Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning and Economic Development Committee - 07/24/1995 (3) KENT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Public Hearing July 24, 1995 The regular meeting of the Kent Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Kent Morrill at 7:00 p.m. on July 24, 1995 in Kent City Hall, Chambers West. PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Morrill, Chair Russ Stringham, Vice Chair Gwen Dahle Kenneth Dozier Connie Epperly Edward Heineman, Jr. Robert Maclsaac Janette Nuss Mike Pattison PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: None PLANNING STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: James Harris, Planning Director Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager Kevin O'Neill, Senior Planner Matthews Jackson, Planner/GIS Coordinator NanSea Potts, Administrative Secretary Sharon Folsom, Planning Intern OTHER CITY STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Ed White, Transportation Engineer APPROVAL OF JUNE 26, 1995 MINUTES Corrections and clarifications to the minutes were as follows: On page five, an error was noted in the text concerning Commissioner Heineman's agreement with Commissioner Nuss' opinion. Also questioned was the statement regarding cars parking two deep in driveways. After explanation, it was agreed no correction would be necessary. Commissioner Pattison said his vote regarding Accessory Housing Units was yea, not nay. It was MOVED and SECONDED to accept the minutes of the June 26, 1995 meeting as corrected. The motion CARRIED. ADDED AGENDA ITEMS - None #CPZ-95-1 -Zoning Map Amendments to Implement the Comprehensive Plan Planning Commission Minutes _ July 24, 1995 Page 2 COMMUNICATIONS Jim Harris, Planning Director, announced that the Boundary Review Board approved the Meridian annexation boundary, an area of 5.3 square miles with a population of 20,000 persons. He said the formal decision will made on August loth, at which time a resolution will be passed. Mr. Harris said this annexation will impact the Planning Commission in the future as there will be several meetings on zoning as well as review of the comprehensive plan. He said the intent of the City Council is to have the annexation take effect on January 1, 1996, and to have the zoning in place at that time. NOTICE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS - None #CPZ-95-1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IMPLEMENTATION-ZONING MAP AMENDMENT Kevin O'Neill, Senior Planner, presented background of the Zoning Map Amendment process, and its correlation to the recently adopted Kent Comprehensive Plan. He referred to the staff report entitled Zoning Map Amendments to Implement the Comprehensive Plan, Phase I - East Hill, which contains information on the locations of tonight's proposed amendments, as well as colored maps which indicate land use designations and current zoning districts. He said staff compared the land use plan map to existing zoning and identified nine areas where zoning designation were a lesser density than the land use plan map. Mr. O'Neill said the changes allowing a higher density to already existing single family areas, except in one case where the City Council changed a designation from single family to multifamily, since the area was already developed as multifamily. Chair Morrill opened the public meeting. Mr. O'Neill outlined the material contained in the staff report, including a summary of the areas size, current and surrounding designations and zoning, and staff's recommendation. Questions will be answered by staff. Area #1 - Mr. O'Neill said this area is located at the north end of the City, east of the SR167 and south of 192nd Street. Surrounding King County and Renton zoning is one unit per acre, and the parcels are large, generally over one acre, and currently zoned RA. Due to limited access and environmental concerns, staff recommends a zoning designation of R1-20. Commissioner MacIsaac questioned if Kent was violating their own comprehensive plan by lowering densities. Mr. O'Neill said they were not, since the plan defines land use designations as "up to" a certain density. No testimony was given. #CPZ-95-1 -Zoning Map Amendments to Implement the Comprehensive Plan Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 1995 Page 3 Area #2 - Matt Jackson gave the background concerning this area, which is located south of Area #1, along the Valley Freeway, and north of 208th Street. He said this 14 acre area is zoned RA, and that most of the lots are already developed. He said since this area is accessible by roads, the density of R1-12 is recommended by staff. No testimony was given. Area #3 - Mr. O'Neill gave the background