Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning and Economic Development Committee - 09/27/1993 KENT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 27, 1993 The meeting of the Kent Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Heineman at 7:00 pm on September 27, 1993 in the Kent City Hall, Chambers West. PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Edward Heineman, Jr. Gwen Dahle Albert Haylor Bob MacIssac Kent Morrill Raymond Ward PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER ABSENT: Kenneth Dozier Christopher Grant Janet Nuss PLANNING STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: James P. Harris, Planning Director Chris Holden, Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF AUGUST 23 , 1993 MINUTES MOTION was made to accept the August 23 , 1993 minutes as presented. The motion was SECONDED. Motion CARRIED. UPCOMING MEETINGS Mr. Harris commented on October 11, 1993 there will be a Planning Commission workshop and on October 23 , 1993, a public hearing is scheduled to consider the Chestnut Ridge annexation zoning and Comprehensive Plan amendment. Furthermore, three meetings concerning Growth Management are scheduled as follows: October 20, 1993 , at Daniel Elementary School; October 21, 1993 , Chambers East; and October 27, 1993 , Sunnycrest Elementary School. All meetings are from 4 to 8 PM. The City Council will be holding a four-hour workshop concerning capital facilities possibly in November. #ZCA-93-7 CONVENIENCE STORES/GASOLINE SALES SIGN CODE AMENDMENT (Section 15. 06. 050 B) . A request to amend the City's sign regulations pertaining to convenience stores with gasoline sales. 1 Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 1993 Mr. Harris briefly described the proposed amendment to the sign code. The proposed requested amendments encompass: 1. The request proposes to change the permitted aggregate sign area calculation from a ratio of one (1) square foot of sign area for each foot of lot frontage to one and one-half (1 1/2) square feet of sign area for each front foot of lot frontage. This change, as proposed, would affect interior lots only. 2 . The aggregate sign area for freestanding signs for convenience stores with gasoline sales would be increased from 150 square feet to 200 square feet. 3 . Also, as proposed, fuel price sign area would be included in the aggregate sign. Existing regulations exempt such signs but restrict their size to 30 square feet. The Planning Department recommends that the sign code amendment be approved. Bruce Creager, Barghausen Engineering, 18215 72nd Avenue S. , Kent, WA 98032, on behalf of Atlantic Richfield, concurred with the Planning Department's recommendation of approval. He felt this is not a grant of special privilege instead convenience stores would be treated equally as other businesses. The public hearing was closed. A MOTION was MADE and SECONDED that the City sign code be amended as recommended by the Planning Department. MOTION CARRIED. A MOTION was MADE and SECONDED to adjourn. MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, 4JS4. HARRIS, secretary 2 CITY OF L"L�� CITY OF KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT (206) 859-3390 VC MEMORANDUM October 25, 1993 MEMO TO: ED HEINEMAN, CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: MATTHEWS JACKSON, PLANNER SUBJECT: PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT: CHESTNUT RIDGE ANNEXATION AREA INITIAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION #CPA-93-2 Background: On April 6, 1993 , the City Council passed Ordinance No. 3099 approving the annexation of 186. 66 acres of land known as the Chestnut Ridge Annexation Area to the City of Kent. Chestnut Ridge became a part of the City of Kent on May 61 1993 . Although this site is located adjacent to the former city boundary, there is no City comprehensive plan designation for the area. This proposal is to amend the City of Kent Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map in order to establish comprehensive plan designations for the Chestnut Ridge Annexation Area. This proposal is being heard concurrently with a zoning code amendment to rezone the area from its current interim zoning of R1-20. The site is generally bordered by 92nd Ave S. on the west, S. 200th Street on the north, 100th Ave S. on the east, and S. 208th Street on the south. A portion of the site extends south of S. 208th Street to S. 212th Street at the southwest corner of the property (SEE, attached site map) . The area includes approximately 294 parcels of land, 263 housing units (all single family) , and 743 residents. Existing Land Use: The proposed amendment site lies on a portion of lower East Hill (SEE, attached vicinity map) . Land use in the area consists mainly of single family residences. Springbrook Elementary School is located in the northeast corner of the site. There are also horse pastures in the area. Significant plats in the area include the divisions of Chestnut Ridge, Valley View Heights, Starview Estates, and Whitney Heights. There is a mixture of lot sizes in the area, however, there are a substantial number of lots in the 8, 000 - 10, 000 square foot range, 1 Memo To: Ed Heineman, Chairs, and Members of the Planning Commission Subject: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment: Chestnut Ridge #CPA-93-2 as well as 1 - 1. 