HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Minutes - 05/09/1973 Kent, Washington
May 9 , 1973
"Vied nesday
Present: Mayor Mogan, Councilmen: Baffaro, Elliott, Just, Ditto,
Martell, Masters and Thornton; City Administrator Street, City
Attorney Mirk, Planning Director IIarris. Public Works Director Ulett
and Finance Director Winkle were absent.
Mayor Hogan reconvened the Council meeting at 7 :00 p.m. and pointed
out that this session would start with the hearing on the mapping
portion of the proposed new zoning code.
NORTHWEST Section 15 - 1.1ap Page 1 . Harris noted that the
QUADRANT Planning Commission has recommended R-A, MR1.1 and CC
zoning. The present zoning is M-2, R-4 and C-1.
Kent highlands , Inc. , through Hugh Goldsmith,
Engineer, has requested site zoning of single,multi-
family and commercial zoning.
Harris pointed out that the request amounts to a
massive rezone and that the Commission did not feel
that specific zonings should be given on this property
without the usual public hearing for a rezone. It
was pointed out that the property is presently being
used as a land fill and gravel pit operation under
M-2 zoning, as a permitted use under a Board of
Adjustment permit to allow Kent Highlands to continue
their operation until 1979 .
James Curran, representing Kent highlands, Inc.
distributed land use maps of the Kent Highlands
area to the Council and noted that Kent Highlands
has a specific plan proposed for the 300 acres. Fie
conceded that the long range plan might not call for
M-2 use, but that for present Kent highlands is
requesting that it remain 11-2.
Hugh Goldsmith, consulting engineer for the owners,
noted that because of the unique physical character-
istics of the land, the obvious use for MRH as well
as MRG, were important to achieve the yield from an
economic standpoint and at the same time represent
the best use of the property.
Mayor IIogan noted that the M-2 zoning was placed upon
the property as a convenience and means for Kent
Highlands to have the gravel operation.
Goldsmith stated that Kent Highlands felt that M-2
was a proper use, and that it is taxed as 1.1-2.
Upon the Mayor 's query, Street recalled that the
Engineering Department regarded the proposed road
as unacceptable because the grade exceeded 20 and
that he has seen no changes since then. hugh Gold-
smith noted that Kent Highlands had agreed to re-
align the road so that it would be north of the
sanitary fill and these plans are to be submitted
to the City early this summer.
The City Attorney asked if Kent Highlands will go
ahead with their plan on the assumption that this
Code is adopted and if the million yards of material
will be put on the lower level in any instance. Gold-
smith stated that the fill below is not part of the
reclamation grogram, but that the reclamation program
is the maintenance and development of the slope.
He further noted that under an R-A zoning, they
would not know what specific zoning they are going
to be working with, and such information is necessary
so they would know the basic valkie of the area and
what they can afford to do to the land in order to
lift the level above; the flood plain. Under R-A zon-
ing, they cannot identify how much 'wQrk. should go -into
the property or how much fill should be made in order
to use .it.
Street noted that there is a contract between Kent
Highlands and the City that includes the restoration
which should be considered, and suggested to the
Council that that contract and its requirements
should be included in their consideration of changes
in this matter. Goldsmith stated that the contractual
requirements include restoration of the slope and
dedication of a park site. Ile noted that the deed
for the park had been given to the City. Street
replied that only one acre had been deeded .
Street suggested that the Planning Department con-
sider this matter, including the requirements of the
contract, and pointed out that the Council has the
right to initiate a rezone . Elliott concurred and
opined that this should go through a regular rezone
process.
THORNTON MOVED to direct the Planning Department to,
within the next sir, months , bring together Kent high-
lands, our Engineering Department and Mr. Goldsmith
to consider their plan, Elliott seconded, motion
carried.
Upon Curran 's inquiry, IIarris noted that the Jensen-
Griffin property is proposed to be zoned CC.
Harris pointed out that the Planning Commission has
tried to follow the City's Comprehensive Plan in
their recommendations on zoning areas.
Section 14, Map Page 2. This area is bounded approx-
imately by Russell Road on the west, S. 228th, West
Valley Highway and the River. No correspondence .
No comments.
Map Page 3 . Property on West Valley Highway to
S. 212th, Russell Road and the River. The Planning
Commission recommends R-A and M-A.
Barris commented on a letter received on May 8th
from Chuck Adams of Glendale Realty, regarding
property west of the West Valley Highway from S.
212th to S . 228th, requesting M-1 for the majority
of the property and some Id-2 and 11-3 south of S .
212th and S. 228th. IIarris pointed out that the letter
had been received too late for the Staff to make a
written report on it's contents, and the the Planning
Commission recommends that it remain M-A.