concerning this area, which is located adjacent to Benson Road, and north of South 240th Street, east of the Beck annexation area. He said this 118 acre area is currently zoned R1-9.6 and staff is recommending R1-7.2, consistent with existing King County and City zoning. He said a correction to the staff report needs to be noted as the City Council recently changed the zoning to the north and to the west from R1-20 (Interim Zoning) to R1-9.6. John Walburn, of 23719 99 Avenue S, said his property borders the southern boundary of Area #3. He said he thought an R1-7.2 meant six units per acre, and asked how many units per acre the designation R1-9.6 represented. He also asked if 99th Avenue would become a through street if the area is zoned with a higher density. Les Loken, of 23206 100 Avenue SE, indicated a city park on the map and suggested a multifamily designation be extended north to South 231st Street to include this area. He gave reasons why this would be helpful to the neighborhood, children walking safely to the park and that an easement through his property would allow park access. He listed City projects currently in progress which he said indicates further residential development that could support additional multifamily development. He asked the Planning Commission to consider his request. Area #4 - Mr. Jackson said this 14 acre area was rezoned in 1989 from MRM to R1-5.0 in an effort to promote single family development. However, multifamily projects were already proposed for the vacant lots. Since this area is already built out as multifamily, staff recommends an MRG designation, as the City Council recommended a low density multi-family designation. Mr. O'Neill explained the difficulties involved if a non-conforming structure is destroyed and needed to be rebuilt. He said the present non-conforming provisions of the zoning code states that a medium density complex, provided it was constructed prior to 1973, could be rebuilt as a medium density rather than garden density. He said staff is recommending elimination of the date provision during the zoning code implementation. Paul Morford, of PO Box 6345, Kent, said this entire area is built out at medium density, and expressed concern with the non-conforming issue from a financing and sales standpoint. He proposed zoning as MRM, as that was the zoning designation at the time he purchased the property approximately 12-15 years ago. He gave the zoning history of this area, and said it was time to correct the zoning back to MRM, instead of MRG, from single family designation. In response to Commissioner MacIsaac's request, Mr. Morford indicated his properties on the map and gave the zoning history of each. #CPZ-95-1 - Zoning Map Amendments to Implement the Comprehensive Plan Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 1995 Page 4 Commissioner Nuss asked staff to explain why MRG was recommended instead of MRM. Chair Morrill said this should be answered at the conclusion of the hearings. Area #5 - Mr. O'Neill said the MRM designation for this two acre area was proposed in response to a request by a property owner who owns an apartment complex that was split-zoned MRD and MRM. He said in the course of plotting the parcel, the adjacent single family residential property was inadvertently included on the map for proposed zoning of MRM. Lee Ann (Blessing) Johnson, of 320 North Summit Avenue said she owns the home located adjacent to the apartment complex at 308 North Summit Avenue, which asked to be zoned MRM. She distributed and read a statement objecting to the proposed MRM designation for her property, and asked that her property remain single family residential. Robert Zube, of 17302 SE 45th Street, Issaquah, owner of the apartment complex located at 308 North Summit Avenue, testified that he did not request the Johnson property be included in the MRM designation when he testified during the comprehensive plan public hearings. Area #6 - Mr. Jackson said the 109 acre site is located north of South 248th Street between 94th and 104th Avenues. He said the comprehensive plan designates this area as SF-8, and staff is recommending R1-5.0 and R1-7.2, from R1-7.2 and R1-9.6, as it is well served by services to support the recommended higher density. He also said street improvements are proposed for South 94th Avenue and South 248th Street. Mr. Jackson explained the proposed zoning changes as R1-5.0 for the area to the north and R1-7.2 for the area to the south. John Talbot of 10008 SE 245th Place said he is against lowering the lot size minimums, and says a group of citizens is petitioning the City Council to keep 100th Avenue and 244th Street closed from becoming through streets. Although his land