5 acres. A number of the larger parcels of land are either undeveloped or underdeveloped. Environmental Considerations: Portions of the site have significant development and access constraints due to topography. The North Fork of Garrison Creek is located on a portion of the southwest tip of the site. Slopes on the subject property range from 3-4 percent to those exceeding 25 percent. Areas with slopes exceeding 15 percent can potentially be classified as class 3 seismic hazard areas. Class 3 seismic hazard areas means those areas subject to severe risk of earthquake damage. These areas can also have high landslide potential. The City of Kent has an inventory of low, moderate, and high hazard areas, as well as restrictions on hazard area development. This area will be reviewed for inclusion in the City's inventory of hazard areas. There are no inventoried wetlands on the site, but drainage in this area will be an issue for new development. There is a variety of vegetation including many significant trees. New development in this area will also have to protect views through the view - regulations of the City of Kent Zoning Code. ccess• Because the site has such significant topographical constraints, there is limited access to the site. Primary access can currently be made from S. 208th Street at 96th Ave S. , and from 100th Ave S. at S. 203rd Street. Traffic impacts are already significant in the area at peak hours and are of concern to neighborhood residents. METRO transit does provide service to the area along S. 203rd Street. Land Use Plans and Zoning: Prior to annexation, the Chestnut Ridge Annexation Area was included in the King County Soos Creek Community Planning Area. The Soos Creek Community Plan and Area Zoning Update was completed in 1991. This plan updated the previous plan which was adopted in November, 1979. The King County Comprehensive Land Use designation for the subject area is Urban. The Urban designation applies to areas planned for growth at a range of residential densities, where urban public facility and service standards will apply. The Soos Creek 2 Memo To: Ed Heineman, Chairs, and Members of the Planning Commission Subject: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment: Chestnut Ridge #CPA-93-2 Community Plan designated the area Single Family, 4 - 8 units per acre. The Soos Creek Community Plan also called for the phasing of development. These policies called for phasing blocks of residential development in order to synchronize development with the availability of services to allow service providers to anticipate and plan for growth. Phasing is a plan for growth and to encourage efficient use of urban land before opening new areas to urban development . The plan designates the Chestnut Ridge area as Phase 1. These are lands immediately adjacent to the incorporated cities and near existing urban activity centers. These areas are planned to receive growth first, because of their proximity to urban services and resources. The previous King County zoning for a majority of the subject property was RS-7200, Single Family , 1 unit per 7, 200 square feet., ' The property bordered by S. 200th Street, 92nd Avenue S. , and S. 202nd Street, excluding the school property, as well as the parcel of land extending from S. 212th Street to S. 208th Street, east of 92nd Avenue S. , was zoned GR-5, with a potential zoning of RS-5000, Single Family, 1 unit per 5, 000 square feet. GR-5, Growth Reserve, 1 unit per 5 acres, is an interim zoning which expires on December 31, 1994 . At this time the potential zoning becomes effective. GR-5 zoning is applied to undeveloped and underdeveloped single family designated lands in Phase 1. A small portion of land located north of S. 208th Street, from 92nd Avenue S. approximately 650 feet to the east and 850 feet to north, was zoned SR-9600, Single Family, 1 unit per 9, 600 square feet. The interim zoning for the Chestnut Ridge area is R1-20, Single Family Residential, 1 unit per 20, 000 square feet. This zoning is applied to all newly annexed property to the City. Adjacent City of Kent zoning ranges from RA, Residential Agricultural, to O, Office. Neighboring land uses include single family dwellings, a City of Kent water treatment facility, and a golf driving range which is under construction. Short plat activity has occurred on properties fronting on 92nd Avenue S. on one acre lots, and potentially 12, 000 square foot lots. The City of Kent also has a "Single Family Designated Area Overlay, " which targets areas where only single family residential housing development should occur. This overlay was created to preserve and create single family neighborhoods in areas where more dense types of development are not appropriate. The area abutting 3 Memo To: Ed Heineman, Chairs, and Members of the Planning Commission Subject: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment: Chestnut Ridge 4CPA-93-2 the annexation area to the south is included in the single Family Designated Area Overlay Map. Plan Amendment Alternatives and Analysis: Planning staff evaluated two alternatives for Comprehensive Plan designations for the area. On September 8, 1993, the Planning Department