Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning and Economic Development Committee - 10/23/1985 L KENT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES October 23, 1985 The rescheduled meeting of the Kent Board of Adjustment was called to order by Chairman Mauritsen on the evening of Wednesday, October 23, 1985, at 7:30 p.m. in Kent City Hall, City Council Chambers. MEMBERS PRESENT: Phyllis Mauritsen, Chairman Christi Houser, Vice Chairman Steve Dowell Robert Kitto CITY STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: James P. Harris, Planning Director Ed Heiser, Assistant Planner Lois Ricketts, Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF JUNE 25, 1985, BOARD Mr. Kitto MOVED that the OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES minutes of the June 24, 1985, Board of Adjustment meeting be approved as presented. Vice Chairman Houser SECONDED the motion. Motion carried. Chairman Mauritsen explained the process used in handling each item presented to the Board. PLEMMONS INDUSTRIAL PARK Mr. Ed Heiser presented the VARIANCE #V-85-4 applicant's request for a var- iance to eliminate landscape islands required between parking stalls and loading areas, as provided in the Kent Zoning Code Chapter 15.05.090 B2. The property is located on the west side of South Central Avenue, approximately 318 feet north of South 262nd Street, covers 5.7 acres and is zoned CM, Commer- cial Manufacturing. The following was quoted from the staff report: The applicant is proposing the elimination of landscape islands that are re- quired to separate loading areas and parking stalls. The landscape, islands are required to provide an adequate separation between parking and loading areas to insure the safety of vehicles parked in close proxigtity. In lieu of the required landscaping, the applicant proposes to install a six-inch-high, cast-in-place, concrete curb. The variance would eliminate 77 landscape islands. The City of Kent issued a building permit in June 1985 to construct the proposed development. The development will be constructed to provide space for businesses that include a combination of uses such as office, light manufacturing, storage and commercial uses. Ten buildings will be constructed totalling 109,422 square feet. One hundred twehty,six (126) parking stalls will be provided (109 are required). The variance would allow the provision of an additional 81 parking stalls. I + Jv Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes) October 23, 1985 The Zoning Code requires a landscape island which would provide a separation of five feet in width and twenty feet in length which would provide a buffer between the loading area and the parking area. Mr. Heiser, showed slides of another previously developed Plemmons Industrial Park t'd, the 'south of the site in which no landscape islands were required or provided around the loading area. The Zoning Code has been amended since the construction of this development to require landscape islands to separate the parking area from the loading area. Mr. Heiser pointed out that the loading area and parking area are not compatible uses and should be separated. Mr. Heiser mentioned that the City-wide Comprehensive .Plan designates the land as "Commerce," and that the overall goal is to assure+ Kent area residents an aesthetic and healthful environment. He quoted the following Planning Depart- ment comment from the staff report: The elimination of 77 required landscape islands would significantly'reduce the aesthetic quality of the proposed development. This type of landscap- ing can be provided to break up large expanses of asphalt. Without these required landscape islands, approximately 94 percent of the site will be covered by impervious surfaces (either building or asphalt). By providing the required landscape islands, this percentage can be lowered to, 90,percent. This landscaping would greatly improve the visual character of the area adjacent to the future tenant spaces and have a positive impact an the aesthetic quality of the man-made environment. The landscape can also have significant impact on the microclioate of the site. The provision of deciduous trees can significantly reduce the'tem- perature of the local area on warm days during the summer months. These same trees can also help to offset air pollution caused by the carbon monoxide emissions of motor vehicles. A variance to eliminate the required landscape islands would not be consis- tent with the above policy guidelines. In the Valley Floor Plan the overall goal is to establish+ a balanced, safe and efficient transportation system for all modes of travel, ,to provide safe egress and ingress and adequate on-site traffic maneuverability,+ and to provide adequate truck loading and unloading zones. The following comment is quoted from the staff report: The Zoning Code requires landscape islands at the ends of all parking rows and where loading doors or maneuvering areas are in close pra**fty o parking stalls. The stated purpose of the requirement is 00 '00tact vehicles and enhance the appearance of parking areas." By elie+ 69 the required landscape islands in the development, the poteni:t�ro1»+v minor accidents will be greatly enhanced. Truck loading ano+ "" ' ing zones and truck maneuvering areas should be separated fr,01, ;tor customer parking. These activities are incompatible and shorn a separated. Before any variance may be granted, the Board of Adjustment must find: 1 . That the variance shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with a limitation upon uses of atber, properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property, on behalf of which the application was filed, is located. -2- Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes October 23, 1985 2. Such variance is necessary, because of special circumstances relat- ing to size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, to provide it with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zooe in which the subject property is located. 3. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated. The Planning Department has reviewed the above statements and made the following findings: 1. The variance shall not constitute a grant of special privileges incon- sistent with a limitation upon uses of other properties to the vicinity and zone in which the property, on behalf of which the application is filed, is located. s Planning Department Finding: The Zoning Code standard that requires landscape islands between truck loading and/or maneuvering areas was adopted in September 1984. Since that time, all developments approved and constructed within file City have complied with this requirement. Granting the variance request, would be a grant of special privilege to the applicant. The variaoitelwou,ld be a precedent and create the potential for other similar variake ,applications, especially in the industrial zones. 2. Such variance is necessary, because of special circgnstames relating to size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the subject property, to provide it with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zone in which the subject property is, located. Planning Department Finding: There are no special circumstances related to the proposed Omlopment that make the variance necessary. The variance is necessary only because of the design of the project. The building is designed to provido space for smaller businesses that may have some potential for growth. These businesses include a combination of office, heavy commercial and manufac- turing-type uses. In order to appeal to the broadest ranggk~•ef those types of businesses, the development has been designed to allow S; st one load- ing door per space. As a result, there is a need for a gr4iat,qumber of landscape islands'to separate the loading and parking area*,. Because the landscape islands are required, the potential number of parlil" stalls close to the units is reduced. This also limits the nu*ej oof tenants willing to pay a premium rent to lease space in the deveiot. The variance request has not been applied for any specific tenant. Instead, it has been requested for the entire development. The ap , Rant is request- ing the variance to insure that the maximum leasable area T'S ovailable. The request is not based on any special circumstance. Granting the variance request would be at the expense of the safety aspects associated with the landscape islands. 3. That granting of such a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to the property or imoroveivents in the vicinity and zone in which the subject property is situated. -3- t Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes October 23, 1985 Planning Department Finding. Granting the variance would be detrimental to the safety of vehicles parked near any truck loading and maneuvering areas. Since the vartadKe,,vold eliminate 77 landscape islands, the potential' for accidents on dill site is probably fairly high. The elimination of the landscape islands would also allow far less land. scape in the area of the buildings. -Approximately 94 percent of the site would be covered by either buildings or asphalt. The required laedscape could greatly improve the aesthetic quality of the site, enhancing the welfare of future customers and employees in the development. The variance would be materially detrimental to the public welfare mW is not in the best interests of future tenants of the site. Planning Department recommends denial of this variance request. Chairman Mauritsen opened the public hearing and asked for the applicant to make his presentation. Jim Plemmons, 3770 SW 171st, owner of the Plemmons Industrial Park, explained that planners at his predevelopment meeting suggested that he make this request. He felt his property is unique because of the small incubator.spaces which range from 750 feet to 1 ,200 square feet. He pointed out that there is sufficient parking to meet the requirements, but he wished to stripe the parking area for cars and trucks to park in a head-in position. He felt that few trucks would be using the bays provided for each space. The bays will not be large enough for the trucks to turn around, and he felt that whether the trucks were parked inside or outside the bay should not be the issue. He emphasized the uniqueness of provid- ing space for incubator businesses, or new businesses getting started. He pointed out that Flow Industries started with 900 square feet of space in one of his other locations, and now they are listed on the stock exchange and a credit to the Kent community. This type of business needs extra parking, and„for this reason he is asking for approval to stripe the area in front of the unites in order to make the most efficient use of the space for parking. He felt this would help to eliminate accidents. He mentioned that he has been operating, in,dustrial parks since 1968 and there has not been one fatality or even a fe'lInder 'bender during this 17-year period. The type of trucks that use this are sinigle-axle or one-ton trucks which are about the same size as an older car. He- emphasized that they do not get large trucks and trailers in this type of park. Chairman Mauritsen asked if he had studied the conditions for granting a variance. Mr. Plemmons responded that he had read them. Chairman Mauritsen pointed out that the criteria for grant,tng a variance are deter- mined by State law. The variance shall not constitute a grant of special privileges. She emphasized that construction today must conform to the present Zoning Code. Regarding number 2, she felt that such a variance is necessary because of special circumstances relating to size, shape, topography, location. or