will not be affected by the proposed change, Mr. Talbot expressed concern with possible new development which would cause 100th Avenue to be opened to through traffic. He also said he was notified only today of the public hearing and asked that communications improve regarding important issues as this. Joe Reichlin of 9425 South 247th said he has lived in this area for 25 years and that he has seen the area grow. He said he feels the density is fine the way it is, and additional density would cause a dangerous traffic situation. He said he opposes the proposed change from RI-7 2 to Rl- 5.0. Jim Schmidt of 10019 SE 246th Place said he opposes the proposed change from R1-7.2 to Rl- 5.0 for the same reasons stated previously. He stated also that the R1-5.0 would create a negative impact on the schools. Connie Ryerson of 10012 SE 244th Court said she agrees strongly with the previous testimonies. She presented a copy of a petition which was submitted to the City Council requesting that both 100th Avenue SE and South 244th Street remain non-through streets. She #CPZ-95-1 - Zoning Map Amendments to Implement the Comprehensive Plan Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 1995 Page 5 gave reasons supporting why these streets should remain closed, and that opening the streets would jeopardize safety of children walking to school. Ms. Ryerson said she strongly disagrees with the proposed zoning change. Commissioner Nuss asked why so many people were uninformed about the meeting tonight. Staff will respond later. When asked how the children are walking to school now, Ms. Ryerson responded there are gravel foot paths through the area and the children walk together in groups accompanied by older children. She said the path is far safer than a busy street with fast cars. Tony Zupan of 9928 South 248th Street said he has lived in his neighborhood over 15 years, said he against the proposed changes for the area. He said additional density would create the need for more streets. He said the present zoning would be best for the neighborhood. Ken Noyce of 9820 South 245th Place testified that he strongly objects to the proposed R1-5.0 zoning. He listed a variety of planning changes he has seen in his neighborhood which have created negative impacts. He said he is concerned about safety for the children walking to school, by increased traffic, and by drivers who do not slow down when children are walking down the street. David McGrew (did not sign the roster) said he was in favor of the change to R1-7.2, and that R1-9.6 is too large and restrictive. Mr. O'Neill clarified that existing zoning as R1-7.2 on the east side of 100th, and R1-9.6 on the west side. Area #7 - Mr. O'Neill described this area as 8 acres located in the southwest corner of SE 232nd Street and 112th Avenue SE. He said the comprehensive plan designation is SF-6, consistent with surrounding county, and staff recommends changing the zoning from R1-9.6 to R1-7.2. No testimony was given. Area #8 - Mr. Jackson stated this 9 acre area is located south of 240th, at the SW corner of 116th Avenue SE, with a current zoning of R1-12. He said staff recommends R1-7.2, consistent with surrounding zoning and the comprehensive plan. When asked why R1-5.0 was not recommended, Mr. Jackson said the change from R1-12 to R1-5.0 would be too substantial, and R1-7.2 was a fair compromise. Mr. Jackson said there was prior public testimony to support the SF-6 request through the Planning Commission, Planning Committee and the City Council. No testimony was given. #CPZ-95-1 - Zoning Map Amendments to Implement the Comprehensive Plan Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 1995 Page 6 Area #9 - Mr. O'Neill said this 12 acre area is located at the northwest corner of 116th Avenue SE and Kent Kangley Road, and that existing zoning is R1-7.2. He explained that this area is surrounded by multifamily and that a property owner requested a multifamily designation for this area, which was denied by the City Council. Therefore, to allow a higher density, R1-5.0 is recommended. When asked if there was a multifamily development east of 116th Avenue, Mr. O'Neill said it may only zoned multifamily, without an actual multifamily development. Tom Sharp of 11126 SE 256th Street said he was the individual who was denied the multifamily request. Mr. Sharp gave reasons why his property should be zoned MRM or MRG, rather than creating a single family island, and stated it is very difficult to sell a house which is located next door to an apartment complex. He confirmed that he is requesting a split zoning to square off the zoning of the 2 acre parcel. Chair Morrill asked if anyone else present wished to speak. Bernel Thorley of 23805 