held an open house at Springbrook Elementary School to get public feedback on neighborhood issues and concerns, zoning alternatives, and comprehensive plan alternatives. The issues of greatest concern to residents are traffic mitigation, rural character and open space, and preserving the single family neighborhood. A questionnaire was completed by 56 people, and those concerns were addressed in evaluating plan amendments. The area west of the subject property is included in the Valley Floor Plan. The section between S. 208th Street and S. 212th Street is designated as O, Office and Professional. The section north of S. 208th Street is designated SF, Single Family. The area south of the annexation area is included in the East Hill Area Land Use Plan. This area is designated SF 6, Single Family, 4 - 6 units per acre. The areas north and east of Chestnut Ridge are not included in the Comprehensive Plan. Compatibility with existing designations was considered in evaluating the two alternatives. Comprehensive Plan Alternative 1 designates the entire area SF, Single Family (SEE, attached Alternative 1 map) . This alternative takes into consideration the constrained topography of the area, the existing single family character of the neighborhood, and compatibility with adjacent uses and designations. Applicable densities for this area would be SF 61 4 - 6 units per acre north of S. 208th Street, and SF 1, one unit per acre for the large parcel between S. 208th Street and S. 212th Street. Single family land uses at these densities would be comparable to existing uses and have less of an impact on the existing infrastructure. Comprehensive Plan Alternative 2 designates the portion between S. 208th Street and S. 212th Street, and the portion north of S. 208th Street, extending east from 92nd Avenue S. 650 feet, and north 850 feet as MF, Multifamily (SEE, attached Alternative 2 map) . An appropriate density for this designation would be MF 12 , 7 - 12 units per acre. This represents an attempt to allow similar densities as the previous King County designations allowed. King County regulations allow both cluster and planned unit developments 4 Memo To: Ed Heineman, Chairs, and Members of the Planning Commission Subject: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment: Chestnut Ridge #CPA-93-2 in single family zones. Though overall density is the same over an area, individual lots may be less than the underlying zoning minimum. In addition, multifamily units may be allowed in PUDs. The areas chosen for the MF designation are those where proposed PUD's have been discussed. The remaining area would be designated SF 6. The idea behind this alternative is to give residents of Chestnut Ridge the same kind of development potential they expected under King County regulations. Since the Soos Creek Community Plan was updated so recently, a lot of research and work had already gone into assessing the future for this area. Unfortunately, it appears little consideration of the topography and other constraints in the area was given in zoning for higher densities. In addition, multifamily housing would not be compatible with the existing single family neighborhood. Staff Recommendation: Based on the findings and conclusions as outlined above, the Planning Department staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommends to the Kent City Council to: 1) Amend the City-wide Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map to designate the entire Chestnut Ridge Annexation Area as SF, Single Family, as depicted in Alternative Plan Amendment #1 attached. 2) In addition, the "Single Family Designated Area Overlay" map shall be amended to include this area. MJ/ch:cpa932 Enclosures cc: Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager James P. Harris, Planning Director 5 1 10ROINI OWN Ph������� p� Vic•• �i►���'V'.�/®�►�I`umor, UR MEXCL ami MA � Y,1P'111WIIIIIHI•' -. 3V t ���APApa SAM �. �. ii_ MAN ' - ^ ^ ^ CHESTNUT RIDGE ALTERNATIVE 1 _ SINGLE FAMILY ��[ 1 `}| | 1 UNIT PER ACRE SINGLE FAMILY (�[ � U J| 4-6UN|TS/ACRE W CITY LIMITS ElANNEXATION AREA DESIGNATION BOUNDARY 77 - � CHESTNUT RIDGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ALTERNATIVE 2 g- w a x m S. 200TH. ST. '�,` ;'�'- A' �5:�x y>��lJ� E M-V ��`,�r>1a.� �>. ^'�+,.Y�. sR 2 F .">^S �M1 J3;' � ,a✓ E P�wA�.. s "1 T• s a ,ixz Ei i a<x'y�•�(�'w ry� � n r�t Z 13�rn�i�i jg SINGLE FAMILY ' �,�•�. k;, , , SF 6 4-6 UNITS/ACRE MULTIFAMILY M F 12 7-12 UNITS/ACRE to CITY LIMITS ElANNEXATION AREA r � DESIGNATION BOUNDARY CITY OF Red 1 L. H CITY OF LU�LSV CITY OF KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT (206) 859-3390 MEMORANDUM October 25, 1993 MEMO TO: ED HEINEMAN, CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: KEVIN O'NEILL, SENIOR PLANNER SUBJECT: PROPOSED CHESTNUT RIDGE ANNEXATION AREA INITIAL ZONING #AZ-93-1 Background In April 1993 , the City Council approved the annexation of the area known as the Chestnut Ridge Annexation Area into the City of Kent. This area, which is approximately 187 acres, is generally bounded by S. 200th Street to the north, S. 208th Street to the south, 92nd Avenue S. to the west, and 100th Avenue S. to the east (see attached maps) . Subsequent to the annexation of the area by the City, the entire area was zoned R1-20 (Single-Family Residential) , pursuant to Section 15. 