SULTAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING
319 MAIN STREET
August 24, 2006
6:00 PM Continued Public Hearing - WWTP Engineering Study
7:00 PM CALL TO ORDER - Pledge of Allegiance and Roll Call
CHANGES/ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
PRESENTATIONS
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC: Citizens are requested to keep comments to a 3 minute maximum to allow time for everyone to speak. It is also requested that you complete a comment from for further contact.
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
PUBLIC HEARINGS
STAFF REPORTS
1) Public Works
2) Grant Report
3) Finance
4) Police
CONSENT AGENDA: The following items are incorporated into the consent agenda and approved by a single motion of the Council.
1) Minutes of the August 10, 2006 regular Council Meeting.
2) Minutes of the July 27, 2006 and August 10, 2006 Public Hearing on Recreational Facility Fees
3) Excused absence of Councilmember Champeaux
4) Approve Contract with Prothman for Building Inspector
5) Confirm the Appointment of the Student Representative
6) Minutes of the August 10, 2006 Closed Record Hearing on AJ’s Place Plat
7) Approval of Vouchers
ACTION ITEMS:
1) Resolution 06-11 - AJ’s Place Preliminary Plat Approval
2) Resolution 06-12 - Vodnick Lane Remand
3) Ordinance 929-06 - Recreational Facillity Fees - 2nd reading
4) Ordinance 934-06 WWTP Report - 1st reading
5) Facility/Rate Charge Study
6) Ordinance 935-06 Police Levy
7) Ordinance 936-06 Special Election
8) Resolution 06-14 Disposal of Property and Relocation of Siren
9) Planing Consultant Agreement
DISCUSSION: Time Permitting
1)
PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS ONLY
COUNCILMEMBER RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS
Executive Session: Real Estate Acquistion
Adjournment - 10:00 PM or at the conclusion of Council business.
ADA NOTICE: City of Sultan Community Center is accessible. Accommodations for persons with disabilities will be provided upon request. Please make arrangements prior to the meeting by calling City Hall at 360-793-2231.
For additional information please contact the City at cityhall@ci.sultan.wa.us or visit our web site at www.ci.sultan.wa.us
Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade
January 2006 the City of Sultan contracted with Brown and Caldwell Consulting firm to write a Facility Plan/Engineering Report for the Upgrade of the WWTP.
The City then selected a Core Design Team consisting of 3 Developers, 3 City Staff, City Engineer, 1 City Councilman, and Brown and Caldwell consulting team. The Core Team held 4 meetings to discuss and select a recommended alternative. The dates of these meetings were April 20, May 9, May 23 and June 2, 2006. From these meetings, Alternative 3, a Membrane Bioreactor Treatment was recommended to City Council at the July 13, 2006 Public Workshop.
To meet the population demands set forth in Snohomish County Comprehensive Plan, the City of Sultan Comprehensive Plan and the City of Sultan General Sewer Plan the upgrade was planned to be constructed in three phases;
Phase I completed Mid 2009 for project cost of $15.2 million which includes $250,000 of short Term Improvements to enhance the existing hydraulics of the existing Treatment Plant, these improvements would be incorporated into the new facility.
Phase II completed by 2017 for a cost of $1.1 million which is additional membrane treatment components.
Phase II completed in 2021 for $1.7 million would serve the projected population to 2029.
The dollar amounts used are projected in out year dollars.
The membrane treatment allows the City of Sultan to stay within the existing foot print of the Wastewater Treatment Plant, avoiding sunken costs, allow for expansion as growth occurs either faster or slower and provides for a possible future water reuse program because of high quality discharge. These improvements are consistent with longer term planning.
July 27, 2006 the City of Sultan submitted a DRAFT copy to the Department of Ecology and Snohomish County PDS. We are expecting final comments from DOE by September 20, 2006.
Authorization to start the Design Phase is pending as this time
Short Term Improvements is being developed now to be installed early 2007, which will generate an additional 206 ERU connections.
Page 2
Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade
Page 2
Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade
Projected start of Phase I construction is December 15, 2008 with this phase being on line by Mid, 2009 providing 1277 additonal ERU’s. The total WWTP Upgrade Project Phase I and Short Term Improvements will provide 1,483 additional ERU’.
As mentioned above, the planning effort and phased improvements will serve the City of Sultan through 2029. This is an adjustable timeline to work with the growth scenario’s for the future of Sultan.
Milestones that are crucial to our project:
· July 13, 2006 Public Hearing (completed)
· August 24, 2006 Extended Public Hearing
· August 24, 2006 First Reading of Ordinance 934-06 by Sultan City Council of the Sultan WWTP Upgrade Engineering Report
· September 14, 2006 Second Reading of Ordinance 934-06 Final Adoption.
· August 29, 2006 Snohomish County Planning Commission Meeting is schedule to proceed with the Docket Briefing for the Remand Cities.