99th Avenue South said his area is between Area #6 and Area #3. He asked several questions including if it is the City's goal or policy to develop at a higher densities, and if so, whether the quality of life and traffic concerns were considered. He said he felt 5,000 square foot lots would destroy the rural atmosphere of the area, as well as creating an area of lower priced homes. Chair Morrill responded that it was not a goal of the City. Commissioner Nuss MOVED to close the public hearing. Commissioner Dozier SECONDED the motion. The motion CARRIED unanimously. At the request of the Chair, Mr. O'Neill answered questions which were presented during the public hearing. Regarding Area #3 and the future opening of 99th Avenue, Mr. O'Neill concurred with Ed White, Traffic Engineer, that there were no immediate plans to do so. Concerning the extension of multifamily near 231st, Mr. O'Neill stated that the purpose of this meeting is to implement zoning to conform to the comprehensive plan, which has designated this area as SF-6. He further explained the legal issues involved with the Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements. He said this process includes adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, which was accomplished on April 18, 1995, and consistency and implementation of development regulations to the comprehensive plan. Regarding Area #4, Mr. O'Neill said the specific differences between MRG and MRM zoning were discussed at hearings and that the City Council designated this area as Low Density Multifamily because they did not want additional multifamily units developed in that area. On Area #5, Mr. O'Neill said staff inadvertently included Mrs. Johnson's parcel in the MRM zoning, and staff concurs with the proposal to zone the property R1-7.2. #CPZ--95-1 - Zoning Map Amendments to Implement the Comprehensive Plan Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 1995 Page 7 Mr. O'Neill said pertaining to the issues on Area #b, public notices were mailed over ten days prior to the hearing, and that he was concerned why so many property owners received late notices or none at all. He said this area offers a lot of development potential, because of the large lots. Concerning traffic, he said this area is included in the City Council adopted six-year transportation improvement program, which plans to widen and improve 94th Avenue and 248th Street. Commissioner Stringham asked Mr. White the status of potentially making 100th Avenue a through street. Mr. White said the Public Works Committee recently met with residents of the area, who submitted a petition requesting 100th remain closed to through traffic. He said because of the approval of the Hilltop Development, 244th will be opened. On Area #9, Mr. O'Neill said it would take a comprehensive plan amendment to achieve the request for a multifamily designation. He said a broad policy decision was made by the City during the drafting of the comprehensive plan, to not change single family zoning to multifamily. He reiterated that one of the City's overall policy of the comprehensive plan is to try to accommodate the city's projected household growth as much as possible with single-family residential development. The Commissioners decided to deliberate on each area separately. Commissioner Dozier MOVED to accept staff's recommendation for Area #1. Commissioner Nuss SECONDED the motion. Discussion: Commissioner MacIsaac asked that the commission be aware that this area is down-zoned, and concern should be given regarding meeting Kent's future housing goals. It was noted that no one testified on this issue. The motion CARRIED. (Nay - Commissioner MacIsaac) Commissioner Stringham MOVED to accept staff's recommendation for Area #2. Commissioner MacIsaac SECONDED the motion. The motion CARRIED unanimously. Commissioner Nuss MOVED to accept staff's recommendation for Area #3. Commissioner Stringham SECONDED the motion. Discussion: Commissioner Stringham said that on many of the decisions the Planning Commission makes, the Commission does not have a choice. He explained that laws from the Growth Management Act, passed by the State Legislature, and the County-wide Planning Policies, passed by King County, dictate how much growth the City will accommodate. He said smaller lot sizes is one method promoting additional single family housing, instead of resorting to additional multifamily development when housing targets are not achieved by the end of the growth period. Commissioner Nuss said she, and perhaps other Commissioners, were not in agreement with Commissioner Stringham's statement. The motion CARRIED. (Nay - Commissioners Dozier, Pattison) #CPZ-95-1 - Zoning Map Amendments to Implement