Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-08-2010 - Supplemental MaterialsExhibit B City Medina Normandy Clyde Hill Burien Total Population 2,970.00 6,485.00 2,815.00 31,890.00 44,160.00 {ERZ760308.XLS;1/99910.002222/ } % of Pop Initial Payment 7% $ 2,500.00 15% $ 2,500.00 6% $ 2,500.00 72% $ 2,500.00 100% $ 10,000.00 Pro Rata Distribution $ 336.28 $ 734.26 $ 318.73 $ 3,610.73 $ 5,000.00 Total Payments $ 2,836.28 $ 3,234.26 $ 2,818.73 $ 6,110.73 $ 15,000.00 *ckw-wk 4-b 043-&' (3(B1(o co-vwu (fit) Page 1 of 1 Rachel Baker From: Michael Luis [luisassociates@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 2:17 PM To: Donna Hanson Cc: Rachel Baker Subject: Please distribute to councilmembers before March 8 Meeting Councilmembers: We are opposed to the proposal to allow the City to lease property in residential areas for a temporary City Hall. It has been longstanding policy in the City of Medina to disallow any non-residential uses in residential areas. Furthermore, the City: • Has instituted strict mitigation policies for temporary activities, such as construction, so as to minimize any disruption to residential areas. Strongly discourages on -street parking and prohibits on -street parking for any business use. Does not allow home businesses to have more than one employee on -site. The proposed movement of City Hall to a neighborhood setting would violate the spirit and intent of all of these policies: temporary disruptive activity, on -street parking and multiple employees in a residential area. A basic principle of good government is that governments should not exempt themselves from their own policies. City should, therefore, not exempt itself from its own zoning, planning, parking and other policies. The use of temporary, modular office space in Medina Park, and the use of facilities at St. Thomas, would seem an excellent solution to the City's office needs, and the additional cost would not be substantial. We urge the Council not to approve an ordinance that allows for the temporary location of City Hall in a residential area and to concentrate on other options. Sincerely, Maryann and Michael Luis 2230 Evergreen Point Road 3/8/2010 Page 1 of 1 Rachel Baker From: Donna Hanson Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 4:41 PM To: Rachel Baker Subject: FW: Temporary city hall From: Jan R [mailto:jan-medina@msn.com] Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 9:07 PM To: City Council Mail Subject: Temporary city hall To Council Members: I am opposed to the use of a residence at 2205-78th Ave NE, Medina for a temporary city hall. While it may be the least expensive option, I think other considerations should be taken into account before a final decision is made. There is not enough parking at that location, it will be disruptive to the neighborhood, it is a non- conforming use in a residential area, and it will turn narrow local streets, most with open culverts and no sidewalks, into a parking lot not to mention the additional traffic that a city hall will attract. It will be difficult for emergency vehicles, particularly fire trucks, to access property. I don't think it is fair to foist a commercial operation on a residential neighborhood and disrupt the peace and quiet, even on a temporary basis. There are far better options available than the one recommended and I suggest that not enough consideration for the neighbors has been done on the matter other than financial ones. Jan Roehr 2233-77th Ave. NE Medina, WA 98039 3/8/2010 Page 1 of 3 Rachel Baker From: Janie Lee Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 4:42 PM To: Rachel Baker Cc: ten51 @comcast.net Subject: RE: Temporary City Hall concerns. Rachel, Please distribute the following email as requested by SB Orishak. Thank you. Janie From: Brian and Shari [mailto:ten51@comcast.net] Sent: Mon 3/8/2010 4:04 PM To: Janie Lee Subject: Temporary City Hall concerns. To the Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and the Medina City Council Members; This letter is submitted to the council members to address the feasibility of the proposed temporary city hall option of leasing a home in a residential neighborhood within the City. This letter, in particular addresses the proposed location at 2205 78th Ave NE (Option A) which is located at the intersection of NE 22nd Street or 78th Ave NE, and the impact that it will have on the neighborhood. This location is particularly ill -suited for the location of a temporary City Hall for a number of reasons. Street width and existing traffic: To get to this proposed temporary City Hall Site, access is through the neighborhood from the primary streets of Evergreen Point Road (76th Ave NE) and NE 24th Street. The residence is sited at the intersection of two very narrow streets: NE 22nd Street or 78th Ave NE. These two streets are only wide enough to accommodating two passing automobiles. If any vehicles are parked along either of these streets, only one auto can pass on the street. During block parties in this neighborhood, only a singe road block is necessary to span either of these streets, while in other areas of the City, two are required. This neighborhood can accommodate the traffic that currently exists, but any increase in traffic flow would negatively affect this neighborhood. Case in point: In the recent past, numerous traffic measurements have been petitioned by the residents and implemented by City Hall as an effort to reduced traffic flow through the particular area of Medina. These measures include: Second set of Stop Signs were placed at the adjacent intersections to create a 4-way stop intersections. Additional Stop Signs were placed at the intersection of NE 22nd Street P.YQIX11 Page 2 of 3 and 78th Ave NE, and at NE 22nd Street and 77th Ave NE in an attempt to slow traffic and reroute vehicles away from this area. Signage was introduced to prevent traffic exiting Overlake Golf and Country Club from cutting through the neighborhood and route that traffic away from the neighborhood and directly to Evergreen Point Road. This was accomplished by placing a "No Right Turn" sign at the intersection of NE 16th and 77th Ave NE to prevent cars and delivery trucks from turning onto 77th Ave NE . Additional