HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning and Economic Development Committee - 03/18/2003 iT
H IN TON PLANNING COMMITTEE
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT March 18, 2003
Fred N. Satterstrom;AICP
Director
PLANNING SERVICES The City Council Planning Committee will meet in Council Chambers East, Kent
Charlene Anderson,AICP City Hall, 220 4th Avenue South, at 3:00 PM on Tuesday, March 18, 2003.
Manager
Mailing Address
220 Fourth Ave. S.
Kent,WA 98032-5895 Committee Members: Leona Orr, Chair Tim Clark Bruce White
Location Address:
400 West Gowe
Kent,WA 98032 Action Speaker Time
Phone:253-856-5454
Fax:253-856-6454
1. Approval of Minutes of YES
October 15, 2002
2. Zoning Code Amendment - Planned YES Charlene Anderson 15 min
Unit Development #ZCA-2002-5 C Acrepbfc)
3. Master Plan Development PUD YES Kim Adams Pratt 10 min
Modification- Ordinance -W?-Cq-ZUGZ-3
4. Cluster Housing NO Charlene Anderson 15 min
5. Capital Facilities Plans-Updates NO Charlene Anderson 15 min
to Comprehensive Plan
The Plannin�Committee meets the third Tuesday of each month at 3:00 PM in Chambers East, Kent City
Hall,220 4` Ave. South,unless otherwise noted. For agenda information please contact Jackie Bicknell at
(253) 856-5712.
ANY PERSON REQUIRING A DISABILITY ACCOMMODATION SHOULD CONTACT THE
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AT(253)856-5725 IN ADVANCE. FOR TDD RELAY SERVICE CALL
THE WASHINGTON TELECOMMUNICATIONS RELAY SERVICE AT 1-800-833-6388.
MARCH 11, 2003
THE AGENDA COVER SHEET FOR THE 03/18/03
NN/NG COMMITTEE MEETING (4:00 PM)
ITLE OF ITEM #1 "CLUSTER HOUSING"or
z coo
INFORMATION ITEM: Staff will discuss clustering provisions
BACKUP MATERIAL: Staff Report from Charlene Anderson dated 3/11/03.
PRESENTER(s): Charlene Anderson
TIME: 20 Minutes }�
• TITLE OF ITEM #2 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLANS—UPDATES TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
INFORMATION ITEM: Staff will discuss the City's 6-year financing plan and the capital
facilities plans for the school districts.
BACKUP MATERIAL: Staff Report from Charlene Anderson dated 3/11/03.
PRESENTER(s): Charlene Anderson
1IME: 20 Minutes
ITLE OF ITEM #3 1 ZONING CODE AMENDMENT-PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT(PUD)
#ZCA-2002-5 (KIVA#2023895)
ACTION ITEM: Staff recommends that the Land Use and Planning Board's
recommendation regarding an amendment to Kent City Code
Section 15.08.400 Planned Unit Developments be forwarded on to
City Council for Approval/Denial/Modification.
BACKUP MATERIAL: Staff Report from Charlene Anderson dated 3/11/03., text of Board's
recommended changes, application for code text amendment, staff
memo to Board, SEPA Responsible Official's determination.
PRESENTER(s): Charlene Anderson
TIME: 20 Minutes
•
SAPeanitlPlanTlanning Committee1030318pc-cvrsht.doc
ITEM #1
Mottram, Pamela
m: Mottram, Pamela
t: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 11:34 AM
Bicknell, Jackie
Subject: Agenda/Cover Sheet-for Planning Committee of 3/18/03
I have attached the Agenda/Cover Sheet for the Planning Committee Mtg 3/18/03
Q�
030318pc-cvrsht.do
c(44 KB)
•
•
1
PLANNING COMMITTEE
MARCH 18, 2003
•
"CLUSTER HOUSING"
•
INFORMATION ITEM :
Staff will discuss clustering provisions.
•
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director
PLANNING SERVICES
KENT Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager
WASHINGTON Phone:253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
March 11, 2003
TO: CHAIR LEONA ORR AND PLANNING COMMITTEE MEMBERS
FROM: CHARLENE ANDERSON,AICP,PLANNING MANAGER
RE: CLUSTER HOUSING
For March 18, 2003 Meeting
At a March, 1995 Planning Commission workshop, Planning staff presented potential amendments to the
Zoning and Subdivision Codes to allow cluster housing and related development techniques. The
Planning Commission held several workshops and two public hearings on the issue. Planning staff also
held two public forums on the issue. On October 23, 1995, the Planning Commission forwarded staffs
proposal to the City Council without recommendation. Unresolved issues related to minimum lot size
and the requirement for a Conditional Use Permit.
On November 25, 1995 and January 16, 1996, the City Council Planning Committee reviewed the
proposal, with outstanding issues being sidewalks and street design, including street widths and on-street
parking. No further action on the issue was taken at that time.
In March 2001, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3551 related to Urban Separators. The
Ordinance required residential clustering for subdivisions located within areas designated Urban
Separators. The clustering provisions allow only detached single family dwelling units, maintain
maximum densities of the zoning district, require a minimum lot size of 2,500 square feet and a 30-foot
minimum lot width, restrict the number of units in a cluster and require cluster separation, and have a
50%common open space requirement beyond that of any sensitive area. Design review is not required.
As you know, the Land Use & Planning Board recently recommended approval of an amendment to the
Zoning Code regulations for Planned Unit Developments. The proposed amendments in many ways
would provide a means of "clustering" development, contain review criteria for granting approval, and
the proposed development standards are more flexible than those adopted under the Urban Separator
amendment. The Urban Separators, of course, are the more sensitive land areas in the City and benefit
from the more restrictive standards.
Staff recommends no further action on provisions for clustering unless the proposed PUD amendments
are not approved by the City Council. Staff will be available at the March 18d, committee meeting to
further discuss this proposal.
CA\pm S:\Permit\Plan\ZONECODEAMEND\2002\clusterhousingpc.DOC
cc: Fred N. Satterstrom, C.D. Director
•
ITEM#2
PLANNING COMMITTEE
MARCH 18, 2003
•
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLANS
UPDATES TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
•
INFORMATION ITEM :
Staff will discuss the City's 6-year financing plan and the
capital facilities plans for the school districts.