surroundings of the subject property--did not address this particular issue. -4- Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes October 23, 1985 Mr. Dowell asked if the plan before the Board was the same p1an that was originally presented to the Planning Department. Mr. Plemmons responded that it was the same plan without, any changes. They were appearing only to be granted the variance request to stripe the parking area. They fit into the code requirements for parking if they do not have marked designations. - Mr. Harris explained that the Zoning Code requires islands if the area is striped for parking. Mr. Kitto stated that if they did not mark the stalls, they could go ahead and use the parking area as they wished. Mr. Harris suggested that the new forms recently approved by City Council would perfectly fit this situation. This opportunity was not, auailable last June when the development was started, but the City Council now desires to have input re- garding the problems found in the regulatory review process. Mr. Dowell asked to have the exact location of the Landsc4pe Islands. Mr. Heiser quoted from page 88, Chapter 15.05.090 B: B. Landscape Islands an scape Islanas (minimum size - 100 square feet) shall be located in the following areas to protect vehicles and to enhance the appearance of parking areas: 1. At the ends of all parking rows. 2. Where loading doors or maneuvering areas are in close proximity to parking areas or stalls. Mr. Kitto felt that the second criteria was the issue which had to be addressed -- that the variance was necessary because of ,speci'ai circumstances relating to size, shape, topography, location or surrounding's of the subject property, to provide it with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zone in which the Subject property is located. Jim Anderson, architect for Mr. Plemmons, 2201 SW 151sit,„,�eattle, Washington, 98166, felt that shape was not a problem, nor was topography or surroundings, but the problem was size. Economics of the investment !40 ermine the use of the space. Chairman Mauritsen responded that the Board could not"t e$s an economic issue. He was using the size of the property to maximize its use, ,not the size of the building. Ms. Houser clarified the meaning of size by stating the size or shape of the land, not the size of the buildings on the land. Mr. Anderson explained that there was 'no point in constructing a building unless it would work out to be economically beneficial to the,owner. -5- Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes October 23, 1985 Chairman Mauritsen pointed out that the economic matteiruwis not addressed in State law. Mr. Plemmons felt that he could use the entire area as a 'loading zone. Chairman Mauritsen closed the public hearing. Mr. Kitto MOVED that the variance request be denied. Ms. Houser SECONDED the motion. Mr. Kitto explained that it was not the property itself"biat was the problem, it was the development. He did not see how the law could accommodate this request. Ms. Houser asked Mr. Harris to take up this matter with the Planning Commission. She felt that Mr. Plemmons should talk with the Chamber of Commerce, because they are very interested in incubators and might be able to 'assist him. Mr. Dowell stated that he would vote in favor of the applicant. Three Board members voted in favor of the denial , one Member opposed the denial . Chairman Mauritsen stated that the variance was denied. SOUTH SEATTLE AUTO AUCTION Mr. Heiser, presented the appli- VARIANCE #V-85-5 cant's request for a variance to allow a light bituminous sealcoat surface in lieu of asphalt pave- ment for a storage yard as provided for in Kent ZoningICode Chapter 15.05.090 C. The property is located on the north side of South 212th Street and on the west side of 76th Avenue South. The property is 8.83 acres 'in size. The request is to eliminate paving approximately 3 acres of the site whiich is zoned M3, General Industrial . The following was quoted from the staff report: The applicant seeks a variance to waive the requirement*.for asphalt pavement in a vehicle storage yard. The zoning code re4eirts ,all vehicular maneuvering areas (including off-street parking oreas, truck and mobile equipment loading, unloading, storaqw * staneuver- ing areas) to be paved with asphalt or an equivalent sa�MaL This requirement is provided for in section 15.05.090 C. The applicant has proposed a light bituminous sealcoat surface in lieu of asphalt paving. This surface would include a light oil coating over a sand and gravel base. This oil-based surfate would be provided for a rectangular-shaped storage area measutrirtg 2f`0 feet by 650 feet. This storage lot would be used to temporarily store wrecked vehicles. The wrecked vehicles are sold to South Seattle Auto Auction by insurance companies. The vehicles are ihon stored on the lot until they can be sold and delivered to salve yards. -6- 9 r'N I Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes October 23, 1985 The salvaged vehicles are often transported to the site mia;trucks. The vehicles are then lowered off the trucks with forklifts. When the vehicles are sold to wrecking yards, the vehicles isr# lifted to trucks again via forklifts. Many of the vehicles ma only minor damage, which would allow them to be towed to and the site. The number of vehicles stored on the site will flucteate. The area of the site subject to the variance request wwonU Allow the storage of hundreds of salvaged vehicles. The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as "Industry." The goal of the Natural Environment Element is to permit optimal usage of the City's waterways for fish, wildlife habitat, general recreation and aesthetic enjoyment and to prevent pollution of both surface and sub;surrf ace water resources. Mr. Heiser quoted the following from the staff report: The