Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning and Economic Development Committee - 09/26/1995 CITY OF ��0� KENT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Public Hearing dls ��e� September 26, 1995 Jim White, Mayor The continuation of the September 25, 1995, meeting of the Kent Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Kent Morrill at 7:00 PM on September 26, 1995 in Chambers West, Kent City Hall. PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Morrill, Chair Russ Stringham, Vice Chair Gwen Dahle Connie Epperly Janette Nuss Robert MacIsaac Mike Pattison PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Kenneth Dozier, excused Edward Heineman, Jr., excused PLANNING STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: James P. Harris, Planning Director Fred Satterstrom,Planning Manager Kevin O'Neill, Senior Planner Brad Hazeltine, Planner Linda Phillips, Planner Matt Jackson, GIS Planner Teresa Beener,Administrative Secretary MERIDIAN ANNEXATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND INITIAL ZONING(Area 2)#CPA-95-1 and#AZ-95-3 (Fred Satterstrom) Mr. Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager for the Kent Planning Department, explained the reason to hold two separate public hearing for the zoning of the Annexation Area. He went on to explain the Ordinance that the City Council passed back in August. According to the City Ordinance the Annexation of the Meridian Area will become effective on January 1, 1996. In a period of approximately four(4) months the City of Kent will try to develop annexation zoning for the Meridian area which will then be in effect January 1, 1996. The City is trying to accomplish this so the residents of the area do not get caught in limbo or in an "interim" Meridian Annexation Area Comprehensive Plan and.Zoning Map Amendments-Area 2 #CPA-95-1 and#AZ-95-3 220 4th AVE SO /KENT W ASHINGTON 98032-5895/TELEPHONE (206)859-3300/FAX#859-3334 Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 1995 Page 2 period between King County zoning and City zoning. Basically the annexation area is not yet annexed to Kent and the King County zoning in the Meridian Annexation Area will be in effect through the end of the year. The effective date of the zoning will be the effective date of the annexation(1-1-1996). Mr. Satterstrom explained the process of pre-annexation zoning. The annexation was approved in August and the City of Kent is trying to implement zoning by the end of the year. The Planning Commission public hearings are the citizen's first opportunity to present input to the City on zoning. The Planning Commission will take the public testimony from Monday and tonight and deliberate among themselves on a tentative date of Monday, October 2. The Planning Commission will consider the staff and public input and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council by law is required to hold two public hearings which must be thirty days apart. At this point the first hearing scheduled before the City Council will be October 17 and the second will probably be November 21. The City Council is expected to make a final decision on this at their meeting on the 21 st. The effective day of the zoning, if approved,would be January 1, 1996. Mr. Satterstrom explained that the hearing tonight is on both the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Zoning Code Amendment. The Planning Commission is taking input on both the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and zoning. Mr. Satterstrom set a couple of ground rules for the public testimony. The public was informed that if they had questions that deal with other topics, like police or other very logical annexation questions,that they were encouraged to bring those questions to one of the scheduled Open Houses. The Open Houses will be held on Wednesday, November 15, at Soos Creek Fire Station, and Thursday,November, 16,at Martin Sortun Elementary,between 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. The Open House is the appropriate venue for dealing with other issues regarding the annexation. Mr. Kevin ONeill, Senior Planner with the Kent Planning Department,explained the purpose of the hearing is to discuss the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the zoning for the Meridian Annexation Area. Mr. ONeill explained the reason for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is because the Comprehensive Plan which was adopted in April of this year included land use designations for the entire Meridian Annexation Area. Mr. ONeill explained the history of this area from a land use and zoning prospective. The Meridian Annexation Area along with the Soos Creek Community Planning Area,which is a much larger area in King County, has had its Comprehensive Plan and zoning changed a couple of times in the last Meridian Annexation Area Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments-Area 2 #CPA-95-1 and#AZ-95-3 Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 1995 Page 3 five years. In 1991,the Soos Creek Community Plan and zoning was adopted by the King County Council. Then, in 1994(about three years later),King County adopted its Growth Management Act Comprehensive Plan and zoning for the entire Soos Creek area including the Meridian Annexation Area in terms of the existing land use pattern. The land use pattern of this area is predominately single family residential. The Staff Report goes into some of the distinctions and differences between King County's and Kent's zoning. Mr. O'Neill