•
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director
PLANNING SERVICES
T Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager
KEN
W"5"'"G r G" Phone:253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
March 11, 2003
TO: CHAIR LEONA ORR AND PLANNING COMMITTEE MEMBERS
FROM: CHARLENE ANDERSON, AICP, PLANNING MANAGER
RE: CAPITAL FACILITIES PLANS—UPDATES TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
For March 18, 2003 Meeting
Each year during the annual comprehensive plan amendment process, the Capital Facilities Element of
the Kent Comprehensive Plan is updated to adopt the capital facilities plans of the Kent and Federal Way
School Districts and to adopt the City's 6-year capital facilities funding plan. Currently, the Land Use &
Planning Board holds the public hearing on the annual amendments and makes a recommendation to the
City Council.
RCW Section 36.70A.130 states that amendments to the comprehensive plan can be considered by the
governing body no more frequently than once every year except amendment of the capital facilities
• element that occurs concurrently with the adoption or amendment of the city budget. Kent City Code
(KCC) Section 12.02.010 states the City Council shall consider amendments to the Kent comprehensive
plan no more than once each calendar year, except if an emergency exists. Kent City Code currently does
not provide for an exception for the annual budget.
In March 1996, Ordinance#3281 adopted the school districts' capital facilities plans as part of the Capital
Facilities Element of the Kent Comprehensive Plan and established an impact fee schedule. KCC
12.13.060 requires school districts on an annual basis to submit their updated capital facilities plan, and
KCC 12.13.070 requires Council review of the updates in conjunction with any update of the Capital
Facilities Element of the Kent Comprehensive Plan.
RCW Section 36.70A.070 requires Capital Facilities Elements to contain an inventory of existing public
facilities, a forecast of future needs, the location and capacity of proposed facilities, and a six-year
financing plan with projected funding capacities; and to coordinate the land use element, capital facilities
element, and financing plan. The City Council reviews the 6-year financing plan annually during the
budget cycle. The school districts capital facilities plans also address 6-year financing.
Staff believes both the City's 6-year financing plan and the capital facilities plans for the school districts
may be considered by the Council concurrently with the annual budget. A public hearing likely would be
required, and we may need to amend some portions of Kent City Code to specify that on these issues the
Council would hold the public hearing rather than the Land Use &Planning Board.
Staff will be available at the March 18'j'committee meeting to further discuss this proposal.
• CA\pm S:\Permit\Plan\ZONECODEAMEND\2002\capfacilitiespc.DOC
cc: Fred N. Satterstrom, C.D. Director
ITEM #3
PLANNING COMMITTEE
MARCH 18, 2003
•
ZONING CODE AMENDMENT
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
#ZCA=2002=5 (KIVA #2023895)
ACTION ITEM :
Staff recommends that the Land Use and Planning Board's
recommendation regarding an amendment to Kent City Code
Section 15.08.400 Planned Unit Developments be forwarded
on to City Council for Approval/Denial/Modification.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director
400 PLANNING SERVICES
.47
KEN T Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager
WASMTNGTON
Phone: 253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent,WA 98032-5895
March 11, 2003
TO: CHAIR LEONA ORR AND PLANNING COMMITTEE MEMBERS
FROM: CHARLENE ANDERSON,AICP, PLANNING MANAGER
RE: ZONING CODE AMENDMENT—PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
#ZCA-2002-5 (KIVA#2023895)
For March 18, 2003 Meeting
After considering testimony at their February 241h public hearing, the Land Use & Planning
Board recommended, by a 4 to 3 vote, approval of an amendment to Kent City Code Section
15.08.400 Planned Unit Developments. The recommendation includes the following:
1) PUDs are allowed in single family zoning districts with a minimum of 10 acres.
2) PUDs in single family zoning districts on less than 100 acres shall be detached single
family dwellings only.
3) Density bonuses shall be allowed.
4) In single family PUDs, parking shall be provided on at least one side of every public and
private street, except alleys. Additional parking may be required based upon site design
and project land uses.
5) Pedestrian walkways shall be provided to connect residences to public walkways and
streets.
6) PUDs shall be subject to administrative design review.
7) Additional review criteria for PUDs include compatibility with adjacent land uses,
integration of open space within the PUD, and addition of features that promote
community interaction, such as porches, common areas, and de-emphasized garages.
The full text of the Board's recommendation is included in the agenda packet, with the Board's
recommended changes in bold. Also included in the agenda packet are the application for code
text amendment, the staff memo to the Board, and the SEPA Responsible Official's
determination that the proposal does not warrant additional review under SEPA.
CA\pm S:\Permit\Plan\ZONECODEAMEND\2002\2023895-2002-5pc.DOC
Attach: Proposed amendment to Sec. 15.08.400 Planned unit development,PUD
February 13,2003 e-mail from SEPA Responsible Official
Code Text Amendment application from Kentview,L.L.C.
cc: Fred N. Satterstrom,C.D.Director
As recommended by Land Use& Plannin2 Board 2/24/03
Sec. 15.08.400. Planned unit development,PUD.
The intent of the PUD is to create a process to promote diversity and creativity in site design,and
protect and enhance natural and community features. The process is provided to encourage unique
developments, which may combine a mixture of residential, commercial and industrial uses. The PUD
process permits departures from the conventional siting, setback and density requirements of a particular
zoning district in the interest of achieving superior site development, creating open space and encouraging
imaginative design i by permitting design flexibility. By using flexibility in the application of development
standards, this process will promote developments that will benefit citizens that live and work within the
city.
A. Zoning districts where permitted. PUDs are permitted in all zoning districts with the exception
of the A-10,agricultural zone;provided,however,that PUDs in SR zones are on4y--only allowed if the site
is at least one hundred(100)acres in size,except as provided in subsection(C)of this section.
B. Permitted uses.
1. Principally permitted uses. The principally permitted uses in PUDs shall be the same as
those permitted in the underlying zoning classifications except as provided in subsection (B)(4) of this
section.
2. Conditional uses. The conditional uses in PUDs shall be the same as those permitted in
the underlying zoning classification. The conditional use permit review process may be consolidated with
that of the PUD pursuant to procedures specified in subsection(F)of this section.
3. Accessory uses. Accessory uses and buildings which are customarily incidental and
subordinate to a principally permitted use are also permitted.