traffic in this neighborhood that would accompany the relocation of City Hall (albeit temporary) would not be beneficial to this area. By locating City Hall (temporary) in this neighborhood would undo all the concerns that the residents of this area in particular have regarding traffic problems. Bear in mind this area, first and foremost, is a residential neighborhood that can not support the additional traffic that is associated with City Hall. While in contrast, both the options of portable trailers in a City Park and Commercial space in Bellevue have the benefit of easily access. Either location is situated off primary avenues, they afford ease of access and limit neighborhood disruption. Sidewalks: There are no sidewalks adjacent to either street where the residence is located: NE 22nd Street or 78th Ave NE, nor are there sidewalks on the neighboring streets. Residents of this neighborhood walk on the street. When families or dog walkers are walking down the street, passing vehicles must approach with caution and pass on the opposite side of the street. Introducing a greater traffic flow to this neighborhood would greatly affect the safety of the residents of the area both during the day and the evenings when public meetings are held. Both the options of portable trailers in a City Park and Commercial space in Bellevue have parking directly adjacent to the proposed sites. Parking: In the Medina City Council Meeting Agenda Bill Item OB-3 stated that the "Second Residence" that on street parking is available within 'h of a block. There is actually limited parking in that location. Both the options of portable trailers in a City Park and Commercial space in Bellevue offer greater parking accommodations than either single family home options. Lighting: It is a dark neighborhood at night as is all of Medina. There exist a single street light at each intersection. This lack of lighting combined with narrow streets, lack of sidewalks and distant parking leads to the question why this particular single family home would be a good fit for a temporary City Hall. Again, both the options that utilize of portable trailers in a City Park, and Commercial space in Bellevue offer easy access, parking and lighting. Staff setup for meetings is excluded from the Option A plan (the proposed location at 2205 78th Ave NE) and should be included in that option as well. No including the staff setup requirements for this site is a mistake and misrepresents the benefits. Additionally, the many opportunities to place temporary trailers Medina Park are overlooked 3/8/2010 Page 3 of 3 The apron that is required would require a site plan evaluation that could be used for both the proposed Medina Park Shelter and additional rest room building. The required asphalt (or concrete) parking lot that remains after the portable trailers are removed could be used as the footing and base for the proposed picnic shelter. The cost of that footing can be than be amortized into the cost of the shelter. This future use of the parking lot apron would reduce the cost associated with Portable Trailer in Medina Park option below what is stated in the total cost. I am against placing City Hall albeit temporary in the residential neighborhoods in Medina. In particular the single family house located at 2205 78th Ave NE is not a good fit for the requirements for a temporary City Hall. Contrary to what is stated in the documents supplied by City Hall, neighbors are not, I repeat: Are Not supportive of a City Hall in this location. strongly urge council members not to sign the lease on this property. It bears repeating that this area, first and foremost, is a residential neighborhood. Sincerely, SIB Orishak 2208 78th Ave NE Medina, WA 98039 3/8/2010 Page 1 of 1 Rachel Baker From: Donna Hanson Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 4:42 PM To: Rachel Baker Subject: FW: Please Forward to the Members of Medina City Council in Advance of the Monday, March 8th, Meeting. Thank you!! From: Odegard Family [mailto:rlodie2@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 4:19 PM To: Donna Hanson Subject: Please Forward to the Members of Medina City Council in Advance of the Monday, March 8th, Meeting. Thank you!! To the members of Medina City Council, I am responding to the issue of temporarily re -locating city hall to a residential location. I have heard that council members were told that the initial response from neighbors was favorable. I live one block from one of the proposed locations and I just learned of this through an upset neighbor. I am wondering who has been polled. I have read Michael Luis' response and think he put it quite well and agree with his logic. Please, Look into all other solutions before causing such a negative impact on any of our residential neighborhoods. Thank you, Liz Odegard 2039 79th Ave NE Medina, WA 98039 3/8/2010 Page I of 1 Rachel Baker From: Donna Hanson Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 4:42 PM To: Rachel Baker Subject: FW: Opposition to Option A: Leasing a home at 2205 78th ave NE From: Janie Lee Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 4:11 PM To: Donna Hanson Subject: FW: Opposition to Option A: Leasing a home at 2205 78th ave NE fyi From: Greg Komen [mailto:gkomen@msn.com] Sent: Mon 3/8/2010 3:35 PM To: Katie Phelps; Shawn Whitney; Doug Dicharry; Mark Nelson; Janie Lee; Bret Jordan; Patrick Boyd Subject: Opposition to Option A: Leasing a home at 2205 78th ave NE As a neighbor living I block from 2205 78th ave NE I want to voice my opposition to staff recommendation to locate the Temporary City Hall at this location. I live at 2042 778i ave NE and first heard of this proposal yesterday afternoon. I don't know how the staff report submitted by Joe Willis could state "To date, the owners and neighbors have been supportive of Temporary City Hall in the location." Since discovering this option yesterday I've spoke with 5 neighbors who knew nothing about this and all 5 were opposed. City business should to be conducted on City property. There are workable options that don't utilize residential properties and should be the site of the Temporary City Hall location. Greg Komen 2042 77th ave NE Medina WA 98039 425.454.6556 93MKIN] Page 1 