explained the process the Planning Department has followed over the last month and a half or so in terms of getting to the three alternatives. The Planning Commission is aware of the process because the staff has had a couple of workshops with the members of the Planning Commission. Once the Boundary Review Board and the City Council made the final decision on the Annexation in August, the Planning Department began the process of developing some land use and zoning alternatives for the area. The City of Kent held an Open House on August 24, at Meridian Elementary School. Prior to the Open House the Planning Department developed four zoning alternatives. The purpose of putting those four alternatives together was to look at some general land use patterns and to get people's reaction to those. The Planning Department had a questionnaire which asked people's opinion on a serious of land use patterns. The Planning Department asked the citizens for their preferences on which zoning alternatives they preferred. The feedback that the staff received was very helpful for the Planning Department in putting the information together for the public hearings. The first alternative in the staffs Report is Alternative 1. Alternative 1 shows what the proposed zoning and Comprehensive Plan would be if the City of Kent simply took the existing King County zoning and transferred it over to the most applicable City of Kent zoning. This is one of the four alternatives shown at the Open House. This alternative received more votes than any of the others. In terms of the overall land use pattern, it is primarily single family. However, one of the most distinguishing features of this alternative is that when the Soos Creek Community Plan and zoning was adopted several Growth Reserve areas were established in all of Soos Creek including this area. Some of those Growth Reserve areas include the area around Clark Lake,the area along the southend of Kent-Kangley,the area at the southern end of the annexation area as well as this large area of the southeast comer,the area north of the Meridian Shopping Center along 132nd and a couple of other smaller areas. Meridian Annexation Area Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments-Area 2 #CPA-95-1 and#AZ-95-3 Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 1995 Page 4 The intent of those Growth Reserve areas at the time the Soos Creek Plan was adopted was to phase growth by keeping very low density areas. Those areas were zoned for one dwelling unit per 2.5 acres or one dwelling unit per five acres. When the King County plan was adopted those growth reserve areas stayed in place;however,the King County Comprehensive Plan has a policy that King County is in the process of implementing right now at looking at Urban Residential designations for those areas. It is important to point out that Alternative 1 shows those Urban Reserve areas as very low density zoning. In the City of Kent's case,the lowest density zoning is RA. All of these areas that are Urban Reserve are all currently being proposed for a higher density ranging typically from four to six units per acre. This alternative shows only what is existing zones. The Planning Department thought it was important to include this alternative. First of all because it was the one selected by more residents than any other and second of all it shows the baseline from which the Planning Department is operating. This is the existing land use and zoning pattern in King County now. The second zoning and Comprehensive Plan alternative is another alternative that was prepared for the August 24,Open House. In terms of residential density,this one is probably at the other end of the spectrum. Everything has been proposed at a minimum of four units per acre (R1-9.6) or six units per acre (R1-7.2). The two things that Alternative 1 and 2 have in common is the commercial areas and some of the vacant multi-family zoned areas at 132nd and Kent-Kangley and 152nd and Kent-Kangley are essentially designated as is shown in existing King County zoning either commercial or multi- family. The major difference between Alternatives 1 and 2 is that the Urban Reserve areas are shown a higher zoning designations throughout the entire area. Alternative 2 received the second highest vote total. Given that fact and given the fact that it is a different alternative than Alternative1,it was included in the Staff Report also. The third alternative is the staff proposed alternative. Mr. O'Neill explained why this is the staff proposed alternative. This alternative was not a part of the August 24th meeting. Essentially what the staff did in putting this alternative together was to review the feedback that they got back from the questionnaire, review the existing land use policies in both King County and Kent Comprehensive Plan, speak with the City Administration, go back to the City Council's resolution that was adopted at the time they were considering the Comprehensive Plan regarding this area, and a number of other things, including the residential targets and capacity. Meridian Annexation Area Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments-Area 2 #CPA-95-1 and#AZ-95-3 Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 1995 Page 5 Based on all of that the staff came up with another alternative that addressed these concerns. In this alternative some of the Urban Reserve areas,particularly the area directly around Clark Lake, the area along Big Soos Creek, and some of the agricultural areas located at the