4. Exceptions. In residential PUDs of -one hundred—(]00) acres or more located in
SR zones, and in residential PUDs of ten (10) acres or more located in other zoning districts commercial
uses may be permitted. Commercial uses shall be limited to those uses permitted in the neighborhood
convenience commercial district. In PUDs of one hundred (100) acres in size located in SR zones,
attached dwelling units are permitted only if they are condominiums created in accordance with the
Washington Condominium Act, Chapter 64.34 RCW;provided that if a proposed PUD in a single-family
zoning district includes condominiums, the density bonus provisions outlined in subsection (D) of this
section shall not apply, and further provided that no condominium building may exceed two (2) stories.
in PUDs of less than one hundred (100) nares in size located On SR zones. the densitv bonus
vrovision- outlined in subseeteon (D) of the section shall of. ..1.
C. Development standards. The following development standards are minimum requirements for a
planned unit development:
1. Minimum lot size exclusion. The minimum lot size requirements of the districts
outlined in this title shall not apply to PUDs.
03/07/03 1
2. Minimum site acreage. Minimum site acreage for a PUD is established according to the
zoning district in which the PUD is located,as follows:
Zones Minimum
Site Acreage
SR zones(SR-1,SR-2,
SR-3,SR-4.5,SR-6, SR-8) 100 acres(a
Multifamily(MR-D,MR-G,
MR-M,MR-H,MRT-12,MRT-16) None
Commercial, office and
manufacturing zones None
a. Minimum acreage requirements in SR zones may be reduced to 10 acres
provided the proposal:
i. consists entirely of detached sinjzle family dwellings(KCC 15.02.1 15);
3. Minimum perimeter building setback. The minimum perimeter building setback of the
underlying zone shall apply. Multifamily transition area requirements shall apply to any multifamily
developments (as provided in KCC 15.08.215), except where specifically exempted by administrative
• design review (as provided in KCC 15.09.045). The hearing examiner may reduce building separation
requirements to the minimum required by the building and fire departments according withto the criteria
set forth in subsection(17)(1) of this section. If an adjacent property is undevelopable under this title,the
hearing examiner may also reduce the perimeter building setback requirement to the minimum standards
in the city building and fire codes.
4. Maximum height of structures. The maximum height of structures of the underlying
zone shall apply. Multifamily transition area requirements shall apply to any multifamily developments
(as provided in KCC 15.08.215) except where specifically exempted by administrative design review (as
provided in KCC 15.09.045). The hearing examiner may authorize additional height in CC, GC, DC,
CM, M1, M2 and M3 zones where proposed development in the PUD is compatible with the scale and
character of adjacent existing developments.
5. Open space.
a. The standard set forth in this subsection shall apply to PUD residential
developments only. Each PUD shall provide a minimum of thirty-five (35) percent of the total site area
for common open space. In mixed use PUDs containing residential uses, thirty-five (35)percent of the
area used for residential use shall be reserved as open space.
b. For the purpose of this section, open space shall be defined as land which is
not used for buildings, dedicated public rights-of-way, traffic circulation and roads,parking areas, or any
• kind of storage. Open space includes but is not limited to privately owned woodlands, open fields,
03/07/03 2
streams, wetlands, severe hazard areas, sidewalks, alkwayTlandscaped areas, trails through parks and
sensitive areas (not including required sidewalks) gardens, courtyards or lawns. Common open space
may provide for either active or passive recreation.
C. Open space within a PUD shall be available for common use by the residents,
tenants or the general public,depending on the type of project.
6. Streets. If streets within the development are required to be dedicated to the city for
public use, such streets shall be designed in accordance with the standards outlined in the city subdivision
code and other appropriate city standards. If streets within the development are to remain in private
ownership and remain as private streets,the following standards shall apply:
a. Minimum private street pavement widths for parallel parking in residential
planned unit developments. Minimum private street pavement widths with and without€or parallel
parking in residential planned unit developments are as follows:
03/07/03 3
No Parking Parking
Parking One Side Both Sides
(feet) (feet) (feet)
One-way streets 20 29 38
Two-way streets 22 31 40
The minimum widths set out in this subsection may be modified upon review and approval by
the city fire chief and the city traffic engineer providing they are sufficient to maintain emergency access
and traffic safety. A maintenance agreement for private streets within a PUD shall be required by the
hearing examiner as a condition of PUD approval.
b. Vehicle parking areas. Adequate vehicular parking areas shall be provided.
The required number of padEing spaees Fnay vary ffoln the fequirements of Ch. 15.05 KCG and shall
appfeved by the hearing examinef based upedi a par4ing iieed assessment study subnii4ted by the appliea;:4
and ,,p~..oyed b the planning nian . Vehicular parking areas may be provided by on-street parking or
off-street parking lots.The design of such parking areas shall be in accordance with the standards outlined
in Ch. 15.05 KCC. In single family PUDs, parking shall be provided on at least one side of every
public and private street except alleys The Planning Manager may recommend for Hearing Examiner
approval additional parking based upon site design and project land uses; the recommendation may
include a requirement for on-street parking,
C. One-way streets. One-way loop streets shall be no more than one thousand
five hundred(1,500)feet long.
d. On-street parking. On-street parking shall be permitted. Privately owned and
maintained"no parking" and"fire lane" signs may be required as determined by the city traffic engineer
and city fire department chief.
7. Pedestrian walkways. Pedestrian walkways shall be provided to connect residences
to public walkways and streets and shall be constructed of material deemed to be an all-weather surface
by the public works director and planning manager.
8. Landscaping.
a. Minimum perimeter landscaping of the underlying zone shall apply.
Additional landscaping shall be required as provided in Ch. 15.07 KCC and KCC 15.08.215.
b. All PUD developments shall ensure that parking areas are integrated with the
landscaping system and provide screening of vehicles from view from public streets. Parking areas shall
be conveniently located to buildings and streets while providing for landscaping adjacent to buildings and
pedestrian access.
C. Solid waste collection areas and waste reduction or recycling collection areas
shall be conveniently and safely located for onsite use and collection,and attractively site screened.
