HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning and Economic Development Committee - 01/30/1989 j9
KENT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 30, 1989
The meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chair
Martinez at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, January 30, 1989 In, the Kent City
Hall, City Council Chambers.
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:
Linda Martinez, Chair
Elmira Forner
Greg Greenstreet
Carol Stoner
Raymond Ward
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT:
Anne Biteman, excused
Robert Badger, absent
Gabriella Uhlar-Heffner, absent
PLANNING STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Fred Satterstrom, Acting Planning Director
Dan Stroh, Senior Planner
Kathy McClung, Senior Planner
Stephen Clifton, Planner
Lauri Anderson, Planner
Ken Astrein, Planner
Lois Ricketts, Recording Secretary
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Marty Nizlek
APPROVAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JANUARY 12 , 1989
Commissioner Forner MOVED that the minutes of the January 12, 1989
Planning Commission meeting ,be approved as printed. Commissioner
Ward SECONDED the motion. Motion carried.
Chair Martinez opened the public hearing.
EAST VALLEY ZONING STUDY
Ken Astrein presented the East Valley Zoning Study. , The basis for
the recommendations are contained in the amendnts to the
Comprehensive Plan which were adopted by Council in .June 1988. The
recommendations included (1) create a new commercial zoning
Kent Planning Commission Minutes
January 30, 1989
district entitled Gateway Commercial (GWC) . (2) apply this new
zoning district to the area recently designated Commercial in the
Valley Floor Plan, and (3) rezone an area from Mobile Dome Park
(MHP) to Office (0) as desigated in the East Valley Study
Amendments to the Valley Floor Comprehensive Plan. The proposed
Gateway Commercial zone is designed to promote commercial
development which would minimize some of the adverse physical and
visual impacts often associated with corridor commercial
development. Two public meetings were held to hear the public's
concerns. The new Gateway Commercial zone would provide retail
commercial uses along East Valley Highway and encourage a more
unified development and recognizable image for the area. Among
the permitted uses to be allowed would be retail establishments
within an enclosed building, personal services, office and
professional services, business services, restaurants, taverns and
night clubs, and repair services. The suggested conditional uses
would include gasoline service stations and automotive repair
facilities. The minimum lot size and maximum coverage would be the
same as required for the General Commercial zone. A side yard
setback of five feet would be required; if adjacent to residential
districts, a 20-foot setback would be required.
Area 1 encompasses all the property adjacent to East Valley Highway
bounded on the south by the SR 167 overpass and extending 300 feet
north of 212th Street, an area of approximately 102 acres. Current
zoning is a mixture of General Commercial (GC) , and Commercial
Manufacturing (CM) in the southern half of the area, and Limited
Industrial (M2) , and General Industrial (M3) in the northern half
of the area. Existing uses range from heavy industrial to
residential.
Criteria used in establishing this zoning change included: 1)
follow the natural and physical boundaries whenever possible; 2)
follow existing commercial boundaries wherever possible; 3) follow
property boundaries wherever possible; 4) encourage land assembly;
and 5) avoid creating nonconforming uses wherever possible.
Nonconforming standards would apply to the existing developments,
which would have to conform to the new standards upon expansion.
Area 2 is adjacent to and east of SR 167, north of 212th, south of
208th Street and is bounded on the west by 92nd Avenue. This area
is approximately 13.2 acres in size and surrounds the Saar Cemetery
on three sides. The site was originally approved for mobile homes
in 1984, but development never occurred. Land has been zoned MHP,
and there have been minor grade and fill improvements. The
proposed zoning would change the site from MHP to Office. It is
felt that this would be compatible with the surrounding land uses.
Because of its proximity to the 'interchange at SR 167, noise makes
2
Kent Planning Commission Minutes
January 30, 1989 '-
it inappropriate for residential use. This zoninq,icthange would
reduce commercial development pressures and fn ithe economic
goals of the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning staff °'recommends the
Commission approve the following three actions:
1. Establish a Gateway Commercial zoning •disrict complete
with use, development and sign standards; ,
2. Apply this Gateway Commercial zoning diet-rilot to the area
labeled "Area 1"; ;
3. Apply Office zoning to Area 2 east of -SR-167.
Marty Nizlek, City Traffic Engineer, stated that anticipated uses
of the rezoned area would generate traffic at a mu(*, greater rate
than the present buildout of the area. In 1980 this *roa generated
3,300 trips per day, and 35,000 could be expectedAm tie year 2000.