of 1 Rachel Baker From: Donna Hanson Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 4:43 PM To: Rachel Baker Subject: FW: Temporary Location for City Hall ... Please forward to council members for tonight's meeting From: Rebecca Johnston [mailto:rlstattoo@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 3:28 PM To: Donna Hanson Cc: 'Mac Johnston' Subject: Temporary Location for City Hall ... Please forward to council members for tonight's meeting Councilmembers: You were provided with the following opposition letter from Maryann and Michael Luis. As residents of Medina and neighbors of Maryann and Michael, we share the same views as they do regarding the proposed temporary site for City Hall. Furthermore, we have a son who will be entering kindergarten at Medina Elementary this fall, and have strong concerns about the increased vehicle traffic that the proposed temporary location at 22"d and 78th would create in close proximity to our son's (and more than a dozen other students') bus stop. We are opposed to the proposal to allow the City to lease property in residential areas for a temporary City Hall. It has been longstanding policy in the City of Medina to disallow any non-residential uses in residential areas. Furthermore, the City: • Has instituted strict mitigation policies for temporary activities, such as construction, so as to minimize any disruption to residential areas. • Strongly discourages on -street parking and prohibits on -street parking for any business use. • Does not allow home businesses to have more than one employee on -site. The proposed movement of City Hall to a neighborhood setting would violate the spirit and intent of all of these policies: temporary disruptive activity, on -street parking and multiple employees in a residential area. A basic principle of good government is that governments should not exempt themselves from their own policies. City should, therefore, not exempt itself from its own zoning, planning, parking and other policies. The use of temporary, modular office space in Medina Park, and the use of facilities at St. Thomas, would seem an excellent solution to the City's office needs, and the additional cost would not be substantial. We urge the Council not to approve an ordinance that allows for the temporary location of City Hall in a residential area and to concentrate on other options. Sincerely, Rebecca and Mac Johnston 2223 Evergreen Point Road 3/8/2010 Page 1 of 1 Rachel Baker From: Donna Hanson Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 4:49 PM To: Rachel Baker Subject: FW: Letter to city council members (for March, 8, 2009 meeting) From: farringer@comcast.net [mailto:farringer@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 1:45 PM To: Donna Hanson Subject: Letter to city council members (for March, 8, 2009 meeting) Dear Medina City Council Members: We are writing to oppose the proposed temporary location for City Hall on the corner of 22nd St. & 78th Ave. We live at 2030 77th Ave NE and have three young children, two of which will be attending Medina Elementary next year (Kindergarten & 2nd Grade). Our children love riding their bikes and scooters in our driveway and street and we are very concerned that the increased traffic due to City Hall being placed in our neighborhood will make an unsafe area for our children to play. We were shocked to learn that our neighborhood was being proposed as a temporary location for City Hall without any kind of notice to the neighbors. We purchased our home in 2005 specifically to be in a quiet and safe residential area. The temporary relocation of City Hall to our neighborhood is unacceptable. The proposed site at the corner of 22nd St. & 78th Ave. is an unfavorable location for City Hall due to the narrow streets and lack of sidewalks. Our neighborhood has many young children and it would be reckless to locate City Hall in this location, even if it is temporary. We would suggest either the option of Medina Park or leasing commercial space in Bellevue as more appropriate choices. Sincerely, Glenn & Farnaz Farringer 3/8/2010 Rachel Baker From: Donna Hanson Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 4:49 PM To: Rachel Baker Subject: FW: [medina_matters] March 8, 2010 Regular Medina City Council Meeting Agenda Packet and Bellevue High -----Original Message ----- From: Daniel Lipkie [mailto:daniellipkie@lipkie.com] Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 12:31 PM To: medina_matters@yahoogroups.com Cc: Daniel Lipkie; City Council Mail Subject: RE: [medina_matters] March 8, 2010 Regular Medina City Council Meeting Agenda Packet and Bellevue High My mistake, my previous message (enclosed below) is wrong ... the Public Hearing is on the website agenda as "PH-1: Code Amendment Regarding Temporary Government Facilities". Since the meeting begins at 6:30 and the public hearing is scheduled for 6:30 as posted on the agenda at City Hall, I mistakenly thought it would be the first item on the website agenda. But is appears on the website agenda after a number of other items, including public comments ... and I missed it. (See below for a copy of website agenda) I would have thought since passing of the ordinance is a prerequisite to siting the temporary city hall in a residential area that the public hearing would precede the public comment period on options for locating the city hall. But this is not the case. The general comment period on any topic precedes the public hearing and once the public hearing concludes it appears there is no more opportunity for the community to comment on the locating options. Maybe the consent agenda could be changed to have the public hearing first. I should have looked further before I wrote my email. Website agenda: PRESENTATION P1: King County Council Member Jane Hague PUBLIC COMMENTS At this time, citizens may address the City Council regarding any issue on the council agenda and any non -agenda items related to city business, excluding public hearings. To ensure equal opportunity for the public to comment, a speaker's comments shall be limited to three minutes per person, per meeting. Those who have service requests or complaints are encouraged to first bring such matters to the city manager for