9. Signs. The sign regulations of Ch. 15.06 KCC shall apply.
•
03/07/03 4
10. Platting. If portions of the PUD are to be subdivided for sale or lease,the procedures of
• the city subdivision code, as amended, shall apply. Specific development standards such as lot size,street
design, etc.,shall be provided as outlined in subsection(E)of this section.
11. Green River Corridor. Any development located within the Green River Corridor
special interest district shall adhere to the Green River Corridor special interest district regulations.
12. View regulations. View regulations as specified in KCC 15.08.060 shall apply to all
PUDs.
13. 4-3—Shoreline master program. Any development located within two hundred(200)
feet of the Green River shall adhere to the city shoreline master program regulations.
14. Desi,Zn review. PUDs shall be subject to KCC 15.09.045 Administrative design review.
PUDs of only single family detached residences shall be evaluated using the review
criteria of KCC 15.09.045(C)Multifamily design review.
D. Density bonus standards. The density of residential development for PUDs shall be
based on the gross density of the underlying zoning district. Exeept :n Prins under- 100 aer-
located *n co Tthe hearing examiner may recommend a dwelling unit density not more than
twenty(20)percent greater than that permitted by the underlying zone upon findings and conclusions that
the amenities or design features which promote the purposes of this subsection, as follows, are provided:
(PUDs under 100 aeFes On soze Weated in SR zones m", not be allowed density bon*se".
1. Open space. A four (4) percent density bonus may be authorized if at least ten (10)
percent of the open space is in concentrated areas for passive use. Open space shall include significant
natural features of the site, including but not limited to fields, woodlands, watercourses, and permanent
and seasonal wetlands. Excluded from the open space definition are the areas within the building
footprints, land used for parking, vehicular circulation or rights-of-way, and areas used for any kind of
storage.
2. Active recreation areas. A four(4) percent density bonus may be authorized if at least
ten(10)percent of the site is utilized for active recreational purposes, including but not limited to jogging
or walking trails, pools, children's play areas, etc. Only that percentage of space contained within
accessory structures that is directly used for active recreation purposes can be included in the ten (10)
percent active recreation requirement.
3. Stormwater drainage. A two (2) percent density bonus may be authorized if
stormwater drainage control is accomplished using natural onsite drainage features. Natural drainage
feature may include streams,creeks,ponds,etc.
4. Native vegetation. A four(4)percent density bonus may be authorized if at least fifteen
(15)percent of the native vegetation on the site is left undisturbed in large open areas.
5. Parking lot size. A two (2) percent density bonus may be authorized if off-street
parking is grouped in areas of sixteen (16) stalls or less. Parking areas must be separated from other
parking areas or buildings by significant landscaping in excess of type V standards as provided in KCC
03/07/03 5
15.07.050. At least fifty (50) percent of these parking areas must be designed as outlined in this
subsection to receive the density bonus.
6. Mixed housing types. A two (2) percent density bonus may be authorized if a
development features a mix of residential housing types. Single-family residences, attached single units,
condominiums, apartments and townbomes are examples of housing types. The mix need not include
some of every type.
7. Project planning and management. A two (2)percent density bonus may be granted if
a design/development team is used. Such a team would include a mixture of architects, engineers,
landscape architects and designers. A design/development team is likely to produce a professional
development concept that would be consistent with the purpose of the zoning regulations.
These standards are thresholds, and partial credit is not given for partial attainment. The site
plan must at least meet the threshold level of each bonus standard in order for density bonuses to be given
for that standard.
E. Master plan approvals. The master plan process is intended to allow approval of a generalized,
conceptual development plan on a site which would then be constructed in phases over a longer period of
time than a typical planned unit development. The master plan approval process is typically appropriate
for development which might occur on a site over a period of several years, and in phases which are not
entirely predicable.
1. Submittal requirements. The distinguishing characteristic between a master plan
development application and a planned unit development application is that a master plan development
proposal is conceptual in nature. However, the master plan application shall provide sufficient detail of
the scope of the development, the uses, the amount of land to be developed and preserved, and how
services will be provided. The specific submittal requirements are noted below:
a. A written description of the scope of the project, including total anticipated
build-out(number of units of residential,gross floor area for commercial),and the types of uses proposed;
b. A clear vicinity map, showing adjacent roads;
C. A fully dimensional site plan, which would show the areas upon which
development would occur, the proposed number of units or buildings in each phase of the development,
the areas would be preserved for open space or protection of environmentally sensitive features, and a
generalized circulation plan,which would include proposed pedestrian and bicycle circulation;
d. A generalized drainage and stormwater runoff plan;
e. A site map showing contours at not greater than five (5) foot intervals and
showing any wetlands, streams,or other natural features.
f. A description of the proposed phasing plan.
g. Documentation of coordination with the Kent school district.
h. Certificates of water and sewer availability.
i. Generalized building elevations showing the types of uses being proposed.
03/07/03 6
2. Density. The gross density of a residential master plan project shall be the same as the
density allowable in the underlying zoning district.
3. Open space. The criteria in subsection(C)(5)of this section shall apply.
4. Application process. The application process for a master plan application shall be as
outlined in subsection(F)of this section.
5. Review criteria. The review criteria for a master plan application shall be the same as
those outlined in subsection(G)of this section.
6. Administrative approval of individual phases. Once a master site plan PUD has been
approved pursuant to subsection (F) of this section, any individual phase of the development shall be
reviewed and approved administratively, as outlined in Ch. 15.09 KCC; provided that for each phase of
development that includes a residential condominium, the applicant shall submit a copy of the
condominium declaration recorded against the property,and as outlined in RCW 64.34.200.
7. Time limits. The master plan approved by the hearing examiner or city council, as
provided in subsection(F)of this section, shall be valid for a period of up to seven (7) years. At the end
of this seven-year period, development permits must be issued for all phases of the master plan
development. An extension of time may be requested by the applicant. A single extension may be
granted by the planning manager for a period of not more than two(2)more additional years.
8. Modifications. Once approved, requests for modifications to the master plan project
shall be made in writing to the planning manager. The planning manager shall make a determination as to
whether the requested modification is major or minor as outlined in subsection(I)of this section.
F. Application process. The application process includes the following steps: informal review
process, compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act, community information meeting,
development plan review,and public hearing before the hearing examiner.
I. Informal review process. An applicant shall meet informally with the planning
department at the earliest possible date to discuss the proposed PUD. The purpose of this meeting is to
develop a project that will meet the needs of the applicant and the objectives of the city as defined in this
title.