· September 26, 2006 County Council Meeting that will hear the Remand Issues, which City of Sultan is one of the Remand Cities
Respectfully Submitted
Connie Dunn
City of Sultan
Public Works Director
August 18, 2006
SULTAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
ITEM NO: Consent C 1
DATE: August 24, 2006
SUBJECT: Council Minutes
CONTACT PERSON: Laura Koenig, City Clerk
SUMMARY: Attached are the minutes of the August 10, 2006 regular Council meeting as on file in the office of the Clerk.
FISCAL IMPACT:
RECOMMENDED Approve as submitted.
ACTION:
1-06
CITY OF SULTAN COUNCIL MEETING – August 10, 2006
The regular meeting of the Sultan City Council was called to order in the Sultan Community Center by Mayor Tolson. Councilmembers present: Champeaux, Wiediger, Slawson, Seehuus, Flower, Blair and Boyd.
Student Representative: Sonaly Sayavong
ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA:
Action: Add Vodnick Lane Plat Request to Remand
Discussion: Animal Control
PRESENTATIONS: Robin McClelland, from Puget Sound Regional Council provided a presentation on the Vision 2020 plan. There are four alternatives that are being considered and they are seeking public input. Discussion was held regarding population projections, transportation issues and funding, job and home locations and the meeting schedule. It was suggested that a meeting be held on a weekend to allow those who work during the week to attend.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
Robert Criswell: Requested an update on the Sportsman Park project and questioned the $35,000 for the fireplace. (Staff advised that the project is ready to go to bid.)
Ray Kistenmacher: When a new connection occurs, the city is selling the new home a share of the system capacity and if the fee is too low, the existing residents will have to pay the additional costs. It was good to hear the City admit that they lose money on new homes. The city choose not to listen to Katy Isaacson when she recommended an adequate fee to cover the costs of debt and expansion. The new rate study will bring the Council an opportunity to increase the fees to adequate levels.
Loretta Storm: Asked if the city codes set construction times and hours of operation. Staff advised that there are no codes that regulate hours of construction and if that is correct, she would like to see the council address the issue. Asked if it is possible to post the Design Review Board meeting times. Commended the City for placing information on the utility bill. The meeting on the 17th is vital to the public and the police issue was supposed to be the only topic. There was a small notice in paper and flyers around the city but the only notice the people might see is the utility billing. Disappointed that the city has not done a better job of communication.
Josie Fallgatter: In regards to notification, she gets some and not others. Received the Vodnick Lane notice but not the AJ’s Place and she is a party of record in both. There is a change in the status of Vodnick Lane plat from a request to appeal to a request to remand. The request to remand and the Hearing Examiner recommendation are not consistent. They have requested to be vested under a different ordinance, not the one that was in place at the time of application. They have failed to meet the minimum site size under the old ordinance and if they re-file, they can start over.
Robert Keck: Agrees with the other comments on the Vodnick Lane Appeal. It appears they are trying to get around the code. They do not address the level of service for the Police. The City has a meeting scheduled for August 17th and at the last meeting it was decided to have it at the Middle School to accommodate the public and to discuss police service but the notice on the utility bill does not mention the police issue.
Gerry Gibson: The July 27th minutes under discussion notes that the City Attorney advised that a one year operation levy was the only option available to the city, is that correct.
17 -06
CITY OF SULTAN COUNCIL MEETING – August 10, 2006
COUNCILMEMBERS COMMENTS:
Champeaux: Requested an update on the property across the river that was supposed to be cleaned up.
(Chief Walser advised that they are still working with the County to clean up the site.)
Weidiger: Asked if the City could provide more notices or put a notice on the High School sign board.
Slawson: Thanked the garbage crew for cleaning up paper and garbage around the city.
Flower: Noted that the garbage crew does cleanup paper and other things when they see them lying in the streets. Agrees with the comments on the rates and is now frustrated by the turn of events on the sewer rates and the need for a new rate study.
Blair: Noted that education will be the key to passing a police levy and is disappointed to hear that the information is limited. Financial responsibility to current residents should be essential and she has some concerns about the budget being based on growth.
Boyd: Agrees with the comments about the rates. The city needs to entice business with new rooftops or stop development. Don’t want to scare development away but need solutions to prevent future problems.
Mayor Tolson: Introduced Sonaly Sayavong, the new Student Representative. At the meeting on August 17th, the City will be using poll devices to record public opinion. The information received from the County indicates that the average home has a value of $168,000 and pays for about 68% of the services. If the value of homes increase, they will pay for a higher percentage of the service costs. The meeting was set in May to discuss the budget, parks and police services.
STAFF REPORTS:
Public Works: Connie Dunn, Public Works Director advised that there will be meetings on August 14th and 16th to take input on Highway 2. Councilmember Boyd asked if the prior rate study could be updated? Staff advised that it may be able to use the prior study with modifications however, it did not address the proposed upgrade.