southern end of the Meridian Annexation Area remain at a very low density. The Urban Reserve areas that are a little closer to some of the more developed areas are proposed at a slightly higher single family density. The developed single family neighborhoods would essentially remain the same so those are either RI-7.2 or R1-9.6 as they are in all three alternatives and that would be consistent with the existing King County designations. The other major change in Alternative 3 is that it takes some of the vacant multi-family zoned land that is currently zoned for multi-family in King County but is not developed and designates the land as Commercial for those properties that directly front on Kent-Kangley Road. Otherwise the developed multi-family land, in other words the land that already has a project on it, is zoned multi- family and that is true in all three alternatives. Again,what this alternative provides for the most part is higher single family density for the urban reserve areas than does Alternative 1 but not quite as high as Alternative 2. The other major change is the way it treats the vacant multi-family parcels. This alternative actually has more land designated commercial and less land designated multi-family than any of the other two alternatives. In regard to capacity, the Planning Department believes that the projected target could be accom- modated by any of these three alternatives. However, with Alternative 1, it would be pretty tight because of all of the low density areas in the Urban Reserve Areas. The Kent Planning Department is confident that this alternative and the second one would accommodate those targets, but it was Mr. O'Neill's opinion that the City would have to do more work on both of those areas in order to accomodate those targets. Public Testimony Ms. Marie Lewis(speaking on behalf of George Lewis owner of property at the north end of Lake Meridian), 25840 - 135th Lane SE. Mr. Lewis owns six and a half acres with one house and 18 cabins. Mr. Lewis is requesting his property to be zoned at ten units per acre with a zero lot line (MRD). At present there is about an acre of beach set aside for those residents who live in the cabins. Commissioner Stringham asked Ms. Lewis how long the property had been in their family. Ms. Meridian Annexation Area Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments-Area 2 #CPA-95-1 and 9AZ-95-3 Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 1995 Page 6 Lewis informed the Planning Commission she has owned the property for 20 years. Commissioner Stringham also asked for the zoning history of the property. Ms. Lewis is unsure of the history but knows they are "non-conforming" zoning. Chair Morrill asked if that is the largest piece of property on the Lake and Ms. Lewis believes it is except for the Blueberry Patch Condominiums at the other end of the property. Mr. Gary Widener, 27220 154th Ave SE. Mr. Widener presented the Planning Commission with a letter and a map of his property. Mr. Widener has requested the Planning Commission to consider zoning his "neighborhood" community commercial. He has requested to square off an existing community commercial area so that his property would be included in the community commercial zoning that is adjacent to his property. Commissioner MacIsaac asked Mr. Widener if the lots to the south of his property were built out. Mr. Widener responded that there were only two lots and they were built out. Mr. Widener stated the only vacant lot is the cemetery to the east of his property. City of Kent Planning Director, James Harris, asked Mr. Widener what properties he represented. Mr.Widener clarified he owned lot 46 and was speaking for the lots#5 (Ormiston)and#7(Wilson). Gerry Ormiston, 9221 SE 61 st,Mercer Island. He is speaking on behalf of himself and his partner. He is in support of Alternative 3. His property has historically been zoned commercial until recently. His parcel is about 330 feet on Kent Kangley, and 120 feet deep. The property is bounded on the west by a commercial parcel and on the east is the Meridian Cemetary. Mr. Ormiston does not believe the property is appropriate for residential zoning. Mr. Ormiston also supports Mr. Widener suggestion to square off the existing community commercial. Again he fully supports the staff proposed Alternative 3. Commissioner Dahle asked Mr. Ormiston if the circle on the map represented a cul-de-sac. Mr. Ormiston explained that it was just the end of the road and it had not been developed as a cul-de-sac it was set up as a turn-around for a fire truck. David Spenser,27848 152nd Ave SE(Shady Park Grocery). This property has been the Shady Park Grocery since about 1920. He also has an existing auto repair shop. He has owned a little over three acres of land that includes the grocery for just under 20 years. Mr. Spenser would like consideration for some type of commercial zoning. He has suggested perhaps dividing the property and zoning the portion of property that is on 152nd commercial. Meridian Annexation Area Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments-Area 2 #CPA-95-1 and#AZ-95-3 Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 1995 Page 7 Mr.Dan Jones,28040 152nd Ave SE. Mr.Jones would like the Planning Commission to reconsider the zoning of his property. He would like consideration for the zoning of his property to be identical to the proposed King County zoning. Commissioner Stringham pointed out to Mr. Jones that according to the staff proposed Alternative #3 he would be zoned at either