2. SEPA compliance. Compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act and
regulations and city SEPA requirements shall be completed prior to development plan review.
3. Development plan review. After informal review and completion of the SEPA process,
a proposal shall next be reviewed by city staff through the development plan review process. Comments
received by the project developer under the development review process shall be used to formalize the
proposed development prior to the development being presented at a public hearing before the hearing
examiner.
4. Community information meeting.
a. A community information meeting shall be required for any proposed PUD
located in a residential zone or within two hundred (200) feet of a residential zone. At this meeting, the
03/07/03 7
applicant shall present the development proposed to interested residents. Issues raised at the meeting may
be used to refine the PUD plan. Notice shall be given in at least one (1) publication in the local
newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. Written notice shall be mailed first class to
all property owners within a radius of not less than two hundred (200) feet of the exterior boundaries of
the property subject to the application. Any alleged failure of any property owner to actually receive the
notice of hearing shall not invalidate the proceedings.
b. Nonresidential PUDs not located within two hundred(200)feet of a residential
zone shall not require a community information meeting.
5. Public notice and hearing examiner public hearing. The hearing examiner shall hold at
least one (1) public hearing on the proposed PUD and shall give notice thereof in at least one (1)
publication in the local newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. Written notice shall
be mailed first class to all property owners within a radius of not less than two hundred(200) feet of the
exterior boundaries of the property subject to the application. Any alleged failure of any property owner
to actually receive the notice of hearing shall not invalidate the proceedings.
6. Consolidation of land use permit processes. The PUD approval process maybe used to
consolidate other land use permit processes, which are required by other sections of this title. The public
hearing required for the PUD may serve as the public hearing for the conditional use permit, subdivision,
shoreline substantial development and rezoning if such land use permits are a part of the overall PUD
. application. When another land use permit is involved which requires city council approval, the PUD
shall not be deemed to be approved until the city council has approved the related land use permit. If a
public hearing is required for any of the categories of actions listed in this subsection, the hearing
examiner shall employ the public hearing notice requirements for all actions considered which ensure the
maximum notice to the public.
7. Hearing examiner decision. The hearing examiner shall issue a written decision within
ten (10) working days from the date of the hearing. Parties of record will be notified in writing of the
decision. The decision is final unless notice of appeal is filed with the city clerk within fourteen(14)days
of receipt by the developer of the decision. For PUDs which propose a use which is not typically
permitted in the underlying zoning district as provided in subsection (13)(4) of this section, the hearing
examiner shall forward a recommendation to the city council, which shall have the final authority to
approve or deny the proposed PUD. For a proposed residential PUD that includes condominiums as
outlined in subsection (13)(4) of this section, a condition of approval by the city council shall be that for
each development phase the applicant shall submit a recorded copy of the covenants, conditions and
restrictions recorded against the property. Within thirty (30) days of receipt of the hearing examiner's
recommendation,the city council shall,at a regular meeting,consider the application.
8. Effective date. In approving a PUD, the hearing examiner shall specify that the
approved PUD shall not take effect unless or until the developer files a completed development permit
application within the time periods required by this title as set forth in subsection (G)of this section. No
03/07/03 8
official map or zoning text designations shall be amended to reflect the approved PUD designation until
such time as the PUD becomes effective.
G. Review criteria for planned unit developments. Upon receipt of a complete application for a
residential PUD, the planning department shall review the application and make its recommendation to
the hearing examiner. The hearing examiner shall determine whether to grant, deny or condition an
application based upon the following review criteria:
1. Residential planned unit development criteria.
a. a—The proposed PUD project shall have a beneficial effect upon the
community and users of the development, which would not normally be
achieved by traditional lot-by-lot development and shall not be detrimental to
existing or potential surrounding land uses as defined by the comprehensive
plan.
b. The proposed PUD project shall be compatible with the existing land use or
property that abuts or is directly across the street from the subject property.
Compatibility includes but is not limited to apparent size, scale, mass and
architectural design.
be. Unusual and sensitive environmental features of the site shall be preserved,
maintained and incorporated into the design to benefit the development and the community.
ed. The proposed PUD project shall provide areas of openness by using techniques
such as clustering, separation of building groups, and use of well-designed open space and landscaping.
Open space shall be integrated within the PUD rather than be an isolated element of the project.
de. The proposed PUD project shall promote variety and innovation in site and
building design, and shall include architectural and site features that promote community interaction, such
as porches, de-emphasized garages, sidewalks"walkways and adjacent common areas. Buildings in
groups shall be related by common materials and roof styles,but contrast shall be provided throughout the
site by the use of varied materials,architectural detailing,building scale and orientation.
e_f. Building design shall be based on a unified design concept, particularly when
construction will be in phases.
2. Nonresidential planned unit development criteria.
a. The proposed project shall have a beneficial effect which would not normally
be achieved by traditional lot-by-lot development and not be detrimental to present or potential
surrounding land uses as defined by the comprehensive plan.
b. Unusual and sensitive environmental features of the site shall be preserved,
maintained and incorporated into the design to benefit the development and the community.
C. The proposed project shall provide areas of openness by the clustering of
buildings, and by the use of well-designed landscaping and open spaces. Landscaping shall promote a
coordinated appearance and break up continuous expanses of building and pavement.
03/07/03 9
d. The proposed project shall promote variety and innovation in site and building
design. It shall encourage the incorporation of special design features such as visitor entrances, plazas,
outdoor employee lunch and recreation areas,architectural focal points and accent lighting.
e. Building design shall be based on a unified design concept, particularly when
construction will be in phases.
H. Time limits.
1. Application for development permit. The applicant shall apply for a development
permit no later than one (1) year following final approval of the PUD. The application for development
permit shall contain all conditions of the PUD approval.
2. Extensions. An extension of time for development permit application may be requested
in writing by the applicant. Such an extension may be granted by the planning manager for a period not
to exceed one (1) year. If a development permit is not issued within two (2) years, the PUD approval
shall become null and void and the PUD shall not take effect.
I. Modifications of plan. Requests for modifications of final approved plans shall be made in
writing and shall be submitted to the planning department in the manner and form prescribed by the
planning manager. The criteria for approval of a request for a major modification shall be those criteria
covering original approval of the permit,which is the subject of the proposed modification.