prompt attention and resolution. Council meetings are business meetings where City Council may hear from residents and take action on official City business. In order to accomplish all the business on the agenda and be respectful of everyone's time, Council Members will not be able to engage in dialogue with individual members of the audience. REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS RA-1: Mayor RA-2: Council RA-3: Advisory Board/Commission/Committee RA-4: City Manager/Staff Medina City Hall • 501 Evergreen Point Road • Medina WA 98039 425-233-6400 phone • 425-454-8490 fax • www.medina-wa.gov Medina City Council March 8, 2010 Page 2 of 2 CONSENT AGENDA These items will be acted upon as a whole unless called upon by a council member. CA-1: Approval of February 8, 2010 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes CA-2: Approval of February 2010 Check Register Claim check numbers 50000 through 50116 in the amount of $114,678, and payroll check numbers 3000 through 3019 in the amount of $216,455.15. Voided payroll check number include: 3002 (check not issued) and 3017 voided/reissued. CA-3: Approval of Agreement for Permit Software Tracking Upgrade CA-4: Approval of Proposed Code Enforcement Ordinance CA-5: Accept January 19, 2010 Park Board Minutes CA-6: Accept January 20, 2010 Emergency Committee Minutes CA-7: Accept January 26, 2010 Planning Commission Minutes PUBLIC HEARING PH-1: Code Amendment Regarding Temporary Government Facilities OTHER BUSINESS OB-1: Ordinance Regarding Temporary Government Facilities Daniel Lipkie mailto: DanielLipkie@lipkie.com http://www.lipkie.com http://www.lipkie.com/glass - wound glass beads hftp://www.lipkie.com/humor - items of possible interest -----Original Message ----- From: medina_matters@yahoogroups.com [mailto:medina_matters@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Lipkie Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 11:17 AM To: medina_matters@yahoogroups.com Cc: Daniel Lipkie Subject: RE: [medina_matters] March 8, 2010 Regular Medina City Council Meeting Agenda Packet and Bellevue High Even though it is not on the agenda posted on the Council website ... there is a public hearing at 6:30 at the City Hall as part of the City Council's March meeting and the public hearing is on the proposed zoning change so that city can place the temporary city hall in a residential area. The Council meeting starts at 6:30 so this must be one of the first items of business. Daniel Lipkie mailto: DanielLipkie@lipkie.com <maiIto: Daniel Lipkie%401ipkie.com> http://www.lipkie.com <http://www.lipkie.com> http://www.lipkie.com/glass <http://www.lipkie.com/glass> - wound glass beads http://www.lipkie.com/humor <http://www.lipkie.com/humor> - items of possible interest Page 1 of 1 Rachel Baker From: Donna Hanson Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 4:51 PM To: Rachel Baker Subject: FW: Temporary City Hall From: Dan Miller [mailto:DanM@intra-corp.com] Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 9:54 AM To: Donna Hanson Cc: smorgan@vertafore.com Subject: Temporary City Hall To the Members of Medina City Council: We are writing to express our request that you reconsider the placement of the temporary City Hall. As understand it, the board is recommending the relocation of the City Hall to a leased home at the corner of 22nd and 78th streets. As a resident of the neighborhood (2240 Evergreen Point Road), that seems like an unwise recommendation. It creates parking and safety issues on 22nd and 78th streets, especially for the kids catching the bus at the corner of 22nd and Evergreen Point Road. It also seems to create logistical challenges as residents will likely expect City Hall access to remain close to City Hall. If the selection were significantly less expensive than the alternatives, I would understand the logic. However, as read the options that were considered for the temporary placement, it appeared that one option was the placement of 2 trailers at the current City Hall/Park, presumably in existing parking lot or in portion of Medina Park that is not as utilized. It would seem that the vacant area that borders the parking lot would be a good candidate. From the email I read, it appears that the expected budget for this option was less than 10,000 more than the rental option on 78th street, which is less than 10%. Unlike a rental from a 3rd party, this option also provides substantially more flexibility in the event that the project goes longer than expected since the City owns the land on which the trailers would be placed My experience working in real estate development suggests that this is a very reasonable expectation for the project. Please take our comments under consideration as you consider this vote. I believe that the trailer option at City Hall is a better solution on all fronts and therefore believe that option should be the recommended solution. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 206-396-9365. Regards, Dan Dan Miller Susanna Morgan 2240 Evergreen Point Road 206-396-9365 3/8/2010 Page 1 of 1 Rachel Baker From: Donna Hanson Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 4:51 PM To: Rachel Baker Subject: FW: Public Comment RE PH-1: Code Amendment Regarding Temporary Government Facilities From: M3 Sweatt [mailto:m3@sweatt.net] Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 9:15 AM To: Donna Hanson Subject: Public Comment RE PH-1: Code Amendment Regarding Temporary Government Facilities Regarding PH-1: Code Amendment Regarding Temporary Government Facilities I am unable to attend the public hearing this evening. My wife and I are opposed to a temporary city hall in a residential area, especially with an option that is close to the same cost accessible via a significant traffic artery. More should be done prior to any vote on the matter with regard to community impact, increased traffic, access to parking and commercial needs. Our preference would be to examine options C and D, with the council establishing a temporary city hall in a local commercial setting with access to appropriate infrastructure. This may be best served by use of portable buildings installed in an appropriate location adjacent to the park. Further, the city should