Police: Chief Walser advised that the new officers are completing their training period. Briefly discussed the proposal for a School Resource Officer and sharing the expense with the School District. Mayor Tolson will discuss the matter with the School Board.
CONSENT AGENDA:
The following items are incorporated into the consent and approved by a single motion of the Council. On a motion by Councilmember Champeaux, seconded by Councilmember Slawson, the consent agenda was approved as presented. Champeaux – aye; Wiediger – aye; Slawson – aye; Seehuus – aye, abstained on the minutes; Flower – aye; Blair – aye, Boyd – aye, abstained on the minutes.
ACTION ITEMS:
Ordinance 929-06 Recreational Fees: Brief discussion was held on the different fees and the anticipated grant funding. On a motion by Councilmember Blair, seconded by Councilmember Flower, Ordinance 929-06 was introduced and passed on to a second reading with an amendment to change the fee to $3415. All ayes.
Resolution 06-10 Six Year Street Program: Connie Dunn advised that the City is required to adopt a Six Year Street Program. On a motion by Councilmember Seehuus, seconded by Councilmember Flower, Resolution 06-10, Six Year Street Program, was adopted. All ayes.
17 -06
CITY OF SULTAN COUNCIL MEETING - August 10, 2006
Facility Rate Study: Connie Dunn, Public Works Director, provided a list of consultants for the proposed Facility Rate Study and recommended that the Council establish a committee to conduct interviews. Councilmember Seehuus moved to establish a committee to select a consultant for a Facility Rate Study. Seconded by Councilmember Blair. All ayes.
Surplus Property: The City owns a lot on Date Avenue that currently is the site of the emergency siren. The siren will be relocated to a different site and the lot will no longer be needed for municipal purposes. Staff is recommending that the property be declared surplus and that they be authorized to proceed with the disposal of the property. On a motion by Councilmember Seehuus, seconded by Councilmember Champeaux, Parcel 2808320031300 (located on Date Avenue) was declared surplus and staff was authorized to prepare the necessary documents to solicit bids. All ayes.
Vodnick Lane Plat: Staff received a letter from Group Four requesting that the plat be remanded back to the Hearing Examiner. On a motion by Councilmember Boyd, seconded by Councilmember Slawson, the matter was continued to the next council meeting. All ayes.
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Comprehensive Plan Update: Rick Cisar, Community Developer Director, discussed the compliance requirements for the Comprehensive Plan Amendments. To comply with the requirements of the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearing Board the city must adhere to a very aggressive schedule which will require additional staffing. Staff was directed to prepare a budget amendment and proposed contract.
Police Staffing: Chief Walser discussed the cost of overtime and extra officers being used to provide police coverage. Gordon Hey, Finance Director, advised that if the City hired another officer they could mitigate part of the problem. Laura Koenig, Clerk, provided information on the amount of money spent to date for overtime and extra officers. Brief discussion was held on the proposed contract with Monroe, need for a budget amendment and the vacant position. Staff was requested to provide additional information on the budget and funding.
Animal Control: Councilmember Slawson provided additional information from Snohomish County regarding animal control and asked if the police could use portable cages to hold animals while they get a van to transport. Discussion was held regarding the necessary code amendments to deal with dangerous dogs, patrol options, and the financial issues. Staff is working with the City Attorney to complete the code amendments.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Ray Kistenmacher: In regards to the animal problem, it is not just the dogs, the owners are a problem also.
Josie Fallgatter: Thanked the Council for the action on park fees. The City could find funds for the Comprehensive Plan amendment if they required the payment of the $1,000 for the zoning change that has not been collected.
Robert Keck: In regards to the Vodnick Lane appeal, this matter will go back to the Hearing Examiner who will be paid for his expert opinion and then the Council has the option to veto his decision that is based on the facts. They pay him and should listen to what he has to say.
Adjournment: On a motion by Councilmember Flower, seconded by Councilmember Blair, the meeting adjourned at 9:30 PM.
Benjamin Tolson, Mayor
Laura J. Koenig, Clerk
SULTAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
ITEM NO: Consent C 2
DATE: August 24, 2006
SUBJECT: Council Minutes
CONTACT PERSON: Laura Koenig, City Clerk
SUMMARY: Attached are the minutes of the July 27, 2006 and August 10, 2006 Public Hearing on Ordinance 929-06, Recreational Facility Fees as on file in the office of the Clerk.
FISCAL IMPACT:
RECOMMENDED Approve as submitted.
ACTION:
17-06
CITY OF SULTAN PUBLIC HEARING – July 27, 2006
Ordinance 929-06 Park Impact Fees:
The public hearing on Ordinance 920-06, Park Impact Fees was called to order by Mayor Tolson in the Sultan Community Center. Councilmembers present: Champeaux, Wiediger, Slawson, and Flower.
There were no objections to the Council participation.