1. Minor modifications. Modifications are deemed minor if all the following criteria are
satisfied:
a. No new land use is proposed;
b. No increase in density,number of dwelling units or lots is proposed;
C. No change in the general location or number of access points is proposed;
d. No reduction in the amount of open space is proposed;
e. No reduction in the amount of parking is proposed;
f No increase in the total square footage of structures to be developed is
proposed; and
g. No increase in general height of structures is proposed.
Examples of minor modifications include but are not limited to lot line adjustments, minor
relocations of buildings or landscaped areas,minor changes in phasing and timing, and minor changes in
elevations of buildings.
2. Major modifications. Major adjustments are those which, as determined by the
planning manager, substantially change the basic design, density, open space or other similar
requirements or provisions. Major adjustments to the development plans shall be reviewed by the hearing
examiner. The hearing examiner may review such adjustments at a regular public hearing. If a public
hearing is held, the process outlined in subsection (F) of this section shall apply. The hearing examiner
shall issue a written decision to approve, deny or modify the request. Such a decision shall be final. Any
appeals of this decision shall be in accordance with KCC Section 12.01.040.
03/07/03 10
S:\Permit\Plan\ZONECODEAM EN D\2002\2023895-2002-5code3.doc
•
03/07/03 11
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director
PLANNING SERVICES
KEN T Charlene Anderson,AICP, Manager
WASHINGTON Phone:253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent,WA 98032-5895
February 18, 2003
TO: CHAIR RON HARMON AND LAND USE&PLANNING BOARD
MEMBERS
FROM: CHARLENE ANDERSON, AICP, PLANNING MANAGER
RE: ZONING CODE AMENDMENT—PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
#ZCA-2002-5 (KIVA#2023895)
For February 24, 2003 Public Hearing
Introduction
On behalf of Kentview, L.L.C., Randy Forsyth submitted an application for a zoning code text
amendment to reduce to 20 acres the minimum acreage requirements for Planned Unit
Developments in Single Family Residential zoning districts. The proposal specifies that the
acreage reduction would apply only when the PUD consists of detached single family dwellings
and when appropriate buffers are provided at the adjoining properties. Existing Kent City Code
(KCC) Sections 15.08.400(A) and (C) allow Planned Unit Developments in Single Family
Residential zoning districts only when the site is at least one hundred acres in size.
According to KCC 15.02.332, a planned unit development "...permits departures from the
conventional siting, setback and density requirements of other sections of(the Zoning Code) in
the interest of achieving superior site development, creating open space and encouraging
imaginative design by permitting design flexibility." There are five review criteria the hearing
examiner uses to determine whether to grant, deny or condition an application for a residential
PUD [Reference KCC 15.08.400(G)(1)]. The criteria relate to benefits/detriments to the
community and users of the development, unusual environmental features, open areas, variety
and innovation in site and building design, and unified concept in design.
The Board held an initial workshop on the Kentview application on January 13th. At their
subsequent February 10`h workshop on the issue, the Board reviewed a draft PUD code
amendment that was presented by staff and expressed concerns about on-street parking and
compatibility of PUDs with adjacent single family zoning development.
Background
PUDs have been permitted as part of the Kent Zoning Code since 1973. In 1987, the Planning
Commission reviewed a new PUD ordinance that, among other things, shortened the review time
• and refined allowable density bonuses for PUDs. After referring the amended provisions to the
Planning Committee for review, the City Council adopted the amended PUD ordinance in
August, 1988 (Ordinance No. 2802).
In 1990, the City Council received a petition from the Responsible Urban Growth Group
(RUGG) requesting that the City Council revise the PUD ordinance to require that all units in
single family PUDs are detached and to establish a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet in
single family PUDs. In July, 1991, the City Council directed the Planning Commission to look
at the PUD ordinance and address these concerns. The Planning Commission examined several
alternatives and recommended to the City Council that PUDs simply not be permitted in single
family residential zoning districts. The City Council concurred with this recommendation and
adopted Ordinance No. 3007 on October 15, 1991, eliminating the ability to develop a PUD in
single family zoning districts.
In April, 1997, Polygon Northwest submitted a regulatory review request to amend the PUD
regulations to allow PUDs to be developed in single family zoning districts as long as the site is
at least 100 acres in size. The applicant also requested changes to the permitted uses in a single
family PUD to allow attached dwelling units in PUDs and to allow a phased or "master plan"
approval process for PUDs. On April 15, 1997, the City Council Planning Committee sent the
request to the Land Use and Planning Board (the "Board") who recommended approval with
revisions. The Board recommendation included limiting multifamily dwellings to two stories in
height, disallowing density bonuses with attached units, requiring the attached dwelling units to
be condominium units, disallowing on-street parking, requiring coordination with the school
district, and reducing the time period for obtaining all development permits for a master planned
development from ten years to seven years. After a public meeting on August 19, 1997 the City
Council sent the Board's recommendation to the Planning Committee for further review. On
November 18, 1997, the Planning Committee recommended approval of the Board's
recommendation including allowing condominiums in PUDs in single family zoning districts.
The City Council concurred with the Planning Committee recommendation and adopted
. Ordinance No. 3381 on December 9, 1997. This is the ordinance that remains effective today.
On April 5, 1999, the City Council Planning and Public Works Committee voted to request the
Board study and make recommendations to the City Council on zoning strategies that would
encourage home ownership opportunities in Kent. This Committee vote stemmed from a series
of meetings on the topic of "condominium zoning." The Board discussed and reviewed the
condominium zoning issue at length, evaluated several alternative strategies including creation of
a special zoning district, revisions to the PUD ordinance, and other proposals, and toured various
condominium developments. Initial considerations brought forward by staff on the PUD
amendment alternative included lowering the site minimum size to a range of one to three acres;
disallowing density bonuses for PUDs in single family zoning districts; disallowing stacked
units; assisting the decision-making process by developing criteria such as access to collector
and arterial streets, proximity to transit services, proximity to and convenience of commercial
services, and compatibility with surrounding neighborhood; and limiting PUDs to certain single
family zoning districts such as SR-6 and SR-8 zoning districts. The Board decided to move
forward to public hearing only the special townhouse zoning district alternative and to revisit the
PUD amendments at a later date.