Chuck Adams spoke from the audience, stating that the
Planning Staff had originally recommended 14-1 for
the west side of the West Valley Highway, but the
Planning Commission decided to use blest Valley
Highway as a dividing line. Harris explained that this
was based on an overall guide from the Comprehensive
Plan. Mr. Adams maintained that the property west of
West Valley Highway has more advantage for industrial
development as opposed to the east side of West Valley
Highway in that it is well severed for industrial use.
Barris noted that the Planning Staff would wort: with
these property owners on a plan for the future develop-
ment of the properties.
Elliott noted that rezone requests could be made
through regular channels.
Charlie Waller stated that the need for a rezone never
arose until 1972, at which time it was anticipated
that it would take a year for the new code to be ready.
James Rayfuse noted that throughout the zoning code
hearings, the intent was to apply the new code as
closely as possible to the existing zoning. He noted
that they did not request a formal rezone hearing, and
that in talking to some of the people represented by
Adams; they actually did not know what was per-
mitted under the existing M-A. Ile stated that there
was some speculation as to the suitability of in-
dustrial park, M-1 zoning, but there were no plans
then for the use as such. He stated that he saw
no problem in considering reclassifying it to 1d-1,
under a routine rezone request. Harris clarified
for Martell that a routine rezone took from 60 to
90 days. Upon Master ' s question, Adams noted that
the area he referred to was approximately 69 acres .
Charlie Faller stated that about five or six years
ago when Boeing proposed to build in the City, there
were commitments made by the City regarding future
sewers through an LID, and at this time the property
owners were assured that if they wished industrial
zoning that there would be no problem, but the own-
ers did not seek it at that time because they had
no commitments. He noted that it was difficult to
sell M-A property.
Kitto pointed out that the public should be aware
that the Council had been supplied copies of all
letters and copies of the Planning Staff recommend-
ations.
Section 10 . No. comments. No correspondence.
Section 3 . No comments . No correspondence.
Section 2. No comments. No correspondence.
It was the opinion of the Council to proceed with the
other quadrants before taking action.
Section 31 . No correspondence. Harlan Bull noted
that about 20 property owners had requested CM or
HC for property near_ the PIE building.
Harris noted the correspondence would come up under
a different map.
Section 36. No correspondence . In answer to Martell 's
question, Rayfuse noted th Et the M-1 zoning was brought
forth from the public hearings and pointed out the
creek as a natural division. The Planning Commission
put M-1 along the highways as an entrance to the city.
No further comments.
Section 1. Planning Commission recommends M-1 and
M-3 .
Mr. Weiser spoke from the audience, requesting
commercial zoning for this area. He noted that under
the old M-2 they had commercial uses and pointed
out that the heath Building has office space to
lease which could not be done under the new M-2
restrictions.
Elliott asked if an existing building has avail-
able office space under the old zone, would they
have the right to rent under the new zone. Harris
and the City Attorney explained that offices could
be used only in connection with manufacturing activities
or as spelled out in the Code. Upon Thornton 's
question, Harris stated that the prime industrial
zones would be dissipated by using them for commer-
cial offices. Upon questions from several council-
men, Rayfuse stated that commercial activity exists
under the current M-2 zoning, and it will continue
in use as it is, but the new restrictions do not
allow for a proliferation of it. Ile noted that if they
wish, they should go through the normal procedures
for a rezone . Harris pointed out that Beath did not
present a letter opposing the proposed zoning.
Section 6. A letter and petition have been filed
by Harlan Bull and Paul Weiser.
Harlan Bull spoke, noting that the drainage ditch
would be a perfect boundary for commercial activity.
He requested commercial zoning fronting on the East
Valley highway and noted that there is a certain
amount of limited retail activity there.
Masters noted that the policy and goals of the Com-
prehensive Plan is the basis of the new zoning
code and pointed out that property served by rail
is somewhat restricted in the community and should
be used for industrial areas instead of diluting
our industrial area with commercial developments.
Upon Martell 's query, Bull replied that he is
suggesting real estate offices, dispatch offices,
barber shops , etc. , as commercial uses in the 11-2
zone along major highways.
Harris clarified that under conditional uses, on
Page 50, commercial service type uses are allowed
that would not interfere with the development of the
area, and stated that perhaps other uses should be
spelled out. Elliott stated that maybe some other
uses could be added , but he was opposed to "strip
commercial" zoning.
Paul Weiser noted that his industrial park had office
spacb for which the use would be restricted .
Mayor Hogan noted that this matter will be further
discussed at the workshop on Monday, May 14th for
the Council 's consideration and for the Planning
Director -to make recommendations. Kitto expressed
opposition to changing the wording of the code as
it was flexible now.
Section 7. No correspondence. No comments.
Section 12. No correspondence. Bull noted that
there is commercial proposed in this area on the
East Valley highway and pointed out that this is
only about a mile from the Section 6 area that was
previously discussed.
