Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning and Economic Development Committee - 11/21/2005 . Planning & Economic Development Committee Agenda KEN T Councilmembers: Ron Harmon#Bruce White#Tim Clark, Chair WAS H I N G 7 0 N PUBLIC HEARING & MEETING—November 21, 2005 4:00 p.m. Item Description Action Speaker Time Page 1. Approval of the Minutes of 10/17/05 YES 5 min 1 2. Public Hearing: #ZCA-2005-3 YES Damien Hooper 25 min 3 Commercial Motor Vehicles in Residential Zoning Districts 3. #ZCA-2005-7 Shipping Containers in YES Damien Hooper 10 min 15 Residential Zoning Districts. 4. 2005 Annual Docket Report, Consider YES Gloria Gould-Wessen 10 min 25 Work Program for seven (7)Docket items 5. 2005 Annual Comprehensive Plan&Zoning YES William Osborne 10 min 67 Map Amendments,Consider Work Program for three(3)Docket items. Unless otherwise noted,the Planning and Economic Development Committee meets the 3"d Monday of each month at 4:00 p.m.in Council Chambers East,Kent City Hall,220 4th Avenue South,Kent,98032-5895. For information on the above items,the City of Kent's Website can be accessed at htto:/,1www.ci.kent.wa.us/CitvCouncil/committees/planningy.asp or contact Pamela Mottram or the respective project planner in Planning Services at(253)856-5454. 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. i This page intentionally left blank. I I I 1 PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES OCTOBER 17, 2005 Committee Members: Chair Tim Clark, Ron Harmon, Bruce White . The meeting was called to order by Chair Clark at 4:00 P.M. with Bruce White's absence noted. Approval of Minutes Member Harmon moved and Member Clark seconded a motion to approve the minutes of September 19, 2005 with Council Member White's concurrence. Motion Passed 3-0. ZCA-2005-3 Commercial Motor Vehicles in Residential Zoning Districts Planner Damien Hooper stated that since the Committee's last meeting, staff has reviewed this issue and he presented five options. He stated that any action taken on options that had not been the subject of the Land Use and Planning Board hearings would require a new public hearing.. Chair Clark accepted public comments. Scott Floyd, 9645 S 232"d St., Kent, WA 98031 asked that the city consider strengthening or clarifying their permitting process to prohibit parking of shipping containers and trailers on residential parcels. He referred to a 2.5 acre site in the vicinity of 234th and 98 h, and stated they are unsightly and a significant detriment to the neighborhoods. Mr. Floyd explained why he is opposed to the other proposed options. Ron Arntson, 24423 137`h Ave. SE, Kent, WA 98042 explained why he objects to commercial semi-trucks and/or trailers parked in residentially zoned designated properties urging the Committee to consider enacting an ordinance to prevent this. Janet Lewis, 13507 SE 2501h St., Kent, WA 98042 explained why she opposes the storage, use, • parking and transfer of commercial vehicles of any length in residential areas, respectively requesting that the Council consider prohibiting commercial vehicles in residential districts. Dick Staples, 14629 SE 267`h, Kent, WA explained why he would support allowing most independent truck owners to park their vehicles on residential sites, citing his personal experience. Judy Hanford, 24736 136�h Ave. SE, Kent, WA 98042 updated the Committee since her testimony at last month's meeting. She explained why she is opposed to allowing commercial vehicles in residential areas. Jerry Sanders, 23102 1121h PI SE, Kent,WA 98031 reiterated his stance in support of allowing smaller trucks to be parked on residential property, citing personal reasons. Brian Swanberg, Code Enforcement Officer for the City of Kent described for the Committee the type of complaints the city has received, which typically did not include the type of truck described by the previous speaker. He stated that complaints received by the city mainly focused on issues with the trailer portion of the tractor-trailer rig, tractor and cargo containers. Mr. Swanberg stated that although there have been some safety issues, most of the complaints have dealt with unsightly appearance factors. Mr. Swanberg addressed questions raised by the Committee members with respect to what type of commercial vehicles people are opposed to having in their residential communities. He stated that the Committee might consider defining vehicles of a recreational nature versus the large commercial rigs permanently parked in residential areas, with discussion ensuing on those variables. Planning Manager Charlene Anderson explained how the conditional use permit and home occupation permit processes are used. Chair Clark continued this item to the next meeting. 2 ZCA-2005-7 Shipping Cgntainers in Residential Zoning Districts Planner Damien Hooper ;said staff has no further information to present stating that Brian Swanberg spoke on container complaints with his previous discussion on commercial vehicles. The Committee asked staff to explore where these types of containers are used, where they might be allowed and to investigate what ordinances from other cities might be most compatible for use as a guideline by the City of Kent with respect to accessory uses. Member Clark stated that this issue would be brought back to the next meeting. I Urban Density Study #CrA-2004-5 Planning Manager Cbarlehe Anderson presented a synopsis of this study; relating it to Kent's Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies and urban growth based on the Growth Management Act which requires that cities evaluate their zoning densities and apply zoning of 4.0 dwelling units per acre where applicable. Ms. Anderson described the public outreach efforts the City undertook to solicit public comment which included a series of Land Use and Planning Board Workshops and Hearings. She presented the Land Use and Planning Board's recommendations for the three study areas defined as the Green River Area A the North East Hill Area B, and the South East Hill Area C. City Engineer Gary Gill and Ms. Anderson addressed concerns raised by Member Clark with respect to development as it relates to access issues along the 228th Street Corridor and SR-516. Mr. Gill addressed Member Clark's concerns with flooding, storm drainage system capacity and water quality standards for the Benson Subarea. Member Harmon requested that staff notify him and other council members via email with respect to where the city stands with regard to the 4284 household target for the year 2020 and how much build-out the MRT-16 area will generate. Member Harmon Moved rand Member Clark Seconded a Motion to accept Garrison Forks - Option 1. Motion Passed 2-0. Member Harmon Moved and Member Clark Seconded a Motion to accept Lower East Hill — Option 1. Motion Passed 2-0. Member Harmon Moved and Member Clark Seconded a Motion to accept Upper Mill Creek — Option 1. Motion Passed. Member Harmon Moved !and Member Clark Seconded a Motion to accept Soosette Creek - Option 1. Motion Passed. In response to City Attorney Tom Brubaker, Chair Clark clarified that all the proposed amendments had been considered by the Land Use and Planning Board. Member Clark stated that the urban density issue will be presented at the City Council Workshop October 18 then will go before the full Council. Member Harmon Moved and Member Clark Seconded a Motion to move forward the Urban Density Study as amended. Motion Passed 2-0. Adjournment Chair Clark adjourned the meeting at 5:26 p.m. Pamela Mottram, Admin Secretary,Planning Services S:IPermihPlanlPlanning Committee120051Minutesl101905min.doe P&EDC Meeting Minutes—10/17/05 Page 2 of 2 3 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fred N. Satterstrom,AICP,Director • PLANNING SERVICES KEN T Charlene Anderson,AICP,Manager W A HI N 0 T 0 N Phone:253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent,WA 98032-5895 November 21, 2005 TO: Chair Tim Clark and Planning & Economic Development Committee Members FROM: Damien Hooper, Planner RE: Zoning Code Amendment#ZCA-2005-3/KIVA RPP6-2052401 Commercial motor vehicles in residential zoning districts. MOTION: I move to approve/deny/modify Zoning Code Amendment#2005-3, as recommended by the Land Use & Planning Board. SUMMARY: On September 19 and October 17, 2005 the Planning & Economic Development Committee reconsidered the Land Use & Planning Board's recommendation to amend Kent City Code to limit the storage and parking of commercial motor vehicles in residential zoning districts. At the October 17 meeting, staff had presented five permitting options for the committee's consideration. These options are being considered at a public hearing before the committee on November 21. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: On August 15, 2005 the Planning & Economic Development Committee voted 2:1 to approve the Land Use & Planning Board's recommendation to prohibit the parking of commercial motor vehicles on residentially-zoned properties, with specific exceptions. The committee asked staff to provide additional information on the number and nature of complaints the City has received regarding this issue. At their October 17 meeting, the committee additionally asked staff to research locations where commercial motor vehicles may be parked if they are not allowed in residential zoning districts. Code Enforcement Officer Brian Swanberg stated that complaints received by the city mainly focused on issues with the trailer portion of the tractor-trailer rig, but also were about the tractor portion. He added that some complaints were about safety issues, but that most of the complaints dealt with unsightly appearance. Staff contacted the State Department of Transportation and the national Warehouse/Distribution Association regarding potential parking/storage areas for commercial motor vehicles. The State of Washington is interested in working with the City of Kent to facilitate development of a truck stop. The Warehouse/Distribution Association did not respond to the telephone call. Staff is bringing forward to the Committee five options relating to commercial vehicles in residential zones. Any combination of the options may also be considered. 4 Option 1: Allow commercial motor vehicles outright on private property in residential zones, either in whole (tractor&trailer) or in part (tractor only or trailer only). 15.04.020: Add a note to ithe category "Accessory uses..." for SR-1, SR-3, SR-4.5, SR-6, SR-8, MR-D, MR-T12, MR-T16, MR-G, MR-M and MR-H: "One commercial motor vehicle is allowed to be parked on site at any one time. `Commercial motor vehicles' include: 1) vehicles used in a commercial enterprise which exceed 19 feet in length; and 2) truck tractors used in the drayage of semi-truck trailers. The vehicle shall be parked on the residential driveway without overhanging sidewalk or street, or shall be parked to the side or rear of the residential structure, without encroaching onto the side and rear yard setbacks of the zoning district. Relevant development standards shall apply." New KCC 15.02.XXX: Motor vehicle means a vehicle, machine, tractor, trailer, or semitrailer propelled or drawn by mechanical power used on highways, or any other vehicle required to be registered under the laws of this state, but does not include a vehicle, machine, tractor, trailer, or semitrailer operated exclusively on a rail. Option 2: Disallow storage and parking of commercial vehicles in residential zones, as recommended by the Land Use & Planning Board: New KCC 15.08.085: Parking or storage of commercial motor vehicles. Commercial motor vehicles are not permitted ito be parked on residentially-zoned property unless actively loading or unloading goods or unless approved through a Home Occupation permit or other land use permit. "Commercial motor vehicles" include: 1) vehicles used in a commercial enterprise which exceed 19 feet in length; and 2)truck tractors used in the drayage of semi-truck trailers. New KCC 15.02.XAX: Motor vehicle means a vehicle, machine, tractor, trailer, or semitrailer propelled or drawn by mechanical power used on highways, or any other vehicle required to be registered under the laws of this state, but does not include a vehicle, machine, tractor, trailer, or semitrailer operated exclusively on a rail. Option 3: Allow the (storage and parking of commercial vehicles on residentially zoned property by means of conditional use permit. Conditional uses are permitted outright in a given zoning district provided they can meet the criteria for approval established in KCC 15.09.030(D). In the case of Conditional Uses, the Hearing Examiner is obligated to grant approval of the request provided the applicant has demonstrated that the approval criteria have been satisfied. 