03 . 020 (E) (2) of the Kent Zoning Code. The purpose of this process is to establish initial zoning for the annexation area, as outlined in Section 15. 09 . 055 of the Zoning Code. This report will outline background information on the area, including the previous zoning of the area while it was still located in unincorporated King County. The report will summarize some of the differences between the previous King County zoning designations and City of Kent zoning, and then outline three alternatives for zoning the area which have been considered by both staff and residents of the area. This project is being done concurrent with a comprehensive plan map amendment, which will incorporate the annexation area into the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map. The report for this project (#CPA-93-2) outlines much of the background and history of this area. This report will summarize this information in order to help understand the rationale behind the zoning alternatives and recommendations. Further background information on the annexation area can be found in the Chestnut Ridge Annexation Area Initial Comprehensive Plan Map Designation (#CPA-93-2) report. 1 Memo To: Ed Heineman, Chair, and Members of the Planning Commission Re: Chestnut Ridge Annexation #AZ-93-1 Existing Land Uses The land uses in this area are predominantly single-family residential, with the exception of the Springbrook Elementary School, which is located at the northeast portion of the annexation area on 100th Avenue S. A large portion of the annexation area has already been subdivided and built upon, particularly the area between S. 202nd and S. 208th Streets. There are also a fair amount of single-family development between S. 200th and S. 202nd Streets; however, the lot sizes tend to be much larger in this area, with many having the potential to be further subdivided in the future. There are some large vacant parcels located at the southwest corner of the annexation area. The zoning alternative maps show both existing parcels and buildings in the area. Environmental Constraints As stated, much of the annexation area is already developed, and environmental constraints are somewhat minimal throughout most of the area. However, there are significant environmental constraints on the southwestern portion of the area. Slopes in parts of this area exceed 25 percent, particularly on the large vacant parcel at the southwestern corner of the area. Much of this parcel is identified as a ravine on the City's Hazard Area Development Limitations Map. The Hazard Area Map also identifies Low and High Hazard Areas just to the north of this parcel, reflecting the topography of this portion of the annexation area. The north fork of Garrison Creek also intersects the southern portion of the area. The Hazard Area Map identifies Garrison Creek as a major creek. These designations will have a significant impact on the level of development which can take place on these parcels under the City's existing Water Quality and Hazard Area Development regulations (Section 15. 08.224 of the Zoning Code) . These regulations restrict the level of development on and adjacent to hazard areas such as creeks and steep slope areas. Therefore, these designations must be a major consideration in developing zoning recommendations for these parcels. Previous King County Zoning Prior to being annexed into the City of Kent, this area had been recently rezoned as a result of the Soos Creek Community Plan, which was adopted by the King County Council in 1991. The previous zoning designations are shown on the attached map (see Previous 2 Memo To: Ed Heineman, Chair, and Members of the Planning Commission Re: Chestnut Ridge Annexation #AZ-93-1 King County Zoning Map) . Prior to the Soos Creek Plan, the entire annexation area was zoned S-R 9600. In preparing the zoning alternatives and recommendation for the annexation area, staff attempted to be as consistent as possible with the previous King County zoning, since the zoning had been done so recently, and had been based on a very long and extensive planning process in the overall Soos Creek Community Planning Area. However, as the next section points out, there are some significant differences between King County and Kent zoning regulations. These differences have a significant impact on keeping the initial zoning of the area in Kent consistent with the previous County zoning. Comparison of King County and Kent Zoning As shown on the Previous King County Zoning Map (attached) , King County zoning designations for the Chestnut Ridge annexation area were residential, including GR-5-P (RS 5000) , RS 7200-P, SR 9600-P; and RS 5000-P. Required minimum lot sizes within the County residential zones are similar to the 5000, 7200, and 9600 square foot lot sizes in the City of Kent Zoning Code. There are differences, however, between Kent and King County residential zoning regulations regarding certain uses and development types and standards. The following is a summary of the major differences: 1. The letter P added to the single family zoning designations shown on the Previous King County Zoning Map refers to County regulations requiring street trees, tree retention, specific