Staff Report: Rick Cisar, Community Development Director, provided the staff report. The following exhibits were submitted for the record:
1. Affidavit of publication
2. SEPA checklist – no comments
3. Determination of Non-significance
4. Letter to CTED for review sent 1/26/06
4. Letter from CTED acknowledging receipt dated 1/30/06
Staff has completed the Park and Recreational Needs and Impact Fee Analysis identifying the cost of new facilities necessited by new development. The analysis has been reviewed and discussed with the City Council at previous meetings. Basically, the analysis suggested different levels of Impact Fees based on various funding sources such as grants and donations. Ordinance Number 929-06 has been prepared to provide for an increase of the current $300.00 Park Impact Fee to $2,968.00 which provides for an adjustment for real estate taxes. The proposed fee can be adjusted and reduced by anticipating grants and donations to help offset the costs. The Ordinance also revises and clarifies the formula for determining the Impact Fee. In addition, the analysis has been updated to include acquisitions and designations of property to both our available active and passive park lands which included (1) the Boucher Dedication of .41 acres adjacent to Osprey Park (SW corner 1ST and Trout Farm Road), the Skate Board Park .28 acres, and the Water Treatment Plant Property designation of 35 acres.
The proposed Recreational Impact fee Ordinance was sent to the State Department of Community Trade and Economic Development (CTED) for their 60-day review beginning on January 30, 2006. Also, an Enviromental Checklist and Determination of Non Significant (DNS) was issued and sent to reviewing agencies on February 6, 2006. No comments from CTED were received. No comments or appeals were received on the Enviromental Review and Determination.
In addition to the procedural requirements, Staff provided Notice of the DNS issued for Ordinance 929-06 to all Parties of Interest.
The cost to acquire and develop parks will be around $8 million dollars.
Public Input:
Josie Fallgatter: The fiscal impact of raising the fee should be noted. The School District uses the Osprey park field for soccer practice and it is not available for the general public and sometimes the field is closed for maintenance. The City should have an agreement between city and school as they are more of a burden then benefit. The Trail system does not take into account the removal of Turk Trail. The City needs to look at the Park Plan done in 1997 as part of the Comp Plan and it is not included in the binder. Can’t base the fees on what other cities are doing, must charge for a proportionate share of parks
Loretta Storm: The fee is too low and she was glad to see the proposed increase. The City has lost income on both park and traffic impact fees. Lack of effective notice for this meeting concerns her. It was noticed twice in the legal notices but not on the doors at City Hall or on the web page.
CITY OF SULTAN PUBLIC HEARING – July 27, 2006
Ordinance 929-06 Park Impact Fees:
Craig Sears: In regard to impact fees from a developer’s standpoint, they look to see if it is a fair across the board for everyone and that it improves the level of the quality of life for new residents.
Garth York: Asked if the approved projects are vested in the old fees? They plats require tot lots and park improvements. Can’t require them to put in a park and also pay for parks elsewhere. The fee is too low but it is not fair to increase for the new developments. Should increase in small amounts annually instead of one large chunk.
Council:
Discussed the
inclusion of property owned by other entities (School District and Fish and
Wildlife) to calculate the amount of park property available and the amount
needed to meet the level of service in the Comprehensive Plan. The number of
acres per thousand proposed in the Comp Plan is high compared to other cities.
On a motion by Councilmember Flower, seconded by Councilmember Weidiger, the public hearing was continued to August 10, 2006 at 7:00 PM. All ayes.
Continued Hearing Ordinance 929-06– August 10, 2006.
The Continued Hearing on Ordinance 929-06 was opened by Mayor Tolson. All Councilmembers were present.
Staff: Rick Cisar, Community Development Director, discussed the revised fees and proposed land costs and improvements that total about $9.7 million dollars. Recommended a fee of $3,415.
Public:
Loretta Storm: If the council had been evaluating and assessing the fees over the past six year, they would have more funds. Supports the increase.
Josie Fallgatter: Was glad to see the calculations that make the fee as accurate as possible. Should be cautious and not rely on grant funds. Need to raise the fees to cover the cost and do projects whether or not grants funds are received.
Ray Kistenmacher: Congratulated the council for taking action. Those who create the need for the parks, should pay for the parks.
On a motion by Councilmember Flower, seconded by Councilmember Seehuus, the public hearing was closed. All ayes.
Benjamin Tolson, Mayor
Laura J. Koenig, City Clerk
SULTAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
ITEM NO: Consent C 3
DATE: August 24, 2006
SUBJECT: Excused Absence
CONTACT PERSON: Laura Koenig, City Clerk
SUMMARY: Councilmember Champeaux has advised that he will be unable to attend the regular Council meeting on August 24, 2006.
FISCAL IMPACT:
RECOMMENDED Excused absence for Councilmember Champeaux for the
ACTION: August 24, 2006 meeting.
SULTAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
ITEM NO: Consent C 4
DATE: August 24, 2006
SUBJECT: Contract for Building Inspector
CONTACT PERSON: Rick Cisar, Community Development Director
SUMMARY: Due to the sudden illness of Craig Bruner, the City has found it necessary to obtain Building Inspector services to prevent delay in the current construction projects. Prothman has provided a temporary employee to perform inspections at an hourly rate of $42 per hour. It is expected that the services will be needed for a 6-8 week period.