15.04.020: Add a "C" with a note to the category "Accessory uses..." for SR-1, SR-3, SR-4.5, SR-6, SR-8, MR-D, MR-T12, MR-T16, MR-G, MR-M and MR-H: On-site parking of a commercial motor vehicle may be allowed via Conditional Use Permit. "Commercial motor vehicles" include: 1) vehicles used in a commercial enterprise which exceed 19 feet in length; and 2)truck tractors used in the drayage of semi-truck trailers. New KCC 15.02.XXY: Motor vehicle means a vehicle, machine, tractor, trailer, or semitrailer propelled or drawn by mechanical power used on highways, or any other vehicle required to be registered under the laws of this state, but does not include a vehicle, machine, tractor, trailer, or semitrailer operated exclusively on a rail. Planning&Economic Development Committee November 21,2005 Page 2 of 3 7 5 An application for a Conditional Use Permit is a Process III application which requires public notice pursuant to KCC 12.01. The hearing examiner then conducts an open record public hearing prior to issuing a decision on the application. • Option 4: Allow the storage and parking of commercial vehicles on residentially zoned property by means of a Special Home Occupation Permit. KCC 15.08.040(F)(2) provides criteria for approval of a Special Home Occupation Permit. The Hearing Examiner also may impose conditions of approval. New KCC 15.08.040(F)(6): Parking/storage of commercial vehicles. "Commercial motor vehicles" include: 1) vehicles used in a commercial enterprise which exceed 19 feet in length; and 2) truck tractors used in the drayage of semi-truck trailers. New KCC 15.02.AXX. Motor vehicle means a vehicle, machine, tractor, trailer, or semitrailer propelled or drawn by mechanical power used on highways, or any other vehicle required to be registered under the laws of this state, but does not include a vehicle, machine, tractor, trailer, or semitrailer operated exclusively on a rail. An application for a Special Home Occupation Permit is a Process III application which requires public notice pursuant to KCC 12.01. The Hearing Examiner then conducts an open record public hearing prior to issuing a decision on the application. There are currently 5 home occupations that require this form of review by the Hearing Examiner as established in KCC 15.08.040(F). These include music lessons, dance lessons, art lessons, academic tutoring, and automobile detailing. if this option is preferred a category for • home occupations requiring use of commercial vehicle would be added to this list. The Special Home Occupation is similar to the Conditional Use option in that it requires review and approval by the Hearing Examiner. However, because the use would not be an outright permitted use in the zone, the City and/or Hearing Examiner would be able to consider the nature and conditions of all adjacent uses and structures in the decision. A special home occupation permit may be granted only if the Hearing Examiner finds that the permit will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property in the zone or vicinity in which the property is located, and that the issuance of such special home occupation permit will be consistent with the spirit and purpose of the code provision. Also, the Hearing Examiner may impose conditions as necessary to protect other properties in the zone or vicinity. Option 5: Deny the proposed amendment. Staff would then work with existing code language. CAIDlfpm S:IPermit IP1anlZONECODEAMEND1200512 0524 01-20 0503pedc112105stfrpt.doc Enc.: Minutes of8115105,9119105 and 10117105 PEDC meetings;Minutes of818105 LUPB meeting cc: Fred N.Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Mgr Kim Marousek,Principal Planner Damien Hooper,Planner Project File Parties of Record Planning&Economic Development Committee November 21,2005 Page 3 of 3 6 This page intentionally left blank. 7 LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 89 2005 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Jon Johnson, Steve Dowell, David Malik, Dana Ralph, Elizabeth Watson, Kenneth Wendling, BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Tim Giminez, Excused STAFF MEMBERS: Charlene Anderson, Tom Brubaker, Chris Holden The meeting was called to order by Chair Johnson at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers. Approval of Minutes David Malik moved and Elizabeth Watson seconded a motion to approve the minutes of April 25, 2005. Motion Carried Unanimously. Added Items/Communications/Notice of Upcoming Meetings Planning Manager Charlene Anderson stated that these issues will likely move forward to the August 15 Planning and Economic Development Committee meeting. If approved by Committee these issues will move on to City Council on September 6. _ZCA-2005-3 Commercial Motor Vehicles in Residential Zoning Districts Planner Damien Hooper stated that this proposed amendment would limit the storage and parking of commercial vehicles in residential districts on residentially zoned property. He stated that this amendment was prompted by numerous complaints received by the city related to parking of commercial vehicles in residential neighborhoods. Mr. Hooper stated that commercial motor vehicles present an incompatibility with residential uses related to noise, visual blight and safety issues. Mr. Hooper cited the textual changes within KCC Section 15.08.085 as recommended by staff. After deliberations, Chair Johnson declared the public hearing open. Seeing no speakers, Steve Dowell moved and David Malik seconded a motion to close the public hearing. Motion Carried. David Malik moved and Steve Dowell seconded a motion to approve "ZCA-2005-3 Commercial Motor Vehicles in Residential Zoning Districts" as recommended by staff to include replacing the language `�etively deliveLiftg" with "unless actively loading or unloading". Motion Carried 5 to I with Dana Ralph opposed. ZCA-20054 Multifamily Dwelling Units in MR-T Zones in Downtown Districts Planning Manager Charlene Anderson stated that staff has revised phrasing for this amendment based on additional review. She stated that this amendment attempts to encourage more dwelling units in Downtown's MR-T zoning districts and provide for other ownership options. Ms. Anderson stated that staff proposes that multifamily dwellings with ownership interest be allowed in the MR-T zone located within the downtown districts. Chair Johnson declared the public hearing open. Seeing no speakers, Steve Dowell moved and David Malik seconded a motion to close the public hearing. Motion Carried. David Malik moved and Elizabeth Watson seconded a motion to approve ZCA-2005-4 Multifamily Dwelling Units in MR-T Zones in Downtown Districts as recommended by staff. Motion Carried Unanimously. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes August S,2005 ZCA-2005-5 Processing of Applications for Rezone Jon Johnson stated that the purpose of this proposed amendment is to clarify optional consolidated permit processing. Chair Johnson declared the public hearing open and seeing no speakers; Steve Dowell moved and David Malik seconded a motion to close the public hearing. Motion Carried. Elizabeth Watson moved and Steve Dowell seconded a motion to approve ZCA-2005-5 as recommended by staff. Motion Carried Unanimously. ZCA-2005-6 Townhouse Ownership Options in MR-T Zonine Districts Chair Johnson stated that this proposed amendment considers ownership options within the MR-T zoning district. Ms. Anderson stated that staff received an application to allow other than condo type ownership options in the Mk-T district. She deferred to the staff report to describe the proposed wording changes. Chair Johnson declared the public hearing open. Seeing no speakers, Steve Dowell moved and David Malik seconded a motion to close the public hearing. Motion Carried. Elizabeth Watson moved and David Malik seconded a motion to approve ZCA-2005-6. Motion Carried Unanimously. ZCA-2005-7 Shipping Containers in Residential Zoning Districts Damien Hooper stated that this proposed amendment would limit the placement of shipping containers in residential zoning districts.: He stated that staff has added language that would exempt temporary storage units. Chair Johnson declared the public hearing open. Seeing no speakers, Steve Dowell moved and David Malik seconded a motion to close the public hearing. Motion Carried. After the Board deliberated with City Attorney Tom Brubaker and planning staff concerning phrasing the amendment, David' Malik;moved and Steve Dowell seconded a motion to approve "ZCA-2005-7 Shipping Containers in Residential Zoning Districts" as recommended by staff. Motion Carried Unanimously. Election of New Vice Chair Chair Johnson announced that;a new Vice Chair needs to be elected since Greg Worthing's resignation from the Board. Chair Johnson opened nominations. David Malik moved and Steve Dowell seconded a motion to nominate Dana Ralph to the position of Vice Chair. Motion Carried. Assignment of RepresentatiLee(s) to Short Plat Meetings After discussion, subsequent to the meeting, Dana Ralph agreed to cover short plat meetings for August, September, and October 2005, Steve Dowell agreed to cover November, December and January, and David Malik agreed to cover February, March and April 2006. Adjournment Steve Dowell moved and David Malik seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting. Motion Carried. Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 7:30 p.m. I Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning M g Secretary of the Board S.IPermitlPlan ILUPB120051Minutes 1080805min.doc Land Use and Planning Board Hearing Minutes—August 8,2005 Page 2 of 2 9 PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES OCTOBER 17, 2005 Committee Members: Chair Tim Clark, Ron Harmon, Bruce White The meeting was called to order by Chair Clark at 4:00 P.M. with Bruce White's absence noted. Approval of Minutes Member Harmon moved and Member Clark seconded a motion to approve the minutes of September 19, 2005 with Council Member White's concurrence. Motion Passed 3-0. ZCA-2005-3 Commercial Motor Vehicles in Residential Zoning Districts Planner Damien Hooper stated that since the Committee's last meeting, staff has reviewed this issue and he presented five options. He stated that any action taken on options that had not been the subject of the Land Use and Planning Board hearings would require a new public hearing.. Chair Clark accepted public comments. Scott Floyd, 9645 S 232"d St., Kent, WA 98031 asked that the city consider strengthening or clarifying their permitting process to prohibit parking of shipping containers and trailers on residential parcels. He referred to a 2.5 acre site in the vicinity of 234d' and 98`h, and stated they are unsightly and a significant detriment to the neighborhoods. Mr. Floyd explained why he is opposed to the other proposed options. Ron Arntson, 24423 137'h Ave. SE, Kent, WA 98042 explained why he objects to commercial semi-trucks and/or trailers parked in residentially zoned designated properties urging the Committee to consider enacting an ordinance to prevent this. Janet Lewis, 13507 SE 2501h St., Kent, WA 98042 explained why she opposes the storage, use, parking and transfer of commercial vehicles of any length in residential areas, respectively requesting that the Council consider prohibiting commercial vehicles in residential districts. Dick Staples, 14629 SE 267`h, Kent, WA explained why he would support allowing most independent truck owners to park their vehicles on residential sites, citing his personal experience. Judy Hanford, 24736 1361h Ave. SE, Kent, WA 98042 updated the Committee since her testimony at last month's meeting. She explained why she is opposed to allowing commercial vehicles in residential areas. Jerry Sanders, 23102 112`h Pl SE, Kent,WA 98031 reiterated his stance in support of allowing smaller trucks to be parked on residential property, citing personal reasons. Brian Swanberg, Code Enforcement Officer for the City of Kent described for the Committee the type of complaints the city has received, which typically did not include the type of truck described by the previous speaker. He stated that complaints received by the city mainly focused on issues with the trailer portion of the tractor-trailer rig, tractor and cargo containers. Mr. Swanberg stated that although there have been some safety issues, most of the complaints have dealt with unsightly appearance factors. Mr. Swanberg addressed questions raised by the Committee members with respect to what type of commercial vehicles people are opposed to having in their residential communities. He stated that the Committee might consider defining vehicles of a recreational nature versus the large commercial rigs permanently parked in residential areas, with discussion ensuing on those variables. Planning Manager Charlene Anderson explained how the conditional use permit and home occupation permit processes are used. Chair Clark continued this item to the next meeting. ZCA-2005-7 Shipping Cgntainers in Residential Zoning Districts Planner Damien Hooper said staff has no further information to present stating that Brian Swanberg spoke on contai>her complaints with his previous discussion on commercial vehicles. The Committee asked staff to explore where these types of containers are used, where they might be allowed and to investigate what ordinances from other cities might be most compatible for use as a guideline by the CAN, of Kent with respect to accessory uses. Member Clark stated that this issue would be brought balk to the next meeting. Urban Density Study#CiA-2004-5 Planning Manager Charleoc Anderson presented a synopsis of this study; relating it to Kent's Comprehensive Plan Goajs and Policies and urban growth based on the Growth Management Act which requires that cities evaluate their zoning densities and apply zoning of 4.0 dwelling units per acre where applicable. Ms. Anderson described the public outreach efforts the City undertook to solicit public comment which included a series of Land Use and Planning Board Workshops and Hearings. She presented the Land Use and Planning Board's recommendations for the three study areas defined as the Green River Area A the North East Hill Area B, and the South East Hill Area C. City Engineer Gary Gill and Ms. Anderson addressed concerns raised by Member Clark with respect to development as it relates to access issues along the 228t" Street Corridor and SR-516. Mr. Gill addressed Member Clark's concerns with flooding, storm drainage system capacity and water quality standards for+;,the Benson Subarea. Member Harmon requested that staff notify him and other council members via email with respect to where the city stands with regard to the 4284 household target for the year 2020 and how much build-out the M.RT-16 area will generate. Member Harmon Moved and Member Clark Seconded a Motion to accept Garrison Forks Option 1. Motion Passed 2-0. Member Harmon Moved and Member Clark Seconded a Motion to accept Lower East Hill — Option 1. Motion Passed 2-0. Member Harmon Moved and Member Clark Seconded a Motion to accept Upper Mill Creek — Option 1. Motion Passed.: Member Harmon Moved Iand Member Clark Seconded a Motion to accept Soosette Creek - Option 1. Motion Passed. In response to City Attorney Tom Brubaker, Chair Clark clarified that all the proposed amendments had been considered by the Land Use and Planning Board. Member Clark stated that the urban density issue will be presented at the City Council Workshop October 18 then will go before the full Council. Member Harmon Moved land Member Clark Seconded a Motion to move forward the Urban Density Study as amended. Motion Passed 2-0. Adiournment Chair Clark adjourned themeeting at 5:26 p.m. Pamela Mottram, Admin Secretary,Planning Services S:IPermit0anWianning Committeel20051MfnutesV01705min.da P&EDC Meeting Minutes—10/17/05 Page 2 of 2 11 PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 Committee Members: Chair Tim Clark,Ron Hannon,Bruce White The meeting was called to order by Chair Clark at 4:00 P.M. Approval of Minutes Member White moved and Member Hannon seconded a motion to approve the minutes of August 15, 2005. Motion Passed 3-0. ZCA-2005-3 Commercial Motor Vehicles in Residential Zonine Districts Planner Damien Hooper