Earlier reports showed a projected volume of 24,000 , vehicles per
day on the East Valley Highway along the corridor.,�;i, The proposed
rezone would at least double the vehicle trips. Hddfelt that the
four-lane facility could not handle 40,000-50,000- triips per day.
The existing Mobile Home Park zoning of 13.2 ac*0al, would have
generated 528 trips per day. With the rezone of Ar [ 2- to Office,
he estimated that 3,3 00.. trips per " day would ba ,q�nerated: —He
�He •.
expressed more concern about 'Area 1 than Area 2.
Commissioner Ward asked for current traffic generation figures.
Mr. Nizlek responded that he did not have current- 'traffic counts
but stated that the intersection of 212th and East:e alley Highway
would go to level of service F, critical failure. t�;- There are no
current plans for a seven-lane arterial at that I lion.
Commissioner Stoner asked if he could foresee ., aa y mitigation
measures. Mr. Nizlek felt that growth in traffiq,,.ina this area
should be studied. There is no current study x041.1 that would
provide this information. When asked if there were.. ny commercial
uses that would have less impact on the roads *, ' Mr. Nizlek
responded that because he had been in the curr intl,:iposition only
since November 1988, he did not feel he could predict how the
impacts should be handled. He did state tht fast food
establishments have the greatest impacts on tha,. ,roadways. Fast
food facilities create 2•,300-2,850 trips pe4, I'*" per acre;
hotel/motel facilities generate 200-1,000; auto and repair
facilities generate 500-1,200; indoor retail co +dal facilities
generate 700-900; convenience retail generates 270-$30. Fast food
generates five percent of the`. trips in the eveninw06',ak hour. Most
other uses generate 10 percent of the trips in ;tUA#.,evening peak
hour. Out of the 32.5 acres he felt would be developed., 20 percent
3
Kent Planning Commission Minutes
January 30, 1989
would be developed into fast ood facilities, 20 percent into
office, 10 percent into hotel/aftel, 20 percent into auto services
and related repair, 20 percent into retail commercial., and 10
percent into convenience retail; When asked if he had considered
efforts to encourage public transportation, use of HQV lanes, car
pools and a transportation management system in his factoring, he
responded that he had not; b'ut with a well-supported traffic
management system a 10-20 percent reduction could be expected. He
had already reduced his calculations by 45 percent assuming that
this percentage would represent diverted trips. Chairman Martinez
asked that a copy of this report be submitted to the Commission.
The report was copied and submitted to the Commission later in the
hearing.
Gary Young, Polygon Corporations 4020 Lake Washington Boulevard NE,
Suite 201, Kirkland, developer ,of the property designated as Area
2 on the plan, submitted into theTrecord a letter Dated January 30,
1989 which supported the staff 'recommendation. This property is
impacted significantly by freeway noise. Their traffic
consultant's studies conclude that office or commercial development
would be feasible for this ,,site. The proposed development would
provide the following changes inthe 212th intersection: (1) the
northbound off-ramp would be widened to provide a double left-turn
lane- and,a a:-through_inn®^•to. SOth.,,�Avenue South,-- the-i access-.for.--the
Valley Freeway Property; (2) an 'eastbound left-turn lane would be
constructed to provide left-turn access onto 90th Avenue South; (3)
a separate right-turn lane wool* be provided for westbound traffic
to turn onto 90th Avenue South to enter the Valley Freeway project;
(4) the eastbound South 212th Street approach would be widened to
provide a right-turn lane onto the southbound on-ramp; (5) the
southbound off-ramp would be reohanneled to increase the storage
for left-turning vehicles. These improvements would be provided
by the development. He felt that there is currently an adequate
supply - of residential and industrial land, but there is a
noticeable shortage of accessible , land designated for commercial
and office use. He felt this ite is well suited for this use.
Their additions to the intersecOgior would improve the functioning
of this intersection.
Commissioner Forner expressed cohcern about the grade and curve of
the hill and the length of the additional lane for slowing traffic.
Mr. Young responded that thinllane would be 150 feet long. He
added that they had used Washington State Transportation standards
in determining the length of this lane.
Ted Bell, Bell Walker Engineers:, explained that the proposed plan
would improve the present situation.