street and pedestrian circulation design, and recreation space. At this time, the City of Kent has no residential street tree requirement for development, but compliance with street standards, compliance with pedestrian circulation standards, and retention of significant trees are required. Recreation space requirements are set forth in the City of Kent Subdivision code. 2 . The County zoning designation GR (Growth Reserve) is shown near the north and south boundaries of the Chestnut Ridge annexation area. The intended purposes of the GR designation are to prevent urban development before provision of adequate services and facilities, to reserve large tracts of land for future growth, to protect environmentally sensitive areas, and to promote efficient land use patterns. The GR-5 zoning also established potential zoning of RS-5000, to go into effect as of January 1, 1995. Until then, the minimum required lot size is five acres with exceptions which included provision for higher densities in multiple lot subdivisions and short subdivisions. The GR designation provided for lot clustering 3 Memo To: Ed Heineman, Chair, and Members of the Planning Commission Re: Chestnut Ridge Annexation #AZ-93-1 with "reserved tract" provisions for open space and possible future subdivision. The Kent Zoning Code does not provide for cluster development or growth reserve space for future development. 3 . The King County RS (Single Family Residential) designation allowed similar uses to those allowed under the R1 zoning designation shown on the City of Kent alternatives maps. However, King County zoning allows more uses because of the diverse nature of properties found in the County. The major differences between King County RS and Kent Ri designations are in regard to townhouse dwellings, Planned Unit Developments, mobile homes, accessory dwellings in residences and accessory dwellings in buildings. The above types of development are allowed under King County Zoning Code regulation, but are not allowed within the City of Kent R1 zoning designation. Zero Lot Line development is allowed in R1 zones in the City of Kent, but is not allowed under County zoning regulation. 4 . The previous SR classification, located north of SE 208th Street, was intended to provide for urbanization of areas which are presently suburban in character. It provided for large lot size (9600 square feet minimum) , which was intended to accommodate present agricultural use and future urban development. It also limited townhouse construction to approved PUDs (Planned Unit Developments) . The City of Kent Zoning Alternative 1 proposes a minimum 9, 600 square foot lot sizes; however, the City has not adopted a policy regarding later development of lots. In addition, the Kent Zoning Code does not provide for PUD development in residential zones. Under the County SR classification, agricultural developments such as small commercial fishing ponds, small animal farms, and animal clinics were allowed outright, while agricultural uses allowed under the City of Kent Zoning Alternative 1 would be limited to crop and tree farming and the keeping of animals other than household pets on lots larger than 20, 000 square feet. Zoning Alternatives and Analysis After reviewing the history and background of the area and conducting field visits, staff generated three alternative zoning designations for the area. On September 8, 1993, the Planning Department conducted an open house at the Springbrook Elementary School to solicit public comment on these zoning alternatives, as well as comment on comprehensive plan alternatives which were 4 Memo To: Ed Heineman, Chair, and Members of the Planning Commission Re: Chestnut Ridge Annexation #AZ-93-1 developed in conjunction with the zoning alternatives. Many residents of the area attended the open house, and completed a questionnaire, which offered the residents an opportunity to express their preferences regarding the zoning alternatives, and also express concerns about other neighborhood issues. A report which summarizes the results of the questionnaire is attached as Exhibit A. The three zoning alternatives are described below. It should be noted that all three alternatives propose to zone the majority of the built-out area between S. 202nd and S. 208th Street to R1-7 . 2 (Single-Family Residential) . The primary reasons for this proposed designation is that most of this area is already developed, and this zoning designation is consistent with the previous King County zoning designation of RS-7200. The rationale for this will be further discussed in the section of the report outlining the staff recommendation. Alternative 1 This alternative would apply the R1-7 .2 (Single Family Residential) zoning designation to the entire area between S. 200th and S. 208th Streets, with the exception of the parcels located at the northeast corner of S. 208th Street and 92nd Avenue S. , which would be zoned R1-9. 6 (Single-Family Residential) . The large parcel at the extreme southwestern portion of the annexation area would be zoned RA (Residential Agricultural) . Under this alternative, the R1-7.2 and R1-9 . 6 zoning designations between S. 202nd and S. 208th Streets are consistent with the previous King County zoning. The R1-9 . 