stated that this amendment was heard before the Land Use and Planning Board then sent to Committee August 15"' and forwarded on to City Council on September 6 where it was remanded to Committee. He stated that staff has since reviewed what surrounding jurisdictions have done with commercial vehicles in their residential zones. Mr. Hooper stated the staff report includes copies of code sections from Auburn, Bellevue, Puyallup, Redmond, Renton, Sumner, Tacoma, Tukwila, Tumwater and Woodinville. Mr. Hooper stated that of those ten jurisdictions, only three jurisdictions allow commercial vehicles to be parked or stored on private property, with two of the jurisdictions specifically excluding semi-trucks and trailers, but allowing other types of commercial vehicles. He stated that Tukwila would allow a semi-tractor to be parked on a residential property. Chair Clark clarified the nature of the proposal then accepted public testimony. Jerry Sanders, 23102 112t° Place SE, Kent, WA stated that his livelihood depends on the use of a truck and spoke in support of the independent truck driver's right to park their trucks on their residential sites. He addressed his views associated with cost and the inconvenience for off- site parking, quality of life and view restrictions. In response to Councilmember Hannon, Mr. Sanders stated he would be supportive if vehicles under 18,000 pounds were exempted from the restriction. Dick Staples, 14629 SE 267`h Street, Kent, WA stated that he hauls freight and spoke in support of the independent truck driver to park their trucks on residential sites, addressing cost impacts associated with off-site parking, the potential for vandalism and view obstruction. He stated that he has parked his 22/23 foot long trailer weighing approximately 16,000 pounds on his residential site for nine years without complaints from his neighbors noting that other neighbors park motor homes or fifth-wheel trailers on their property that range in length from 35 to 40 feet in length. In response to Chair Clark, Mr. Staples stated he has a large lot. Judy Hanford, 24736 136t6 Ave SE, Kent, WA stated that she objects to the commercial trucks and trailers parked (typically on right-of-ways) along major roadways and on a church lot, throughout Kent, endangering pedestrians and obstructing vehicular views. She urged the Committee to consider enacting a law to stop this type of parking. Ms. Hanford submitted pictures indicating various locations where these trucks are parking. Addressing questions from Councilmembers Harmon and White, Ms. Hanford stated about 90% of the vehicles are on right- of-way and 10% on private property. The Committee Members clarified which pictures were of sites in Kent and which were in unincorporated King County. Tom Sharp, 24254 143`d Ave. SE, Kent, WA spoke in opposition to commercial vehicles parked in residential zoning districts citing property rights and zoning compliance issues. He indicated through pictures submitted for the record, several locations throughout Kent where semi trucks and/or trailers are parked in residential zoning districts. He urged the Committee to consider enacting an ordinance to support the City's code compliance people. In response to Councilmember White, Mr. Sharp stated these vehicles are commercial in nature and are not meant for residential zones. Ralph Linderman, 14029 SE 194`h St., Renton, WA spoke in opposition to commercial vehicles parked along roadways or in residential districts, encouraging the city to implement regulations enforcing compliance in Kent. He voiced concern for the safety of children. 1� Damien Hooper defined recreational vehicles as indicated in the City's zoning code, with Planning Manager Charlene Anderson clarifying some issues within the code. Mr. Hooper concurred with Chair Clack's supposition that recreational vehicles are to be screened from view. In response to Chair Clark's request, Ms. Anderson stated that staff would find out what restrictions the county plaices in urbanized areas on arterials. Chair Clark requested staff alert the County on trucks parked on right-of-way. He also asked staff to keep track of the number of complaints. Mr. Hooper stated that the Police Department enforces the City's traffic code which currently prohibits the parking of commercial vehicles on a public right-of-way. Member Harmon moved and Member White seconded a motion to accept the pictures submitted by Judy Hanford and Tom Sharp for the record. Motion passed 3-0. Chair Clark stated that hea would like to see a definition in place to distinguish between the types of commercial trucks allowed in residential districts. He stated that he also is concerned aobut the noise impact as trucks are warmed up. Member Harmon stated that staff needs to address on- street parking, address parking of commercial vehicles on property on 132nd possibly by meeting with that group to educate them of the City's rules and regulations, and additionally suggesting that staff consider employing the use of conditional use permits through the Hearing Examiner process for those who want to park commercial vehicles on their property. Member White asked staff to provide statistics with regard to the number and nature of complaints received by the City with respect to single owner operators parking their commercial vehicles in residential neighborhoods, stating that he would like a determination as to whether it is the actual parking of;the commercial vehicle or how that vehicle is stored in residential neighborhoods that is creating problems. After the Committee deliberated, Ms. Anderson addressed questions raised by Chair Clark and Member Harmon with respect to establishing applicable criteria for a conditional use permit as well as reviewing the City's home occupation license as a possible way to execute solutions for commercial vehicles parked in residential zoning districts. Chair Clark asked that this amendment be brought back to Committee after staff has reviewed further options. ZCA-2005-7 Shipping Containers in Residential Zonine Districts Jerry Sanders, 23102 112` Place SE, Kent, WA stated that the nature of his work requires the use of thirty-yard containers stored on the sites of homes he is renovating. He stated that it is not possible to complete a renovation within the 72 hour limitation as set forth in Kent's ordinance. Member Harmon stated I that an active construction permit would allow for the temporary container to remain on site for the duration of the project. Mr. Hooper concurred. Chair Clark asked that staff bring this item back to the Committee with a report that shows the locations where shipping: containers are stored in residential zoning districts. Councilmember White would like a report of number and nature of complaints. Growth Manaeement Htes Board Decision on Recent Urban Density Case—City of Bothell Assistant City Attorney, ;Kim Adams Pratt submitted a letter for the record summarizing the Board's decision with regard to the City of Bothell; listing the six questions the Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB) stated they will look at when they review urban density issues. Ms. Pratt explained why the GMHB found Bothell to be in compliance with the Growth Management Act with regard to their urban densities. Chair Clark asked Ms. Pratt to please review the City's position on a proposal before the Suburban Cities Association concerning the urban density issue. Adiournment Chair Clark adjourned the meeting at 5:15 p.m. Pamela Mottram, Admin Secretary, Planning Services S:IPermitOanWlanning Committeel2OO51Minutes1O81505min.doc P&EDC Meeting Minutes-9/19/05 PAOP 9 of 9 13 s PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES AUGUST 159 2005 Committee Members: Chair Tim Clark, Ron Harmon, Bruce White . The meeting was called to order by Chair Clark at 4:00 P.M. Approval of Minutes Member White moved and Member Harmon seconded a motion to approve the minutes of June 20, 2005. Motion Passed 3-0. ZCA-2005-6 Townhouse Ownership Options in MR-T Zoning Districts Planning Manager Charlene Anderson gave a brief synopsis on this proposal, indicating that the Land Use and Planning Board recommended approval of this amendment. Community Development Director Fred Satterstrom stated that this amendment helps to create a mechanism to ensure ownership more than the condominium actually does. After deliberations with staff, Member Harmon moved to recommend approval of ZCA-2005-6 amending Chapter 15 of the Kent City Code to provide for ownership options in the MR-T Multifamily Residential Townhouse District as recommended by the Land Use and Planning Board. Member White seconded the motion. Motion Passed 3-0. ZCA-20054 Multifamily Dwelling Units in MR-T Zones in Downtown Districts Ms. Anderson stated that this amendment provides for stacked dwelling units in addition to townhouses in the MR-T zones in downtown. This is more reflective of the City's goals to increase residential density in downtown. She stated that the Land Use and Planning Board recommend approval. Member White moved to recommend approval of ZCA-2005-4 amending Chapter 15 of the Kent City Code to allow multifamily dwelling units in the MR-T Multifamily Residential Townhouse districts located in downtown districts as recommended by the Land Use and Planning Board. Member Harmon seconded the motion. Motion Passed 3-0. ZCA-2005-5 Processing of Applications for Rezone Ms. Anderson stated Kent's Hearing Examiner proposed this amendment to clarify that rezones could be processed separately or simultaneously with other types of land use applications such as a plat. Member Harmon moved to recommend approval of ZCA-2005-5 amending Chapter 12 of the Kent City Code regarding the processing of applications for a rezone as recommended by the Land Use and Planning Board. Member White seconded the motion. Motion Passed 3-0. ZCA-2005-3 Commercial Motor Vehicles in Residential Zoning Districts Ms. Anderson stated that this proposed amendment is intended to clarify an existing code, and is a recommendation to limit the storage and parking of commercial motor vehicles in residential zoning districts including single family and multifamily zones. Ms. Anderson stated that the police department regulates on-street parking of these types of vehicles, but this issue relates to semi-truck and trailers, and tractors parked on private residential property. She stated that the Land Use and Planning Board recommended approval by a 5-1 vote. Community Development Director Fred Satterstrom explained why he and the City's Code Enforcement Officer Brian Swanberg believes this issue to have become problematic in the recent past, citing visibility, public safety and noise issues. Member White requested additional information on the number and location of complaints. After deliberations, Member Hannon moved to recommend approval of ZCA-2005-3 amending Chapter 15 of the Kent City Code to limit storage and parking of commercial motor vehicles in residential zoning districts as recommended by the Land Use and Planning Board. Chair Clark seconded the motion. Motion Passed 2-1 with Member White opposed. t ZCA-2005-7 Shipping Containers in Residential Zoning Districts Ms. Anderson stated that this proposal attempts to limit the placement of shipping containers in residential zoning districts; and clarifies the interpretation of an existing code. This amendment would exempt containers collecting debris or accepting household goods for moving as long as the container is on the property for less than 72 hours. Ms. Anderson stated that the Land Use and Planning Board voted for unanimous approval of this amendment. The Committee discussed their concerns with staff and opted to defer this amendment to another meeting until staff can obtain further information as requested. Ms. Anderson stated that staff proposes sending to Council the amendments that passed unanimously as ordinances under the Consent Calendar and the one amendment not passing unanimously would go to City Council under Other Business. The Committee concurred. Growth Management Bearings Board Decisions on Urban Density Assistant City Attorney Kim Adams Pratt presented information from a memo prepared by the Legal Department describing two "Recent Urban Density Cases—Normandy Park and Issaquah From the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board" (GMHB). Ms. Pratt stated that these two decisions show us how the GMHB will analyze our urban densities to determine if they are appropriate under the Growth Management Act. Ms. Pratt said that the City of Kent is before the GMHB regarding the urban density issue, stating that the City of Kent's Comprehensive Plan Update was appealed by 1000 Friends of Washington(now known as Futurewise). Ms. Pratt discussed six questions with the Committee, referred to in her memo, that the GMHB would ask each city that comes before it on the urban density issue. Ms. Pratt stated that while planning staff has been going through the City's urban density study, the City's Legal Department and Futurewise have been obtaining extensions from the GMHB on the case schedule. Ms. Pratt and Planner Gloria Gould-Wessen addressed Chair Clark's concerns with respect to density issues along Kent's steep slopes and relinquishment of development rights. Ms. Pratt stated that the Land Use and Planning Board has scheduled public hearings for August 22, and September 12, 2005, on the urban density issue. She stated that legal briefs in the GMHB case are not due until September and the Legal Department is negotiating with Futurewise for another 90 day extension. If the extension is not granted, the City would end up before the GMHB defending the densities in Kent's Comprehensive Plan without any changes that may be adopted as a result of the urban density study. Ms. Pratt stated that the GMHB would decide if the current Comprehensive Plan meets GMA requirements for accommodating urban densities. If the GMHB decided against the City, staff would have been completing the Urban Density Study and Council's decisions on density designations could be presented to the GMHB for the Board's determination as to whether the new densities comply with the Growth Management Act. Adjournment Chair Clark adjourned the meeting at 5:00 p.m. Pamela Mottram, Admin Secretary, Planning Services S:IPermit(Plan(PlanningCommittee Lc 005 Winutes108l505min.doc P&EDC Meeting Minutes—8115/05 Page 2 of 2 I 15 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fred N. Satterstrom,AICP,Director PLANNING SERVICES KT Charlene Anderson,AICP,Manager VVA SH IN GTON Phone:253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent,WA 98032-5895 November 14, 2005 TO: Chair Tim Clark and Planning & Economic Development Committee Members FROM: Damien Hooper, Planner RE: Zoning Code Amendment#ZCA-2005-7/KIVA RPP6-2052605 Shipping Containers in residential zoning districts. MOTION: I move to approve/deny/modify #ZCA-2005-7, amending Chapter 15 of Kent City Code to limit the placement of shipping containers in residential zoning districts, as recommended by the Land Use & Planning Board. SUMMARY: At the August 15, September 19 and October 17 meetings, the Planning and Economic Development Committee considered the Land Use & Planning Board's recommendation of approval of an amendment to Kent City Code to limit the placement of shipping containers in residential zoning districts. The committee asked staff to draft other options for committee consideration that would allow these containers in residential districts, incorporating code language from neighboring jurisdictions as deemed appropriate for the City of Kent. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: The City's Zoning Code recognizes the need of all legitimate uses of land to be protected from other uses which are unrelated or incompatible (KCC 15.01.020.C.2). The City has received complaints related to shipping containers located in residential neighborhoods. These containers present an incompatibility with residential uses, particularly related to visual blight. Staff is bringing forward the following options for committee discussion; Options 2 and 3 would require a public hearing. Option 1: Limit the placement of shipping containers in residential zoning districts (Land Use &Planning Board recommendation). KCC 15.04.170: Add Note 34 in "Additional Standards" section of all SR, MR and MHP zoning districts. KCC 15.04.180 (34) would read "Shipping Containers. No person shall place or cause to be placed any shipping container on any portion of a property located within this zone. This restriction does not apply to containers collecting debris or accepting household goods for moving that are located on residential property for less than 72 hours." Option 2: This option is similar to Option l but changes "shipping containers" to "cargo containers" and includes a definition. KCC 15.04.170: Add Note 34 in "Additional Standards" section of all SR, MR and MHP zoning districts. KCC 15.04.180 (34) would read "Cargo Containers. No person shall place or cause to be placed any cargo container on any portion of a property located within this zone. This 6 restriction does not apply to containers collecting debris or accepting household goods for' moving that are located on residential property for less than 72 hours." New KCC 15.02.071: "Cap-go Containers—A standardized, reusable vessel, designed without an axle or wheels, which was: A. Originally, specifically, or formerly designed for or used in the packing, shipping, movement or transportation of freight, articles, goods or commodities; and/or B. Designed for or capable of being mounted or moved on a rail car; and/or C. Designed for or capable of being mounted on a chassis or bogie for movement by truck trailer or loaded on a ship. When used for any purpose other than those listed in subsection A of this section, a cargo container is a structure. ' Option 3: KCC 15.04.170: Add Noto 34 in "Additional Standards" section of all SR, MR and MHP zoning districts. KCC 1,5.04.I86 (34) would read "Cargo Containers proposed to be located in a residential zone must be located completely within a stick-built structure with a peaked roof and building materials similar'.to that of the principal residence on the site. No containers greater than ten (10) feet by twenty (20) feet may be placed in residential districts. This restriction does not apply to containers collecting debris or accepting household goods for moving that are located on residential property for less than 72 hours. Additionally, institutional uses are exempt from these requirements except when a shipping container is proposed to be located adjacent to or within sight of a residential use." New KCC 15.02.071: "Catfgo Containers —A standardized, reusable vessel, designed without an axle or wheels, which was:. D. Originally, specifically, or formerly designed for or used in the packing, shipping, movement or transportation of freight, articles, goods or commodities; and/or E. Designed for or capable of being mounted or moved on a rail car; and/or F. Designed for or capable of being mounted on a chassis or bogie for movement by truck trailer or loaded on a ship. When used for any purpose other than those listed in subsection A of this section, a cargo container is a structure. Option 4: Deny the proposed amendment. Staff would then work with existing code language Planning staff will be present at the Committee meeting to answer questions about these options. DHICA/pm/S:\Permit\Plan\ZONECOD$AMEND\2005\2052605-2005-7pedc 112105.doc End.: Minutes of8/15/05,9119105 4nd 10/17105 PEDC meetings Minutes of 818105 LU&PB meeting cc: Fred N.Satterstrom,AICP,QD Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Mgr Kim Marousek,Principal Planner Damien Hooper,Planner Brian Swanberg,Code Enforcement Officer Project File Parties of Record i 17 PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES AUGUST 159 2005 Committee Members: Chair Tim Clark, Ron Hannon, Bruce White The meeting was called to order by Chair Clark at 4:00 P.M. Approval of Minutes Member White moved and Member Harmon seconded a motion to approve the minutes of June 20, 2005. Motion Passed 3-0. ZCA-2005-6 Townhouse Ownership Options in MR-T Zoning Districts Planning Manager Charlene Anderson gave a brief synopsis on this proposal, indicating that the Land Use and Planning Board recommended approval of this amendment. Community Development Director Fred Satterstrom stated that this amendment helps to create a mechanism to ensure ownership more than the condominium actually does. After deliberations with staff, Member Harmon moved to recommend approval of ZCA-2005-6 amending Chapter 15 of the Kent City Code to provide for ownership options in the MR-T Multifamily Residential Townhouse District as recommended by the Land Use and Planning Board. Member White seconded the motion. Motion Passed 3-0. ZCA-2005-4 Multifamily Dwelling Units in MR-T Zones in Downtown Districts Ms. Anderson stated that this amendment provides for stacked dwelling units in addition to townhouses in the MR-T zones in downtown. This is more reflective of the City's goals to increase residential density in downtown. She stated that the Land Use and Planning Board recommend approval. Member White moved to recommend approval of ZCA-2005-4 amending Chapter 15 of the Kent City Code to allow multifamily dwelling units in the MR-T Multifamily Residential Townhouse districts located in downtown districts as recommended by the Land Use and Planning Board. Member Harmon seconded the motion. Motion Passed 3-0. ZCA-2005-5 Processing of Applications for Rezone Ms. Anderson stated Kent's Hearing Examiner proposed this amendment to clarify that rezones could be processed separately or simultaneously with other types of land use applications such as a plat. Member Harmon moved to recommend approval of ZCA-2005-5 amending Chapter 12 of the Kent City Code regarding the processing of applications for a rezone as recommended by the Land Use and Planning Board. Member White seconded the motion. Motion Passed 3-0. ZCA-2005-3 Commercial Motor Vehicles in Residential Zoning Districts Ms. Anderson stated that this proposed amendment is intended to clarify an existing code, and is a recommendation to limit the storage and parking of commercial motor vehicles in residential zoning districts including single family and multifamily zones. Ms. Anderson stated that the police department regulates on-street parking of these types of vehicles, but this issue relates to semi-truck and trailers, and tractors parked on private residential property. She stated that the Land Use and Planning Board recommended approval by a 5-1 vote. Community Development Director Fred Satterstrom explained why he and the City's Code Enforcement Officer Brian Swanberg believes this issue to have become problematic in the recent past, citing visibility, public safety and noise issues. Member White requested additional information on the number and location of complaints. After deliberations, Member Harmon moved to recommend approval of ZCA-2005-3 amending Chapter 15 of the Kent City Code to limit storage and parking of commercial motor vehicles in residential zoning districts as recommended by the Land Use and Planning Board. Chair Clark seconded the motion. Motion Passed 2-1 with Member White opposed. ZCA-2005-7 Shipping Containers in Residential Zoning Districts Ms. Anderson stated thit this proposal attempts to limit the placement of shipping containers in residential zoning districts; and clarifies the interpretation of an existing code. This amendment would exempt containers collecting debris or accepting household goods for moving as long as the container is on the property for less than 72 hours. Ms. Anderson stated that the Land Use and Planning Board voted for unanimous approval of this amendment. The Committee discussed their concerns with staff and opted to defer this amendment to another meeting until staff can obtain further information as requested. Ms. Anderson stated that staff proposes sending to Council the amendments that passed unanimously as ordinances under the Consent Calendar and the one amendment not passing unanimously would go to City Council under Other Business. The Committee concurred. Growth Management Hearings Board Decisions on Urban Density Assistant City Attorney!Kim Adams Pratt presented information from a memo prepared by the Legal Department describing two "Recent Urban Density Cases—Normandy Park and Issaquah From the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board' (GMHB). Ms. Pratt stated that these two decisions show us how the GMHB will analyze our urban densities to determine if they are appropriate under the Growth Management Act. Ms. Pratt said that the City of Kent is before the GMHB regarding the urban density issue, stating that the City of Kent's Comprehensive Plan Update was appealed by 1000 Friends of Washington (now known as Futurewise). Ms. Pratt discussed six questions with the Committee, referred to in her memo, that the GMHB would ask each city that comes before it on the urban density issue. Ms. Pratt stated that while planning staff has bee n going through the City's urban density study, the City's Legal Department and Futurewise have been obtaining extensions from the GMHB on the case schedule. Ms. Pratt and Planner Gloria Gould-Wessen addressed Chair Clark's concerns with respect to density issues along Kent's steep slopes and relinquishment of development rights. Ms. Pratt stated that the Land Use and Planning Board has scheduled public hearings for August 22, and September 12, 2005, on the urban density issue. She stated that legal briefs in the GMHB case are not due until September and the Legal Department is negotiating with Futurewise for another 90 day extension. If the extension is not granted, the City would end up before the GMHB defending the densities in Kent's Comprehensive Plan without any changes that may be adopted as a result of the urban density study. Ms. Pratt stated that the GMHB would decide if the current Comprehensive Plan meets GMA requirements for accommodating urban densities. If the GMHB decided against the City, staff would have been completing the Urban Density Study and Council's decisions on density designations could be presented to the GMHB for the Board's determination as to whether the new densities comply with the Growth Management Act. Adiournment Chair Clark adjourned the meeting at 5:00 p.m. MA&Vw Pamela Mottram, Admin Secretary,Planning Services S:I PermillPlan lPlanning CommilleeUOO5Winuies1081505min.doc P&EDC Meeting Minutes—8/1 5/05 Page 2 of 2 19 PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 Committee Members: Chair Tim Clark, Ron Harmon, Bruce White The meeting was called to order by Chair Clark at 4:00 P.M. Approval of Minutes Member White moved and Member Harmon seconded a motion to approve the minutes of August 15, 2005. Motion Passed 3-0. ZCA-2005-3 Commercial Motor Vehicles in Residential Zoning Districts Planner Damien Hooper stated that this amendment was heard before the Land Use and Planning Board then sent to Committee August 151h and forwarded on to City Council on September 6 where it was remanded to Committee. He stated that staff has since reviewed what surrounding jurisdictions have done with commercial vehicles in their residential zones. Mr. Hooper stated the staff report includes copies of code sections from Auburn, Bellevue, Puyallup, Redmond, Renton, Sumner, Tacoma, Tukwila, Tumwater and Woodinville. Mr. Hooper stated that of those ten jurisdictions, only three jurisdictions allow commercial vehicles to be parked or stored on private property, with two of the jurisdictions specifically excluding semi-trucks and trailers, but allowing other types of commercial vehicles. He stated that Tukwila would allow a semi-tractor to be parked on a residential property. Chair Clark clarified the nature of the proposal then accepted public testimony. Jerry Sanders, 23102 112`h Place SE, Kent, WA stated that his livelihood depends on the use of a truck and spoke in support of the independent truck driver's right to park their trucks on their residential sites. He addressed his views associated with cost and the inconvenience for off- site parking, quality of life and view restrictions. In response to Councilmember Hannon, Mr. Sanders stated he would be supportive if vehicles under 18,000 pounds were exempted from the restriction. Dick Staples, 14629 SE 267`h Street, Kent, WA stated that he hauls freight and spoke in support of the independent truck driver to park their trucks on residential sites, addressing cost impacts associated with off-site parking, the potential for vandalism and view obstruction. He stated that he has parked his 22/23 foot long trailer weighing approximately 16,000 pounds on his residential site for nine years without complaints from his neighbors noting that other neighbors park motor homes or fifth-wheel trailers on their property that range in length from 35 to 40 feet in length. In response to Chair Clark, Mr. Staples stated he has a large lot. Judy Hanford, 24736 1361h Ave SE, Kent, WA stated that she objects to the commercial trucks and trailers parked (typically on right-of-ways) along major roadways and on a church lot, throughout Kent, endangering pedestrians and obstructing vehicular views. She urged the Committee to consider enacting a law to stop this type of parking. Ms. Hanford submitted pictures indicating various locations where these trucks are parking. Addressing questions from Councilmembers Hannon and White, Ms. Hanford stated about 90% of the vehicles are on right- of-way and 10% on private property. The Committee Members clarified which pictures were of sites in Kent and which were in unincorporated King County. Tom Sharp, 24254 143'd Ave. SE, Kent, WA spoke in opposition to commercial vehicles parked in residential zoning districts citing property rights and zoning compliance issues. He indicated through pictures submitted for the record, several locations throughout Kent where semi trucks and/or trailers are parked in residential zoning districts. He urged the Committee to consider enacting an ordinance to support the City's code compliance people. In response to Councilmember White, Mr. Sharp stated these vehicles are commercial in nature and are not meant for residential zones. Ralph Linderman, 14029 SE 194`h St., Renton, WA spoke in opposition to commercial vehicles parked along roadways or in residential districts, encouraging the city to implement regulations enforcing compliance in Kent. He voiced concern for the safety of children. 