request is to eliminate the paving requirement in lieu of an oil shot surface over a sand and gravel base. This surface Wli11. be,used to cover an area for the storage of wrecked vehicles. The oil shot, sand and gravel base would allow the contamination of local surface and groundwater flows. Oils, engine fluids, and other sediments would leach through the gravel and move into,the natural drainage system. Surface water contamination is also likely. Although the applicant will provide oil/water separators within the ttorhn drain- age system, these systems require maintenance. The oil surface proposed by the applicant will result in a constant movement of oil into the storm water drainage system. In addition, other fluids and sediments will move into the system. With the substantial amounts of 'these pollutants, the storm drainage system will be difficult to maintain to insure proper operation. Mr. Heiser pointed out that a drainage channel exists �to-;thp west of the property and also west of Weyerhaeuser and west of Matled Trucking. This drainage system was designed to take all the storm wate>�...drainage from these four lots, hold it and release it at a natural rate. No, cr4ek actually exists to the south of this property. The storm water, drainage system provided on this site should have a catch basin which' would, separate the oil and the water and keep the oil from going into the';,draainage system. He felt that the level on the site would be such that it would be almost impossible to maintain the catch basin system to adeq0t ly; insure that the surface and groundwater could be kept at an acceptidilt level . The Human Environment objective is to encourage a high degree of aesthetic quality in the man-made environment by requiring that neW construction and improvements be designed and built so as to enhance thr quality of the neighborhood in which it is located. He quoted from the staff report: -7- 14, Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes October 23, 1985 The subject property is in an area that has been developed ,for industrial use. Matlack, Inc. operates a truck storage yard'to the south of the subject property while Weyerhaeu ser's "� Oary fiber recovery plant is to the north. Each of these deve ' nts were constructed before the subject property was developed. The adjacent developments (Matlack and Weyerhaeuser) both maintain some outdoor storage areas. These storage areas were paved to insure a high degree of aesthetic quality. These propelrttes do not generate dust nor pollute the surface and groundwater draieage systems. The adjacent properties do not have loose gravel spilling onto adjacent paved areas. These storage yards will not require resurfaCtog and con- tinuous maintenance, even though they may be more intensively used than the proposed storage yard. The City Council adopted the paving requirement as a law that would apply equally to all new developments. The law was adoptid to serve as a consistent standard for all developments, insuring the general improvement of the City. As such, the applicant should cmpl'y with ,the paving requirement and meet the standard set by neigh ring properties. The Valley Floor Plan Circulation Element addresses the reed for providing safe egress and ingress and adequate on-site traffic maneuverability. He quoted from the staff report: The applicant has stated that the required asphalt will be damaged by the constant dragging and scraping of wrecked vehicles atross the surface of the storage yard. The Planning Department maintains that this destruction is unlikely to occur. The damaged vehiClils .'are brought to the site on trucks. They are then lifted off the; trucks by forklifts and maneuvered into place. This process wogl# ble r versed when the salvaged vehicles leave the site. Instead of mo*jn0 �h: salvaged vehicles horizontally across the storage yard sur'Paee, ', fork- lifts move the vehicles vertically up off the trucks and dbww oni:0 the storage yard. There is little reason to believe that aoy �daalaoei,to the asphalt surface would occur because of the way the s4hvd vehicles are moved around the site. Many of the salvaged vehicles have tires intact when they Jgre:brought to the site. These vehicles represent little potential fgr' oarelmetal to be placed on the surface of the storage yard. Some vet�itlIps tgight be so badly damaged that metal parts would touch the surface of the storage yard. It would seem appropriate to place blocks under these vehicles to eliminate any potential damage that might occur from bare metal sitting on an asphalt suface. This site was annexed to the City of Kent in 1959 as part of a 2,990-acre annexation. The initial zoning of the site was M2, Heavy -Industrial . The designation was changed to M3, General Industrial , in 1973 with the adoption of the present zoning code. -8- Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes October 23, 1985 The property includes lots two and three of the Valley Investors Short Plat. This short plat was approved by the City in September 1979:. South Seattle Auto Auction covered the area with gravel "Arf ,the spring of 1984. This area was used for the interim storage of vehicles which were to be auctioned at a later time. The improvements and use of the land, were without City authori- zation and in contempt of regulatfons related to such improvements and use. The applicant submitted a plan for the property which was subquently approved in August 1984. After several requests of the applicant tn:comply with zoning code standards, the City cited South Seattle Auto Auction on March 25, 1985 for violation of the following standards: Failure to provide parking as provided under size and design standards Failure to pave parking and storagq area Failure to locate landscaping at e6d -of all rows of parking Failure to install concrete curbing As a result of the