HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-02-25 Committee of the Whole MinutesTukwila City Council Committee of the Whole Meeting
City Hall Council Chambers February 25, 2013 — 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council President Hougardy called the Tukwila City Council meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. and led the
audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.
OFFICIALS
Present were Kathy Hougardy, Council President, Councilmembers Joe Duffie, Dennis Robertson,
Allan Ekberg, Verna Seal, De'Sean Quinn, Kate Kruller.
CITY OFFICIALS
Jim Haggerton, Mayor; David Cline, City Administrator; Shelley Kerslake, City Attorney; Chris Flores,
Acting Fire Chief; Marty Grisham, Emergency Manager; Raejean Kreel, CERT Trainer; Jack Pace,
Community Development Director; Rick Still, Parks and Recreation Director; Dave Johnson, Recreation
Superintendent; Peggy McCarthy, Finance Director; Derek Speck, Economic Development Administrator;
Kimberly Matej, Government Relations; Melissa Hart, Deputy City Clerk.
AMEND AGENDA
Council President Hougardy stated there has been a request to add an item to the Special Presentations
section of the agenda. This will give the City Attorney an opportunity to provide an update on the LID
Process (Klickitat Project). She suggested the presentation be item 2b under Special Presentations.
COUNCIL CONSENSUS EXISTED TO AMEND THE AGENDA TO ADD THE LID PROCESS AS ITEM
2b UNDER SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
a. Introduction of Raejean Kreel, Public Educator /Community Emergency Response Team (CERT)
Trainer.
Marty Grisham, Emergency Manager, introduced Raejean Kreel. Ms. Kreel comes from the City of
Auburn, where she started as an AmeriCorps Vista Volunteer. She has a Bachelor's degree with a
double major in Counseling Psychology and Theology and is currently in her last semester for her
Master's degree in Emergency Management. Ms. Kreel will complete the "Basic Emergency Academy"
from the Emergency Management Institute in Emmitsburg, Maryland during the summer of 2013.
Ms. Kreel is excited for the opportunity to serve the citizens, the Tukwila School District, and businesses
within the Tukwila community.
b. Local Improvement District (LID) Process, per agenda amendment.
Shelley Kerslake, City Attorney, stated there have been several questions about the Council's role in the
LID Process. Ms. Kerslake explained the LID was formed in 2009. The Urban Center Access Project
(Klickitat) is now complete, and it is time to assess the property owners for the benefits their property
received from the project. State law allows the City to appoint a Hearing Examiner to conduct the LID
assessment roll hearing. An assessment roll advises property owners how much they are required to
pay. The assessment is based on a determination of the special benefits to each parcel of property
resulting from the local improvements.
The degree to which a property specially benefits from an improvement is measured by the difference
between the fair market value (FMV) of the property immediately before and immediately after the
improvements. The City will mail notices to the property owners about the assessment roll hearing and
Tukwila City Council Committee of the Whole Minutes
February 25, 2013 Page 2 of 10
anyone objecting to their assessment must file written notice (a specific date will be included in the
hearing notice) with the City Clerk prior to the assessment roll hearing. A property owner challenging
their assessment must prove it was incorrect, and the Hearing Examiner will receive the testimony. The
Examiner can correct, revise, raise, lower, change or modify the assessment roll based on the evidence
and testimony received at the hearing. The Hearing Examiner's decision is a recommendation. The
Hearing Examiner will attend a City Council meeting and present his assessment roll recommendation to
the Council.
According to state law, when a Hearing Examiner conducts the evidentiary hearing, the City Council is
required to hear objections to the Hearing Examiner's recommendation from those who objected before
the Examiner. The Council will hear assessment roll objections the same evening they will consider the
Hearing Examiner's recommendation.
An ordinance that sets forth the procedure for that part of the process is on the March 4, 2013 consent
agenda.
In order to appeal to the Council, a property owner will have to provide written notice to the City Clerk
within 10 days of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. Their appeal to the Council will be based
upon the record created before the Examiner. If the City receives an appeal. the Council will be provided
a video copy of the appeal hearing along with any written materials. The appeal hearing will not be
evidentiary, and no new evidence will be allowed. A property owner who appeals the Hearing Examiner's
recommendation will be allowed to make their argument to the Council, and the Council can then decide
to affirm or modify the Hearing Examiner's assessment roll recommendation. In this capacity, the Council
will be acting like the court of appeals, thus the appeal hearing is considered a quasi - judicial proceeding.