4
a r 3
fe
Kent Planning Commission Minutes
January 30, 1989 x
Commissioner Stoner asked what plans Polygon, bA4•jj:*eda for the
historic cemetery site. Mr. Young responded, that, the cemetery
would continue to be zoned Residential Agricultux aJ,,,,$M, and there
would be a 20-foot setback. On the east side of a etery there
would be a significant separation from the project. Polygon would
maintain the separation, and, the cemetery would, .rcatinue in its
present form,
Jim Rust, 8619 South 218th, asked if there were -apy Provisions for
routes around South 218th. At the present time, gArs enter South
218th and leave by going out the same street.
Bob Millikin, Operations, Manager of Van waters 'and'
; R+agers, 8201
South 212th, moved from Seattle in 2973 to Kent and .'has no desire
to change their location. He expressed concern that future
development may not wish to have them remain in "- is,;.erea. He was
also concerned about making a .left-hand turnout feh .s property.
Mr. Satterstrom responded that Van waters and Rogegs conforms to
the zoning code and is one of the most attractiveF #3 uses in the
East Valley area. He saw no reason for concern. ,
{
Torgy Torgerson, 24456 164th Avenue SE, Kent, felt,,' t i the present
zoning should remain unchanged or be changed ; * Commercial
Manufacturing because . of ,the, surrounding. . uses*.,, . ti was, also •
concerned about trees obscuring signs in the area,
Lawrence Campbell, 1609 South Central, Kent, support the proposed
rezone but wondered why all the areas within the Kaet 'valley were
not being rezoned to comply, with the plan. He fe , .it would be
unfair to the other property owners if they wer#,_required to
individually go through the, zoning process. He. ��Viesented two
clients who wished to rezone their properties• . Satterstrom
responded that these two areas were significantly i �istent with
the planned designation.
Jim Lashbrook, 8801 South 218th, asked if the t.raf o,, mitigation
would be implemented prior toy during, or after tte4ing change.
He felt the area between SR 167 and the proposed CwOs4ould remain
M2.
MOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
Mr. Clifton presented the proposal for the Housing Inqment Update
as requested by Council Resolution Number 1172 WU4directed the
Planning Department to conduct a two-phased stu4y, �hase I was to
update the Housing Element, and Phase II was to dp,,oM 'area-by-area
analysis of the residential densities. The Kent e4ensive Plan
has not been updated since 1977, The Planning s ;xwith the help
5
a
Kent Planning Commission Minutes"
January 30, 1989
of a nine-member advisory committee, reviewed every goal, policy
and objective in the existing #Ian and unanimously endorsed the
revisions to the Housing Elemelit Update. Following is a summary
of the five goals.
Goal 1 deals with maintaining -end improving the city's existing
residential neighborhoods. There is an emphasis on the retention
of existing residential ars as livable and attractive
neighborhoods. These are considered vital to the overall health
of the city. A survey will take place to analyze 'the existing
infrastructure deficiencies. One policy addresses protection of
existing single family neighborhoods from incompatible uses or
other intrusions through buffer*, landscaping, fencing and density
gradations.
Goal 2, New Housing ' Element, 1als with the integration of new
development with existing housfiq. The first objective addresses
new residential development in *Uitable areas of the Valley Floor.
This would help to direct growth dlose to transportation corridors,
near commercial centers and alehg major commuter transit routes.
Manufactured housing has been proven'to be a cost-effective housing
type and can fit in with existing single family neighborhoods.
Housing policies for multifamily development include establishing
. densities, for. . .news growth an*:Xfor -single-..family, rdevelopment, -
limiting multifamily development,"on East Hill, responsibly guiding
new residential growth and developing areas already served by
utilities and transportation systems.
. ,
Goal 3, Housing Diversity and Affordability, plans for more balance
between multifamily and single family housing. By preserving and
maintaining housing, more affordable housing would become
available. Mixed-use zoning weal provide an opportunity to live
closer to transportation, shoppi,hg and recreational opportunities.
Infilling under-developed neighborhoods can often strengthen
existing single family neighborhoods by adding new housing to these
areas. By reducing minimum 1otlaiies, it is hoped that this would
reduce the cost by increasing thb supply.
Goal 4, Housing and the Natural Environment, assures that
environmental quality exists in'-residential areas by prohibiting
residential development in areaw,unsuitable for development, such
as wetlands and areas that have steep slopes. Conserving features
such as streams, trees and wetloMls; providing for open green areas
in residential neighborhoods, ` otecting sensitive area such as
woodlands, wetlands, meadows a wildlife habitats also assure
environmental quality. The H"Ord Area Development Limitations
Map, which currently includes Irks, waterways, steep and unstable
slopes and ravines, should be updated to include woodlands,
i
iy
Kent Planning Commission Minutes -w "
January 30, 1989
wetlands, meadows and wildlife habitats. Good eater , quality in
residential areas could be promoted by restrictia residential
densities in areas unconnected to city sewers in'vlr�or- to protect
the water table.
