT 8:30 P.M. City Attorney Haney read an ordinance of the City of Tukwila, Washington, amending Section 2.08.010 of the Tukwila Municipal Code to provide for the setting of the Mayor's salary in the annual budget and establishing an effective date. MOVED BY BAUCH, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1342 BE ADOPTED AS READ. MOTION CARRIED. Council Member Phelps reported that the Metro Transit Center Committee met and approved the acquisition of the last three parcels of property for the Park and Ride Lot on Interurban. Construction will be timed with the construction of the Effluent Transfer System. MOVED BY BAUCH, SECONDED BY SIMPSON, THAT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL ADJOURN. MOTION CARRIED. Ga of 66' Du s R(ayor Maxine Anderson, City Clerk TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING January �1? 1985 Verbatim transcript: Tukwila Transit Center MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY BAUCH, TO AMEND THE AGENDA AT THIS POINT TO ADD AN ITEM THAT WAS DISCUSSED EARLIER AND I WOULD LIKE TO COME BACK TO NAMELY THE TUKWILA TRANSIT CENTER. MOTION CARRIED. BOHRER: The Council has the resolution before you, I would note.... COLLINS: Could I interject before you act further on that information? That is the proposed resolution that was sent to us prior to the meeting. Neither the Mayor nor I kept a copy that was distributed at the meeting, Councilman Phelps and Councilman Duffie were there. Does the proposed resolution correspond to the one that was passed at the around at the meeting? I just wanted to bring it to the Council's attention that that isn't necessarily the resolution that that was passed at CSF committee meeting because I did not have a copy of that. That was the one that was sent to us earlier. I believe it is one and the same but I don't know that to be a fact. MAYOR: To make further comment. We finally were able to get that Tuesday before the Wednesday meeting. COLLINS: Correct.That is the proposal that the Mayor's letter responded to. MAYOR: The Wednesday before Bob Near informed me that paraphrased this to me and I was quite surprised that this was the approach they were going to take so I kept asking and trying to get a copy and we finally got it on Tuesday and my response before the CFS was the letter that is attached. We did make comment, we got about upset for an hour and one -half we did not get very. far. DUFFIE: Their minds were already make up. MAYOR: They just Bob Near made a growl and they BOHRER: If I may, the resolution in its first paragraph says, the recommendation is to deter "because there is currently no site available that is satisfactory to both Metro and the local community." I would note that at no time has this City or the Task Force ever given its specific approval or recommendation to any site. I would further note that in the report given by staff member Bob Fluor, at least the copy came from Bob Fluor, the report is actually Martin Baker's report, Bob Fluor simply reports it to us. That in his analysis under "Disadvantages" the first says There is no political support within Tukwila for Site E or F or for any other permanent site that satisfies Metro's markets /transfers objectives. The Tukwila Task Force as have Tukwila's Council Members Bauch, Bohrer, and Phelps has expressed its opposition to Sites E and F." I would categorically state at this meeting that I have never expressed my opposition to any Site, I do not think the other members of the Task Force have taken such action either. I think we have all been very vocal in saying that we oppose the process which Metro has taken in this matter. What I see happening quite frankly is the Metro staff using the City Council and its members and the Task Force to justify its own failure to meet an unrealistic goal at the outset. They started out at the outset to try to make the answer to this supposedly unbiased site selection process come out the Southcenter site in some fashion. It was very clear that their criteria were derived with that in mind and they have never weakened at any point despite the fact that the Task Force members early on pointed out to them the two difficulties they ultimately had with this site which resulted in its rejection, namely, that Southcenter had contracts for parking that would be difficult to break and that would make a condemnation the only way that Metro could acquire this site and as a consequence of all those items the site would be over budgeted and beyond schedule for Metro,... In a poll on Council in this particular t -2- committee the CFS has gone overboard on a couple of their other transit centers and they have simply exhausted the budget for transit centers. They are putting about $19 million, I believe the number is, into the transit center at Northgate, a very large amount into the transit center in Bellevue, the budget for this site in Tukwila was $3.9 million in comparison. So quite obviously the amount of money they were willing to spend, had budgeted to spend in Tukwila, was a paltry sum in comparison to the quantities they were budgeted to spend elsewhere. The South King County then is getting the short end of the stick and Metro is not living up to their obligations under the bond issue that they put to the voters earlier which was to provide the funding for these transit centers, they are not providing transit service to South King County in equal manner: to the transit service they intend to provide elsewhere. This is simply a ruse in my estimation to place the blame for that in part upon the facility instead of placing precisely where it should be placed on the backs of Metro and its own staff. I object to this. I believe that the Council and the City need to take action. I believe there should be another meeting of the Tukwila Transit Center Task Force to discuss this, whether Metro chooses to participate or not I believe that the City's position needs to be very clearly expounded and that we need to make our position clear in the press and to the people of South King County. We are being held up in effect as the reason why this project cannot be taken forward when in truth it is all Metro. I do not want want that blame to fall on the shoulders of the City because of failure of some staff person in the Metro staff. I believe that after my association on this Task Force that we are seeing another example of bureaucracy run riot. Metro has no constituency, there are no people who vote for Metro council members, and consequently there is no accountability of the people who take these decisions for all of us. This is, I think, a clear example where that process is shown to have its very definite perils. End of speech! MAYOR: We should have had you with us, Bud. PHELPS: Definitely. MAYOR:. It would not