Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning and Economic Development Committee - 10/02/1990 crry of TXetd CITY OF KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT (206) 859-3390 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE October 2, 1990 4: 00 pm Committee Members Present Planning Staff Jon Johnson, Chair James P. Harris Christi Houser Fred Satterstrom Leona Orr Lin Ball Margaret Porter HUMAN SERVICES ROUNDTABLE UPDATE (L. BALL) Senior Planner Lin Ball passed out the Roundtable's Family Violence Work group's final plan entitled, "The Challenge: Building an Effective Response to Family Violence" . The second item that was passed out was the Human Services Roundtable Family Violence Project state Legislative Agenda for the Roundtable to take to the legislature to advocate for family violence. The Roundtable at the September meeting accepted the work which the Family Violence Work Group has completed, including development of a comprehensive Family Violence System, and a proposed funding mechanism to put the system into place. The RT also adopted a Legislative Agenda for the RT Family Violence Project. The main funding for the System in 1991 would come from the cities' commitment of a portion of its Law/Safety/Justice money. Ms. Ball reported that the Law, Safety and Justice Measure did pass. There is now funding available. Ms. Ball updated the Commission on the Human Services Housing levy. Originally in August the County Housing Finance Master Plan was going to be forward to the county Executive. This has been delayed due to the Regional Work Group doing some additional work on the plan. The process and timing has changed in that this Plan will be forwarded to communities and cities for their review prior to it going to the County Executive. This way input can be integrated into the Plan that is forwarded to the County Executive. The Plan was to be mailed out the week of October 2 . Community forums will be held around the County in different areas to review the Plan. The County staff will be coming to the City to talk with us. A potential housing levy could, at the earliest, be in February but more likely will be in the Fall. The housing levy would contain a small portion for housing related services. It has not been decided at this time how to move forward with a separate human services levy. The Roundtable has a concern that service dollars should not be tied to a levy which is temporary; it needs a permanent funding source. 1 Planning Department City Council Planning Committee October 2, 1990 SODS CREEK INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT (F. SATTERSTROM) Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom mentioned this has been the third time that this agreement has come back to the City for signature with Tim Hill's signature on it. The City of Kent has always responded quickly to the County. Mr. Satterstrom gave a history of delays that has occurred in the last few years, which was also given in the memo in the agenda packet. Mr. Satterstrom passed out Comparisons between the City and County wording of the Proposed Soos Creek Cooperate Planning Agreement. The wording changes to five items were discussed at the meeting. The recommended action stated in the agenda packet is as follows: "The Planning Department staff recommends that the City Council Planning Committee approved the proposed Soos Creek Cooperative Planning Agreement and place it on the consent calendar at the next available City Council meeting. " Councilmember Christi Houser made a MOTION and Councilmember Leona Orr SECONDED for this agreement to go on the City Council Consent Calendar for October 16, 1990 for approval. The MOTION approved. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT FUNDING (F. SATTERSTROM) Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom reported on these six items (SEE memo included in agenda packet) . According to a formula, Kent is eligible to receive $62 ,835. However, the City must agree to perform certain conditions to receive this money. In order to be eligible to received the projected funds, cities in King County must agree to work cooperatively to accomplish the objectives of the Growth Management Act. Listed below are the six conditions listed in the memo that the City would agree to perform: 1. Designate the King County Planning Directors as the group that will manage the completion of work program tasks; 2. Send a representative to participate in regional technical forums on critical areas, urban growth boundaries and regional data sharing. 2 Planning Department City Council Planning Committee October 2, 1990 Mr. Satterstrom stated that the above two items were mandated by the Act. Further, Kent would want to coordinate with the County on these items. 3 . Agree to the preliminary grant funds distribution formula developed by the Planning Directors group. Mr. Satterstrom commented there was a base of $35, 000 and according to our population a prorated share of all monies available would be $62,835. 4. Designate King County as the jurisdiction that will accept grant funds from the Department of Community Development and disburse them to the cities. Mr. Satterstrom stated the Department of Community Development (DCD) requested the County to accept and disburse the funds to reduce paperwork. 5. Submit a short written description of a high priority project which the City intends to work on in this funding year. Mr. Satterstrom passed out a memo concerning this description and proposed changes (SEE explanation on page 5) . 6. Complete the Growth Management Needs Assessment and return it to the State Department of Community Development by January 1, 1991. Mr. Satterstrom stated that the above items are the conditions that must be agreed to in order to receive the money. The conditions are delineated in the Work Program (SEE Attachment A in agenda packet) . According to a September 24, 1990, memo some subtle changes have been made to the Work Program (SEE "Attachment All passed out at the meeting) . Mr. Satterstrom discussed the changes as follows: 1. RESOURCE AND CRITICAL LANDS TECHNICAL FORUM: The City is agreeing as mandated by the Act to work with the County to have uniform definitions and a consistent designation process to identify resource in critical lands. 