6 zoning of the parcels at the northeastern corner of S. 208th and 92nd Avenue S. reflects the steep slopes in this area, which seems to justify a lower density zoning than the surrounding R1-7 .2 zoning. The area between S. 200th and S. 202nd Streets is proposed to be R1-7.2 , since the overall potential development characteristics of this area seem to be substantially similar to the area to the south of S. 202nd Street. This zoning would be lower density in the long term than the previous County zoning designation of GR-5 (RS-5000) . Finally, the RA zoning is recommended in this alternative for the parcel south of S. 208th Street due to the severe environmental constraints of this site, since the RA zone is the lowest density single-family zoning district in the current zoning code, restricting development to 1 dwelling unit per acre. In the long term, this is substantially less density than would be allowed under the previous GR-5 (RS-5000) County zoning for the site. 5 Memo To: Ed Heineman, Chair, and Members of the Planning Commission Re: Chestnut Ridge Annexation #AZ-93-1 Alternative 2 This alternative is similar to Alternative 1, with two exceptions: the parcels at the northeast corner of S. 208th and 92nd Avenue S. would be zoned R1-7 .2 instead of R1-9. 6; and the large parcel south of 208th Street would be zoned R1-12 (Single Family Residential) instead of RA. The rationale for this alternative is similar to the rationale for Alternative 1. The major difference is that this alternative would allow slightly higher densities on the two areas identified above. This alternative proposes that the parcels directly to the north of S. 208th Street be zoned the same (R1-7.2) as the rest of the area between S. 200th and S. 208th Streets, since there are some other parcels within that area which also have steep slopes. The parcel to the south of S. 208th Street would still have a low density zoning designation (approximately 3 units per acre) , but would allow more development capacity than Alternative 1. Alternative 3 This alternative is distinct from the first two alternatives regarding the zoning of three major portions of the annexation area: the area between S. 200th and S. 202nd Streets; the parcels at the northeast corner of S. 208th and 92nd Avenue S. ; and the large parcel to the south of S. 208th Street. The proposed zoning of the area to the north of S. 202nd Street would be R1-5. 0 (Single Family Residential) , which is the highest density single family zoning district under the City's existing zoning regulations. The parcels to the north and south of S. 208th Street would be zoned MRD (Duplex Multifamily Residential) . This zoning district permits both single-family residential development and duplexes. The rationale for zoning the area north of S. 202nd Street R1-5. 0 is that this most closely approximates the previous King County zoning of GR-5 (RS-5000) in this area. The MRD zoning along S. 208th Street is proposed due to the environmentally constrained nature of these parcels. A Planning Unit Development (PUD) , which offers more design flexibility, is not permitted under City of Kent zoning regulations in single-family zoning districts, whereas PUDs are allowed in multifamily districts such as MRD. Therefore, the proposed zoning of MRD would allow a PUD on these sites, which may be the most feasible way for these sites to be developed due to steep slopes. The MRD zoning on the large parcel to the south of S. 208th Street also is fairly consistent with the previous County zoning of GR-5 (RS-5000) --RS-5000 zoning would allow 8 units per 6 Memo To: Ed Heineman, Chair, and Members of the Planning Commission Re: Chestnut Ridge Annexation #AZ-93-1 acre, while the MRD zoning district allows approximately 10 units per acre. Staff Analysis Alternative #1 places zoning on the majority of the area which is consistent with the previous County zoning of RS-7200 for the area between S. 202nd and S. 208th Streets. It is recommended that the area to the north of S. 202nd Street also be zoned R1-7 . 2, since there does not appear to be any compelling reason to treat this area differently than the area to the south. The recommended R1-9. 6 and RA zoning designation reflect the environmentally constrained nature of these sites, particularly the large parcel south of S. 208th Street. The R1-9 . 6 zoning is also consistent with the previous County zoning designation. While a PUD may very well be the most appropriate way to develop these sites, the development density that the MRD zone allows (10 units per acre) is not appropriate for these sites. It should also be noted that many citizens in the area requested that the zoning throughout the annexation area be lower density than R1-7 . 2 , either R1-9 . 6 or preserving the interim zoning of R1-20. However, many of the parcels which are already platted and developed throughout the area are less than 9, 600 square feet. Therefore, any zoning designation of density less than R1-7. 2 would create many nonconforming parcels. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council the zoning designation outlined in Alternative 1 for the Chestnut Ridge Annexation Area. Ko/ch:az931.rpt Enclosures cc: James P. Harris, Planning Director Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager Matthews Jackson, Planner 7 CHESTNUT RIDGE PREVIOUS KING COUNTY ZONING 5• > x m m S. 200TH. ST. 5' GROWTH RESERVE y. ,._ *GR-5 1 UNIT PER 5 ACRES _ EXPIRES 12/31/94 2ni , r'T", SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL RS-5000 1 UNIT PER 5,000 SO FT = 1, r: w, RS-7200 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL T , � 1 UNIT PER 7,200 SO FT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SR-9600 1 UNIT PER 9,600 SO FT � ^ H � \ N CITY LIMITS GR.z °. rJ ANNEXATION AREA =5000 ZONING BOUNDARY GrY of [Cll I _ H � 1NVICfA � VT Q91, � M" It" ' N ": R Di G s u 4,H, 'i z ZONING a ♦ Sr. D , � O g.40 o Q Q o pQ 0 fl p oo C7 ao Q Go p0 a Cf 03o bo o&D [I 6p Sp OPJ O TG Elm C�:] ado CP+ „ t Sd -41 02NO T. y 1 rs i' f } e t1 RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL RA 1 UNIT PER ACRE - ©{t ((�� SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIA'. , 4 tH +I <� ♦ .� H� , r i� VaRl - 1 UNIT PER 7,200 SQ F T _ r SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIA'. Rl 41 Ll I mo. Q . V 1 UNIT PER 9,600 SQ FT. C;TY LIMITS �I ;. a ANNEXATION AREA CS «„ 0 I ° I : .00 0 o � ® ZONING BOUNDARY 0 Q 0 0 O o a Q G3 O fl CITY of Rind 0 � N � 4 �i►IC'P� A, L R I DH Z N Q9Lo�R t3 p Q {7 o o cf 0 0 Q ° 0 0 0 P O 0• o a o L`-0aPP� 4 0 S���JO�Yi. �Tp oQ o(r^ 02io iG 1 fi LL 02flifi. I, aF it zl IN . c Si" 4i 1 y r� •� - S� R 1 - 7 . 2 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIA 1 UNIT PER 7,200 SO F gp. � �:.7 �. ems; �,,,•_ �, _.� ,�] ^.. �� D SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIA'. Q a R 1 - 1 2 1 UNIT PER 12,000 SQ.FT tJ lo cm �. df 'I€ i r of }• CITY LIMITS 9� G' p a Sp o , Q i qe o d N° ANNEXATION AREA r o o 0 0i0 ® ZONING BOUNDARY p a T P o a O D V fl CBrY of Taind � 6 p _ O Q ap o0 0l u H Q 0 IP IESTNUT IRIDGE ZONING ?A o 9 �9oT. Q o a4 0� O o B Q fl [� El o O C I 0 o � Q O ❑ Ofill* �Sa❑QIo �TO Poi °aI-� ado La a rN h S SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL -R1 5 . G 1 UNIT PER 5,000 SO FT • r,'. a SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R 1 - 7 . 2 1 UNIT PER 7,200 SO FT C; Qir-,: ` DUPLEX MULTIFAMILY M R D 7,200 SO.FT MIN. SINGLE FAM 8,500 SO FT. MIN DUPLEX CITY LIMITS to 13 ± 9 fl d ANNEXATION AREA WIR En odpo O u' i 9L a 9 ZONING BOUNDARY O o 0 jf p O fl c rry of emu' Q Q � p a p O Q 6 a ff EXHIBIT A CHESTNUT RIDGE ANNEXATION ZONING REPORT ON THE RESULTS OF CITIZEN QUESTIONNAIRE On September 8, 1993, the Kent Planning Department hosted an Open House on potential zoning in the Chestnut Ridge annexation area. The meeting was held at Springbrook Elementary School at 20035 100th Avenue South. Approximately 60-70 persons attended the Open House. Attendees at the Open House were encouraged to respond to a questionnaire regarding land use planning issues and zoning alternatives for the Chestnut Ridge annexation area. To help attendees understand the proposed zoning alternatives, maps and graphics were displayed and City staff were available to answer questions. A total of 56 questionnaires were returned. The following is a report of the final survey results with a commentary by Kent Planning Department staff on the implications of the response: :rtrttttr:t:trrrrrrrrttrrtttrrrtttrrtttrrttttrtttrrrttttwrtttrrtt 1. Are you a resident of the Chestnut Ridge annexation area? Yes 55 No 1 Comment: With the exception of one person, all respondents to the survey were residents of the Chestnut Ridge annexation area. Landowners adjacent to Chestnut Ridge were notified of the meeting but did not elect to turn out in any significant number. 2. Do you own or rent a home in the Chestnut Ridge areal Own 53 Rent - Other 2 Comment: The vast majority of respondents were homeowners. This is consistent with the high overall homeownership rate of the annexation area. Although respondents were not asked the type of residence they owned, it is safe to say assume that most homeowners, if not all, resided in single family homes. 3. If you currently live in the Chestnut Ridge area, how long have you resided here? Less than one year 4 1 - 5 years 20 More than 5 years 31 Comment: The majority of respondents have lived in the annexation area for more than five years. However, a significant number of respondents have lived in the Chestnut Ridge area for a period of less than five years. This may be related to the fact that the housing in much of the annexation area is relatively new. Other (Please specify): 1 Comment: The vast majority of respondents are concerned about traffic mitigation in their neighborhood. Nearly one-half (25) of the respondents indicated traffic was their most important environmental issue. All other issues were relatively less significant in comparison, with the possible exception of Open Space which ranked as the number one issue with nine (9) respondents. Environmental issues such as noise, tree preservation, and view protection were not ranked first by a significant number of respondents. 