have changed it one bit. PHELPS: I heartily concur with Mr. Bohrer's comments. I think he is exactly right about the fatal flaws in the process... a term that was much over -used by Metro staff as far as any of the criteria of what occurred on any of the other sites that were recommended by the Task Force. I also want to let you know that when I attended the Transit Committee meeting where the Northgate transit center was being discussed and I subsequently distributed that paper to the City Council there was not even a blink of any eyelash about the $19 million that was being spent at that transit center. No discussion.... no question. It had all of the political support of every member of that committee that went forward to the Metro Council not to Metro Council... to another committee for their further study so it was really disappointing to see the differences in the two processes. MAYOR: After that lengthy interview we gave out to the press... was there any I never saw. PHELPS: Yes, there was. BOHRER: I have one further point to make. An issue that then Council President Phelps raised at some of these meetings was that one of the factors that Metro should consider as a consideration in choosing future site locations was what were potential locations for the new light rail transit being considered into South King County That subject was not considered, was never included in any of the criteria and I think Metro is out of bed with all of their planning, they are doing things in a totally uncoordinated fashion and it is happening all within the same department. BAUCH: I believe the Mayor should poll the members of the Task Force to see if there is any interest, at least on a final meeting, to reply to this. If there is, you ought to have me. -3- MAYOR: I will do that and see if we do have, you know, enough interest to get that group together. That is a good base for us right there. I will certainly do that. MORGAN: I think that the problem is far larger than you have intimated, than a Transit Center in Tukwila. I commented to you many months ago at the entrance of this process that I had felt through observation and through my connections with social service agencies in South King County that Metro has never taken transit in the south county seriously. That they only added a route east and west past south of Tukwila from Federal Way to approximately the Green River Community College location about two years ago and I really feel that because it is a larger issue than our City that in addition to the meeting of the Transit Center Committee that I would respectfully request the Administration to consider the drafting of a letter to Cities of Kent, Auburn, and Renton, you may include Algona and Pacific in there if you so desire, and perhaps a letter to Randy Revelle regarding the unincorporated parts of King County. I respectfully request that we all group together and ask for some answers to questions related to sufficient public transportation services in the South King County. Seeing as how much of the South County represents the fastest growing populace of King County. Why the services have not don't seem to keep pace with these things and why the decisions are cumbersome andI would suggest that that occur in addition to whatever correspondence comes from if any... from the top. An additional meeting of the Transit Center Committee. I think one of the reasons why public bodies fail to respond to needs in the community they either shut their eyes and do not see what is going on or the community either is not equipped or has not made a loud voice known so that is why I would encourage to ask the other cities to work with you in a more long -range look at what services should be available to citizens in South King County. PHELPS: Mr. Collins, I think, is aware of a planning process going on in South King County with Public Works and Planning people on that...has come to the elected officials for discussion once and they were sent back to do additional home work. Are the staffs prepared to talk about...to take this up as an issue among themselves in addition to what Ms. Morgan is about? COLLINS: The most recent thing I attended was a Southwest group, they now have a South and a Southwest group which is basically unincorporated King County and the Cities of Des Moines and Normandy Park. Tukwila is not really considered in the Southwest group. Essentially the main staff role is going about developing the model ride- sharing program that would be added to local land -use plans requiring properties that develop in the future to commit a certain portion of their transportation needs to service by Metro and also working very strongly to developing HOV lanes within corridors not just on the freeway but in major east -west and north -south arterial corridors to make it advantageous for those commitments in ride sharing to access the roadways that are so dear. I believe that is the primary focus of that group, I did attend that meeting and I raised the question with Metro planners at that time what the Metro is going to be doing to implement the 1990's plan if the transit center was not acted upon in a timely fashion. Basically the response I was given was much the same response that was given to Bruce Lang and that was that they were not going to do anything to decrease service. That was their answer to implementing the 1990 plan. BOHRER: Just a couple of more questions.... is my understanding correct that the funding for this plan came from a bond issue or at least Metro revenues that are generated in effect by the whole County? COLLINS: I would have to review the 1990 plan to give you a definitive answer. That is my understanding but it is not from personal knowledge of the 1990 plan. PHELPS: It is not the only source of revenue in the 1990 plan. BOHRER: I guess that I would suggest that we may want to ask the question whether the South King County area is receiving its reasonable share of benefits from Metro in +hic rarrard MORGAN: Absolutely. BAUCH: LOOk at the .3 of a percent of sales tax that Metro takes out of Tukwila which is it comes up to at least $1,800,000. Do we get that kind of service? ri Out of Metro? MAYOR: I think we all agree where we stand. BAUCH: They could give everybody a free ride as soon as they crossed the City line and they wouldn't take that much in revenue. OLLINS: Did that answer your question? Our staff is still particpating in those meetings and we are not optimistic that there is a lot forthcoming. YOR: Okay. We will certainly poll the Task Force and see what kind of support we get there and I will also communicate with two letters with Randy Revelle's office on South King County and the cities. I will report back to the Council.on what we get back. nb; Transcribed 2 -12 -85 e -4--