FISCAL IMPACT:
RECOMMENDED Authorize the Mayor to sign the contract with Prothman for
ACTION: Building Inspection Services.
SULTAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
ITEM NO: Consent C 5
DATE: August 24, 2006
SUBJECT: Student Representative
CONTACT PERSON: Mayor Tolson
SUMMARY: In accordance with Ordinance 863-04, the Council must confirm the appointment of a Student Represenative to the Council. Sonaly Sayavong has agreed to serve as the Student Representative for the 2006 school year. She is on the ASB Council at the High School and has expressed an interest in learning more about governmental operations.
FISCAL IMPACT:
RECOMMENDED Confirm the appoint of Sonaly Sayavong as the Student
ACTION: Representative for the 2006 School year.
SULTAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
ITEM NO: Consent C 6
DATE: August 24, 2006
SUBJECT: Council Minutes
CONTACT PERSON: Laura Koenig, City Clerk
SUMMARY: Attached are the minutes of the August 10, 2006 Closed Record Hearing on the AJ’s Place Plat as on file in the office of the Clerk.
FISCAL IMPACT:
RECOMMENDED Approve as submitted.
ACTION:
1-06
CITY OF SULTAN PUBLIC HEARING – August 10, 2006
The Closed Record Hearing and Appeal on the AJ’s Place Plat was called to order in the Sultan Community Center by Mayor Tolson. Councilmembers present: Champeaux, Wiediger, Slawson, Seehuus, Flower, Blair and Boyd.
Mayor Tolson reviewed the procedures for the hearing. There were no objections to the Council participation and there were no conflicts of interest disclosed.
Staff: Rick Cisar, Community Development Director, provided the staff report. The following Exhibits were presented for the record:
1. April 17, 2006 Staff Report and Recommendations
2. May 2, 2006 Hearing Examiner’s Recommendations
3. May 25, 2006 Applicants Appeal of Hearing Examiners Decision Denying Motion for Reconsideration
4. April 10, 2006 Preliminary Plans Skoglund Estates
5. Notice of meeting.
The Hearing Examiner held an Open Record Hearing on May 8, 2006, and a Remand Hearing on July 10, 2006 for the AJ’s Place Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit BSP05-001. Based on the Findings of Fact, Principles of Law, Discusson and Conclusions the testimony and evidence submitted at the Hearings, the Hearing Examiner’s site visit the Hearing Examiner RECOMMENDS that the AJ’s Place Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit Development be Approved subject to the 25 Conditions as outlined on pages 27 through 30 of the Hearing Examiner’s July 12, 2006 Recommendation - Revised on Remand. The Examiner’s Recommendation on page 25 also request City Council to Rule that either (1) A 60 foot wide commercial driveway and median Standard or (2) City Council will grant a modification to the Design Standards and allow a 24 foot wide driveway for the main entrance into the development. The variation in the driveway design to 24 feet will allow for an additional unit to be constructed on the site. The 60 foot wide driveway , as required by code, could potentially create a traffic hazard at the intersection with First Street due to the median requirement to seperate the ingress and egress movements.
The Applicant on, July 20, 2006 submitted an Appeal Request to the Hearing Examiner Condition of Approval #25 (LOS Police Services) on page 30 of the Hearing Examiner’s Recommendation. As noted in the appeal, this Condition is inconsistent with prior determination made by the City Council in Resolutions Nos. 06-06, 06-07 and 6-07,and 06-09A.
The City Council, in considering the Development and Appeal request, has the option to follow (1) the Hearing Examiner’s Recommendation, (2) the Applicants request (page 2 of Appeal) (3) to Approve or Deny the request based on the Council’s own set of Findings and Conclusions. To assist City Council in their evaluation of this project and the Recommendations, Staff has attached the April 15, 2006 Staff Report that provides a project overview.
Applicant:
Dennis Jordan; The applicant would propose using Alternate B for the road design with a 24 foot driveway. This would allow 40 units instead of 39. The ordinance is confusing regarding the process to file an appeal. The appeal was filed on the basis of protesting condition #25 of the Hearing Examiner’s recommendation. The problem with the level of service for police is not a condition they created, however, they are willing to enter into a developer agreement to provide funding for police services. They are asking to be treated the same as the other plats and under the current conditions, they don’t know if they would be allowed to occupy the buildings once they are completed.
CITY OF SULTAN PUBLIC HEARING – August 10, 2006
Public Input:
Josie Fallgatter: Thinks the project is great as it provides in fill. Procedurally, the process was not correct. There was an open record hearing and then it went to Design Review and then it went back to the Hearing Examiner. The retention pond is the buffer area of the wetland. The lighting is proposed on the buildings and not streets and this will make it difficult for police patrol. Lighting that is directed downward instead of outward is better. The issue of the fence around the pond has not been addressed adequately. How will wildlife access the buffer if there is a chain link fence around the area? If the wetland is dedicated to the city, it will need to be maintained. Can they afford the maintenance cost of the critical areas? Misleading to say there is greater level of protection.