2�0 Damien Hooper defined' recreational vehicles as indicated in the City's zoning code, with fl Planning Manager Charlene Anderson clarifying some issues within the code. Mr. Hooper concurred with Chair Clack's supposition that recreational vehicles are to be screened from view. In response to Chair Clark's request, Ms. Anderson stated that staff would find out what restrictions the county places in urbanized areas on arterials. Chair Clark requested staff alert the County on trucks parked!on right-of-way. He also asked staff to keep track of the number of complaints. Mr. Hooper stated that the Police Department enforces the City's traffic code which currently prohibits the parking of commercial vehicles on a public right-of-way. Member Harmon moved and Member White seconded a motion to accept the pictures submitted by Judy Hanford and Toni Sharp for the record. Motion passed 3-0. Chair Clark stated that he!would like to see a definition in place to distinguish between the types of commercial trucks allowed in residential districts. He stated that he also is concerned aobut the noise impact as trucks;are warmed up. Member Harmon stated that staff needs to address on- street parking, address parking of commercial vehicles on property on 132"d possibly by meeting with that group to educate them of the City's rules and regulations, and additionally suggesting that staff consider employing the use of conditional use permits through the Hearing Examiner process for those who wait to park commercial vehicles on their property. Member White asked staff to provide statistics with regard to the number and nature of complaints received by the City with respect to single owner operators parking their commercial vehicles in residential neighborhoods, stating that he would like a determination as to whether it is the actual parking of `the commercial vehicle or how that vehicle is stored in residential neighborhoods that is creating problems. After the Committee deliberated, Ms. Anderson addressed questions raised by Chair Clark and Member Harmon with respect to establishing applicable criteria for a conditional use permit as well as reviewing the City's home occupation license as a possible way to execute solutions for commercial vehicles parked in residential zoning districts. Chair Clark asked that this amendment be brought back to Committee after staff has reviewed further options. ZCA-2005-7 Shipping Containers in Residential Zoning Districts Jerry Sanders, 23102 1 Wh Place SE, Kent, WA stated that the nature of his work requires the use of thirty-yard containers stored on the sites of homes he is renovating. He stated that it is not possible to complete a renovation within the 72 hour limitation as set forth in Kent's ordinance. Member Harmon stated ;that an active construction permit would allow for the temporary container to remain on site for the duration of the project. Mr. Hooper concurred. Chair Clark asked that staff bring this item back to the Committee with a report that shows the locations where shipping:containers are stored in residential zoning districts. Councilmember White would like a report of number and nature of complaints. Growth Management Hiles Board Decision on Recent Urban Density Case—City of Bothell Assistant City Attorney, Kim Adams Pratt submitted a letter for the record summarizing the Board's decision with regard to the City of Bothell; listing the six questions the Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB) stated they will look at when they review urban density. issues. Ms. Pratt explained why the GMHB found Bothell to be in compliance with the Growth Management Act with regard to their urban densities. Chair Clark asked Ms. Pratt to please review the City's position; on a proposal before the Suburban Cities Association concerning the urban density issue. Adiournment Chair Clark adjourned theimeeting at 5:15 p.m Pamela Mottram, Admin Secretary, Planning Services S:IPermittftnOanning Committee UdO5IMinutes1081505min.doc P&EDC Meeting Minutes—9/19/05 Paor 9 of') 21 PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES OCTOBER 179 2005 Committee Members: Chair Tim Clark, Ron Harmon, Bruce White The meeting was called to order by Chair Clark at 4:00 P.M. with Bruce White's absence noted. Approval of Minutes Member Harmon moved and Member Clark seconded a motion to approve the minutes of September 19, 2005 with Council Member White's concurrence. Motion Passed 3-0. ZCA-2005-3 Commercial Motor Vehicles in Residential Zoning Districts Planner Damien Hooper stated that since the Committee's last meeting, staff has reviewed this issue and he presented five options. He stated that any action taken on options that had not been the subject of the Land Use and Planning Board hearings would require a new public hearing.. Chair Clark accepted public comments. Scott Floyd, 9645 S 232°d St., Kent, WA 98031 asked that the city consider strengthening or clarifying their permitting process to prohibit parking of shipping containers and trailers on residential parcels. He referred to a 2.5 acre site in the vicinity of 234th and 98d', and stated they are unsightly and a significant detriment to the neighborhoods. Mr. Floyd explained why he is opposed to the other proposed options. Ron Arntson, 24423 1371h Ave. SE, Kent, WA 98042 explained why he objects to commercial semi-trucks and/or trailers parked in residentially zoned designated properties urging the Committee to consider enacting an ordinance to prevent this. Janet Lewis, 13507 SE 250th St.,Kent, WA 98042 explained why she opposes the storage, use, parking and transfer of commercial vehicles of any length in residential areas, respectively requesting that the Council consider prohibiting commercial vehicles in residential districts. Dick Staples, 14629 SE 267"', Kent, WA explained why he would support allowing most independent truck owners to park their vehicles on residential sites, citing his personal experience. Judy Hanford, 24736 136th Ave. SE, Kent, WA 98042 updated the Committee since her testimony at last month's meeting. She explained why she is opposed to allowing commercial vehicles in residential areas. Jerry Sanders, 23102 112th PI SE, Kent,WA 98031 reiterated his stance in support of allowing smaller trucks to be parked on residential property, citing personal reasons. Brian Swanberg, Code Enforcement Officer for the City of Kent described for the Committee the type of complaints the city has received, which typically did not include the type of truck described by the previous speaker. He stated that complaints received by the city mainly focused on issues with the trailer portion of the tractor-trailer rig, tractor and cargo containers. Mr. Swanberg stated that although there have been some safety issues, most of the complaints have dealt with unsightly appearance factors. Mr. Swanberg addressed questions raised by the Committee members with respect to what type of commercial vehicles people are opposed to having in their residential communities. He stated that the Committee might consider defining vehicles of a recreational nature versus the large commercial rigs permanently parked in residential areas, with discussion ensuing on those variables. Planning Manager Charlene Anderson explained how the conditional use permit and home occupation permit processes are used. Chair Clark continued this item to the next meeting. 2 ZCA-2005-7 Shipping Containers in Residential Zoning Districts Planner Damien Hooper 'said staff has no further information to present stating that Brian Swanberg spoke on container complaints with his previous discussion on commercial vehicles. The Committee asked staff to explore where these types of containers are used, where they might be allowed and to investigate what ordinances from other cities might be most compatible for use as a guideline by the City of Kent with respect to accessory uses. Member Clark stated that this issue would be brought back to the next meeting. Urban Density Study#CrA-2004-5 Planning Manager Charletle Anderson presented a synopsis of this study; relating it to Kent's Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies and urban growth based on the Growth Management Act which requires that cities evaluate their zoning densities and apply zoning of 4.0 dwelling units per acre where applicable. Ms. Anderson described the public outreach efforts the City undertook to solicit public comment which included a series of Land Use and Planning Board Workshops and Hearings. She presented the Land Use and Planning Board's recommendations for the three study areas defined as the Green River Area Ai the North East Hill Area B, and the South East Hill Area C. City Engineer Gary Gill and Ms. Anderson addressed concerns raised by Member Clark with respect to development as it relates to access issues along the 228t' Street Corridor and SR-516. Mr. Gill addressed Member Clark's concerns with flooding, storm drainage system capacity and water quality standards for!the Benson Subarea. Member Harmon requested that staff notify him and other council members via email with respect to where the city stands with regard to the 4284 household target for the year 2020 and how much build-out the MRT-16 area will generate. Member Harmon Moved and Member Clark Seconded a Motion to accept Garrison Forks - Option 1. Motion Passed 2-0. Member Harmon Moved �md Member Clark Seconded a Motion to accept Lower East Hill — Option 1. Motion Passed 2-0. Member Harmon Moved and Member Clark Seconded a Motion to accept Upper Mill Creek — Option 1. Motion Passed. Member Harmon Moved and Member Clark Seconded a Motion to accept Soosette Creek - Option 1. Motion Passed. In response to City Attorney Tom Brubaker, Chair Clark clarified that all the proposed amendments had been considered by the Land Use and Planning Board. Member Clark stated that the urban density issue will be presented at the City Council Workshop October 18 then will go before the full Council. Member Harmon Moved ind Member Clark Seconded a Motion to move forward the Urban Density Study as amended: Motion Passed 2-0. Adjournment Chair Clark adjourned the meeting at 5:26 p.m. Pamela Mottram, Admin Secretary, Planning Services S:TP mitlPlanTlanning Committee120051Miyutes1101705min.doc P&EDC Meeting Minutes—10/17/05 Page 2 of 2 23 LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 8, 2005 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Jon Johnson, Steve Dowell, David Malik, Dana Ralph, Elizabeth Watson, Kenneth Wendling, BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Tim Giminez, Excused STAFF MEMBERS: Charlene Anderson, Tom Brubaker, Chris Holden The meeting was called to order by Chair Johnson at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers. Approval of Minutes David Malik moved and Elizabeth Watson seconded a motion to approve the minutes of April 25, 2005. Motion Carried Unanimously. _Added Items/Communications/Notice of Upcoming Meetings Planning Manager Charlene Anderson stated that these issues will likely move forward to the August 15 Planning and Economic Development Committee meeting. If approved by Committee these issues will move on to City Council on September 6. _ZCA-2005-3 Commercial Motor Vehicles in Residential Zoning Districts Planner Damien Hooper stated that this proposed amendment would limit the storage and parking of commercial vehicles in residential districts on residentially zoned property. He stated that this amendment was prompted by numerous complaints received by the city related to parking of commercial vehicles in residential neighborhoods. Mr. Hooper stated that commercial motor vehicles present an incompatibility with residential uses related to noise, visual blight and safety issues. Mr. Hooper cited the textual changes within KCC Section 15.08.085 as recommended by staff. After deliberations, Chair Johnson declared the public hearing open. Seeing no speakers, Steve Dowell moved and David Malik seconded a motion to close the public hearing. Motion Carried. David Malik moved and Steve Dowell seconded a motion to approve "ZCA-2005-3 Commercial Motor Vehicles in Residential Zoning Districts" as recommended by staff to include replacing the language $etively-del g" with "unless actively loading or unloadin>;'. Motion Carried 5 to I with Dana Ralph opposed. ZCA-20054 Multifamily Dwelling Units in MR-T Zones in Downtown Districts Planning Manager Charlene Anderson stated that staff has revised phrasing for this amendment based on additional review. She stated that this amendment attempts to encourage more dwelling units in Downtown's MR-T zoning districts and provide for other ownership options. Ms. Anderson stated that staff proposes that multifamily dwellings with ownership interest be allowed in the MR-T zone located within the downtown districts. Chair Johnson declared the public hearing open. Seeing no speakers, Steve Dowell moved and David Malik seconded a motion to close the public hearing. Motion Carried. David Malik moved and Elizabeth Watson seconded a motion to approve ZCA-2005-4 Multifamily Dwelling Units in MR-T Zones in Downtown Districts as recommended by staff. Motion Carried Unanimously. Land Use and Planning Board Minutes August 8,2005 . 