Section 13 . No correspondence. Wally Peterson of
Van 's Furniture spoke, requesting that the boundary
line between GC and HC be the line between Van 's
property and the Reef Restaurant (GC) .
fIarris noted that he will bring this matter to the
workshop, and recommended that the change be made,
as an error had been made in -the boundaries.
Mel Kleweno spoke from the audience, representing
himself and Norman Anderson, requesting M-2 zoning
for the area west of 4th Avenue as it is extended
north, suggesting that 4th Avenue be used as a divid-
ing line. It was pointed out that the area referred
to extends south to James Street.
Rayfuse noted that this . was designated R-2 because
there are currently residences in that area, most
of which are rentals.
Harris stated that there are very few areas for
low income people in the city and that the city
needs zones providing for such areas. IIe pointed
out that there were a few new homes built in this
area in the last few years and that there is a park
there also.
The concensus of the Council was to approve the
Planning Commission 's recommendation to leave it
in the R-2 zone designation. It was noted that the
owners could seek a rezone through the regular channels .
Section 10. No correspondence. No comments.
Section 17. No correspondence. No comments.
SOUTHEAST Section 29 . No correspondence. Harris noted that
QUADRANT this includes a recent annexation and a correction
is required to CC zoning. Ile pointed out that the
Bon Bon apartments were under a non conforming use.
Section 20 . No correspondence. No comments.
Section 19 . No correspondence. Farris pointed
out that the Staff proposes a change. It had been
the intent to zone all city-owned parcels R-A, but
two of the parcels have riot yet been acquired, and
they will, therefore retain their R-1 designation.
Section 30. No correspondence. No comments .
Section 36. No correspondence. No comments.
Section 25 . A letter was received from Stanley
Bever, along with a petition signed by 12 prop-
erty owners, requesting an extension of C-M zoning
easterly 350 feet into the area proposed to be
zoned MRM. The Planning Staff recommends approval
of this change. Harris noted that the old zoning
split ownership.
Section 24. is petition, signed by 15 property owners
on the north side of E. McMillan Street (Bulg arelli,
et all) was received, requesting GC zoning for the
north side of E. McMillan and the east side of S.
State.
Harris pointed out the areas on the map, noting
that the Planning Commission had considered this
matter. The Planning Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission 's recommendation of MRM be
upheld.
Street pointed out that the majority of the block
is being used for residential purposes , and suggested
that the area be left at it 's common usage. Harris
concurred .
The City Attorney pointed out that this area is
probably the most troublesome spot in the city
for the Kent Police Department. He noted the Junior
High is close by and youngsters congregate along the
alley near the garage to smoke. Mayor Hogan noted
that the school has had input into this matter.
She pointed out that if the area was changed to
commercial , there might be a traffic problem.
Harris pointed out that there is a traffic light
there which is a good bypass .
Martell opined that the area should be changed to GC,
Elliott, Just and Kitto agreed.
Rayfuse felt that it should be a request for a
rezone, so as to get the input from the neighbor-
hood at the public hearing. Masters suggested that
the proper procedure is to initiate it as a consid-
eration for a rezone through proper channels, rather
than have the Council change the zoning without
proper input. Rayfuse concurred. Kitto agreed also,
but felt that it should be zoned commercial. It
was suggested that Harris bring a change of zone
proposal to the council workshop on Monday.
Section 24 Couture and Morrison. The Planning
Commission recommends IIC and MRM.
Letters were received from R.L. Couture, owner
of property located on the northeast corner of
Meeker Street and the ;lest Valley IIic;hway and from
Robert E. Morrison, o�mer of property located on the
corner of Smitli and Thompson, both of whom are
requesting GC zoning.
Ilarr_is pointed out that this area was formerly in
a C-3 , Generla Commercial zone.
Iiarlan Bull , representing Security Savings and Loan,
also requested GC zoning.
2lasters requested that the Planning Department
reconsider this zoning for. the Monday workshop.
Section 24. Alex Cugini, Jr. The Planning Commission
recommends 11C.
A letter was received from Gerard Shellan attornev
for Telex Cuclini, Jr. , owner of 11% acres located
north and south of the Willis Street interchange,
east of the West Valley Highway, requesting zoning
of GC.
Mr. Shellan spoke from the audience, noting that
the proposed highway commercial use is too restrictive,
and that the former M-1 zoning was more desirable.
He noted that the HC designation would limit the
permitted uses and the conditional uses to activities
which were ill-suited and inappropriate for this
area. He requested the same zoning (GC) , as is
proposed on the west side of the I'lest Valley Highway.
Kitto referred to Page 39 , paragraph 3 .14.1 ##5 ,
noting the HC usage that is permitted in GC districts.
I3e did not see any point in the HC classification
at all and felt that GC is the type of use which
would locate in this area. Martell suggested the
change to GC also, all the way from the river to
Smith Street, for this request.