Councilmembers:
Boyd: Asked why the driveway was reduced down to 24 feet.
Blair: Asked about trash pickup. Expressed concern about the parking and the dedication of critical areas to the city. The level of service issue has not been clarified to the Hearing Examiner. Asked if the storm water will be pretreated before it goes into the retention pond.
Flower: Agrees that there should be street lighting. The revisions to the street design appears to be safer for those accessing the plat.
Slawson: Asked why they did provide additional parking instead of including an additional unit. Who is responsible for the pond?
Champeaux: The lighting and parking issues need to be addressed.
Mayor Tolson: Asked how high the fence around the pond will be since it is so close to the playground. Who is responsible for maintenance of the wetlands and streets?
Staff: Rick Cisar advised the street was redesigned for safety reasons. The lighting plan is a condition of the plat however, there will be street lights included. There are 17 additional parking spaces in the plat. The homeowners association will be responsible for maintenance of the wetlands and the streets. The drainage system will have filters and bio-swale system and must meet DOE standards.
Dennis Jordon: Parking is always an issue and the plat is designed to meet code and to have the maximum extra spaces. This is different from other projects the Council have reviewed lately as it is an in-fill project. The Hearing Examiner has modified his position based on the council prior decision with some modification. There are no objections to language in the homeowner covenants regarding maintenance of the open space.
Councilmember Boyd moved to direct staff to prepare all three resolutions with all options for the next agenda, seconded by Councilmember Flower. All ayes.
The hearing was closed.
Benjamin Tolson, Mayor
Laura J. Koenig, Clerk
SULTAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
Date: August 24, 2005
Agenda Item #: Consent C 7
SUBJECT: Voucher Approval
CONTACT PERSON: Laura Koenig, City Clerk/Deputy Finance
SUMMARY STATEMENT:
Vouchers will be presented at the Council meeting for approval. We are still working on a blanket approval system under the new program.
FISCAL IMPACTS: Expenditure Required:
RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval as submitted.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
ITEM NO: Action A-1
Resoutions 06-11 A, B,C, and D
AJ’s Place Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit
DATE: August 24, 2006
SUBJECT: Resolution Number 06-11A Approving the AJ’s Place Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit with 40-units and a 24-foot wide driveway entry, Resolution Number 06-11B Approving the AJ’s Place Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit with 39-units and denying a 24-foot wide driveway modification, Resolution 06-11 C Approving the Hearing Examiner Recommendation for AJ’s Place Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for 39-units and LOS for Police Department and denying the modification to allow a 24-foot driveway, Resolution 06-11 D Approving the Hearing Examiner Recommendation for AJ’s Place Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for 40-units and LOS for Police Department and approving the modification to allow a 24-foot driveway.
CONTACT PERSON: Rick Cisar, Director of Community Development
SUMMARY: Staff at the direction of City Council has prepared 4 Resolutions. Resolution Number 06-11A approving the AJ’s Place Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit with 40-units and a 24-foot wide driveway modification, Resolution Number 06-11B Approving the AJ’s Place Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit with 39-units and denying a 24- foot wide driveway modification, Resolution 06-11 C Approving the Hearing Examiner Recommendation for AJ’s Place Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for 39-units and LOS for Police Department and denying the modification to allow a 24-foot driveway, Resolution 06-11 D Approving the Hearing Examiner Recommendation for AJ’s Place Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for 40-units and LOS for Police Department and approving the modification to allow a 24-foot driveway.
FISCAL IMPACT: Preparation and processing of Resolutions.
RECOMMENDATION: In consideration of the information presented at the Closed
ACTION: Record and Appeal Hearing held on August 10, 2006 move for Adoption of Resolution 06-11A, 06-11B, 06-11C or 06-11D.
Note: Accepts recommendation, but with revised findings on concurrency consistent with the three prior applications, approves for 40 lots and grants design modification for 24 foot entry road.