2�l ZCA-2005-5 Processing of&ylications for Rezone 1 Jon Johnson stated that the purpose of this proposed amendment is to clarify optional consolidated permit processing. Chair Johnson declared the public hearing open and seeing no speakers; Steve Dowell moved and David Malik seconded a motion to close the public hearing. Motion Carried. Elizabeth Watson moved and Steve Dowell seconded a motion to approve ZCA-2005-5 as recommended by staff. Motion Carried Unanimously. ZCA-2005-6 Townhouse Owpership Options in MR-T Zoning Districts Chair Johnson stated that this proposed amendment considers ownership options within the MR-T zoning district. Ms. Anderson stated that staff received an application to allow other than condo type ownership options in the MR-T district. She deferred to the staff report to describe the proposed wording changes. Chair Johnson declared the public hearing open. Seeing no speakers, Steve Dowell moved and David Malik seconded a motion to close the public hearing. Motion Carried. Elizabeth Watson moved and David Malik seconded a motion to approve ZCA-2005-6. Motion Carried Unanimously. ZCA-2005-7 Shipping Containers in Residential Zoning Districts Damien Hooper stated that this proposed amendment would limit the placement of shipping containers in residential zoning districts.', He stated that staff has added language that would exempt temporary storage units. Chair Johnson declared the public hearing open. Seeing no speakers, Steve Dowell moved and David Malik seconded a motion to close the public hearing. Motion Carried. After the Board deliberated with City Attorney Tom Brubaker and planning staff concerning phrasing the amendment, David Malik'moved and Steve Dowell seconded a motion to approve "ZCA-2005-7 Shipping Containers in Residential Zoning Districts" as recommended by staff. Motion Carried Unanimously. Election of New Vice Chair Chair Johnson announced that,a new Vice Chair needs to be elected since Greg Worthing's resignation from the Board. Chair Johnson opened nominations. David Malik moved and Steve Dowell seconded a motion to nominate Dana Ralph to the position of Vice Chair. Motion Carried. Assignment of Revresentatft(s) to Short Plat Meetings After discussion, subsequent to the meeting, Dana Ralph agreed to cover short plat meetings for August, September, and October 2005 Steve Dowell agreed to cover November, December and January, and David Malik agreed to cover February, March and April 2006. Adjournment Steve Dowell moved and David Malik seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting. Motion Carried. Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 7:30 p.m. Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning M aan ger Secretary of the Board S:I PermitlPlanl LUPB00051Minutes1080805min.doc Land Use and Planning Board Hearing Minutes—August 8,2005 Page 2 of 2 I 25 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fred N. Satterstrom, C.D.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 November 14, 2005 To: Chair Tim Clark and Planning & Economic Development Committee Members From: Gloria Gould-Wessen, GIS Coordinator/Planner Re: 2005 Annual Docket Report MOTION: I move to accept/modify the Land Use &Planning Board's recommendation of approval of the 2005 Annual Docket Report. SUMMARY: On December 2, 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3722 amending Chapter 12.02 of the Kent City Code to include a docketing process as required by the Growth Management Act (GMA). After holding a public hearing on the issue on October 24, 2005, the Land Use & Planning Board recommends approval of the 2005 Annual Docket Report that is included in the agenda packet. • BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: The Growth Management Act outlines a procedure for jurisdictions to follow that assists the public in making suggested amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, development regulations, and growth policies on an annual basis. The suggested amendments "shall be docketed' meaning maintained on a list to ensure they will be considered by the city and available for public review. In 2004 a text amendment to Kent City Code integrated language for an annual docket process. The deadline for filing a docket item is the same as for the annual amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, i.e., September 1 of each calendar year. The 2005 Annual Docket Report contains a total of ten (10) items: one (1) is a code amendment proposed by a citizen; three (3) are miscellaneous text amendments proposed by city staff, as well as a miscellaneous map correction; three (3) are map amendments proposed by either city staff or neighboring jurisdictions; and three (3) are Comprehensive Plan land use map amendments proposed by property owners. Staff will be available at the November 21 meeting to further discuss this issue. CA\GGW\pm P:\Planning\Docketing\2005\pedcl12105.doc Enc: 2005 Annual Docket Report w/attachments;October 17 staff memo to LUPB;Minutes of 10124 LUPB hearing cc: Fred N.Satterstrom,AICP,Community Development Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Mgr. Gloria Gould-Wessen,AICP,GIS Coordinator/Planner William D.Osborne,Planner Project File 6 This page intentionally left blank. I I I 27 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fred N. Satterstrom,C.D.Director PLANNING SERVICES KE N T Charlene Anderson,AICP,Manager WASHINGTON Phone:253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent,WA 98032-5895 October 17, 2005 TO: JON JOHNSON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE LAND USE AND PLANNING BOARD FROM: GLORIA GOULD-WESSEN, GIS COORDINATOR/PLANNER RE: 2005 ANNUAL DOCKET REPORT Land Use & Planning Board Public Hearing—October 24, 2005 INTRODUCTION On December 2, 2004, Council adopted Ordinance No. 3722 amending Chapter 12.02 of the Kent City Code to include a docketing process as required by the Growth Management Act (GMA). The 2005 Annual Docket Report will follow the process outlined in the aforementioned ordinance. Attached are the docketed items for 2005; these items were discussed in the October 10'b workshop. BACKGROUND The Growth Management Act outlined a procedure for jurisdictions to follow that assists the public in making suggested amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, development regulations, and growth policies on an annual basis. The suggested amendment "shall be docketed' which refers to compiling and maintaining a list of suggested changes to the comprehensive plan or development regulations to ensure they will be considered by the city and will be available for review by the public. A 2004 Kent City Code text amendment to Chapter 12.02 integrated language for an annual docket process. The deadline for filing a docket item is the same as for the annual amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, which is by September 0 of each calendar year. The following is a brief outline of the docketing process (section 12.02.035): ■ Proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan land use map will be forwarded to the city council for action during the current annual amendment cycle; ■ Proposed amendments to development regulations will be considered in an Annual Docket Report and forwarded to the city council for action and possible inclusion in a city department work program; ■ Proposed amendments to Comprehensive Plan text and development regulations shall be compiled and distributed for review and comment to those city departments responsible for the applicable Comprehensive Plan element or implementing the development regulation; ■ City staff will review and submit no later than October 31' recommendations as to which proposals should have action taken on them or made part of a city department work program; 8 ■ Planning Services willicompile comments and recommendations on proposed amendments to Comprehensive Plan next and development regulations in an Annual Docket Report, along with a list of the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan land use map; ■ The LU&PB will hold:a public hearing to consider the Annual Docket Report and forward a recommendation to the city council by no later than December 15t as to which proposed text amendments or work program items should be considered for action in the current annual amendment cycle; ■ Council may accept ov modify the recommendation given on the Annual Docket Report by no later than January 31"; ■ Those proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendments or development regulation amendments not included for action by the city council shall be included for consideration in the next year's docket for a period of three (3)years; ■ For Docketed proposals accepted by city council for inclusion in the annual Comprehensive Plan amendment cycle, the Planning Services office shall prepare a report and recommendation which shall be presented to the LU&PB in workshop and public hearing; and ■ Recommendations on the annual Comprehensive Plan amendments shall be forwarded to the city council no later than March 31". The 2005 Annual Docket Report with staff recommendations for action are attached. It contains a total of ten (10) items: one (1) is a code amendment proposed by a citizen; three (3) are text amendments proposed by city staff, although includes miscellaneous map correction; three (3) are map amendments proposed by either city staff or neighboring jurisdictions; and three (3) are Comprehensive Plan land use map amendments proposed by property owners. Staff will be available for further discussion at the October 24th hearing. If there are any questions prior to the workshop,please contact Gloria Gould-Wessen at(253) 856-5441. CA\GGW1pm P:\Planning\Docketing\2Q05\LUPB hearing-102405.doc Enc: Attachment A—2005 Annuall Docket Report cc: Fred N.Satterstrom,AICP,Community Development Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Mgr. Gloria Gould-Wessen,AICPs GIs Coordinator/Planner William D.Osbome,Planned Project File LUPB Public Hearing October 24,2005 Annual Docket Report Page 2 of 2 N , ca U M v U cov E V M "m � � � o � � � O � c� � � c� ❑ C O O � c> rig CR u U c>i U c>i U 3 Q U m U o � Y u (V N wd .� 'YN •� N O 'd CV aU+ +� W tb bl) O m �+ O c0 F. S: i« C O O t-- E q 06 w Q a� a> a� c Cn to w O .'" COd 'C v� O w Cn u ram+ U y , o U U y = "C 0 u o Y u d o � Y U •y O w o W Cd a w A o o > o rA o 'y W o CA � W Y a> W cn ca c cn O 0 " CA fl U r O c N oC13 ca N ice+ ¢, O ��d W > .7n O LYi W V] U N cC N F'" f"'� � U d Or L1• U d d U 0 bA Y hI cz {,y �.y O 3•a i•w U �� �+ u Cz Y ��y ,r,i 4-4 U dz .r.wl rl y LZ 0 o y N U Y ti •� � O Y Q � Q .� 1••`I d Y ^ Q y Y � r Y vo �N 03 � dv 30fir: u �w cc �Con 00 O 0 00 u � i� °,�' � o b^' C p 4H 'v�' 00 > w u at cz f� �: z F SwF wQU Qd � o Q .oQ o ry. 4 - as o vN ^ c vM o kA o 'n o o o °' oMd oNQ oNQ mod ooQ o � Na' AMC- x � 0.a x � P•, x � w Qw o' U QboU Qa, U Q4 U Qo U 0 co aU E 7 E U a� R CU bU ca ° m y U U U cd U U cd U U U � O O Y Y � rq ccr ^ a� Z Chi c O cc EU � Ln U E, c U v � d �c � N a `v P' a Fil � U �� � � � 0 � � 3 OU � � N E � •., � ~ O O d ~ v o Zn Y ° °i•y a) s. a ccd U Y ir. •� v, y .� Q� •ti vl v, V Ny v aoi cd En N cd .ro C ? k, cad bA E .� U Q W 'm � U Q " W rA rsy Y FBI !� •.� M a '7•"y 3 Q•I U •�! US", m � ly � Q WUQ E .E NW c' rn O cc O i O U ci cd aa) cd 1) i uj ° v� v°� U ca 5555 f� � Y (U y U y bA ca a)0 � g u U v caa > xcda � U � a � rx L Q dQca dd W I'D u v; kn zzo n �jjo n O v, `n O O ON O CD N o a Z cv drq d d " oM A. a x a, x (� o U L� o, U 000c`i Qoo4cv U U � O U E � � N U � chi U � y � O � .x ccd °y' o O ca ro E oCd 0 to En ct o N G � a� C � x y, 3 U t a V� o N C Cd QQv5w O (74 i Y � � ^ U � a Q00 :m � :1#2 . I This page intentionally left blank. 33 Planning:Services Location:400 W.Gowe•Mail to:220 4th Avenue South•Kent;WA 96632 5895 \ � Permit Center(253)856-5302<FAX:(253)856-6412 N-r www.cI.kenLwa.us1permltcenter KE WASMIRGICH PLANNING SERVICES Zoning/Development Code . Amendment Docket Please print in black ink only. �EYi�E �'CC /5,0�.�oU Application Name: 1VA02V—Cd A0-,efK1A04 LUT✓i Docket ff: . OFME USE ONLY r - us! ONLY get'.,uic.o( .�� 2 3/ We�-`4 7 OFFlC! guC �36fiJ.