Discussion
The PUD process is intended to promote diversity and creativity in site design and to protect and
enhance natural and community features. It encourages unique developments. Through
• flexibility in the application of development standards, it promotes developments that will
benefit citizens that live and work in Kent. (Reference KCC 15.08.400.) Kent City Code
requires a minimum of thirty-five percent common open space for residential development and
provides incentives for amenities and design features. Applications for PUDs within or adjacent
Land Use&Planning Board Public Hearing—February 24,2003
Paee 2 of 4
to residential zones require community meetings and a public hearing. Kent City Code also
defines review criteria for PUDs, including benefits/detriments to the community and users of
the development, unusual environmental features, open areas, variety and innovation in site and
building design, and unified concept in design.
The Kent Comprehensive Plan supports creation of a wide range of housing options;
accommodation of targeted household growth; expansion of home ownership opportunities;
quality design; flexibility and innovation in building and site design; development of innovative
and affordable demonstration housing projects by exploring alternative design, land
development, and construction techniques; open space linkages within the developed area;
clustering of housing units to maximize allowable build-out while preserving open space and
environmentally sensitive areas; and protection and enhancement of environmentally sensitive
areas. (Reference Policy H-2.1, Policy LU-1.1, Goal LU-9, Goal H-4, Goal H-9/Policy
9.1/Policy 9.2, Goal LU-10/Policy LU-10.2, Goal LU-20, Policy P&R-3.2, and Goal CD-14.) At
the same time the City's adopted framework policies support preservation, maintenance, and
improvement of existing single family residential neighborhoods and providing opportunities for
a diversity of housing that is available to all income levels. The PUD process can accommodate
each of these goals and policies, whether in single family or multifamily residential
neighborhoods.
Options
Following are options that staff suggests for consideration as the Board reviews the Kentview
proposal.
1. No Change
This option maintains the existing zoning code regulations regarding PUDs, i.e., PUDs
would be allowed in single family zoning districts only on sites of 100 acres or greater.
This option does not encourage variation or flexibility in residential subdivision site
design for most lots in single family zoning districts, especially when a site is constrained
by sensitive areas. Applicants for residential subdivisions of less than 100 acres in size
typically create lots of similar configuration meeting minimum lot sizes, and replicate
existing housing styles throughout the City.
2. 20-acre Minimum PUD (as prepared by applicant, Kentview, L.L.C.)
This option amends existing code to reduce to 20 acres the minimum acreage for a PUD
in single family residential zoning districts, under certain conditions. This reduced
acreage allowance would be permitted only when (1) the PUD consists entirely of single
family dwellings as defined by Kent City Code 15.02.115, and (2) a portion of the
required open space is provided in a thirty-five (35)-foot Type II landscaping buffer or
native growth equivalent along any areas adjoining incompatible uses. Residential design
review would be applicable. The applicant desires to take advantage of the existing
density bonus provisions.
For the purposes of a PUD, open space currently is defined [KCC 15.08.400(C)(5)(b)]
• "...as land which is not used for buildings, dedicated public rights-of-way, traffic
circulation and roads, parking areas, or any kind of storage. Open space includes but is
not limited to privately owned woodlands, open fields, streams, wetlands, severe hazard
areas, sidewalks, walkways, landscaped areas, gardens, courtyards or lawns. Common
Land Use&Planning Board Public Hearing—February 24,2003
Paee 3 of 4
open space may provide for either active or passive recreation." Incompatible use is not
defined in existing code. However, New World Dictionary of the American Language,
Second College Edition, defines incompatible as "1. Not compatible; not able to exist in
harmony or agreement; not going, or getting along, well together; incongruous,
conflicting, discordant; etc. (often followed by with)." A definition of incompatible use
can be created for the purposes of a PUD under this option.
This option would allow some flexibility for development in single family zoning
districts while maintaining the detached residential character of the district. It would also
provide a buffer between what would be considered incompatible uses.
3. Low acreage PUD
This option would allow PUDs in all single family zoning districts, with a 10-acre
minimum site area requirement. This option allows only detached single family
dwellings; density bonus provisions are not allowed. The proposed code amendment
(attached) includes additional review criteria regarding compatibility with the
surrounding neighborhood, provisions for variety and innovation in site and building
design, amends the parking and open space requirements, and provides some minor code
updates. Residential design review would be applicable.
This option provides increased flexibility in single family residential site design.
Recommendation
Staff is recommending Option 3 and will be available at the February 24th public hearing to
further discuss the options.
\\MS\SDATA\Permit\Plan\ZONECODEAMEND\2002\2023895-2002-5lupbph.DOC
Attach: Sec. 15.08.400 Planned unit development,PUD
cc: Fred N.Satterstrom,C.D.Director
•
Land Use&Planning Board Public Hearing—February 24,2003
Paee 4 of 4
,
i i +: d 4 ' .Pv&" �"w�t�`�2 T��wr-p+•i,^�X'4 [.-,a(r __
r '� .• r`�L, .. J tY 4 4 1 � P�f R' yy J\.�V�{.
V, r r _ � k ot £on 400` owe"
•
Mail to:220 4tti i4venue-SoutlS . Kent;WA 98032 5895
KENT PermitCenter(253)856-5302 FAX:(253)856-6412
W.6MIx6l0M
PLANNING SERVICES Code Text Amendment
Public Notice Board Fee...$100 each
Application Fee...S1500
Application #:_ 7 C - �QQ Z —�� KIVA
OFnCE USE ONLY /+
Kent OFFICEUSEONLY
Application Name: r LLC
Code Text Amendment Requested:
0 AMENDMENT TO ZONING CODE
❑ AMENDMENT TO SUBDIVISION CODE
❑ AMENDMENT TO MOBILE HOME PARK CODE
❑ AMENDMENT TO OTHER DEVELOPMENT CODE: (Specify)
APPLICANT 1: (mandatory)
Name: Kentview, L.L.C. (425) 586-7700
Daytime Phone:
Mailing Address: 11624 SE 5th St. , 1200 Fax Number: (425) 688-0500
City/State/Zip: Bellevue, WA 98005
Signature:
APPLICANT 2: (mandatory if different from applicant 1)
Name: Daytime Phone:
Mailing Address: Fax Number.