Ms. Kerslake stated in the event an appeal is filed, she would provide the Council with a briefing, orally
and in writing, before the hearing regarding the standard of review and the criteria to be applied.
The final step of the process is for the Council to adopt an ordinance which finalizes the assessment roll.
Councilmember Robertson inquired about how the Council should respond if they are contacted by a
property owner who disagrees with the Hearing Examiner's assessment roll recommendation.
Ms. Kerslake advised if a property owner contacts a Councilmember about their assessment roll, the
Councilmember should decline to speak with the property owner. The Council will be sitting as the
appellate body, and depending on the course of the conversation, the Councilmember may have to
recuse themselves from the decision making process.
Councilmember Kruller asked if a property owner files an appeal, what type of information will be provided
to the Council prior to the hearing.
Ms. Kerslake stated the Council should receive a copy of the video recording from the assessment roll
hearing and any associated materials and exhibits.
Councilmember Quinn feels there should be guidelines provided to property owners relating to testimony
on this item.
Ms. Kerslake explained at the beginning of the hearing property owners are provided instructions on this
type of hearing and testimony allowed. The hearing before the Council will not be evidentiary; property
owners will be allowed to provide the same testimony that was given to the hearing examiner.
Council President Hougardy asked if the Hearing Examiner will provide a recommendation to the Council.
Ms. Kerslake answered yes. She explained the Hearing Examiner will be present at the Council meeting
to answer Council questions.
Tukwila City Council Committee of the Whole Minutes
February 25, 2013 Page 3 of 10
Councilmember Robertson commented if the Council chooses to modify an assessment, the remaining
properties could receive an increased assessment, and the process would have to start from the
beginning.
Ms. Kerslake stated if the Council chooses to lower an assessment, it may impact the other assessments
and the assessment roll would need to be recalculated. She reminded the Council that she is available to
answer any questions they may have prior to the hearing.
c. King County Airport noise mitigation update.
Jack Pace, Community Development Director, introduced Sharyn Parker, Sound Insulation Program
Manager.
Ms. Parker utilized a PowerPoint presentation to update the Council on the King County Airport (Boeing
Field) noise mitigation project. Highlights of the presentation included:
Back round of the Kin. Count International Air.ort KCIA Sound Insulation Program:
• A Part 150 Study (Federal Aviation Regulation -FAR Part 150) was initiated at the request of the
King County Council and began in 1999; Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approved KCIA's
Part 150 Study in 2005.
• KCIA's Noise Exposure Map established the eligibility of residences in noise contours 65 decibels
(dB) and greater, that includes portions of Beacon Hill, Georgetown, and Allentown in Tukwila.
Since 2008:
• 313 homes (136 Beacon Hill; 152 Georgetown; 25 Tukwila) received acoustical doors, windows
and ventilation.
• 173 homes (76 Beacon Hill; 60 Georgetown; 37 Tukwila) have been bid and are ready for
construction in 2012 -2013.
• 41 homes (18 Beacon Hill; 13 Georgetown; 11 Tukwila) are in design.
• 14 "historic" homes (2 Beacon Hill; 1 Tukwila; 11 Georgetown) are completed; and 4 (3
Georgetown; 1 Tukwila) are in design.
• "After" construction noise tests reveal up to 20 decibel reduction in homes participating in the
program.
• FAA contributed $36,160,000 grant funds, matched by KCIA's $1,809,000 non- general tax
revenue.
• Sound Insulation Program will be completed in 2014.
Who is Eligible?
• Residences located in noise contours 65 dB and above.
• Residences located in noise contours 65 -69 dB require noise testing to determine whether interior
noise level is greater than 45 dB.
• KCIA does not limit eligibility to owner- occupied properties — rentals are also eligible.
• KCIA has received an 80% response to the January 2013 mailing about the program. The
program materials are translated into 6 different languages.
Councilmember Duffie inquired about how a homeowner would seek another noise test if they fail the first
test.
Ms. Parker stated if a homeowner fails a noise test, and they would like a retest they can contact her or
mail a written request to Peter Doyle, FAA NW Mountain Region, 1601 Lind Ave. SW, Renton WA,
98055.
Councilmember Kruller clarified the noise study area within the Tukwila area include the Ryan Way area
and the Allentown area.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
There were no citizen comments.
Tukwila City Council Committee of the Whole Minutes
February 25, 2013 Page 4 of 10
SPECIAL ISSUES
a. An ordinance regarding advanced payment of travel expenses.
Councilmember Robertson indicated this item was discussed at the Finance and Safety Committee
meeting on February 20, 2013. The committee members were unanimous in recommending approval.
