Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning and Economic Development Committee - 02/13/1989 KENT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 13 , 1989 The meeting of the Kent Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Martinez at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, February 13, 1989 in the Kent City Hall, City Council Chambers. COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Linda Martinez, Chair Robert Badger, Vice Chair Anne Biteman Greg Greenstreet Carol Stoner Raymond Ward Gabriella Uhlar-Heffner COMMISSION MEMBER ABSENT: Elmira Forner, excused PLANNING STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Fred Satterstrom, Acting Planning Director Dan Stroh, Senior Planner Ken Astrein, Planner Lois Ricketts, Recording Secretary ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: Marty Nizlek, Transportation Engineer Ed White, Assistant Transportation Engineer APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 30, 1989 MEETING Commissioner Stoner MOVED that the minutes of the January 30, 1989 Planning Commission meeting be approved as printed. Commissioner Biteman SECONDED the motion. Motion carried. Chair Martinez reopened the public hearing. EAST VALLEY ZONING STUDY (GWC) Mr. Satterstrom entered the Sound Ventures Development Company letter dated January 30, 1989 as Exhibit 1, and a letter from Hill Investment Company dated February 8, 1989 as Exhibit 2. Ken Astrein presented the three actions involved in the East Valley Zoning Study: (1) creating a Gateway Commercial Zoning District (GWC) complete with design, landscape and development standards; Kent Planning Commission Minutes February 13 , 1989 (2) applying this new zoning district to the area outlined; (3) rezoning the site located on the corner of SR 167 and South 212th from Mobile Home Park to Office. Jim Torina, realtor, 1048 West James Street #104, Kent, WA 98032, representing the Pierres ' 4.8 acres of property, presented drawings of the proposed development which have been designed based on the GWC requirements. He expressed support of the new GWC standards, because it would allow higher use of the property. He did not object to the landscaping, sidewalk and setback requirements, but was concerned about the appearance of inconsistency along the street if only the new developments had sidewalks, curbs, etc. He felt that the street improvements should include the entire street. Torgy Torgerson, 24456 164th SE, Kent, 98042, felt that the area was industrially oriented, not retail oriented. only 20 percent of the area is currently undeveloped. He felt that the sprinkling of GWC uses would not change the appearance of the area significantly, and that the GWC landscaping requirement could eventually restrict the displaying of merchandise. He wished to use his property for auctions, a use not allowed under the proposed GWC zoning regulations. He asked that the Commission not recommend GWC to Council but he encouraged staff to consider CM2 zoning for Area 1. Gary Young, The Polygon Corporation, 4020 NE Lake Washington Boulevard, NE, Kirkland, WA 98033, developer of the Area 2 property, submitted into the record Exhibit 3, a letter dated February 13, 1989 to Mr. Nizlek from Bell-Walker Engineers, Inc. The letter stated that additional study showed the impacts created by the proposed development on the intersection of SE 212th and East Valley Highway are insignificant; the flow would be opposite to the peak flow on South 212th Street. He submitted Exhibit 4, a letter dated February 13, 1989 from Bell-Walker Engineers, Inc. to Gary Young, explaining the methodology utilized in determining the length of the right-turn (eastbound) lane on 212th which would provide right-turn access into the proposed development. The design would provide 85 feet plus the 50 foot area that follows the taper, a total of 135 feet. This has been approved by WSDOT. He rescinded his previous estimate of 150 feet. One-car storage is required, and they have provided for a three-car storage area. Because Area 2 is providing its own traffic mitigation which improves the situation at the interchange of SR 167/212th and is independent of the East Valley Road traffic situation, he asked that consideration be given to approving Area 2, even if Area 1 is not approved at the present time. 2 Kent Planning Commission Minutes February 13 , 1989 Gary Griswold, realtor, 5245 West Mercer Way, Mercer Island, 98040, supported the proposal because it would eliminate the constant nonconforming applications which are sometimes granted. It will also enable the Planning Department to plan for the future in a more realistic way. The aesthetic value of the area could be controlled and monitored for the benefit