citations, work began on the subject !Prppsrty. After a number of subsequent inspections by the City, the work was genorilly complete in June 1985 with the exception of the paving requirement. Regarding the storm water system, the following is quoted from the staff report: A storm water system has already been constructed on the subject property in accordance with the Kent Surface Water and Drainage Code. There is an existing storm drainage ditch to the west of the property which serves as a detention pond for development in the area. The damaged vehicles that are part of the proposed salvage oWa,tion have a high potential for leaking oils, fluids, etc., onto the ground. The Engineering Department has recommended that,'*'tro approved oft/water separators (Utility Vault No. 660SA orja+"al) be installed on all stormwater lines discharging to the 4r'*411age ditch on the west side of the facility. The installation-lof,,these special oil/water separators would only be needed if a gravel: sur- face is permitted. The special oil/water separator would;dau„a better job of screening the oils, vehicle fluids, etc., 'iria,the standard devices required for asphalt lots. Before any variance may be granted it shall be shown and, e,Board of Adjustment shall find: 1. That the variance shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with a limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property, on behalf of whjch,the, ap- plication was filed, is located. -9- {rAi d� 4� Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes October 23, 1985 ;a 2. Such variance is necessary, because of special circumstapoles,,,relat- ing to size, shape, topography, location or surroundin the subject property, to provide it with ;pse rights and pri�Ps permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the Nie, in which the subject property is located. 3. That the granting of such variance will not be material,ly.detri-, mental to the public welfare, or-injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the subj t;ptoporty is situated. The Planning Department has reviewed the above statementj: and made the following findings: 1. The variance shall not constitute a grant of special p'ri'vileges inconsistent with a limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property, on behalf of which the application was filed, is located. Planning Department Finding The subject property is in an area that has developed with todus'ltrial uses. Weyerhaeuser operates a secondary fiber recovery pl=ant, to the north, while Matlack, Inc. has a truck storage and mainteimn�e yard to the south. Both of these developments were built prior to the improvement of the subject property. These adjacent developments have been constructed in accordance with City regulations. Both Weyerhaeuser and Matlack have outdoor storage yards. These storage yards are paved in accordance with City stan- dards. These businesses help to maintain a basic standard for develop- ment in this area. Granting the variance to the applicant would be a grant of special privilege. It would not be consistent with the standards,.colied with by Weyerhaeuser and Matlack as well as others in this., area. 2. Such variance is necessary, because of special circtw� ces re- lating to size, shape, topography, location or surrougtdiW O the subject property, to provide it with use rights a privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the",Zone in which the subject property is located. Planning Department Finding The applicant has requested a variance to allow an oil-sh0t ,san4 and gravel surface in lieu of asphalt paving. The applicant Ikas stated that an asphalt surface would be destroyed by the scrapirio and dragging of salvaged vehicles over the surface of the storage yard. The Planning Department maintains that this scraping anddrsgging will not ordinarily occur. Many of the vehicles that will tome, to the lot will have tires that will prevent bare metal surl'UOS from touching the surface. Severely damaged vehicles withouf wheels could be placed on blocks to insure that bare metal does ,hot come in contact with the storage yard surface. In addition, the salvvaged vehicles are to be moved around the site by forklift. It is unlikely that a forklift driver is going to drag a vehicle anywhere., The entire function of a forklift is to lift material up and; n. The process then is really vertical movement of the cars by the forklift rather than the horizontal "scraping and dragging" as deticribed, by the applicant. -10- § 7 r �1 Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes October 23, 1985 There are no special circumstances that otherwise necessttate the variance request. Mr. Kitto commented that whether the asphalt would be ru%ed', or not had nothing to do with this requirement. 3. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detri- mental to the public welfare, or injurious to the 04erty or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the Subject property is situated. Planning Department Finding Granting this application would be materially detrimental to the natural environment, specifically the drainage system adjsce6t to the subject property. An oil-shot coating over a sand"4ad gravel base has the potential to leach oils, vehicular fluids�,anti other sediments into the adjacent drainage system. These types:of 'pollut- ants are also likely to be carried into the surface water system, regardless of the type of oil/water separator used. Tile Variance would have a negative impact on the natural environmgn and wildlife habitat in the area. ' Although the portion of the lot to be exempt from the paving require- ment is difficult to see from the front of the property, tW storage yard can be seen from land to the north and south. Weyerhaeuser and Matlack operate paved storage yards to the north and s4pih, respectiv- ely. While both