The revolving fund for advanced payment of travel expenses was established in 1970 pursuant to
Chapter 174, laws of 1969, which provided reasonable allowance in advance of expenditure for travel
related expenses incurred by elected or appointed officials and employees of the City for necessary
official travel. Under the current method for certain travel related expenses, advances are given for meal
per diem and incidentals for upcoming travel to those who request advances. The amount of the advance
is based on estimated travel dates and meals not provided during the event. In 2010 the Finance
Department began issuing Procurement Cards (PCards) for a variety of City related expenses including
travel expenses. Closing the revolving fund and encouraging the use of PCards for travel related
expenses, or reimbursing expenses after travel is completed, creates efficiencies and reduces costs to
the City. The Council is being asked to consider the draft ordinance repealing Ordinance Nos. 614, 1215,
and 2252, eliminating the advanced travel fund.
COUNCIL CONSENSUS EXISTED TO FORWARD THIS ITEM TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING.
b. An agreement for the Parks and Recreation Open Space (PROS) Plan.
Councilmember Ekberg indicated this item was discussed at the Community Affairs and Parks Committee
meeting on February 11, 2013. The committee members were unanimous in recommending approval.
Dave Johnson, Recreation Superintendent, explained a current 6 -year Open Space Plan is required in
order for the City to be eligible to apply for any state and federal grant funding. This planning tool also
assists the entire parks and recreation system and identifies community needs, as well as providing
policies and standards to help guide the department into the future. The Council is being asked to
authorize the Mayor to sign the consultant agreement.
The Councilmembers asked clarifying questions of staff on the above topic.
COUNCIL CONSENSUS EXISTED TO FORWARD THIS ITEM TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING.
c. A proposed development agreement for 223 Andover Park East.
Councilmember Ekberg indicated this item was discussed at the Community Affairs and Parks Committee
meeting on January 28, 2013. The committee members were unanimous in recommending approval.
Derek Speck, Economic Development Administrator, explained City Administration is recommending the
Council forward this item to the March 11, 2013 Committee of the Whole meeting for a public hearing and
to March 18, 2013 for adoption. The property owner of 223 Andover Park East (former Circuit City
property) has requested permission to construct buildings that would exceed the current limits for building
height and residential units. The Council is being asked to review the proposed development agreement
(DA). He clarified that the proposed development is one building (not two as written in the Informational
Memorandum) for two proposed uses.
Mr. Speck utilized a PowerPoint presentation to review key points of the proposed development
agreement.
➢ Property owners are considering:
• 17 -story building (180 feet) with hotel and residential units
➢ Current development regulations:
• Maximum height 115 feet
• No residential units
➢ Property owners request certainty in order to continue feasibility analysis
➢ Development Agreement Proposal:
Tukwila City Council Committee of the Whole Minutes
February 25, 2013 Page 5 of 10
• Height up to 180 feet over 50% of property
• Up to 300 residential units
• Easy conversion to condominiums
• Rights expire 12/31/2015
➢ Key question:
• Does this type of development fit the City's vision for this location?
Mr. Speck introduced Omar Lee, owner of the former Circuit City site.
Omar Lee, 8448 North Mercer Way, Mercer Island, stated they purchased the former Circuit City site
three years ago. They have successfully developed other projects, including the Great Wall shopping
center in Kent. Mr. Lee introduced Craig Davenport with MulvannyG2.
Mr. Davenport explained the proposed project, as envisioned, is a type -one, high -rise construction mixed -
use development. He reviewed the proposed design as identified on pages 47 -66 of the agenda packet.
The Councilmembers exchanged comments and asked clarifying questions of staff on the proposed
development agreement.
Councilmember Robertson commented that a development of this type would provide a sense of
ownership and safety in the Urban Center. He asked if the proposed 300 residential units would be
required to conform to the City's multi- family design standards as identified in the Tukwila Municipal
Code.
Jack Pace, Community Development Director, explained part of this initial phase is to seek Council
approval on the requested height increase, and return at a future date to review and address the details
of the design. The first step for the developer is to have a soil study completed for the proposed
development, and then design the project based on those results. The type of soil in the area will dictate
the type of foundation and design required. Once the developer moves forward with the actual design
based on the site conditions, the design review will follow the City's standard design review process.
Mr. Speck clarified the draft development agreement addresses additional building height and residential
units as requested; it does not provide exceptions to the City's current codes.