+1�---- Applicant: Name: CLtLf; Daytime Phone: Mailing Address: _ Fax Number: City/State/Zip: Signature:Professional License No: E-mail: f Agent/Consultant/Attorney: (mandatory if primary contact is different from applicant) Name: Daytime Phone: Mailing Address: Fax Number: City/State/Zip: E-mail: Suggested zoning/development code amendment language.This can be either conceptual or specific amendatory language.Please be as clear and concise as possible so that your proposal can be adequately evaluated. If specific wording changes are proposed, reference the specific code section and show changes in strikeout/underline format.Attach additional pages as needed. i l. Support for the suggested zoning/development code amendment.Explain the specific reason for the request.Describe how the amendment is consistent with the intent of the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan and reference the specific supporting goals and policies.Include any data, research,or reasoning that supports the suggested amendment.Attach additional pages as needed. TX * PSD4098 * GHI-I TSIMM. psd4098 10/I3/03 p.I oft 15.08.100 -a -3 CI Kent Ci ode structurally altered or changed,nor may any major made except such as are required by law or ordi- nonconforming building, structure, or lot be occu- nance or authorized by the planning manager. pied after discontinuance of change in use, unless 4. Planning manager's authority. The plan- the structure, use, and associated grounds and ning manager may waive specific development development are brought into compliance with use standard requirements or impose additional and minimum development istandards of the dis- requirements when all the following criteria are trict in which such structures is located, except as met: follows: a. When owing to special circumstances a a. Any major nonconforming structure literal enforcement of the provisions of this title or damaged by fire, flood, explosion, wind, earth- other land use regulatory ordinances of the city will quake, war, riot, or other natural disaster, may be result in unnecessary hardship. restored, reconstructed, and used as before; pro- b. When the waiver of development vided, that the work be vested by permit applica- requirements is in harmony with the purpose and tion within one (1) year of such happening; any intent of city ordinances and the comprehensive restoration or reconstruction not vested by permit plan. application within twelve (1:2) months from the c. When the proposed use, building, and date of the fire or other casualty shall be deemed development will function without adverse impact abandoned and not allowed to be restored. upon adjacent property,development in the area or b. Such repairs and maintenance work as the city as a whole. required to keep the structure in sound condition d. When a conditional use permit is not may be made to a major nonconforming structure, required. provided no such structural!alterations shall be E. Nonconforming lots. made except such as are required by law or ordi- 1. Applicability of restrictions. Regulations nance or authorized by the planning manager. applicable to nonconforming lots are in addition to 3. Minor nonconforming buildings and strut- the regulations applicable to nonconforming uses, tures. No minor nonconforming structure may be structures, and signs, and, in the event of conflict, expanded, enlarged, extended, reconstructed or the most restrictive provisions shall apply. otherwise structurally altered or changed,nor may 2. Nonconforming lots of record. any minor nonconforming building, structure, or a. Residential districts. lot be occupied after discontinuance or change in (1) In any district in which single-family use, unless the structure and;associated grounds dwellings are permitted, a single-family dwelling and development are brought into compliance with and customary accessory buildings may be erected the minimum development standards of the district on any single lot of record , ,pot- in which such structure is located, except as fol- withstanding limitations �mposed by.other'provi- lows: sions of this title. paste- a. Any minor nonconforming structure wn *us_- ntagrVith damaged by fire, flood, explosion, wind, earth- odwHeft in-thP same-ownershipr-fhis provision quake, war, riot, or other natural disaster, may be shall apply even though such lot fails to meet the restored, reconstructed and used as before; pro- requirements for area or width that are generally vided, that the work be vested by permit applica- applicable in the district; provided, that yard tion be completed within one (1) year of such dimensions and requirements other than those happening; any restoration or reconstruction applying to area or width of the lot shall conform vested by permit application twelve (12) months to the regulations for the district in which such lot from the date of the fire or other casualty shall be is located. deemed abandoned and not allowed to be restored. zomng districts, b. Such repairs and maintenance work as with-the-excepfro of the SR-_ zomng rs ict, if required to keep the structure in sound condition two (2) or more lots or combination''-s7o ots anJ may be made to a minor nonconforming structure, portions.of,lots with continumis"fldffige ms gle provided no such structural alterations shall be ownership are of record pridr-to June-20;••I973-,-a-nr if all or part,of the Iots,do not"nee of i�i'mm m (Revised 11/03) 15-108 35 Kent City Code 15.08.110 requirements established for lot width and area,the owaership-and-MT-61 continuous frontage wr . jand ve shalt be considered to be an undo cF4ets m the s e ownership poor io une , vided parcel for.the purpose&of this title, andaso- 11 , nd if all or part of the lots do not meet the portion of the parcel shall be used or sold in a man- minimum requirements established for lot width ner which-diminigMs comp+ance and area, the land involved shall be considered to and area requirements established by this title,nod be an undivided parcel for the purposes of this title, shall any rvrsron o any pareel�be made which cre- and no portion of the parcel shall be used or sold in ales a lot with width or awaliP1n,,.th is wiements a manner which diminishes compliance with lot stated i_n-tltis.title- width and area requirements established by this (3} in-the-SR.S-zoning trict if two(2) title, nor shall any division of any parcel be made or more single-family zoned Lq(s.or cdi ibinatio�n o which creates a lot with width or area below the lots and port ioi!s oP'tSt`s with continuous frontage requirements stated in this title. 1el �p�t. d prior to June 20, F. Nonconforming signs. in sir3 a ownershi eaof.>:ecoz. p .f g 8 1973;gnd if eU or part of the lots o not meet the 1. Applicability of restrictions. Regulations following minimum require7iients established for applicable to nonconforming signs are in addition lot width,.,.lot-,stba, and topography, the land to regulations applicable to nonconforming uses, involved"shall be considered<to•be-am•un vided structures,and lots,and in the event of conflict the parcel,for the purposes of this title, and5lbortion most restrictive provisions shall apply. of the parcel-shall be used or sold in a manner 2. Continuation of nonconforming signs. whicb.Ziminishes"d'ornpfi�-avith'lot width and a. Signs that were legally existing as of the area requirements estailished this title,nor shall effective date of this title or subsequent amend- any divi� iir n f aimjx8r'�d�which creates a ments thereto that do not conform to the regula- lot with�.,Willt�or--area..below rthe`requirements tions of this title shall be considered stated in this title. - nonconforming signs. Nonconforming signs may • (a) .Miniifi'ui%r-la area: Four thousand not be moved,relocated, altered,or added to with- six hundred(4,600) square feet. out receiving approval from the planning services �,_(b) igimuti51otwi y(40)feet. office. o Miaxir>S - -cite sloe Fifteen 15 b. No sign permit shall be issued to allow _. .petrrerit. legal signs on property having an illegal or noncon- CZ )4�-In any district in which duplex dwell- forming sign until such time as the nonconforming ings are permitted, a duplex dwelling and custom- or illegal sign is modified to conform to this title. ary accessory buildings may be erected on any 3. Amortization period. single lot of record as of June 20, 1973,with a min- a. Abandoned signs.Abandoned signs must imum area of seven thousand two hundred(7,200) be removed within ninety(90)days. square feet, notwithstanding limitations imposed b. Number and type of signs. The number by other provisions of this title. c•�^h. :y t+bcin and type of allowable signs for each occupancy s ge{ must conform to the regulations of this title. 1Mi�1' n}hr 10 c in thr ca P � -- i�This provi- (Ord. No. 2905, § 1,2-20-90; Ord. No. 3122, § 1, sion shall apply even though such lot fails to meet 6-15-93; Ord. No. 3409, § 50, 7-7-98; Ord. No. the requirements for area or width that are gener- 3439, § 7, 2-2-99; Ord. No. 3521, § 2, 8-15-00; ally applicable in the district; provided, that yard Ord.No.3600,§ 5,5-7-02;Ord.No.3665,§ 1, 10- dimensions and requirements other than those 7-03) applying to area or width of the lot shall conform to the regulations for the district in which such lot 15.08.110 Reduction of lot area. is located. - No land may be so reduced in area that it would b. Other districts.In any other district,per- be in violation of minimum lot size, yard provi- mitted building and structures may be constructed sion, lot coverage,off-street parking or any other . on a nonconforming lot of record, provided site requirements of the zoning district or use. coverage,yard,landscaping,and off-street parking requirements are met.Such lots must-be hTuplar'ate- 15-109 (Revised 11/03) �6 This page intentionally left blank. i I I I 37 C E I V E D x - ` Planning:Services Location. 400 W. Gowe Mail to: 220 4th Avenue South• Kent,WA98032 58955 • 3 1 1�5 Permit Center(253)856-5302 FAX:(253) 856-6412 • www.cl.kent.wa.us/permltcenter PLANNING SFOW CeIra Comprehensive Plan Text and Zoning/Development Code Please print in black ink only. Amendment Docket ,j// " Ch}P/TAL /�77E� Application Name:. '/!3 Docket#: OFFIC... .nui v �� OFFIC SE ONLY Date Application Received: I Received by: �Il� h -- Applicant: Name: KgWr FIDE DtPA12.T UST Daytime Phone: 2,h3 35 2& 440D Mailing Address: 400 wresir L-pAc Sre-EET Fax Number: M M' (o4 ) City/State/Zip: V63-r W gB0?,2 Signature: Professional License No: E-mail: 16t2E( Q.Tfu��f(p 6, Wit .'K L Agent/Consultant/Attorney: (mandatory if primary contact is different from applicant) Name: 600 QPCV►LX, - 1-�)tJ 1 V Ot,3 ,*I ey—� Daytime Phone: 21�9 3$SO 41400 Mailing Address: 40D VtJE'N- 5T12ELT Fax Number: 253 &RO (oqffl _. City/State/Zip: t OJr QJA 9&)?S2 E-mail: 6,l imt 0a,Us Signature Suggested comprehensive plan text or zoning/development code amendment language.This can be either conceptual or specific amendatory language. Please be as clear and concise as possible so that your proposal can be adequately evaluated. If specific wording changes are proposed, reference the spe- cific comprehensive plan or code section and show changes in strikeout/underline format. Attach additional pages as needed. 7r>g-r- Ptrtc 1`>e j7AETNr:A)T- ,y�-cLe6z I I Tfxr cHpWoC5 JN -TAiC C49A-j M. e6LIL►T/ice O_el-lajr, (kr,)o ome E%LFF it3 WTAElct,) e-Le'1I0-aT' Pa•�Ib APPOUlX 6. �SM agh A17S A� K 6e- SUK-esrEO -I-EX-r LltT-r-�bEs TIE EX 0761 iS CcQr N TN& Cc-cf, 9TZlonX 1 tJ klzpdF� Support for the suggested comprehensive plan text or zoning/development code amendment. Explain the specific reason for the request. If a zoning/development code amendment, describe how it is consistent with the intent of the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan and reference the specific supporting goals and policies. If a comprehensive plan text amendment, describe how it addresses the interests and changed needs of the entire city as identified in the City's long-range planning and policy documents, in- cluding, but not limited to, the Comprehensive Plan. Include any data, research, or reasoning that supports the suggested amendment. Attach additional pages as needed. MP" CF -ram Sv(,C�jN ITS LA S PmE VL-v-- L55PI t6 PU Off, Tvie- �_ )(T t-tpgt, 2M :P SEC- j5xf 7AJ T A T-16 k` _ rESTep 04+AAY_2i9S GH M cdp12888_sd4098DRAFr•V24105 p.I of 3 3�8 III Exhibit A Kent Fire Department Comprehensive Plan Amendments Capital Facilities Element - Fire & Life Safety Services Section I Item #1 Proposed text changes - Page 8-9; Paragraph 2 I The City of Kent Fire Department is responsible for delivering fire protection and emergency medical services to the City, and to the geographic area within King County Fire District#37 that includes the City of Covington. Fire Suppression &Emergency Medical Response units provide the most directly recognizable services to homes and businesses in Kent and other service area jurisdictions. Other fire districts adjacent to Kent may provide response assistance as requested, The Emergency Management Office and Fire Prevention Office carry out several objectives, including assessment and reduction of potential fire and life hazard risks through educational outreach programs and development plan inspections throughout the City. The Kent Fire Departmient is has received accreditation offered jointly by the International Association of Fire Chiefs (LkFC), the Commission on Fire Accreditation International (CFAI), and the International Cities/Counties Management Association(ICMA). Reason for request In 2004, the Kent Fire Department received accreditation. The department became the fourth accredited department In the State of Washington. Item #2 Proposed text change t Page 8-10; Paragraph 1 The City owns six (6) fire stations: Station 71 (in the southern portion of Downtown Kent); Station 72 (Lake Meridian area); Station 73 (West Hill); Station 74 (East Hill); Station 75 (east, near Covington); and Station 76 (north, in the industrial area). A seventh station is located in Fire District#37 and is owned by the Fire District. Each station is equipped with at least one fire engine or ladder truck that carries emergency medical supplies and equipment. Each station is staffed with a minimum of three(3)personnel 24 hours per day, 365 days per year. Each station has future capacity for additional staffing. The Fire Depat4ment Legisties Building is pmsent!5 used 1V3 equipment ate-age, e and might lie_eenye-led in the Future for- as e Poliee Depaft.,ea Fire District#37's Capital Facilities Plan identifieg 2 future stations that will serve the city. Station 78,which will open in January 2008, will be 1!4ated in the City of Covington and will serve the eastside of the City of Kent. There is also a prpposed station serving the North Benson/Panther Lake neighborhood, The North Benson/Pantber Lake station will be inside the potential annexation area for the City Page 1 of 7 39 of Kent. The Fire District is currently collecting level of service fees for the future construction and purchase of land for these proiects In addition Stations 75 & 76 have a King County Medic One paramedic unit housed in the station Each unit is staffed with 2 personnel. These units are part of the county-wide Advance Life Support (ALS) system. Table 8.4 lists each station, location, number and type of units in service, total station capacity, and minimum staffing. Figure 8.2 illustrates locations of fire and life safety services and facilities. Figure 8.2 illustrates locations of fire and life safety services and facilities. Reason for request • The first proposed change is needed to fix a discrepancy between the paragraph and Table 8.4. The department does not staff afire engine at all stations. • The second change is needed to identify Fire District #37 capital facilities that will serve the citizens of Kent. • The third change is needed to add new language to identify King County Medic One units that are housed in selected Kent rre stations. These units fill an important role in the delivery of Emergency Medical Services in the form of Advanced Life Support to our citizens. King County Medic One has housed units in our fire stations for over 10 years. Item#3 Proposed text change— Page 8-10; Paragraph 2 All f the tmi s is t d :n Table 8.4. A with the a °.tier o f the Fire DepaAfne,.t T e is4i s Building, Reason for request Fire District #37 sold the Fire Department Logistics building in the spring of 2005. The reference is no longer needed. The reference to the Performance measures has been