3 Planning Department City Council Planning Committee October 2, 1990 2 . URBAN GROWTH AREAS DESIGNATION (relates to the Soos Creek Plan) : The City agrees to work with the County in urban growth designations. Mr. Satterstrom noted on page 3, in 1991, some of the first cities that they intend to work with respect to urban growth boundaries are the valley cities: Auburn, Kent and Renton. One of the reasons why is because of the Soos Creek Plateau Plan. The County has the responsibility of doing the urban growth areas and designating the boundaries. In 1992, other cities will be doing this. 3 . COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REGIONAL GOALS: The City will be working with King County. The County will be having a stronger role in reviewing their Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Satterstrom quote on page 4 in the middle of the Actions section as follows: "The cities will actively participate in the Comprehensive Plan Review, through the King County Suburban Cities Association, and, where appropriate, through direct involvement and discussions with the County. At a minimum, each city will be responsible for identifying any conflict or inconsistency between their own plans and policies, and any proposed regional policies for King County. Cities should also make suggestions for resolving any such conflict or inconsistency. " Mr. Satterstrom stated the burden is on us, The City, to resolve any of these conflicts. Mr. Satterstrom stated this is a new task and was not in the original Work Program. 4 . GROWTH MANAGEMENT DATA SHARING GROUP: The City will be getting together with the County to find some comparing data collection and tabulation or some common methods of collecting information. 5. WORK PROGRAMS FOR INDIVIDUAL KING COUNTY JURISDICTIONS: On page 5 are some subtle changes. Originally, it was the City's understanding that the City would tell the County what the City was going to be doing; e.g. data collection or working on a sensitive area ordinance. Once the City told the County what the City would be doing, the City would get a lump sum of money and the money would be used to accomplish the task. However, in the final paragraph, last sentence, changes were made as follows: 4 Planning Department City Council Planning Committee October 2, 1990 "Milestones and timelines are the two key words in completing this requirement as they will be used as the basis for measuring progress and disbursing funds during this first year" . Mr. Satterstrom stated that this is a grant and will be monitored by the County, and the progress made will be measured and funds will be disbursed accordingly. The Planning Department had originally understood this differently. The County will be performing a more key and central role not only in disbursing funds but in evaluating progress. Councilmember Leona Orr made the MOTION and Councilmember Christie Houser SECONDED to approve the proposed Resolution accepting the grant funds to implement the Growth Management Act of 1990 and to recommend this to full Council with the inclusion of the revised Attachment A with the provision that this be treated as grant money so that the Planning Department has access to the funds before the funds will become available from actuality from the State. The MOTION carried. It was decided to change the meeting time to 4: 30 p.m. instead of 4: 00 p.m. and meet in the Court Room at Kent City Hall. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 4: 55 p.m. 5 trey of len CITY OF KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT (206) 859-3390 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE October 2 , 1990 4 : 00 pm Committee Members Present Planning Staff Jon Johnson, Chair James P. Harris Christi Houser Fred Satterstrom Leona Orr Lin Ball Margaret Porter HUMAN SERVICES ROUNDTABLE UPDATE (L. BALL) Senior Planner Lin Ball passed out the Roundtable's Family Violence Work group's final plan entitled, "The Challenge: Building an Effective Response to Family Violence" . The second item that was passed out was the Human Services Roundtable Family Violence Project state Legislative Agenda for the Roundtable to take to the legislature to advocate for family violence. The Roundtable at the September meeting accepted the work which the Family Violence Work Group has completed, including development of a comprehensive Family Violence System, and a proposed funding mechanism to put the system into place. The RT also adopted a Legislative Agenda for the RT Family Violence Project. The main funding for the System in 1991 would come from the cities ' commitment of a portion of its Law/Safety/Justice money. Ms. Ball reported that the Law, Safety and Justice Measure did pass. There is now funding available. Ms. Ball updated the Commission on the Human Services Housing levy. Originally in August the County Housing Finance Master Plan was going to be forward to the county Executive. This has been delayed due to the Regional Work Group doing some additional work on the plan. The process and timing has changed in that this Plan will be forwarded to communities and cities for their review prior to it going to the County Executive. This way input can be integrated into the Plan that is forwarded to the County Executive. The Plan was to be mailed out the week of October 2 . Community forums will be held around the County in different areas to review the Plan. The County staff will be coming to the City to talk with us. A potential housing levy could, at the earliest, be in February but more likely will be in the Fall. The housing levy would contain a small portion for housing related services. It has not been decided at this time how to move forward with a separate human services levy. The Roundtable has a concern that service dollars should not be tied to a levy which is temporary; it needs a permanent funding source. 1 Planning Department City Council Planning Committee October 2 , 1990 SOOS CREEK INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT (F. SATTERSTROM) - Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom mentioned this has been the third time that this agreement has come back to the City for signature with Tim Hill 's signature on it. The City of Kent has always responded quickly to the County. Mr. Satterstrom gave a history of delays that has occurred in the last few years, which was also given in the memo in the agenda packet. Mr. Satterstrom passed out Comparisons between the City and County wording of the Proposed Soos Creek Cooperate Planning Agreement. The wording changes to five items were discussed at the meeting. The recommended action stated in the agenda packet is as follows: "The Planning Department staff recommends that the City Council Planning Committee approved the proposed Soos Creek Cooperative Planning Agreement and place it on the consent calendar at the next available City Council meeting. " Councilmember Christi Houser made a MOTION and Councilmember Leona Orr SECONDED for this agreement to go on the City Council Consent Calendar for October 16, 1990 for approval. The MOTION approved. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT FUNDING (F. SATTERSTROM) Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom reported on these six items (SEE memo included in agenda packet) . According to a formula, Kent is eligible to receive $62 ,835. However, the City must agree to perform certain conditions to receive this money. In order to be eligible to received the projected funds, cities in King County must agree to work cooperatively to accomplish the objectives of the Growth Management Act. Listed below are the six conditions listed in the memo that the City would agree to perform: 1. Designate the King County Planning Directors as the group that will manage the completion of work program tasks; 2 . Send a representative to participate in regional technical forums on critical areas, urban growth boundaries and regional data sharing. 2 Planning Department City Council Planning Committee October 2, 1990 Mr. Satterstrom stated that the above two items were mandated by the Act. Further, Kent would want to coordinate with the County on these items. 3 . Agree to the preliminary grant funds distribution formula developed by the Planning Directors group. Mr. Satterstrom commented there was a base of $35, 000 and according to our population a prorated share of all monies available would be $62, 835. 4. Designate King County as the jurisdiction that will accept grant funds from the Department of Community Development and disburse them to the cities. Mr. Satterstrom stated the Department of Community Development (DCD) requested the County to accept and disburse the funds to reduce paperwork. 5. Submit a short written description of a high priority project which the City intends to work on in this funding year. Mr. Satterstrom passed out a memo concerning this description and proposed changes (SEE explanation on page 5) . 6. Complete the Growth Management Needs Assessment and return it to the State Department of Community Development by January 1, 1991. Mr. Satterstrom stated that the above items are the conditions that must be agreed to in order to receive the money. The conditions are delineated in the Work Program (SEE Attachment A in agenda packet) . According to a September 24, 1990, memo some subtle changes have been made to the Work Program (SEE "Attachment All passed out at the meeting) . Mr. Satterstrom discussed the changes as follows: 1. RESOURCE AND CRITICAL LANDS TECHNICAL FORUM: The City is agreeing as mandated by the Act to work with the County to have uniform definitions and a consistent designation process to identify resource in critical lands. 3 Planning Department City Council Planning Committee October 2 , 1990 2 . URBAN GROWTH AREAS DESIGNATION (relates to the Soos Creek Plan) : The City agrees to work with the County in urban growth designations. Mr. Satterstrom noted on page 3, in 1991, some of the first cities that they intend to work with respect to urban growth boundaries are the valley cities: Auburn, Kent and Renton. One of the reasons why is because of the Soos Creek Plateau Plan. The County has the responsibility of doing the urban growth areas and designating the boundaries. In 1992 , other cities will be doing this. 3 . COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REGIONAL GOALS: The City will be working with King County. The County will be having a stronger role in reviewing their Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Satterstrom quote on page 4 in the middle of the Actions section as follows: "The cities will actively participate in the Comprehensive Plan Review, through the King County Suburban Cities Association, and, where appropriate, through direct involvement and discussions with the County. At a minimum, each city will be responsible for identifying any conflict or inconsistency between their own plans and policies, and any proposed regional policies for King County. Cities should also make suggestions for resolving any such conflict or inconsistency. " Mr. Satterstrom stated the burden is on us, The City, to resolve any of these conflicts. Mr. Satterstrom stated this is a new task and was not in the original Work Program. 4 . GROWTH MANAGEMENT DATA SHARING GROUP: The City will be getting together with the County to find some comparing data collection and tabulation or some common methods of collecting information. 5. WORK PROGRAMS FOR INDIVIDUAL KING COUNTY JURISDICTIONS: On page 5 are some subtle changes. Originally, it was the City' s understanding that the City would tell the County what the City was going to be doing; e.g. data collection or working on a sensitive area ordinance. Once the City told the County what the City would be doing, the City would get a lump sum of money and the money would be used to accomplish the task. However, in the final paragraph, last sentence, changes were made as follows: 4 Planning Department City Council Planning Committee October 2, 1990 "Milestones and timelines are the two key words in completing this requirement as they will be used as the basis for measuring progress and disbursing funds during this first year" . Mr. Satterstrom stated that this is a grant and will be monitored by the County, and the progress made will be measured and funds will be disbursed accordingly. The Planning Department had originally understood this differently. The County will be performing a more key and central role not only in disbursing funds but in evaluating progress. Councilmember Leona Orr made the MOTION and Councilmember Christie Houser SECONDED to approve the proposed Resolution accepting the grant funds to implement the Growth Management Act of 1990 and to recommend this to full Council with the inclusion of the revised Attachment A with the provision that this be treated as grant money so that the Planning Department has access to the funds before the funds will become available from actuality from the State. The MOTION carried. It was decided to change the meeting time to 4:30 p.m. instead of 4 : 00 p.m. and meet in the Court Room at Kent City Hall. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 4: 55 p.m. 5