R1-12 or R1-7.2 (3 or 6 units per acre). Mr. Jones clarified that the King County zoning is for six units per acre. Mr. Steve Burpee, 1048 W. James#104. Mr. Burpee supports the annexation and also supports the previous recommendation to square off the commercial zoning located off Kent Kangley between 152nd and 156th. Mr. Burpee also complimented the Planning Department the process they used and how responsive they have been for information. Mr. Burpee supports staff s final proposal (Alternative#3). Commissioner Stringham asked Mr. Burpee if he owned property in the area or if he was present tonight representing other property owners. Mr. Burpee clarified he represents several property owners in the area. Mr. Sam Vass, 14610 SE 266th Street. He is a member of the Lake Meridian Options Committee. The committee was originally for Alternative 1 and strongly against Alternative#2 in its entirety. Mr. Vass had not had an opportunity to review Alternative #3 so was unable to comment on that alternative. However, he stated the Lake Meridian Options Committee is strongly against any change from existing zoning. Brenda Houston,22901 114th Way SE. Ms. Houston is representing her grandmother who resides at 15304 SE 273rd. The property is located in the area discussed previously by residents who would like to square the commercial area off. Ms. Houston's grandmother has lived in the area for 48 years. The property is currently directly east and south of commercial properties. The Houston's are against squaring off the area and making it commercial. They are happy with the way it is. Mr. Dean Wilson, 27234 154th Ave SE. This property is located immediately south of the Widener's. Mr. Wilson requests a commercial zoning for this area. He is a single parent with eight children who would like to move out of the area. Mr. Wilson believes it is more practically zoned as commercial. It is his opinion that the area is changing and it is no longer appropriate to raise a family. Commissioner Stringham clarified Mr. Wilson's property was lot #7 on the map provided to the Meridian Annexation Area Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments-Area 2 #CPA-95-1 and#AZ-95-3 Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 1995 Page 8 Planning Commission by Mr. Widener. Oly Pearson,26626 132nd SE. The 1.25 acre of property is on 132nd just east of the Lake Meridian Shopping Center. There is currently a nursery on the property. The current King County zoning is R6. He is requesting the same zoning as now in existence. Mr. Jack Evans, 13720 SE 259th. Member of the Lake Meridian Village. Mr. Evans brought to the attention of the Planning Commission the existence of about a 100 unit condominium units that are located in a single family residential. The condominium's are located right off of 256th Street on 138th Avenue behind the Meridian EIementary School. The area was developed about 15 years ago as condominiums. If the property is zoned as single family residential and there is a fire and the units burn down they will be unable to rebuild. The Lake Meridian Village would like the Planning Commission to reconsider the zoning in this area. Mr. Dean Conti,21121 SE 206th Street. Mr. Conti submitted a letter to the Planning Commission. Mr. Coni owns 16 acres at 12633 SE 270th Street. The property is the largest undeveloped property adjacent to Kent-Kangley Road west of Highway 18. The site contains significant wetlands and two seasonal streams. Mr. Coni is requesting consideration for commercial zoning on the frontage of his property. He has proposed using the wetlands for a community park. Commissioner Janette Nuss MOVED to close the public hearing. Commissioner Connie Epperly SECONDED the motion. MOTION CARRIED. The public hearing adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Mr. ONeill, Senior Planner,clarified that the questions requiring further research will be answered at the Monday, October 2,hearing. He addressed the following issues: In the instance of the nursery owned by Mr. Pearson, his property is indeed zoned R6, which is a single family zone. If it is legal and non-conforming or grandfathered it will also be legal and non- conforming in the City of Kent with the single family zoning designation. Regarding the condominium project on the north side of Lake Meridian,the City's non-comforming use provisions have a section that states that any legally established residential use in place prior to 1984 is legal in terms of its density. It's not legal and non-conforming, it's legal. In this specific instance a use such as Mr. Evans use would be considered a legal use in the City of Kent. Meridian Annexation Area Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments-Area 2 #CPA-95-1 and#AZ-95-3 Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 1995 Page 9 Mr. Satterstrom informed the Planning Commission that the animal issue question will be further address at the Monday, October 2, hearing. Mr. Satterstrom also clarified the reason the staff has not been addressing the mapping issues is the staff is researching the public's recommendations and zoning changes and will bring their recommendations on those issues as well to the October 2 hearing. Commissioner Stringham MOVED to adjourn the hearing. Commissioner Epperly SECONDED the motion. MOTION CARRIED. The public hearing adjourned at 8:22 p.m. -Respectfully Submitted, J es P. Harri c:\users\doc\pcmin9.26 Meridian Annexation Area Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments-Area 2 #CPA-95-1 and#AZ-95-3