SOUTHWEST Section 23 . The Planning Commission recommends R-A.
QUADRANT
Albert Bon spoke from the audience, requesting GC
and MRM for his property which has been zoned C-3 .
Mr. Kleweno, attorney representing Mrs . Iva Kendall
also requests GC zoning for this area. He referred
to the Council minutes of September 6, 1966, at which
time the entire piece of property was zoned C-3 , to
conform to other general zoning in the area. IIe
stated that this property was zoned to it 's highest
commercial use and it is now proposed to be zoned
to probably its lowest value.
Harris pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan shows
commercial zoning Stopping at Russell Road. James
Rayfuse stated that there were many factors considered
by the Planning Commission before recommending the
R-A zone. He pointed out that the area never
developed as C-3 and it was questionable whether it
ever would. Kleweno stated that the property owner
is willing to take that risk.
Harris stated that the Planning Commission is criti-
cized for not having enough areas zoned for farm
land, and noted that this property is presently being
so used.
Kleweno stated that his client had made her home
there, but that she now wished to sell the property.
Mayor Hogan asked if this is another instance where
commercial might be used later. Masters noted that
this is a good example of anticipated development and
premature zoning.
Kitto, Martell and Just supported the Planning
Commission 's recommendations for R-AA zoning. Masters ,
Elliott, Ba£faro and Thornton supported C-3 zoning
for the Bon and Kendall properties .
Section 2.2. Planning Commission recommends R-A.
Norm Anderson requested that the five acre City
Transfer pit site remain MRM zoning. Ile noted
that they just spent $7000 for a sewer line under
the frontage road and were already landscaping.
It was the concensus of the Council to allow the
MRM zoning on the flat area and the Planning Director
was asked to bring this up at the workshop.
Section 1 , 15 and 16. No correspondence. No
comments.
Section 21. Planning Commission recommends IIC an(,
R-1.
A letter was received from Forrest Williams , request-
ing retaining GC and R-4 Multi-family for his
property on the west side of Pacific highway South,
just north of S . 252nd.
'Harris pointed out that there is a buffer strip
approximately 100 ' deep behind �lilliams 's property
which the Planning Commission recommends be includes;
in -the IBC designation.
�iilliams asks that the entire commercial property
be retained as GC. The City Attorney noted that
a 20 ' rear yard is required if this property abuts on
residential property and that -the buffer zone should
be sufficient to protect the residential district
which is directly west of William 's property.
Harris pointed out that there is approximately a
30 ' drop from Williams ' property to the, residential
property behind. IHe noted further that the Planning
Staff recommends that the GC zoning be granted.
Mr. Williams noted that the R-4 zoning request is
for the north portion of the tract which is very
steep ' and the terrain is very appropriate for
apartment house usage. IIarris concurred with the
R-4 request.
The concensus of the Council was to allow the change
to GC and R-4 and Harris was so directed .
Section 21, Midway Sand and Gravel. Planning Commis-
sion recommends GC.
A letter was received from James Curran, attorney
for Midway Sand and Gravel , requesting that M-1
zoning be retained for their property located on the
east side of Pacific Highway South, north of S. 262nd.
Kleweno noted that the City of Seattle is now
completing a sanitary land fill on this property.
Harris pointed out that the property was zoned M-1
originally to allow completion of the sanitary
land fill . Masters noted that two businesses in
the area were changed from M-1 to CM and Rayfuse
explained that they could operate under CM.
The decision of the Council was to accept the
Planning Commission 's recommendations.
Section 2.7. Planning Commission recommends R-1.
No Correspondence.
Byron Lane spoke from the audience, requesting R-4
for their 43 acres of property, noting that the
property slopes to the south, and to the east has
a fine view of the valley. Ile pointed out that
a city park is north of his property. Access to this
property is from S. 272nd.
It was pointed out that MRM zoning is comparable
to R-4 zoning and Martell noted that 14RG zoning would
allow 680 units on this property.
Street questioned that the sewer size and/or depth
was adequate to physically serve the area if zoned
multiple housing.
Elliott questioned the change from R-4 to R-1 .
Harris stated that R-4 zoning was wrong for this
property in the first place.
The concensus of the Council was to direct the
Planner to review the matter of utilities for the
workshop on Monday.
Section 35 . Planning Commission recommends R-A.
No correspondence . No comments. Street noted that
the zone has been changed to open space for tax
purposes and is owned by Smith Drothers Farms .
Section 2'. No correspondence. No comments.
Masters pointed out that once this hearing is closed ,
there will be no more public input on the proposed
code.
There were no further comments from the audience
and KITTO MOVED to close the hearing, Thornton.
seconded , motion carried .
MEETING ADJOURNED: 11 :30 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Marie Jensen
City Clerk