HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning and Economic Development Committee - 11/08/1979 h
KENT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
NOVEMBER 8, 1979
A special meeting of the Kent Board of Adjustment was called to
order by Chairman Beth Carroll on the evening of Thursday, November
8, 1979, at 6: 40 p.m., in the Kent City Hall,
MEMBERS PRESENT;
Beth Carroll, Chairman
Steve Dowell
Phyllis Mauritsen
Chet Wheeler
CITY STAFF MEMBERS:
Will Wolfert, Associate Planner
Carol Cowan, Recording Secretary
RENTON GYMNASTICS UNLIMITED, INC. A' special meeting was called
APPEAL OF ADMINSITRATIVE in order to clarify the motion
INTERPRETATION made at the Novemt�ek 6, 1979
Board of Ad justroent 'meeting,
Ms. Carol Jacobs, representing Renton Gymnastics Unlimited, Inc,,
was requesting a reversal of the Planning Department's determin-
ation that a gymnastics school is not a use permitted in an M-2,
Limited Industrial zone (Section 3.18 of the Kent ;on,i`ng Code) .
The original motion was to uphold the Planning Department's inter-
pretation with the recommendation that the applicant pursue the
Conditional Use Permit under the M-2 zone with the Board recommend-
ing to the Zoning Examiner that it be granted with certain conditions,
The motion was seconded and approved, ,
Chairman Carroll, referring to a memo from Don dirk, City Attorney,
to the Board of Adjustment, dated November 8, 1979, stated the
Board would have to find specifically that the proposed use "is
one intended primarily to serve the needs of the M-2 district" or
"will not interfere with the orderly development of the industrial
area" .
Mrs. Mauritsen took issue with the second paragraph on the second
page of the memo. The Board was not asking to approve a conditional
use permit.
Mr. Wheeler stated when he made the motion at the last meeting,
he felt this was a service-type operation and an allowable condi-
tional use. He felt the applicant should be allowed to file an
application for a Conditional Use Permit and be heard by- the Hearing
Examiner, who would put on any conditions she thought appropriate.
Mr. Wheeler stated he was not aware that the Planning, Department had
determined that this- use was not allowed a Conditional Exception.
Now that it is clear, he would vote to overturn the Planning
Department's determination.
-1-
r
a
Kent Board of Adjustment
November 8, 1979
Mr. Wheeler MOVED to OVERTURN the Planning Department's deter-
mination because this is an allowed use under Conditional Use with
the proper guidance from the Zoning Examiner..
Mrs. Mauritsen SECONDED,
Mr. Wheeler statedthat the intent of the motion was to allow- this to
be heard by the Zoning Examiner,
Mrs. Mauritsen added the Board feels that it should fit under
Conditional Exception as either compatible with the permitted
parts of industrial uses or will not interfere with the orderly
development of industrial areas.
Mr. Wheeler clarified that the Board was not making the determin-
ation;but the Zoning Examiner could.
Chairman Carroll stated the motion of November 6 was to uphold
the Planning Department's determination, this motion was to overturn i
the Planning Department's determination based upon evidence which
was not available at the Tuesday's meeting.
Mr. Wolfert stated the City Attorney had advised him that in the
Board overturns the Planning Department's determination, the Board
is to find it to be either a Principally Permitted Use or a Condi-
tional Use. Mr. Wolfert asked if the Board is finding it under the
Conditional Use section of the Code.
Chairman Carroll stated they didn't have the role to find that it is.
Mrs Mauritsen stated they are allowing the applicant the opportunity
to file for a Conditional Exception. The Board feels that it should
fit, and it can go before the Zoning Examiner and she has the
final say.
Chairman Carroll added that they are not determining, in fact, that
it is a Conditional Use..
Mr. Wolfert asked if they are finding that it falls under that
section of the code,.
Mr. Wheeler stated that it �could'l fall under the section,
Mr. Wolfert asked if the Board was finding that this use is intended
primarily to serve the needs of an M=-2 district, This is a require-
ment that the Board has to find to deem it to fall under the
Conditional Use section.
-2-
t.
�f
Kent Board of Adjustment
November 8, 1979
Mr. Wheeler replied that the Board could not..
Mr. Dowell stated there is another option. The Board could overturn
the Planning Department 's determination. Because of legal circum-
vention in the paragraph of the City Attorney's memo and because
when the people who adopted the Zoning Code could not think of
every possible use of that property, this use could be considered
principally permitted. The Zoning Code does not say- what you cant
have in the principally permitted use---only what you can have..
This use would not be detrimental to the publc welfare and for
those reasons, he could vote for the motion to reverse the Planning
Department's determination.
Mr. Wheeler stated he agreed with Mr. Dowell, but he didn't want
to open a situation where there wouldn't be any controls,
Mr. Dowell doesn't feel the Board should be making the determination..
He feels the Board should either have to uphold the Planning
Department's determination or overturn it.
Chairman Carroll stated the problem was in finding that this use
is "intended primarily to serve the needs of the M--2 district" .
She asked when do these needs start to be served. Do they start
to be served after the real estate offices were there? At this
point in time, the club does not serve primarily the industrial
area. But once it is there, there is an opportunity for it to serve.
This should be given consideration. People on their lunch hour
can go to the gym.
Mr. Wheeler WITHDREW his previous MOTION, He then MOVED to OVERTURN
the Planning Departments interpretation.. The Board finds that the
application is an allowed use in the Conditional Use section
under the M-2 section of the Zoning Code.. It can be used to serve
the needs of the M-2 district and it is compatible. It will not
detrimentally effect the orderly development of the industrial area.
Mrs. Mauritsen SECONDED. The MOTION PASSED unanimously..
There was a discussion concerning the lack of material that is avail-
able to the Board and the need for more information in the staff
report and from the City's departments.
ADJOURNMENT Mrs. Mauritsen MOVED and it was
SECONDED a MOTION to ADJOURN the
meeting. MOTION CARRIED,
Respectfully- submitted
James P. Harris, Board of Adjustment
Secretary
B f �
Will Wolf di-El A sociate Planner
-3-