of these developments have complied with the paving standards, they will be forced to flank a three-acre gravol storage yard if the variance is approved. The salvaged vehicle storage yard will detract from the general quality of the area and thus be detri- mental to the properties and other improvements in the area., The Planning Department recommends denial of the variarKe request. This recommen- dation is based on the following findings: The Planning Department recommends denial of the vari" request. This recommendation is based on the following findings: - The applicant would be granted a special privil'*w not enjoyed by other developments in the area, specifically ,gayerhaeuser and Matlack. - There are no special circumstances related to „Yih property that necessitate approval of the variance request. - The proposed use would be detrimental to the notuftl environment, specifically the natural drainage system and. wildlife habitat. - The proposed use would detract from the general; quality of the area, being thereby detrimental to the various,praperties and improvements in the vicinity. -11- 4 Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes October 23, 1985 Mr. Kitto asked if the runoff of the oils would be conO.,b:llgd by another agency if there would be a problem. If it would run off into ,4011 'Creek, he felt that EPA or some other agency would be vitally interested -irk the situation. Mr. Heiser responded that the Engineering Department is vitally interested in the situation, and that is the reason that they have requested the oil separators. Mr. Harris added that one of the parts of the new stormiotility ordinance is quality. The Kent Engineering Department now has the, responsibility of Garrison Creek, Mill Creek and S pringbrook Creek to maintain the outer quality. Mr. Kitto did not see how the possibility of the asphalt being ruined had any bearing on whether or not the variance could be granted. , He felt it might possi- bly have some bearing on item number one. He expressed an interest in how this property could justify a variance. Chairman Mauritsen opened the public hearing. Jeff Corigliano, attorney representing South Seattle Auto Auction, introduced Bob McConkey, President, and Fred McConkey, General Manager, He presented to each Board member a letter from Ronald Benson, General Manager of City Transfer of Kent. Attached to this letter was information regarding, asphalt emulsion-- aggregate applications. Chairman Mauritsen reminded the applicant that three conditions must be addressed before granting a variance. Mr. Corigliano stated that they were present to make this request because they felt there was sufficient grounds for this request to ike granted, not because the project would cost $75,000.00. When one weighs $75,,Q00 against five million, the amount of money isn't really the issue, Tho Kent Zoning Code requires that this type of yard be asphalt coated or coated with an equivalent material . He explained that they have had no success fn, convincing the Planning Department that what is being proposed is an equivalent:material . He introduced Fred McConkey and asked him to explain the, Sogth Seattle Auto Auction activity. Mr. McConkey responded that South Seattle Auto Auction) is a wholesale exchange in which dealers and car rental companies bring their ;cars on a weekly basis. These cars are physically auctioned off to other dealer s: • '�This is part of the trading exchange for the wholesale automobile bus,9jness. In relation to the salvage business, they take their consignments fra,mt §tate Farm Insurance Company and other companies. After the cars are wrecked', the cars are towed to a storage lot, not Seattle Auto Auction. At times these cars stay on these lots up to two months. When the adjuster settles with, the ',client, the car is towed on a truck or flatbed down to their lot and dumped-' off. They have a salvage sale once a month. The cars are then sold to the highest bidder, wrecking yards and parts houses. At another location the people disassemble the car and resell the parts, i.e. , fenders, motors, etc. -12- Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes October 23, 1985 Mr. Corigliano asked the date they started their salvo business at the present location. Mr. McConkey responded that they opened the new facility,,n ,January 1980, and at the beginning of 1981 they began the salvage busi'nes,s and obtained the contract from State Farm. At that time they were using -the existing facility. In 1982 they purchased the addifional 8.83 acres. Mr. Corigliano asked if the salvage yard was at a diff'efent 'location in 1981 . Mr. McConkey responded that it was located on another s Otion of their property. Mr. Corigliano asked if they had moved it from one ardz�;to another. Mr. McConkey explained that it was located at that time An an oil and gravel lot. They paved the rest of the lot, the triangular portion, to make more room for general sale consignment, or regular automobiles. 