CITY OF SULTAN
Sultan, Washington
RESOLUTION NO. 06-11 A
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SULTAN ACCEPTING THE HEARING EXAMINER’S RECOMMENDATION AS REVISED IN THIS RESOLUTION AND APPROVING THE AJ’S PLACE PRELIMINARY BINDING SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 40 UNITS AND GRANTING A MODIFICATION TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS TO ALLOW A 24 FOOT WIDE DRIVEWAY CURB CUT (PLUS CURB RETURNS) FOR BOTH DRIVEWAYS
WHEREAS Sultan Real Property Investments, LLC filed an application for approval of the AJ’s Place Preliminary Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit;
WHEREAS an open record hearing occurred before the City’s Hearing Examiner on May 8, 2006, denying the application at that time, and the application was remanded to the hearing examiner by the City Council and a remand hearing occurred on July 10, 2006, with the Hearing Examiner making a “Recommendation Revised on Remand” dated July 12, 2006;
WHEREAS the application came before the City Council for a closed record hearing and appeal by the applicant on the “Recommendation Revised on Remand” on August 10, 2006;
WHEREAS the City Council has determined based upon the law and the facts to accept the Hearing Examiner’s findings of fact in part, to accept the Hearing Examiner’s Conclusions of Law in part, and to and to accept as revised herein the Hearing Examiner’s recommendation and approve the application;
NOW, THEREFORE:
A. The City Council accepts the Recommendation Revised on Remand of the Hearing Examiner dated July 12, 2006, as further revised by this Resolution and approves the Preliminary Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for 40 dwelling units and grants modification of the City’s design standards to allow a 24 foot wide driveway curb cut (plus curb returns) for the two driveways on the conditions set out in the Recommendation Revised on Remand by the Hearing Examiner.
B. Commencing at page 2 of the Hearing Examiner’s Recommendation Revised on Remand, the Hearing Examiner made 30 Findings of Fact. The Council adopts the Hearing Examiner’s Findings of Fact 1-16, 25- 29 and 30. Findings of Fact 17 to 24 are rejected. Based upon the evidence in the record and judicial notice the Council makes the following Findings of Fact:
1. On April 25, 2006, the City Council enacted Ordinance 922-06 annexing 35 acres adjoining the City’s water treatment plant to the City and designating said property for public use, including public parks. This property is suitable for public park use, and should be counted in the land available as public park in the City. The addition of this acreage provides sufficient additional public park facilities in the City so that the City’s level of service for parks is still met, notwithstanding this application.
2. Applicant offered at the open record hearing a developer agreement to pay the developer’s pro rata share for one year of the cost of a police officer to mitigate the impacts of this development. Thereafter, the revenues from real estate taxes on the increased value of the property will be available to the City’s general fund.
C. Beginning at page 16 of the Hearing Examiner’s Recommendation Revised on Remand are 40 Conclusions of Law. The Council adopts Conclusions of Law 1-4, 6-16, 30-40. The Council rejects Conclusions of Law 5, and 17-29 and makes the following Conclusions of Law and Conditions:
1. The proposed Preliminary Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit are found to be in conformance with the general purposes of the Comprehensive Plan and Planning Standards and specifications as adopted by the laws of the State of Washington and the City of Sultan.
2. The proposal meets BSP Criterion 2. DRB review has occurred, and the DRB recommends approval. The better driveway design allows for 40 units, through a 24 foot driveway curb cut (plus curb returns) and driveway. As such a modification in the design standards should be granted.
3. Based upon Findings of Fact 25-29, incorporated above, this proposed development does not lower the existing level of service for parks below the adopted LOS in the comprehensive plan.
4. The City’s existing level of service for police is below the adopted LOS in the comprehensive plan. The LOS failure for police, however, was not caused by this proposed development, and further reduction in the LOS caused by this proposed development is modest by comparison to the existing deficiency.
5. The Council takes notice of the recommendations in the Prothman Report accepted by the Council and Ordinance 900-06. The City has adopted a utility tax applicable to its municipal utilities and has received recommendations for additional tax options, including a utility tax on cable television service, an increased real estate excise tax, and a B & O tax. Other funding sources include potential developer loans to advance the receipt of payment of needed funds, and monies contributed by proposed development for their impacts on the LOS. A combination of developer agreements and public funds will put in place the required public services for police concurrent with development impacts, and provide appropriate strategies for the six years from the time of development to achieve the necessary police LOS as now established or as subsequently revised.
6. The Council takes notice of the Applicant’s offer at the open record hearing to deliver to the City a Developer Agreement to pay Applicant’s incremental share for a police officer for one year.
7. Based upon the foregoing, this proposed development is deemed concurrent for police.
PASSED BY THE Sultan City Council and APPROVED by the Mayor this _____ day of ______________________ 2006.
CITY OF SULTAN
By___________________________
Ben Tolson, Mayor
Attest:
By______________________________
Laura Koenig, City Clerk
Note: Accepts recommendation, with revised findings on concurrency consistent with the three prior applications, approves for 39 lots and rejects design modification and requires 60 foot entry road.