Councilmember Robertson stated the DA references that major amendments to the DA are to be
approved by the City Council, while minor amendments are to be approved by the Mayor. He requested
an example of a major and minor amendment.
Mr. Speck stated the intent of a minor amendment would be to correct typos or wording
misunderstandings within the DA. A major amendment requiring Council approval for example could be if
the developer requested to increase the number of residential units. The intent of this language within the
DA is that any change in governing regulations would be considered a major amendment and would be
brought before the Council.
Councilmember Robertson commented that as the development agreement is currently written, there
could be as few as zero residential units constructed.
Mr. Speck suggested changes be made to the DA that state the additional height requested by the
developer would be granted with a minimum number of residential units to be constructed. He said he
would work with the developer on this issue.
Councilmember Robertson asked if the Fire Department has reviewed the proposed development as it
relates to the Fire Department operations and any additional equipment needs.
Chris Flores, Acting Fire Chief, explained Fire Department staff would need to review the codes of cities
where a similar structure is located. The International Fire Code addresses buildings such as the
proposed height, and the code provides specifications on how to engineer systems that will protect
building occupants. They feel they can address the issues with the use of the International Fire Code.
Tukwila City Council Committee of the Whole Minutes
February 25, 2013 Page 6 of 10
They would address the staffing issues for an active call through mutual aid agreements with the
neighboring jurisdictions. If the Tukwila skyline significantly changed over the next few years and
additional high -rise development occurred, there would need to be a discussion with City Administration
about increasing Fire Department staff.
Councilmember Robertson asked for information on a water intrusion system.
Mr. Speck explained state law requires extra protection for potential condominium owners due to the
ownership structure. The state building codes specify that inclusion of a water intrusion system, such as
additional vapor barriers, are required for construction of condominium buildings. This language has
been included in the DA to enable some of the units to be converted to condominiums in the future if the
market changes.
Councilmember Ekberg suggested language relating to the number of residential units be added to
reference "no less than" a specific number of residential units.
Councilmember Seal voiced her support for the proposed project. She feels the residential units are very
important to the successful development, and she requested staff address the language in section 4.4,
"Residential Units," and the minimum number of units to be included in the proposed development.
Councilmember Quinn commented on how well this project would work within the Urban Center. He
asked staff to update the Council on any comments they have received on the proposed development
from surrounding property owners.
Mr. Speck stated Mr. Lee presented the project during a recent Southwest King County Chamber of
Commerce luncheon, and there was an open house at Albert Lee Appliance. One hundred invitations to
the open house were mailed to surrounding properties and businesses, where approximately 6 property
owners attended. The proposed project has received positive feedback.
Councilmember Quinn stated he would like to hear from the public on the proposed development. He
asked Mr. Lee to explain the next steps for the proposed development.
Mr. Lee explained the draft development agreement is the first phase of the preliminary design process.
The proposed project is a major project and it requires a lot of expertise for many consultants. If the
Council approves the draft agreement, they will move forward to engage with the large number of
consultants needed for the project. Once the geo- technical report has been completed, they can move
forward with a design and cost estimates based on that report. Based on the new design and cost data,
they will need to conduct a new feasibility study (projected income) for the project.
Councilmember Kruller commented that having a vibrant development within the Urban Center for visitors
and travelers would be beneficial to the City and the surrounding businesses.
Mr. Speck said staff wanted to address Councilmember Robertson's concerns relating to Fire Department
staff resources during the proposed project design permit review process and the inspection process.
Chris Flores, Acting Fire Chief, stated that while he previously discussed the operational issues
associated with the development, he did not address the impacts to fire prevention staff. A development
of this size could impact one to two full -time Fire Prevention staff with the necessary design review and
ongoing inspections. In the past, the Fire Department was required to fulfill these types of issues through
staff overtime and /or by hiring a retired Fire Prevention expert on a consultant basis to fulfill the required
development activities.
Councilmember Robertson asked if the additional costs associated with additional Fire Prevention review
would be included in the permitting costs. Mr. Speck answered in the affirmative.
Councilmember Duffie thanked Mr. and Mrs. Lee for choosing Tukwila for their proposed development.
Mr. Lee introduced his family in attendance at the meeting this evening.
Tukwila City Council Committee of the Whole Minutes
February 25, 2013 Page 7 of 10
Council President Hougardy voiced her support for the project and for strengthening the language relating
to the minimum number of residential units.
Robert Wiley, partner of Fidelity Northwest Associates, stated they own the property adjacent to the
proposed project site. He stated his partnership is in support of the proposed development.