'Then they moved the salvage area to the new lot, which they thought would be kept in a gravel condition. He stated that it is not practical to operate a salvage lot on a paved piece of ground. He stated that there are no salvage lots on paved ground. It is not the norm and it is not practical . Mr. Corigliano asked if in 1981 when they started the sal,,vage business and had their salvage yard at the place previously described, did he have any problems fulfilling the requirements of the Planning Department. ' Had they been asked to pave the area. Mr. McConkey responded "no," and then added that they d'id pave it later volun- tarily. Mr. Corigliano asked if they used the paved area for anbt�her activity. Mr. McConkey responded that they used it for additional cars. Mr. Corigliano asked if they have oil-water separators on the premises at the present time. Mr. McConkey responded that they do have them and that they, are being maintained. Mr. Corigliano asked if they were maintained by Amalgamated' Services, Inc. Mr. McConkey replied that this was correct information,6--i"iV� Mr. Corigliano asked how many acres of asphalt they presently have on their property. Mr. McConkey answered that the main facility is made up •Of ?8 acres which are entirely paved with asphalt. The new lot covers 8.83 acres'. Approximately 5.5 acres are paved at the present time. He felt this infoimation was immaterial for this hearing but wanted the Board to know that the, applicant had tried to purchase a piece of property which would have been con ti,$uo6' s to their property. However, the owner had already made plans for a buildij4g,, so they purchased an adjacent piece of land. -13- 14 Kent Board of Adjustment October 23, 1985 Mr. Corigliano asked Mr. McConkey to tell the Board ab"t tail contamination and leakage. Did he find this to be a true situation? Mr. McConkey explained that he had given Mr. Heiser the information about the forklifts. Most of the cars are towed onto the site. Tie cars that are badly damaged are brought to the site on flatbeds and then lifted off with a forklift. Overall the salvaged vehicles bring in 17 percent of big, value. Mr. Coriglianc asked if he found much oil leakage on tie site. Mr. McConkey answered that the cars are stored off the site for a period of one month to two months at the adjusters' lots. Any oil that would be running out of these cars would have already run out. Tow trucks c4alt bring in cars that are leaking gas for safety reasons. He emphasized that this is the third place that these cars are taken. Mr. Corigliano referred to the letter and attachment submitted at the beginning of the hearing stating that it is true that the light bituminous sealcoat is about half the cost of asphalt. He felt that Mr. Benson would love to sell asphalt because he would make twice as much money, but the point is, that they don't feel that it is necessary to have asphalt. It would be a wasi+e of money. He urged that the Board study the attachment submitted from the 1Wevron Asphalt Division, because he felt the terms used in the staff report were misleading. When they used the terms light oil and oil-shot surface, he felt nothing could be farther from the truth. First, the surface is prepared with crushed rock, the type' of rock that is used in making asphalt. A good base is laid, then over the top of the base they place asphalt emulsion, which is not light oil in any sense, of the word. He called it liquid asphalt. Over the top of that they put:,,more rock. When those two are together, they roll it. When this was done in Pik'. Corigliano's neighborhood, they only used the cars driving over the :,Ve a, to compact the materials. It took only three weeks before it turned to..payement. Mr. Benson stated that the City of Kent uses this specific coating tin streets, and a number of other cities also use it. When these materials bond together, the effect is asphalt. Mr. Corigliano had difficulty with the term "light oiV 4rW an oil-shot' surf ace." He felt that it was not a fair characterization of how�$ his{worked. It was asphalt in effect. At the present time South Seattle Auto Auction has their oil/water separators maintained by Amalgamated. The Engineeringl,04 iiatment has indicated that if a light bituminous sealcoat is approved, they Wt4196 to have a certain oil/water separator installed. South Seattle Auto AuCtitn is willing to do this. He realized that Central Premix Concrete Company was a;preeiisting use and that the City could not do anything about it, because it existed before any of these laws and regulations were in effect. Metro Hauling has a gr,a*l surface, and Automic Auto has no asphalt. Torgerson Machinery was,.aloWed by the Board of Adjustment to have a gravel surface to store heavy equipment. -14- Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes October 23, 1985 av Mr. Corigliano felt that because these other areas were,-oot required to be paved with asphalt,that granting this request would not be w ciol privilege to his client. He pointed out that they were-aocated on a de'al .ind' street, a street which South Seattle Auto Auction had previously paid to,be paved. There are no residential houses involved. This site is located in An industrial area which is situated in the midst of other preexisting uses or ,vkriance-granted uses, some of which are similar to theirs and yet different. :,iie felt that their choice of surface would look nicer and appear to the average ,prson as asphalt. He mentioned that they had no problem with their salvage yard when it had a gravel surface in 1981 . It was only when they moved their'', sa',lvage yard a short distance that they were faced with the rules and regulations from the Planning Department. He felt that the Planning Department has done a commendable job in the City of Kent and that he had always been impressediwith the City of Kent. He felt that there is a point when one deals with rules that', one has to exercise discretion and judgment, something that comes with experience. He hoped that the Board of Adjustment would do this. Mr. Corigliano noted that South Seattle Auto Auction had been cited for violations. This had been mentioned in the staff report. He expressed amazement that it was a criminal offense in the City of Kent to not pave a parking lot, to fail to landscape or install curbing. He realized that the citizens had an interest in these things being done. It was at the time his client was charged with these criminal offenses that he became involved in this case.