Goal 5, Housing Special Populations, ancoarogos, housing
opportunities for persons with special needs such as senior
citizens, the homeless, mentally and developmentally disabled and
lower income persons and families. Objectives ard 'Volicies were
created to address concerns for these special populaions, such as
funding, coordination and community acceptance strategies.
Policies include promoting preservation of lowai#fie housing,
and developing and maintaining a citizen participation process.
Leona Orr, 24909 114th Avenue SE, expressed support qC the proposal
for a Housing Element Update, She was concerned a )434t imaintaining
the single family neighborhoods and felt that this, ol�osal helped
to preserve this housing. She felt that Goal Nu% r �S was badly
needed. The work of the staff was greatly appr tia ,*4..
Surinder-Pal Khela, 10818 SE 236th, Kent, expressed=;15U port of the
update. He liked the idea of limiting multifamily,46 to opment, but
felt that it should be handled on a regional basks. " go suggested
communicaeti.ng with -King,County• on, this Assue.
Commissioner Ward MOVED that the public hearing !be closed.
Commissioner Greenstreet SECONDED the motion. MotiOnicarried.
Commissioner Stoner MOVED that the Commission adopt the Housing
Element Update as printed and presented to the ,.+Commission as
Proposal for a Housing Element Update, January 19.8%.4w. Commissioner
Greenstreet SECONDED the motion. Motion carried:, �,� ,f
r:
WELFARE FACILITIES IN THE GC ZONE (ZCA 88-10) `
Ms. McClung presented the request of South King, -County Multi-
Service Center, an agency which helps low-iri0oso people with
transitional and emergency housing, for a zoning c ,`amendment to
allow transitional housing as an outright permi�tta fuse in the
General Commercial zone. She indicated on a map Aee that is
zoned GC and defined transitional housing as a . , ty operated
publicly or privately to provide housing for uals and/or
families who are otherwise homeless and have'°xr immediate
living options available to them. Transitiona shall not
exceed an 18-month period per individual or f The 18- month
period is the maximum time adopted by the code of Sootth King County
Multi-Service Center and the City of Bellevue. ' Zis GC area was
selected because of its close proximity to public transportation,
7
Kent Planning Commission Minute
January 30, 1989
laundry facilities, stores, eto,.�, Ms. McClung explained that the
difference between a ,special pe=it use and an outright permitted
use is that certain development, standards can be -required of a
special permit use. The Planning Department felt that the
development standards for the General Commercial zone were adequate
for transitional housing. Discussion followed regarding these
standards.
Sharon Atkins, 30901, East sake Morton Drive SE, Kent, expressed
appreciation to the Planning staff in locating transitional housing
in Kent. This would be a, puxehase rather than a lease. She
explained that most transitiaftl housing recipients stay for
approximately two to four months. The housing would accommodate
a maximum of 20 individuals at any one time. She felt the area
selected was suitable for chiU[ren, and that this was a partial
solution to the special populations and welfare facilities
objective of the Comprehensivei' Tlan. She explained that these
people can't become self-sufficient unless they have access to jobs
and services in the area.
Commissioner Ward XOVED to close the public hearing. Commissioner
Greenstreet SECONDED the motion: ; Motion carried.
Commissioner Stoner.Mt D.,that-the-.Commission,accept the -tcllowiniq . ,
recommendation:
;3
That Section 15.02 of the Kent Soning Code be modified to include
the following definition of transitional housing:
"A facility operated publicay or privately to provide housing
for individuals and/or families who are otherwise homeless and
have no other immediate t ving options available to them.
Transitional housing shall"not exceed an 18-month period per
individual or family."
That the principally permitted uses of the GC zone (Section
15..04.140 2h of the Kent Zoning Code) be modified to add the
following use:
-Transitional housing facilities, limited to a maximum of 20
residents at any one :time and four resident staff.
(Facilities accommodating i. larger number of residents require
a conditional use permit. ); ll•
Commissioner Forner SECONDED that motion. Motion carried.
8
Kent Planning Commission Minutes
January 30, 1989
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Forner MOVED and Commissioner Stoner SWONDED a motion
to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted
fWN!emn oc= -
N. Satterstrom
ng Planning Director
9