COUNCIL CONSENSUS EXISTED TO FORWARD THIS ITEM TO THE MARCH 11, 2013 COMMITTEE
OF THE WHOLE MEETING.
REPORTS
a. Mayor
Mayor Haggerton attended the February 20, 2013 Sound Cities Association networking dinner and the
Council Retreat on February 23, 2013.
b. City Council
Councilmember Duffle attended the Council Retreat February 23 -24, 2013.
Councilmember Robertson attended the Council Retreat February 23 -24, 2013. He commended Council
President Hougardy on the changes she has made to Council processes.
Councilmember Kruller attended the Sound Cities Association networking dinner on February 20, 2013,
and the Council Retreat February 23 -24, 2013. She reminded the Councilmembers of the Bowl -a -Thon
benefiting the Tukwila Pantry on March 23, 2013.
Council President Hougardy thanked the Council for participating in the Council Retreat February 23 -24,
2013.
c. Staff
David Cline, City Administrator, thanked the Council for the invitation to the Council Retreat.
d. City Attorney
The City Attorney's presence is not required at Committee of the Whole meetings.
e. Intergovernmental
Kimberly Matej, Government Relations, said she previously distributed a copy of the 2013 legislative
cutoff calendar to the Council. (http: / /www.leq.wa.gov /legislature /pages /cutoff.aspx) She reviewed the
upcoming deadlines for bills in the legislature. Additionally, she reminded the Council to review the
information relating to sequestration and its effect on Washington that was previously distributed.
MISCELLANEOUS
Councilmember Robertson had inquiries relating to the Briscoe / Desimone Levee repair project. He
asked if the proposed levee repair work that is to be performed on the City's portion of the levee violates
the City's Shoreline Master Program.
Jack Pace, Community Development Director, explained prior to beginning any work within a shoreline,
the project must go through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review process. Public Works
has not completed the detailed drawings of the proposed work to be completed on the City's portion of
the levee. The project will be required to comply with the Shoreline Master Program, and at this time
there has not been enough detail presented to Public Works staff for a response to be provided.
Tukwila City Council Committee of the Whole Minutes
February 25, 2013 Page 8 of 10
Councilmember Robertson stated the proposed levee repairs have not been presented to the City
Council. He said the project documentation identifies this project as a City of Kent project. However, 40-
50% of the Briscoe / Desimone levee is within Tukwila. The Council was first notified of this project via
email on February 21, 2013. The Kent City Council conducted a meeting on February 12, 2013 to
discuss the proposed levee repairs. The Tukwila City Council has not had an opportunity to discuss the
Kent proposal relating to the levee repairs. In researching the issue, it appears there are many players in
the project, besides the City of Kent.
He referenced and read from a letter that was sent to the King County Flood Control District (KCFCD)
Board from the Department of Ecology (DOE) relating to the Briscoe / Desimone project. The referenced
letter from DOE supports a proposal submitted by King County for the levee repairs and opposes the City
of Kent's proposal. He is concerned that the proposed project was not presented to the City Council for
discussion prior to this discussion. He said KCFCD will have a meeting on February 26, 2013 to discuss
the proposals and render their decision. Additionally, he referenced a letter from the Mayor to KCFCD
that states the City of Tukwila has been supportive of this proposal." He feels the letter implies that the
City is supportive of the Kent design, and without a detailed design he is unclear how the City could voice
its support for the project. He is concerned that the Council was not informed of the issue, and he feels
this is a policy decision that should be made by the Council. There is indication that the U.S. Department
of Commerce, WRIA 9, and the Department of Ecology all oppose the City of Kent's proposal. Without
detailed project information, the Council is not able to vote on the proposed project. He stated he most
likely would be supportive of the Kent proposal if he had been presented the information, and if he could
be sure it complied with. the City's Shoreline Master Program. He voiced his concern about the City
supporting the proposed levee repairs without first confirming they comply with City regulations.
Council President Hougardy asked if there was a specific request the Council should consider.
Councilmember Robertson explained if he were to make a request of administration, he would ask that
they request the KCFCD Board delay their decision for one month to allow staff to analyze the project
information and provide the Council with detailed project information.
Councilmember Seal asked what ramifications there could be if the City were to move forward with levee
repairs and the project does not comply with the Shoreline Master Program.
Mr. Pace stated staff is processing this project as any other project along the river. Public Works staff will
submit the application for review on the project within Tukwila. The project application will be reviewed,
and they will have to address any environmental review comments and comply with the City's standards.