City/State/Zip: Signature:
AGENT/CONSULTANT/ATTORNEY:(mandatory if primary contact is different from applicant)
Name: Randy Forsyth w1 pc, y l (425) 586-7700
Daytime Phone:
Mailing Address: 11624 SE 5th St. , #200 Fax Number. (425) 688-0500
City/State/Zip: Bellevue, WA 98005
Signature:
r a et • . r a � o r a a a > s o • a s ,a n s e n a r a s s � a � m a a a e s a a r + s � � r a a a ► s r � n a , r � r � M � . r a
OFFICE USE ONLY:
DATEAPPLICATION RECEIVED: RECEIVED BY:
DATEAPPLICATION COMPLETE: COMPLETENESS REVIEW BY:
I _
� ' ' ` IIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
'PSD4015' psd4015 6115101 p. 1 of I
i I
1. Which ordinance or regulation are you requesting to be amended or
added?
To add an exception to the planned unit developments acreage requirements as
listed in KCC#15.08.400(A);KCC 915.fI4 400(C)(2) allowing reduction of SR
Zone PUD to 20 acres. �S5
2. What do you want to change about the comprehensive plan and why?
Applicant proposes adding an exception to reduce minimum site acreage for
PUD's in SR zones to 20 acres if
1. the proposal consists of all detached single-family dwellings
2. appropriate buffers are provided at the adjoining properties.
With the very limited supply in available parcels over 100 acres, the current
requirements are dated and impacts the effectiveness of the PUD ordinance
specifically designed to promote better planning and uses of Kent's remaining
buildable lands.
PUDs allow for a more effective and sensitive development of land as well as a
diversity of ownership opportunities by providing for open space,recreation and
common use areas, and by allowing clustering of the developed area on smaller
lots or in Single Family Detached Condominiums.
Because of these factors as well as other regulations within the PUD ordinance,
land can be developed with less impact to the environment and neighborhood
areas including;reduced impervious surfaces,reduced disturbance to existing
vegetation and habitats; diversity of single family housing opportunities;the
clustering of dwellings; and more controlled access points.
3. What language revision to the code text are you requesting?
This revision would only change the sections as noted below.
KCC 15.08.400(A). Zoning districts where permitted. P.UD's are permitted in
all zoning districts with the exception of the A-1,agricultural zone;provided,
however, that PUDs in SR zones are en J alle ed '''the�site i,rmust be on sites at
least one hundred (100) acres in size, extent as provided for in subsection(c)of
this section.
iEL 'Y. ..
1, c..
___-__ _._KCC 15.08.400(C)Development
2. Minimum site acreage. Minimum acreage for a PUD is established
according to the zoning district in which the PUD is located, as follows:
Zones Minimum
Site Acreage
SR Zones (SR-1,
SR-2, SR-3, SR-4.5, SR-6 100 acres L
SR-8)
Multi family(MR-D,MR-G
MR-M, MR-H) None
Commercial office and
Manufacturing zones None
a) Minimum acreage requirements in SR zones may he reduced to 20 acres
provided the proposal,
i) consists entirely of Single-family Dwellings (RCC 15.02.115);imd
ii) provides a portion of the required PUD openscape in at least a thirty-
flve(35) foot Type H landscape buffer or native growth equivilant along
any areas adjoining incompatible uses.
4. What are the effects or impacts related to the proposed amendment?
The proposed revision will allow lowering the minimum acreage for a PUD in the
SR zones to 20 acres,only if it contains detached single family dwellings as
defined in Section 15.02.115 and if appropriate landscape buffers or native areas
are maintained.
This revision provides for a more feasible development of single family lands
with greater flexibility,innovation of building and site design and a better variety
of housing types and densities(LU-9, 10& 11). Furthermore, it encourages better
protection of natural resources and sensitive areas by giving incentives for well-
designed land use patterns like clustering,centralized community amenities and
reduced impervious surfaces(LU-18, 19,20, 21, 23,25).
The lowering of acreage requirements for PUD's in SR zones will have no
notable negative impacts when compared to current zoning and ordinances.In fact
should only serve to reduce impacts on the livability of existing neighborhoods
and sensitive areas by encouraging clustering,openspace,centralized community
amenities, and the strategic placement of landscape buffers.
•
Anderson, Charlene
From: Marousek, Kim
-- ..__--Sent:---- ------------- Thursda February-13i 2003 2:58 PM-- ----- _--- ----- -----
--To: AndersflrrEhadene ------------ - ------- ----
bject: RE: PUD Amendment-SEPA determination
Charlene,
I've taken a look at the proposed ordinance changes going to the LUPB public hearing on Feb. 24th. Based upon
my evaluation, there is nothing in this proposed revision that would warrant additional review under SEPA. The
proposed m difications would not result in any additional impacts or densities beyond that which was evaluated
under the Comprehensive Plan EIS. Please let me know if you need a more formal response.
Kim
—Original Message—
From: Anderson,Charlene
Sent: Monday,January 06,200312:57 PM
To: Marousek,rim
Cc: Satterstrom,Fred
Subject: PUD Amendment
Kim: Attached is the draft memo for the Land Use&Planning Board workshop on a proposed amendment to our
PUD ord:.iance. Kenntview, L.L.C. proposes a 20-acre minimum lot size if the dwellings are all detached single family
dwellings and apprupriate buffers are provided at adjoining properties. I haven't worked out the code details yet.
Kentview submitted an environmental checklist with their proposal (I'll put a copy on your chair),but we didn't have
them pay or submit multiple copies because we thought the proposal would not need to include a SEPA review by
anyone other than yourself. You will notice the draft memo includes other options available to the Board for
discussion. Do you see anything in these options that would require us to complete a checklist and route for SEPA
issues? My feeling is that the Board might go for a demonstration project I have a copy of other demonstration
project ordinances that you might want to review. I would think our proposal would be very simple-existing PUD
reps for the most p.-irt,SFR only,providing no density bonuses,single family design review(similar evaluation as we
do for MFR design review), and just allow low minimum site acreage for a PUD. The SEPA decision has to be made
. befcm L. public h::7::ing is held by the Board so I'll need to get your comment ASAP. Thanks!
<< File: '-023895= 02-51upbws.DOC>>
1