the Comprehensive Plan Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 1995 Page 8 Commissioner MacIsaac MOVED to change Area #4 to an MRM designation to remain consistent with the existing structures. Commissioner Stringham SECONDED the motion. The motion CARRIED. (Nay - Commissioner Dahle) Commissioner Epperly MOVED to accept staff's recommendation of MRM for Area #5, but removing the single family residence located on the northwest comer, which would be zoned Rl- 7.2. Commissioner Stringham SECONDED the motion. The motion CARRIED unanimously. Commissioner Nuss MOVED to keep Area #6 as R1-7.2 as requested by the citizens. Commissioner Heineman SECONDED the motion. Discussion: The Commission received a clarification from Mr. O'Neill on current zoning. Commissioner Nuss asked to change her original motion to state that she wished to accept R1-9.6 and R1-7.2, out of respect to the safety of the children in the area. Commissioner Dozier SECONDED the motion. Discussion: Commissioner Dahle asked if the entire area could be zoned R1-7.2, which would lower the number of new children to the neighborhood and still retain property values. The Commissioners also discussed if it was zoned R1-7.2, if 100th Avenue could remain as a non- through street. Mr. O'Neill said he could not make that guarantee. Commissioner MacIsaac expressed his concern regarding acquiring details for slated street improvements for this area, and Mr. White provided the types background material used to base improvements to roadways. In response to Commissioner MacIsaac's questions, Mr. White said financing is currently not available to place a traffic light at 94th Avenue and Canyon Drive, nor Strawberry Lane. He said there was an insignificant difference in peak hour trips generated when comparing zoning of R1-9.6 and R1-7.2, but pass through traffic would increase substantially if 100th Avenue is opened. Commissioner Heineman said in response to the comment concerning a law requiring that we have a specified number of housing units allowed for growth, he said he has a copy of a letter from a State official which states that Kent was at the extreme upper end of the range for housing growth projections. Several Commissioners expressed their interest in obtaining a copy of the letter. Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager explained the letter Commissioner Heineman refers to was sent to the City late last year from the Department of Community and Economic Trade. He said during the comprehensive plan process, a household target number of 7,520 was derived. He said after the target figure had been established and the draft comprehensive plan created, the Urban Centers Committee developed ranges which were presented to the GMPC. He said our City Council never acted on the target ranges, which Kent's low end was approximately 6,000 households. Mr. Satterstrom said the State wanted to use the midpoint figure, and the actual figure will fluctuate. Commissioner Nuss added that she was aware of the letter and the adjustments at GMPC hearings. Commissioner Nuss withdrew her motion. Commissioner Dozier MOVED to leave the zoning as is for Area A. Commissioner Heineman SECONDED the motion. The motion CARRIED unanimously. #CPZ-95-1 -Zoning Map Amendments to Implement the Comprehensive Plan Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 1995 Page 9 Commissioner Dozier MOVED to accept staff's recommendation for Area #7. Commissioner Nuss SECONDED the motion. The motion CARRIED unanimously. Commissioner Dozier MOVED to accept staff's recommendation for Area #8. Commissioner Epperly SECONDED the motion. The motion CARRIED unanimously. Commissioner MacIsaac MOVED to accept staff's recommendation for Area#9. Commissioner Heineman SECONDED the motion. The motion CARRIED unanimously. Commissioner Stringham said for the benefit of those property owners in Area #9, the Comprehensive Plan will be reviewed on an annual basis, and he suggested requests for multifamily zoning be addressed at the City Council meetings. He said property owners could ask the Council to explain why the area was designated single family. Commissioner Pattison MOVED that the Planning Department staff review the method of notification of citizens, and present it to the next Planning Commission Workshop. Commissioner Stringham SECONDED the motion. Commissioner Dahle added that the public notice was in the local newspaper three times. The motion CARRIED. GOOD OF THE ORDER - There were no items. It was MOVED and SECONDED to adjourn the meeting. The motion CARRIED. The meeting adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, jcr esP. Harris etary #CPZ-95-1 - Zoning Map Amendments to Implement the Comprehensive Plan