examine the possibility to leverage other semi-public facilities for meetings in other public properties (such as Medina Elementary, if possible) rather than other commercial space that may be subject to additional costs. Thank you Lisa & M3 Sweatt 2233 79th Ave NE 3/8/2010 Page 1 of 3 Mark Nelson From: Babuca, Daniel [BabucaD@wsdot.wa.gov] Sent: Mon 3/8/2010 1:37 PM To: Mark Nelson Cc: Subject: RE: Federal TIGER grant announcement today Attachments: Hi Mark — below is a brief summary of ESSB 6392 that you might find helpful for your council update... Summary of ESSB 6392: • Allows SR 520 toll revenue to be used on projects within the full SR 520 corridor, not just the floating bridge and connections. • Reiterates that the project is four general purpose lanes and two HOV lanes that will be open to traffic in 2014. • Directs the Mayor and the City Council (Seattle) to convene a work group consisting of Sound Transit, Metro, the Seattle Department of Transportation, and the University of Washington to study and make recommendations of alternative connections for transit to the University Link light rail line. The recommendations must include a connection of less than 1200 feet. A report is due to the Governor and Legislature by October 1, 2010. If the group does not complete its work by that time, WSDOT must complete the work and provide a report by November 30, 2010. • Directs WSDOT to convene a work group to outline options for planning and financing for high capacity transit in the SR 520 corridor. The report is due to the Governor and Legislature by January 1, 2011. • Directs WSDOT to convene a workgroup with the Seattle City Council and the Mayor, to make recommendations on potential design refinements to the preferred alternative that will be selected in April. The report is due by December 31, 2010. • Directs WSDOT to work with the Arboretum to develop a mitigation plan. • Directs WSDOT to report to the Legislature when average transit speeds in HOV lanes fall below forty-five miles per hour at least ten percent of the time. • Provides $200 million of bond proceeds to the west side project. • Creates a special account for civil penalties from toll violators that may be used for the SR 520 project, including mitigation. Current Status: ESSB passed in the Senate on Feb. 16, and passed in the House on March 2. The bill must now go back to the Senate for concurrence in the House amendments. https://mailmd.medina-wa.gov/exchange/nmelson/Inbox/RE:%20Federal%20TIGER%20gr... 3/8/2010 Page 2 of 3 Regrads, Daniel R Babuca P.E. Engineering Manager SR 520 Bridge Replacement and HOV Project From: Mark Nelson [mailto:mnelson@medina-wa.gov] Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 9:12 AM To: Babuca, Daniel Subject: RE: Federal TIGER grant announcement today Daniel, Sorry for the late request, but I am giving a report on the status of 520 to the Medina City Council tonight. Do you have any updates that might be worth passing on to the council? Mark Nelson From: Babuca, Daniel [mailto:BabucaD@wsdot.wa.gov] Sent: Wed 2/17/2010 4:56 PM To: Fred McConkey; George Martin; Joan McBride; David Cooper; John Marchione; Bret Jordan; Don Davidson Cc: Mark Nelson; Ziegler, Jennifer; Meredith, Julie; Fies, George (Consultant); Pelley, Suanne (Consultant) Subject: Federal TIGER grant announcement today Dear Mayors, The US Department of Transportation announced the winners of the federal TIGER (Transportation Investments Generating Economic Recovery) discretionary grant this morning. Although we submitted a strong proposal for $300 million to help fund the SR 520 Eastside Transit and HOV Project, the project was not selected for the highly competitive grant. Over 1,400 applications totaling $57 billion were received by USDOT for just $1.5 billion in available funds. I want to thank you once again for the letter that each of you provided in support of the Eastside proposal —they were included in the submittal package along with letters from Governor Gregoire, Senator Haugen and Representative Clibborn, and industry letters from Microsoft, Ford and Inrix. And thank you, as always, for your ongoing support of our efforts to improve the SR 520 corridor. Two Washington projects were awarded grants: WSDOT's US-395 North Spokane Corridor received $35 million and Seattle's Mercer Corridor Redevelopment was awarded $30 million. The state total of $65 million represents the fifth highest state total out of 41 states to receive grants, so although we did not receive funding for the Eastside project we are pleased that Washington did so well. https://mailmd.medina-wa.gov/exchange/nmelsonlInboxlRE: %2OFederal%20TIGER%20gr... 3/8/2010 Page 3 of 3 Here are links to the USDOT press release announcing the TIGER grant awards and to a list of the winning projects: Press release: htto://www.dot.gov/affairs/2010/dot3010a:htm Project list: http://www.dot.gov/documents/finaltigergrantinfo.odf In related news, the State Senate passed SSB 6392 yesterday which would authorize expenditure of toll bond revenues on the entire corridor program, including the Eastside project. The bill will now to move to the House for a Transportation Committee hearing, which could take place as early as next week. Please let me know if you have any questions about today's announcement. We will have the opportunity to discuss this and other matters when we meet on Mar. 12. As a reminder, please let me know if you plan to attend that meeting if you haven't had a chance to do so already (Julie Meredith e-mailed an invitation on Feb, 9). Sincerely, Daniel Babuca P.E. Engineering Manager SR 520 Bridge Replacement and HOV Program Washington State Department of Transportation 206-770-3545 directl 206-770-3500 main 600 Stewart Street, Suite 520 1 Seattle, WA 98101 Visit usat our Web site: http://www.wsdot.wa.aov/proiects/sr520bridoe https://mailmd.medina-wa.gov/exchange/mnelson/InboxlRE: %20Federal%20TIGER%20gr... 3/8/2010 From: Daniel Lipkie, 7715 NE 22nd St, Medina, WA 98039 To: Medina City Council Re: March 8, 2010, Medina Public Hearing Code Amendment Regarding Temporary Government Facilities The attached is submitted for the record of the public hearing. These comments were prepared for and presented at the Open Comments