CITY OF SULTAN
Sultan, Washington
RESOLUTION NO. 06-11 B
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SULTAN ACCEPTING THE HEARING EXAMINER’S RECOMMENDATION AS REVISED IN THIS RESOLUTION AND APPROVING THE AJ’S PLACE PRELIMINARY BINDING SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 39 UNITS AND DENYING A MODIFICATION TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS TO ALLOW A 24 FOOT WIDE DRIVEWAY CURB CUT (PLUS CURB RETURNS) FOR BOTH DRIVEWAYS
WHEREAS Sultan Real Property Investments, LLC filed an application for approval of the AJ’s Place Preliminary Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit;
WHEREAS an open record hearing occurred before the City’s Hearing Examiner on May 8, 2006, denying the application at that time, and the application was remanded to the hearing examiner by the City Council and a remand hearing occurred on July 10, 2006, with the Hearing Examiner making a “Recommendation Revised on Remand” dated July 12, 2006;
WHEREAS the application came before the City Council for a closed record hearing and appeal by the applicant on the “Recommendation Revised on Remand” on August 10, 2006;
WHEREAS the City Council has determined based upon the law and the facts to accept the Hearing Examiner’s findings of fact in part, to accept the Hearing Examiner’s Conclusions of Law in part, and to and to accept as revised herein the Hearing Examiner’s recommendation and approve the application;
NOW, THEREFORE:
A. The City Council accepts the Recommendation Revised on Remand of the Hearing Examiner dated July 12, 2006, as further revised by this Resolution and approves the Preliminary Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for 39 dwelling units and denies modification of the City’s design standards to allow a 24 foot wide driveway curb cut (plus curb returns) for the two driveways on the conditions set out in the Recommendation Revised on Remand by the Hearing Examiner.
B. Commencing at page 2 of the Hearing Examiner’s Recommendation Revised on Remand, the Hearing Examiner made 30 Findings of Fact. The Council adopts the Hearing Examiner’s Findings of Fact 1-5, 7-16, 25- 29 and 30. Findings of Fact 17 to 24 are rejected. Based upon the evidence in the record and judicial notice the Council makes the following Findings of Fact:
1. On April 25, 2006, the City Council enacted Ordinance 922-06 annexing 35 acres adjoining the City’s water treatment plant to the City and designating said property for public use, including public parks. This property is suitable for public park use, and should be counted in the land available as public park in the City. The addition of this acreage provides sufficient additional public park facilities in the City so that the City’s level of service for parks is still met, notwithstanding this application.
2. Applicant offered at the open record hearing a developer agreement to pay the developer’s pro rata share for one year of the cost of a police officer to mitigate the impacts of this development. Thereafter, the revenues from real estate taxes on the increased value of the property will be available to the City’s general fund.
3. For the purposes of city code, this is a multi-family development. City design standards require a sixty foot road or driveway. Preserving a 60 foot entry better accords with the streetscape the city wishes to preserve for this type of development.
The 16 foot wide panhandle is proposed to be dedicated to the City which intends to keep if for pedestrian access to the School District property.
Three recreation areas are proposed. Two will house play equipment; the third will be a passive play area in the northeast corner of the site. A trail and bridge will provide pedestrian access across the wetland to the passive area.
The wetland and stream will not be altered other than for the trail crossing. SRPI proposes to reduce the required width of the wetland and stream buffer and to place the detention pond party within the required buffer by using the Innovative Design provisions of SMC 16.80.100. Extensive revegetation of the wetland buffer is proposed to enhance its functions and values. The result will be a wetland with higher functions and values than the present system.
C. Beginning at page 16 of the Hearing Examiner’s Recommendation Revised on Remand are 40 Conclusions of Law. The Council adopts Conclusions of Law 1-4, 6-16, 30-40. The Council rejects Conclusions of Law 5, and 17-29 and makes the following Conclusions of Law and Conditions:
2. The proposed Preliminary Binding Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit are found to be in conformance with the general purposes of the Comprehensive Plan and Planning Standards and specifications as adopted by the laws of the State of Washington and the City of Sultan.
2. The proposal meets BSP Criterion 2. DRB review has occurred, and the DRB recommends approval. It is not in the City’s best interest to modify its design standards, and the entry road should be built in accordance with those standards.
3. Based upon Findings of Fact 25-29, incorporated above, this proposed development does not lower the existing level of service for parks below the adopted LOS in the comprehensive plan.
8. The City’s existing level of service for police is below the adopted LOS in the comprehensive plan. The LOS failure for police, however, was not caused by this proposed development, and further reduction in the LOS caused by this proposed development is modest by comparison to the existing deficiency.
9. The Council takes notice of the recommendations in the Prothman Report accepted by the Council and Ordinance 900-06. The City has adopted a utility tax applicable to its municipal utilities and has received recommendations for additional tax options, including a utility tax on cable television service, an increased real estate excise tax, and a B & O tax. Other funding sources include potential developer loans to advance the receipt of payment of needed funds, and monies contributed by proposed development for their impacts on the LOS. A combination of developer agreements and public funds will put in place the required public services for police concurrent with development impacts, and provide appropriate strategies for the six years from the time of development to achieve the necessary police LOS as now established or as subsequently revised.
10. The Council takes notice of the Applicant’s offer at the open record hearing to deliver to the City a Developer Agreement to pay Applicant’s incremental share for a police officer for one year.
11. Based upon the foregoing, this proposed development is deemed concurrent for police.
PASSED BY THE Sultan City Council and APPROVED by the Mayor this _____ day of ______________________ 2006.