Councilmember Kruller stated in her opinion this is a policy decision for the Council, and she requested
City Administration speak to this issue.
Mayor Haggerton clarified that he has the ability to sign correspondence on behalf of City Administration.
He joined the Valley Mayors in support of Kent's proposed levee repairs. There was an effort to siphon
off the funds that had been granted to Kent by the Washington State Legislature. He explained the City
of Kent lobbied for the $7 million of funding for the project, which was sent to King County for
disbursement. However, King County had other uses for the funding. The City of Kent was required to go
on the defensive for the funding awarded to them for the Briscoe / Desimone levee project. Kent's
proposed levee repairs are much more environmentally friendly compared to King County's. The King
County proposal included "armoring," which is bad for the fish, and purchasing warehouses in order to set
back the levee. He conveyed the City of Kent has begun the repair work on the levee within their City
limits, and he supports the Kent proposal due to the design and that it does not have an impact on the
businesses within the valley.
David Cline, City Administrator, clarified there will be future actions to be taken by the Council. He
encouraged the Council to contact staff to schedule a tour of the project site. This levee is a key levee
within Tukwila, and staff monitors this site during high -water events.
Councilmember Robertson commented that the Council spent a good deal of time discussing the
proposed development at the former Circuit City site. He stated while that project is in the future, there is
Tukwila City Council Committee of the Whole Minutes
February 25, 2013
Page 9 of 10
significant conflict between several agencies relating to the Briscoe / Desimone levee project. He voiced
his concern that the City supports a project that is opposed by state agencies and could be in conflict with
the Shoreline Master Program.
Council President Hougardy stated she would like to address the process. She asked if the Council
wanted to continue the discussion in a Council Committee or at a future Council meeting.
Councilmember Kruller stated she would like the Council to determine the policy making process.
Mayor Haggerton stated timing was critical on the Valley Mayors' support. While attending a meeting with
Fred Jarrett, King County; Suzette Cooke, Mayor of Kent; Senator Keiser; Senator Fain; Representative
Upthegrove; and Representative Orwell, as well as members of King County Flood Control, the Senators
and Representatives spoke on behalf of Kent and stated the $7 million was awarded to the City of Kent
for their project. If the approved funding was not used for the Kent project, the funding would have been
revoked.
Councilmember Duffie stated he would support calling a Special Meeting to discuss the issue of needed.
However, he would like the City Attorney to be available during that meeting.
Council President Hougardy asked when this item will be presented to a Council Committee.
Mr. Cline explained the Interlocal Agreement between the City and Kent relating to this project will be
forwarded to a Utilities Committee meeting in the future. Mr. Pace said there is not a specific time frame
for the item to be sent to the Council Committee.
Derek Speck, Economic Development Administrator, stated there is an important distinction for
consideration. There are two issues in the immediate term. The first is the work to be performed along
the three outside curve areas of the levee that are the most at risk. He suggested the Council view that
as a separate issue from the second issue, which is the long -term plan for the river. This approach would
take into account all the needs of the area and allow for a balanced response. The report submitted to
the King County Flood Control District by Professor Gilbert talks about the comprehensive plan for the
entire river, to include that some areas of the river require different setbacks. When the comprehensive
plan begins its process in King County, staff will alert the Council and bring that item forward for Council
discussion. Staff is not aware of a time frame for the proposed work along the Tukwila portion of the
levee.
Councilmember Robertson asked that the Mayor, while attending the February 26, 2013 King County
Flood Control District meeting, clarify the letter of support previously submitted was from City
Administration.
Mayor Haggerton commented he has previously acknowledged the letter of support is from City
Administration.
Councilmember Ekberg stated it appears this has been an ongoing issue. Prior to the Briscoe /
Desimone issue, the Council was asked to make a decision at a Regular Meeting on support for a letter to
the Washington State Legislature relating to the proposed vehicle excise and sales tax. He voiced his
concern about the City supporting a proposal that could conflict with the Shoreline Master Program and
other City regulations. If there is something the Council should be aware of, he asked they be informed
sooner rather than later.
Council President Hougardy acknowledged that during a legislative session, there could be times when
some items will require a quick response.
Tukwila City Council Committee of the Whole Minutes
February 25, 2013 Paae 10 of 10
ADJOURNMENT
9:03 p.m. COUNCIL PRESIDENT HOUGARDY DECLARED THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MEETING ADJOURNED.
Kathy Houga
Melissa Hart, Deputy City Clerk
APPROVED AND SIGNED BY THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT ON 03/11/2013
AVAILABLE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE 03/12/2013