period during the March 8, 2010 Medina Council Meeting Page 1 of 5 Comments on Ordinance My name is Daniel Lipkie and I reside at 7715 NE 22nd St. It is my understanding that the following two items are before the Council tonight for decision and approval and I would like to comment on both: 1. An ordinance change allowing the temporary city hall to be located in a residential area. 2. A set of 4 relocation options have been submitted by the staff and they are requesting the Council's approval to proceed with locating the temporary city hall at 2055 78d' Ave NE The proposed ordinance contains a WHEREAS clause which states: ... the Medina Comprehensive Plan discourages residential uses being converted to non-residential uses except when clearly supported by the community and when impacts to the surrounding area can be fully mitigated; Let me explain why I think this WHEREAS clause cannot be used to relocate city hall to the residence on 78d'. I walked the neighborhood yesterday for a distance of at least 1 block in all directions from the residence and talked with everyone who was home. I could not find any resident who knew of these agenda items. I could not find any resident who expressed support for these actions. On Feb 17 I heard a comment by a resident who does not live in our neighborhood that the proposed residence was being considered as a temporary location for the City Hall. The next day I sent an email to some council members and the City Manager. In that email I wrote: • My initial reaction is "there doesn't seem to be adequate onsite parking at the residence". • I didn't think parking should be allowed on or along NE 22nd St east or west of the residence because it is just wide enough for two cars to pass and there is no on -street parking. • I offered the suggestion that the city might acquire access to a property due south of the residence that has been for sale for some time and convert it to a parking lot with appropriate resurfacing and water runoff controls for neighboring properties. My closing comments were: • These are my initial thoughts. I'm trying not to have a totally "Not In My Back Yard" attitude but I do think the parking issue is one that needs to be recognized, adequately resolved and mitigated for the surrounding neighborhood. And finally: • If the city decides to proceed with this option I look forward to seeing the plans and commenting further. I received a reply from Donna Hanson the City Manager within an hour. Page 2of5 • Daniel, thank you for your input. I will forward your suggestion on parking to our project manager. We are looking at several options, but appreciate your openness. I have not been contacted by the city since that message from Donna Hanson. The staff report submitted tonight on relocation to the residence on 78`h says: To date, the owners and neighbors have been supportive of Temporary City Hall in this location. I think it would be an incorrect understanding of the sentiments expressed in my email if they were the basis of this conclusion. And I have not found a neighbor who was aware of, let alone was supportive of this location decision. It also appears to me that the proposed ordinance was re -written to specifically allow relocating to the proposed residence. The ordinance presented in the Feb Council packet required that: The temporary (location) ... has adequate on -site parking ...; Anyone reading this version of the proposed ordinance would quite logically conclude that the residence at NE 78t' did not meet the criteria of the ordinance. In the information packet for tonight's meeting there is a statement. At the Feb 8 council meeting, a potential issue was raised regarding the criterion for on -site parking. After analyzing the issue further, it was concluded that this criterion should be modified to allow greater flexibility. This change has been incorporated into the proposed ordinance. And the ordinance now requires that: The temporary (location) has adequate parking within a sufficient proximity to the site ...; The staff report also says: Parking in this case will need to be on -street parking 1/2block to the south of the home. But the block referred to, runs from NE 20`h to NE 22nd. So the I/z block is more like a block. There is no sidewalk from the residence to this on -street parking. In fact there are no sidewalks near the residence in any direction. There is no on -street parking on the streets running East, West or North from this residence. The streets are only wide enough for two cars to pass each other. I could find nothing in the staff report that attempts to mitigate the impact of parking on neighbors, e.g. install no parking signs, funds to repair damage done by parking in inappropriate areas, ways for neighbors to have inappropriately parked cars removed. Currently there is a single street light across the street from this residence. This does not appear to be adequate for • A public place • Or a police department Page 3of5 • Or for persons leaving City Hall at night and going down a street without sidewalks to their cars a block away. So I assume that lighting on this rather quiet and dark residential corner will have to be improved with the addition of onsite and/or offsite lighting. But I could find nothing in the staff report on plans, costs or mitigating the impact of such lighting additions. The ordinance states: The City Manager may approve a temporary use permit if it is found that: B. The temporary use has adequate parking within a sufficient proximity to the site for employees, city vehicles and customers; C. Except in the case of emergencies, the temporary use will not cause noise, light or glare which adversely impacts surrounding uses; Given my previous comments, I'm not sure how the city will be able to find that this residential use is clearly supported by the community and impacts to the surrounding area can be fully mitigated as stated in the WHEREAS clause. When we built our home 5 years ago • We were required to provide mailing labels for all residents with 300 feet so that the city could notify them of the proposed construction. • We were required have a construction and mitigation plans approved by the city and then publically available at the city