for everyone. Since growth will inevitably occur, he felt it is important to set guidelines to deal with the growth. He felt that the GWC rezoning would provide these guidelines. The traffic count could be lowered by serving the local consumer and eliminating the need to drive out of the area for goods and services. He felt there would be a minimum number of people who would come to the area because of the rezone. He commended the Planning Department for visualizing the impending growth and dealing with it from an offensive rather than defensive position. Phyllis Mauritsen, Kent Nursery, felt the zoning change to GWC would be a reasonable way to control the growth that is coming. If this is approved, she asked that crop and tree farming be included in the code as a permitted use for this zone. All the other zones in the city include crop and tree farming. Surinder-Pal Khela, 10818 SE 236th, Kent, 98031, supported the proposed GWC rezone because Polygon has provided adequate traffic mitigation. He suggested that Area 2 be approved as an office district, even if Area 1 were not approved at the present time. Rick Romney, partner with Spieker Partners, 1746 89th Place NE, Bellevue, a Kent commercial developer during the past nine years, explained that the addition of the freeway interchange at South 212th and East Valley Highway has changed traffic considerably. He has a 100-unit motel development planned for the area at South 206th and East Valley Highway. He foresees this area as a commercially-oriented corridor. He has been waiting four years for this rezoning. The Planning Department previously agreed with his request but had asked him to wait until this study is completed. He supported the proposed GWC but suggested minor changes. James Lashbrook, United Truck Lines, Inc, 8801 South 218th, Kent, 98031, supported the GWC proposal and felt this zoning could support some of the needs of the area. He noted that everything on the north side of South 218th and on the east side of the proposed GWC is currently zoned M2. The south side of South 218th is currently zoned CM1. He would like to see the south side changed to M2 . Lawrence Campbell, Campbell and Associates, 1609 South Central Avenue, Kent, supports the GWC plan but feels that all properties 3 Kent Planning Commission Minutes February 13 , 1989 south of 218th, west of the freeway and east of the GWC zone should be zoned M2, which would make the entire strip of land consistent along the entire length of the proposed GWC zone. The M2 designation would allow businesses that are now operating in that area to expand and remain in business rather than relocate. Don Lundberg, 2310 100th Avenue SE, Bellevue, owner of Tract 8 and the north half of Tract 7, stated that he built a high-quality steel building in strict conformance with the M1 zoning for Ingersoll Rand Company. This was designed especially for servicing and sales of heavy machinery. This building is presently occupied by Petzoldt Brothers Inc. which services and maintains large truck fleets, such as Lynden Transfer, Coca Cola and other companies. The use for which this building was designed would not be permitted under GWC zoning. The boundary for the GWC is on the east side of this building. He requested that the eastern boundary of GWC be moved to the west side of his facility so that he would be able to continue to operate the facility. If he were to lose a tenant and the building were empty for six months, he would not be able to rent the building for its present use. He explained that all the repair and servicing of heavy equipment takes place within the walls of the building, but parking and storage of large equipment must take place outside the building, a use not permitted in the proposed GWC zone. He felt that GWC zoning would be appropriate for the front portion of his property. Howard Montoure, Montoure Realty, 21620 84th Avenue South, has been located in the area 12 years and has been waiting for a rezone. Sites along this area are too small for industrial facilities. He would like to place a retail center in this proposed GWC zone without a conditional use permit. Jim Torina added that he has located several tenants for a certain empty building, but business licenses could not be issued because of the current zoning. Regarding the suggestion of M2 zoning south of South 218th, Phyllis Mauritsen commented that there are a number of small businesses in this area that fit into the CM zoning designation. She felt that the extension of M2 would be a mistake since there is a mobile home park located in the area. Torgy Torgerson expressed concern about the rear setback requirement of five feet of landscaping. He felt there was no reason for this landscaping, that it was lost property and a waste of money. 