- •He 'had talked with Mr. Bill Williamson in the City Attorney's office, and they had reached an agreement to dismiss the other charges. He emphasized ,thatilthe applicant had a preexisting use, a use that existed prior to the effective date of the ordinance, at least the codification of Title 15 as it now exists, and 'that there had been no problems until recently. He suggested that these cars do not contaminate, and that, his client would not want a situation where there would be oil and transmisoion fluid on his property. He pointed out that they run an orderly business and would prevent this sort of thing from happening . The Kent Engineering Department has suggested that the applicant install a specific type of oil water separator. They would be wili,ing to do this, and that they would monitor and maintain this separator. ale pointed out that they have 28 acres of asphalts and that three more acre$1Jor this use he felt was unreasonable.. Mr. McConkey added that Central PreMix is not paved, npr,.is ,Metro Hauling, and they are on the same road. He mentioned that 77th ha+ ,,be,en ',paved by South Seattle Auto Auction with this light bituminous sealcoat. and that it was very difficult to distinguish it from asphalt. He felt that 0 there were a water problem, the E.P.A. would have contacted them. E.P.A. had .;taken samples from their property approximately one year previous to this hearing. They had not been cited or contacted. He added that Matlock and Weye0haeuser had paved their areas because it fit their needs. The salvage business does not require paving. -15- Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes October 23, 1985 Mr. Kitto wished to know if this variance was necessary-:because of special circumstances relating to the location or surroundings !�f the property, to provide it with the use rights and privileges permitted4l,.to other properties in the vicinity. He felt that South Seattle Auto Auction -fl6od�d to fit this test. Mr. Corigliano suggested that this variance was necessary for South Seattle Auto Auction to function efficiently in order to provide it �W#h the privileges enjoyed by other businesses in the area, including Too tison Machinery, Metro Hauling and Central Premix, even though he acknowledgod? i,4at Central Premix was a preexisting use. He suggested that his clent was attoppting to go one step further and felt that the Auction should be commended fbr this. He pointed out that the surface of the road was not visible from most of the road because of the curvature of the road. The cars on the lot were notyi$ible from the road. Chairman Mauritsen pointed out that Torgerson Machinery 's not in an M3 zone, but is located in an M2 zone. Mr. Corigliano stated that the reason he used Torgerson equipment as an example was because they store heavy diesel equipment on a gravel, surface. They were proposing to store their cars on an "asphalt" surface. Mr. Dowell asked if the staff considered this proposed surface as an "equivalent" surface. Mr. Harris responded that the proposed surface had not, been presented to the Planning Department prior to this hearing. He wondered how strong the surface would be and how long it would last. He felt that expepi,ts� would need to determine whether or not this was "equivalent" material . ; Mr. Dowell asked if the Engineering Department had approvedlthe material . Mr. Heiser responded that Gary Gill of the Kent Engineering Department did not consider the proposed material to be equivalent to asphalt., This was the reason the staff had recommended denial . Mr. Corigliano added that Mr. Benson had been prepared., appear before the Board to explain this surface at the previously designated h A'tings, but a conflict made it impossible to be present at this hearing. Mr. McConkey, president of South Seattle Auto Auction,! 3; 605 First Place S.W. , explained that when he built the Auction in 1980 theroj; s Po mad into the property, so he created and surfaced this street. NI�,;jtr�cks have been using this road for the past five years. He asked the staff!',tb check this surface, which the City of Kent now maintains. He mentioned thiefthjs road is made of the same substance that they are asking permission to put,on,.the' storage area. Mr. Dowell felt that the City Engineer would need to 4etermine whether this is an equivalent material . If the City Engineer felt thot this were an equivalent material , then the Board of Adjustment would not need ,to, act on this request. He suggested that the matter be continued until the ,needid ,,information could be obtained from the Engineering Department. -16- Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes October 23, 1985 x Chairman Mauritsen asked if the Engineering Department 4t4d seen the material that was presented by the applicant at this hearing. ,; - ", Mr. Corigliano responded that it had not been made available to the Engineering Department. Chairman Mauritsen reminded him that since neither th0, E,n9i'neering Department nor the Planning Department had seen this information,,; the ',Board would not be able to rule on it at this hearing. `* Ms. Houser remarked since they have a road that has been,, in existence for five years, it would seem that by looking at the road the Engineering Department would be able to make a decision. She felt that they would not need to meet again if the City Engineer approved of the surface that wos being presented. Mr. Kitto felt that it would be to the applicant's benefit to wait for the City Engineer to make his decision. If the City Engineer approves the proposed sur- face, South Seattle Auto Auction would have no need for this variance request. Chairman Mauritsen closed the public hearing. Mr. Kitto MOVED to continue the hearing to November 5, i98% suggesting that the City Engineer review the material . Mr. Dowell SECONDED ' he motion. Motion carried. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Do,Well MOVED to adjourn the Ming. Ms. Houser SECONDED the mW 6n. The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m., Respec!tfully submitted *,_ iHarrYs, ecretary -17-