hall. • A sign was posted on our property notifying the public of our intent to build, where the plans were available for review and when comments could be registered. As far as I can tell, the city has taken none of these actions with respect to the proposed city hall move to the residence in option A. Neighbors have not been notified and their comments have not been solicited. There appears to be a double standard. Medina has not applied to itself the stringent standards it requires of its residents. Had I been aware of the four options and asked to comment, I would have favored Option C which is to have 2 trailers in the park with meetings across the street at St Thomas.. • The park already is a public place with parking, street lighting and is easy to get to since it is at a major entrance to the City of Medina • The cost of Option C is only $6,800 more than option A (about 5% of the proposed $130,000 budget), • It allows the City Staff and Public Safety Department to be co -located • and it has the additional benefit as stated in the staff report: Page 4of5 o The asphalt parking lot can remain following the removal of the trailers for utilization by park patrons or can be rented to contractors for construction parking. Similarly, the utility connections can be utilized for an additional restroom building in the future. I hope that upon consideration of all the issues, the City Council also concludes that Option C is the preferred option. Page 5 of 5 0 PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET A Public Hearing is a specific time allowed for members of the public to provide in to the City Council on a particular subject which has been legally posted as a Public Hearing. Complete the following information and submit to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. When your name is called, proceed to the podium and state your name and address. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY Name: Address: ��/ Phone: 1. Public hearing sign in sheet must be completed before speaking. 2. Public testimony is limited to three minutes per speaker. 3. No speaker may convey or donate his or her time to another speaker. 4. Comments shall be courteous and respectful at all times. S. No person may use public comment for the purpose of campaign or advertisement. 6. This is not a question and answer time and Council can not engage in conversation with the public. 7. No further testimony will be taken once the public hearing closes. 8. The presiding officer has the responsibility for enforcing these rules. WISH TO SPEAK to the City Council on ,the following agenda item and/or issue: ❑ IN LIEU OF SPEAKING / request the City Clerk to include my written comments into the public record. r^ Signature Required: t �--- Date: +� By signing, I acknowledge public comment rules presented on this form. Pursuant to RCW 42.56, this document is considered a public record. Disclosure may be required upon request. Me PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET A Public Hearing is a specific time allowed for members of the public to provide input/testimony to the City Council on a particular subject which has been legally posted as a Public Hearing. Complete the following information and submit to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. When your name is called, proceed to the podium and state your name and address. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY Name:C�iG-YC�Pc��'+ Address: `7`1 �� per"' �- `5-t . Y'r .e4aq Phone: 4Z5 1. Public hearing sign in sheet must be completed before speaking. 2. Public testimony is limited to three minutes per speaker. 3. No speaker may convey or donate his or her time to another speaker. 4. Comments shall be courteous and respectful at all times. 5. No person may use public comment for the purpose of campaign or advertisement. 6. This is not a question and answer time and Council can not engage in conversation with the public. 7. No further testimony will be taken once the public hearing closes. 8. The presiding officer has the responsibility for enforcing these rules. WISH TO SPEAK � to the City Council on the following , agenda item andl or issue: } ( � / + ✓J� f-3e;r- i -L /iAA i., Y/_L'!TL'i � J , IP11 �r_r� 1, 1 1 ''— / 1 01 A � � "S l �4 r) t ✓1C7 a✓ v ❑ IN LIEU OF SPEAKING / request the City Clerk to include my written comments into the public record. Signature Required: �U���^� ®ate: } By signing, I acknowledge public comment rules presented on this form. Pursuant to RCW 42.56, this document is considered a public record. Disclosure may be required upon request. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET A Public Hearing is a specific time allowed for members of the public to provide input/testimony to the City Council on a particular subject which has been legally posted as a Public Hearing. Complete the following information and submit to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. When your name is called, proceed to the podium and state your name and address. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY Name: Address: - 7 1 — &&- IV Z . Phone:a 1. Public hearing sign in sheet must be completed before speaking. 2. Public testimony is limited to three minutes per speaker. 3. No speaker may convey or donate his or her time to another speaker. 4. Comments shall be courteous and respectful at all times. 5. No person may use public comment for the purpose of campaign or advertisement. 6. This is not a question and answer time and Council can not engage in conversation with the public. 7. No further testimony will be taken once the public hearing closes. 8. The presiding officer has the responsibility for enforcing these rules. I WISH TO SPEAK to the City Council on the following agenda item and/or issue: ��.�9/hr�' �`�!� t(�..-t--L•*.-4�i,-�..y' fir- /✓% �.,�Gw ❑ IN LIEU OF SPEAKING 1 request the City Clerk to include my written comments into the public record. Signature Required: %' `7 Date: By signing, I acknowledge public comment rules presented on this form. Pursuant to RCW 42.56, this document is considered a public record. Disclosure may be required upon request. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET A Public Hearing is a specific time allowed for members of the public to provide input/testimony to the City Council on a particular subject which has been legally posted as a Public Hearing. Complete the following information and submit to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. When your name is called, proceed to the podium and state your name and address. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY Name:��1. Address: Phone: Z,-' e I- e-, 141� 71n2.2 1. Public hearing sign in sheet must be completed before speaking. 2. Public testimony is limited to three minutes per speaker. 3. No speaker may convey or donate his or her time to another speaker. 4. Comments shall be courteous and respectful at all times. 5. No person may use public comment for the purpose of campaign or advertisement. 6. This is not a question and answer time and Council can not engage in conversation with the public. 7. No further testimony will be taken once the public hearing closes. 8. The presiding officer has the responsibility for enforcing these rules. II WISH TO SPEAK to the City Council on the following agenda item and,/or issue: ❑ IN LIEU OF SPEAKING / request the City Clerk to include my written comments into the public record. Signature Required: Date: By signing, I acknowledge public comment rules presented on this form. Pursuant to RCW 42.56, this document is considered a public record. Disclosure may be required upon request. Page 1 of 2 Rachel Baker From: Donna Hanson Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 4:57 PM To: NJ Smith Cc: Rachel Baker Subject: RE: Temporary Government Facilities - Medina City Council meeting 3/8/10 Consider it done. Thank you for your input. Donna From: NJ Smith [mailto:njtsmith@comcast.net] Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 10:53 PM To: Donna Hanson Subject: Temporary Government Facilities - Medina City Council meeting 3/8/10 Hi Donna, Could you please forward my comments to the Medina City Council for their review prior to the Council meeting on 3/8/10? Also, I would like to speak at the council meeting, the public comment form can be completed at the council meeting correct? Thanks, NJ Smith Dear Council Members: was alarmed to read the Medina City Council Meeting Agenda Bill regarding the Temporary City Hall Options. My family & I are vehemently opposed to Option A (leasing house at 22nd & 78th) I can only imagine that the neighbors where option B is proposed feel the same way as we do. live at 2038 78th Ave. NE. We purchased our property in 2007 and completed construction on our new house in 2008. We purchased this property specifically to live on a quiet, low traffic street. The youngest of my four children, is 6 year old Parker. Parker is a kindergartner at Medina Elementary and loves to ride his bike, razor and skateboard in front of our house with his many friends. Our neighborhood has lots of small children. As you can imagine, think putting a commercial use (City Hall) in a quiet residential neighborhood is irresponsible. There are other viable alternatives for temporarily relocating City Hall. City Hall parking on our street for 12 months is quite unacceptable due to the danger is poses. I was quite surprised to read in the agenda bill with regard to option A that "To date, the owners and neighbors have been supportive of Temporary City Hall in this location." Does this statement seem reasonable to you? This is extremely hard to imagine. I spoke to several of my immediate neighbors today and nobody had even heard of this situation. I am extremely disappointed that this option A was not disseminated to our neighborhood properly. The only way that my neighbors and I became aware of it is through our good neighbor, Daniel Lipkie. Daniel spread the word, otherwise we would never have heard about this situation. I 3/8/2010 Page 2 of 2 respectfully ask that you carefully consider the negative impact of Option A on our neighborhood. My family and I will fight this option should it go any further. Through this experience we are also opposed to this proposed ordinance: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MEDINA, WASHINGTON, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 17.56B RELATING TO THE LOCATION OF TEMPORARY CITY GOVERNMENT FACILITIES The following language from the agenda bill states very plainly that your neighborhood could be next for temporarily relocating City Hall. I don't believe that this is the way we want to go, the consideration of neighborhood impact should be a prime consideration not the "widest range of possible alternatives" for the City. "While City Council action is required on selecting a temporary location, the alternatives that may be considered are limited due to existing zoning regulations. The proposed ordinance would amend the Medina Zoning Code to allow City government facilities to be temporarily located in residential zoning districts subject to the approval criteria. The purpose of the amendment is to allow the City Council the ability to consider the widest range of possible alternatives in selecting a temporary location." Thanks, NJ Smith NJ Smith njtsmith@comcast.net 3/8/2010 Page 1 of 1 Rachel Baker From: Donna Hanson Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 5:35 PM To: Rachel Baker Subject: FW: Temporary Relocation of City Hall From: Ty Schultz [mailto:tyschultz 47@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 4:43 PM To: Donna Hanson Cc: jennyschultz@gmail.com Subject: Temporary Relocation of City Hall To Whom it May Concern: I am a concerned resident located at 2039 78th Ave. NE. Currently one of four proposed options for relocation of City Hall (option A) concerns me as it substantially impacts the neighbors in the area (increased traffic, loss of parking, safety for children, lack of sidewalk) and does not appear to be substantially more expensive than the other options. At this moment, absent stronger evidence than that presented in the outline of the proposal, I strongly urge the council to vote for one of the other three options and to error on the side of the option that impacts as few Medina residents as possible --at the expense of operational complexity due to its temporary nature. Sincerely, Ty Schultz (425) 502-9459 3/8/2010