8. King County zoning allows "clustering" of development in single family residential zones; Kent's zoning rules do not. If Kent changed its policy to permit clustering in single family zones, what issues would you consider to be important in the review process of such proposed developments? Buffering of adjacent uses 21 Access of proposed development 17 Size and density of proposed development 34 Environmental protection 21 Character of neighborhood 26 Other (Please specify): 3 Comment: The majority of persons indicated that they were concerned about the size and density of clustered residential developments (34 responses). In effect, this concern is very much related to the second, Character of Neighborhood, which received 26 responses. The summary of responses, above, does not show that several respondents indicated they were opposed to clustering altogether and did not check any of the listed concerns. It should be noted that the sum of responses exceeds the number of completed questionnaires. Some respondents indicated multiple concerns, and all were tallied. ZONING ALTERNATIVES 9. Which zoning alternative do you prefer? Alternative 1 43 Alternative 2 6 Alternative 3 1 Other 5 Comment: The overwhelming majority of respondents favored Alternative 1, as evidenced by the numbers above (43 responses, or 78%)• Alternative 1 is the lowest density alternative, overall. Alternative 3, which proposed duplex type zoning for portions of the annexation area, received only one response. Five (5) respondents favored zoning alternatives different from any which were outlined in the questionnaire. All of these responses indicated a preference for even lower density residential zoning than proposed in Alternative 1. a:survey.cr KENT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES September 27, 1993 The meeting of the Kent Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Heineman at 7: 00 pm on September 27, 1993 in the Kent City Hall, Chambers West. PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Edward Heineman, Jr. Gwen Dahle Albert Haylor Bob MacIssac Kent Morrill Raymond Ward PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER ABSENT: Kenneth Dozier Christopher Grant Janet Nuss PLANNING STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: James P. Harris, Planning Director Chris Holden, Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF AUGUST 23 , 1993 MINUTES MOTION was made to accept the August 23 , 1993 minutes as presented. The motion was SECONDED. Motion CARRIED. UPCOMING MEETINGS Mr. Harris commented on October 11, 1993 there will be a Planning Commission workshop and on October 23 , 1993 , a public hearing is scheduled to consider the Chestnut Ridge annexation zoning and Comprehensive Plan amendment. Furthermore, three meetings concerning Growth Management are scheduled as follows: October 20, 1993, at Daniel Elementary School; October 21, 1993, Chambers East; and October 27 , 1993 , Sunnycrest Elementary School. All meetings are from 4 to 8 PM. The City Council will be holding a four-hour workshop concerning capital facilities possibly in November. #ZCA-93-7 CONVENIENCE STORES/GASOLINE SALES SIGN CODE AMENDMENT (Section 15. 06. 050 B) . A request to amend the City's sign regulations pertaining to convenience stores with gasoline sales. 1 Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 1993 Mr. Harris briefly described the proposed amendment to the sign code. The proposed requested amendments encompass: 1. The request proposes to change the permitted aggregate sign area calculation from a ratio of one (1) square foot of sign area for each foot of lot frontage to one and one-half (1 1/2) square feet of sign area for each front foot of lot frontage. This change, as proposed, would affect interior lots only. 2 . The aggregate sign area for freestanding signs for convenience stores with gasoline sales would be increased from 150 square feet to 200 square feet. 3 . Also, as proposed, fuel price sign area would be included in the aggregate sign. Existing regulations exempt such signs but restrict their size to 30 square feet. The Planning Department recommends that the sign code amendment be approved. Bruce Creager, Barghausen Engineering, 18215 72nd Avenue S. , Kent, WA 98032, on behalf of Atlantic Richfield, concurred with the Planning Department's recommendation of approval. He felt this is not a grant of special privilege instead convenience stores would be treated equally as other businesses. The public hearing was closed. A MOTION was MADE and SECONDED that the City sign code be amended as recommended by the Planning Department. MOTION CARRIED. A MOTION was MADE and SECONDED to adjourn. MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, J S P. RABBIS, secretary 2 KENT PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF KENT ZONING CODE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Kent Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to consider the following: #ZCA-93-7 CONVENIENCE STORES/GASOLINE SALES SIGN CODE AMENDMENT (SECTION 15. 06. 050 B) . A request to amend Section 15. 06. 050 B in the Kent Zoning Code regarding convenience stores/gasoline sales. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the Planning Commission will hold the public meeting on Monday, September 27, 1993 at 7 : 00 PM in Chambers West of Kent City Hall. All interested persons are requested to be present. For further information, contact the Kent Planning Department at (206) 859-3390. - DATED: September 14 , 1993 )Panning es P. Harris Director FOR PUBLICATION IN THE VALLEY DAILY NEWS ON FRIDAY, September 17, 1993