4 Kent Planning Commission Minutes February 13, 1989 Dan Stroh responded to the question of the Petzoldt Brothers site by stating that existing businesses had been considered when drawing the proposed boundaries. He had no objection to withdrawing this building from the GWC zone. He added that portions of the nursery site are included in the proposed GWC zone. He saw no reason why crop and tree farming could not be included in the proposal. Discussion followed regarding the separation of Area 1 and Area 2. Mr. Satterstrom responded that this was an area-wide issue. Mr. Nizlek submitted Exhibit 5, a memorandum to the Planning Commission dated February 13, 1989, showing present and projected traffic volumes. There are deficient levels of service that exist on South 212th Street at East Valley Highway and in the vicinity of SR 167 . The addition of 200 trips to the present zoning could be accommodated if South 212th were widened both east and west of East Valley Highway by one lane in each direction, and East Valley Highway from the southbound off ramps of SR 167 to 228th. The signals at South 212th and SR 167 southbound off ramps should be improved. For the addition of 400 trips, East Valley Highway should be widened north of the southbound off ramp to 224th by one lane in each direction and the signal at 224th should be improved. If 800 trips were added, East Valley Highway should be widened north of 224th with attention to turn lanes and signals as developments are determined. Kent has been growing approximately four percent per year. With the growth of 1, 000 trips plus a 15 percent factor representing this growth, SR 167 would become a problem even though widened by two lanes, the off-ramp would have congestion problems, and 224th would become a problem. He stated that truck traffic usually uses off hours for moving goods. He added that the master plan includes widening of East Valley Highway to five lanes when funding becomes available. Commissioner Badger pointed out that the widening of East Valley Highway could make it increasingly attractive for gaining access to SR 167 and the north valley area. He asked if the proposal included a request for dedication of each side of East Valley Highway for additional lanes. Mr. Stroh responded that it was now 65-80 feet wide and additional widening had not been taken into consideration in this proposal. Seven lanes and sidewalks would require more than 100 feet. Mr. Torina felt that if 20 additional feet were required for roads and 20 feet more for landscaping, the landscaping requirement should be reduced. 5 Kent Planning Commission Minutes February 13 , 1989 Mr. Young asked if the traffic mitigation being discussed affected Area 1 or Area 2 or both. Mr. Nizlek responded that the traffic studies involved Area 1, and he did not feel that Area 2 would contribute to the traffic situation being discussed. Chair Martinez asked if there were other measures that might mitigate traffic congestion other than making roadways wider. She wondered if the proposed rail study would have any effect on the area, and if cooperation between businesses and Metro to obtain smaller busses to service the area would help to mitigate the problem. Mr. Nizlek responded that the most that could be expected from such other mitigation measures would be a 15 percent reduction. Commissioner Stoner asked for a specific mechanism for a traffic mitigation measure that could be included in this rezone study. Mr. Nizlek responded that as development occurs, dedication of the necessary rights of way along the frontage is the standard procedure. Commissioner Stoner MOVED to close the public hearing. Commissioner Ward SECONDED the motion. Mr. Satterstrom suggested that staff (1) look at possible ways to mitigate the proposal by looking at the allowed uses in terms of reducing the trips; (2) look at the desirability and mechanism for adding two lanes; (3) look at some options for the freeway intersection of SR 167 and the East Valley Highway. He stated that it is difficult to channel 40,000 trips underneath the overpass of SR 167 with the limitation of four lanes. He suggested looking at options in terms of disallowing certain left-hand turns in the area and ways of decreasing the delay through intersections. Commissioner Badger MOVED to continue the hearing to March 20, 1989 . Commissioner Stoner SECONDED the motion. Motion carried. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Badger MOVED to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Stoner SECONDED the motion. Motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 10: 10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, rNNP";f== . Satterstrom Planning Director 6