moved to the third paragraph on page 8-10. See proposed text change below. Item#4 Proposed text change—Page 8-10; Paragraph 3 r ne : et meeting the standard it should he noted again the4 the Kent Fi Department, Op'yes-Fire Di itn:ct 37, which iioz¢a co aninva igratea King cavunty,�, Covington-, Maple Valley and Blaek Diamend.Current data collection for the Level-of-Service indicates that the Fire Department is not meeting the standard. The Kent Fire Department is refining its data collection and analysis support functions in order to identify areas in need of capital and • operating improvements. Such improvements would be pursued to Page 2of7 4 tines meet the established levels-of-service. Performance measures for fire and life safety LOS standards are found in Table 8.5. Reason for request • The f rst change was needed to update the current data findings that have been collected � for the LOS. • The definition of the area served was removed. The definition can be found in the opening paragraph on page 8-9. Item#5 Proposed text Change Page 8-11; Figure 8.2 See Exhibit B for changes of page 8-11; Figure 8.2. Reason for request Fire District #37 sold tho Fire Department Logistics Building which housed Support Services. Support Services is currently housed inside Station #77. Station 71 located at 504 West Crow Street and is mislabeled as Station #76. Item#6 Proposed text change-Page 8-13; Table 8.4 Minimum Facility Name Location Unit in Service Capacity Staffing Engine 71 and 5 —(3)Engine; Station 71 504 West Crow Street Aid 71 3-4 Ba s 2 Aid Station 72 25620 - 140` Avenue SE Engine 72 3 Bays 3—Engine Station 73 26512 Fqilitary Road S Engine 73 3 Bays 3 —Engine Ladder 74; Aid 6 —(3) Ladder; 74; and (2) Aid; (1) Station 74 24611 r 116a'Avenue SE Battalion Chief 3 Bays Battalion Chief Engine 75 Station 75 15635 —SE 272"d St KC Medic 11* 3 Bays 3 —Engine Engine 76 Station 76 20676 72 Avenue Avenue S KC Medic 7* 3 Bays 3 —Engine Station 77 20717 132" Avenue SE Engine 77 3 Bays 3 —Engine moire DepaFtfnt Legisfies 71l�nrrvw- i3�pdzitc-i:ucvc lone None Station 78 Corner iof 180 Avenue SE Pro sed 3 Bays Operational Page 3 of 7 41 and SE 256 Street —Engine 1/1/08 . North Benson/Panther In area of 108`s Avenue SE Lake Area and SE 210' Street * , ,.ate ** Existing use with pewafial eenversion to Peliee substation seFving Panthei-- Lake Potential Annexation Area-. Reason for request ' • The actual capacity of Station 71 is 4 bays instead of 3. • Medic 7 and 11 are added to the table to identify the in-service units provided by King County Medic One. See proposed text change Item #2 above. • Fire Department Logistics Building is removed because of its sale in 2005. See proposed text change Item #2 above. • The addition of the 2 future Fire District #37 station locations identified in proposed text change Item #2 above. • Ladder truck footnote is removed, unknown what it referenced. • Reference to Police Substation is removed. Logistics building has been sold. Item#7 Proposed text change-Page 8-13; Table 8.5 Call Type Performance Measure LOS Standard Stfueiur-al Fires A yeFage espeaseti nes 13 to 15 firefighters .. seene within 10 minutes ..T1 cor-nnoi a feyent,. c to 6 first ithin n ffi.iflutes Gem fie° -6�-9ven£S Structure Fires -all Reslonse Time by First due apparatus with a percentage(fractile) minimum of 3 firefi ters will arrive on scene within 7 minutes of initial dispatch on 80%of incidents. Structure Fires—Single Response Time by Effective Response Force of family residential and percentage (fractile) 16 firefiaters will arrive on standard commercial scene within 10 minutes of • initial dispatch on 80% of incidents. Page 4of7 42 Structure Fires— Response Time b Effective Response Force of Commercial target hazards percentage (fractile) 18 firefighters will arrive on scene within 10 minutes of initial dispatch on 80%of incidents. Structure Fires—high risk Response Time by Effective Response Force of target hazards percentag (fractile) 21 firefighters will arrive on scene within 10 minutes of initial dispatch on 80%of incidents. Advanced Life Support Response Time by Effective Response Force of (life threatening) percentage (fractile) 5 to 6 firefighters will arrive on scene within 10 minutes of initial dispatch on 80%of incidents. Reason for request • The existing level+of--service has been removed and replaced by the level-of-service established through the accreditation process. Through the Standards of Cover analysis, it was determined; that a different LOS was needed to better reflect current operational needs and service delivery of the department. This LOS system measures the first arriving unit and the arrival of an Effective Response Force. The Effective Response Force is the rest of the responders needed to complete the tasks needed to mitigate the problem. The new LOS ensures that early response is achieved with the accompanying compliment of responders to follow. • The measurement;has changed from the "Average response time"to the "Response time percentage". TheCommission on Fire Accreditation International(CFAI) uses the Response time percentage instead of the average response time for performance measurement. Item 48 Proposed text change— Page 8-38; Fire and Life Safety Services Goals & Policies/Goal CF- 14 Goal CF-14: Provide effective,efficient, equitable and professional fire suppression and emergency medical response services throughout the City of Kent Fire Department service area. Reason for request Page 5 of 7 I 43 Services that are provided should be equitable across the city. Equality needs to be our goal when setting policy for the identification of Capital facilities and planning for the future. All areas of the city should receive similar service by the Kent Fire Department. Item#9 Proposed text change—Page 8-38; Fire and Life Safety Services Goals & Policies/Policy CF-14.1 Policy CF-14.1: Consider the response time percentage as the primary level-of-service measure in assessing needs for fire suppression and emergency response service improvements. Reason for request The Commission on Fire Accreditation International(CFAI) uses the Response time percentage instead of the average response time for performance measurement. Item#10 Proposed text change—Page 8-38; Fire and Life Safety Services Goals & Policies/Policy CF-14.2 Policy CF-14.2:Maintain or improve the level-of- service to emergency calls,where fire or other community safety hazards are reported to exist. Reason for request CF-14.1 established the measurement used by the Level-of-Service. It was felt that the text change better reflected the intent of the policy and keeps the focus on the LOS. Item#11 Proposed text change—Page 8-38; Fire and Life Safety Services Goals & Policies/Policy CF-14.3 Policy CF-14.3:Maintain or improve the level-of- service to personal emergency medical calls, where no immediate danger exists to the community-at-large. Reason for request CF-14.1 established the measurement used by the Level-of-Service. It was felt that the text change better reflected the intent of the policy and keeps the focus on the LOS. Page 6 of 7 44 Appendix A —Background and Analysis Item#12 Proposed text change I Page A4; Capital Facilities Element City of Kent Fire Department Standards of Coverage(2003) Reason for request The City of Kent Fire Department Standards of Coverage (2003) was the document created through the accreditation process. The document was the key to the development of the Level-of- Service through complex analysis of response data, tasks performed on-scene and station coverage. The Standards of Coverage will be incorporated into the department's Strategic Plan next year. It is an important document in the departments planning process. Transportation Elefent Item#13 Proposed text change-'Page 941; Street System Goals and Policies/ Policy TR-2.2 Policy TR-2.2: Coordinate implementation of street construction standards for each functional classification with policies in the Transportation Element to provide attractive, safe facilities that complement the adjacent land use.. and emergency response and operation. i Reason for request Through the accreditation process, the department identified that the speed and placement of response vehicles were crucial elements in maintaining or improving the department's LOS. Many elements of street construction can have a positive or negative effect on our response to emergencies. The emergency response and subsequent operation in the roadway should be considered when implementing the street construction standards. This need is to ensure our LOS is maintained. Page 7 of 7 LU y P S I o- 964 ►— O U s ti w = H W O W Fa- £g N zcA a� a •Z; 00 �+ Z z Ood bill �+ O ti C � O Q � A � I•�� � �. LL C-- H Z �_ T-W W w a 'S U 15 a Gr, U � - .�• Jewp.Bp.Ww(.V iDwN.LC l�Vlcrpp 4aPNwV uulsea:3LON 353nV it ,� lJ ,••'• ��L ': i_�•' 3S 3AY tr i,, • L --yLy- l ` i �1 3S'3�'40f1�'T�—� ,.rL•, "-ICI -� " ift,�J;-- ' 1� ' 1lhr�- IE �+1--\•:. ' ' ! �T-�� III `ri. ,/�. I,- r II y , AV 01U, 1 7 l j 7 :I a I�I T 38 3A"t L �! _`y�. I uT" '}i 4 F, -r— i _13s3nrct - 3S 3nY DOII F ...T;�_ 1 I I O8 `^ "'\ �t'I:L17 of tLt -•_'1YLivT- �I. 35 3ntl BOl ' T-I'L_ .. ...I I 5 3nY Ml�l� ov ��_ Y L�:'�=`'�_f •� I jZr_'ITi,�_' I I //�i r��.•..........1..- s-+--/..�.'je�' •';�.:,.. I j.1 �yopp d5'�J,i- 4t'• \ fF'�. �y i ��jyI TI - c --�/- •'i .('I.. ; /• 11._] LI_: \I Mi66ilp f�- . 1�-1I r� I� � I- 1 -+�T1����I II{I1uI- •' � L••it••'••• I—I as MIPA 3 T ILTTz1 -`:JeN 11-- { b� I _ L� PawPeU N� `� •. AM �IIOA M I `� AMj r(DIID . jY B ...w..•..........� -fF7I _`� n........ .{DIIDAM 1 _ -I rtf$ggg� "__�JJfr""�"IIICCJJ t Iv F9 j �5�•�' , � —; .........: �i 3AVSS h=' �n !i �'�•. I I I ���a�ca....� .:i _i- o ,) .. _ ., -ti ... . �•:II I /� C'-�� 1_- 6 This page intentionally( left blank. 47 Planning Services �1 C h litlB:bo W.Gowe •Mail to 220 4th.Avenue South •Kent,WA 98032-5895 Permit Center(253)856-5302 FAX: (253) 856-6412 . KENT S " 29IS www.ci.kent.wa.us/permitcenter WAS" "OTOM • PLANNING SERVICES CITY OF KEN7Comprehenslve Plan Text and iPJ.ANNING SERVICES Zoning/Development Code Please print in black ink only. Amendment Docket 4bior A,� P44 .3ozI.✓&4Ae o Application Name: Mr7f PML4 Docket#: OFFICE USE ONLY OFFICE USE 7LY Date Application Received: . 20Do s Received by: {�- Applicant: Name: 1-16A I/c-P-AliM — 4/11 a0oc T0901- } Daytime Phone:�Zl1b?q3l Mailing Address: /2Zdn soU'n+c�k�r/ ��✓� Fax Number: (2A6) 3 3 City/State/Zip: _rygl zLA_ uj? - 9Y/8�' Signature: Professional License No: �^ E-mail: ,PA4 AA4- L (0 ea' 'lk/c447a�GLIr<.vJ Agent/Consultant/Attorney: (mandatory If primary Contact is different from applicant) Name: ll",wt achr� - 3S c Daytime Phone: L " Sz/ / Mailing Address: C%/71*1 D-F rCE7V'? Fax Number: City/State/Zip: r E-mail: IL Signature Suggested comprehensive plan text or zoningidevelopment code amendment language.This can be either conceptual or specific amendatory language. Please be as clear and concise as possible so that your proposal can be adequately evaluated. If specific wording changes are proposed, reference the spe- cific comprehensive plan or code section and show changes in strikeout/underline format. Attach additional pages as needed. /� Awlvs vy f" alm, Ap -`'s r' - r/ �+l lu &dtk 44M dsrer9 t •TAw!%a.-. I.rrl( c,,� w,'fk KLAAk 04 •4 Le f�o Pik is P bA.rvdary Support for the suggested comprehensive plan text or zoning/development code amendment. Explain the specific reason for the request. If a zoning/development code amendment, describe how it is consistent with the intent of the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan and reference the specific supporting goals and policies. If a comprehensive plan text amendment, describe how it addresses the interests and changed needs of the entire city as identified in the City's long-range planning and policy documents, in- cluding, but not limited to, the Comprehensive Plan. Include any data, research, or reasoning that supports the suggested amendment. Attach additional pages as needed. !NGl vded i N is • G Sp I budN r. 45 Seer/ I'h A% / DDep l"'14er- •A 46 • 0Tyir3 PlCpQ1sL/ ctK edmf/C 4, ±"rf 7'Xe Z06 GHl-1 cdp12888�ad4098DRAFF•8/24/05 p.1 of 3 4�8 Anderson Charlene From: Lisa Verner[Iverner@ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 9:49 AM To: FSafterstrom@ci.kent.wa.us Cc: CAndierson@ci.kent.wa.us; GGould-Wessen@ci.kent.wa.us; Jack Pace; Steve Lancas Subject: RE: Kent's PAA Boundary with Tukwila at 204th Fred, Tukwila will make the PAA change through a Comp Plan amendment in the 2005 cycle. so, f both cities do it next Year, it will make sense to all (including the county). Thanks . Lisa I >>> "Satterstrom, Fred" xFSatterstrom@ci .kent.wa.us> 10/27/04 08:19AM Lisa. . . . we think your idea is a good one. It makes sense for the PAA boundary to follow the rold and not bisect a lot. Alome future point, probably next year when Kent entertains amendments to its comp plan, we'll propose one of our own and show a revised planning boundary that follows 204th Street from Orillia Road to Frager Road. Fred ---original Message-- From: Lisa Verner [mailt6:lverner@ci .tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Friday, October 22 2004 4:08 PM To: FSatterstrom@ci.kent.wa.us Cc: Steve Lancaster Subject: Kent's PAA Boundary with Tukwila at 204th Fred, AS part of the Segale annexation, I've been working with the Tukwila planners who are amending the Tukwila Comp Plan for the '04 deadline on Dec 1. I'm also working on a council resolution promising King county that Tukwila will begin annexation proceeding on the rest of the PAA after the Segale annexation is complete. we've noticed that both Tukwila's and Kent's PAA boundary is 204th, but it's a straight line where the road curves to the north just ;east of the Catholic cemetary and orillia Road. (STR SE03-22 04) So, the boundary doesn't follow the road and runs through parcel 0322049020. It's more logical for both Tukwila and Kent to change the PAA line so that it actually follows the road and doesn't bisect a lot. what do you think? Tukwila will go ahead aid do this on the comp Plan maps being worked on now, if at some point (next year's comp Plan amend cycle?) you will change Kent's PAA boundary line. I was in your office today (Friday) and spoke to Gloria Gould-wessen about this and we looked at maps. she agreed it seemed logical to change the line, and said she'd talk to Charlene Anderson; Gloria thought Charlene would talk with you about it too, for a decision. The resolution (promising; Kin gg county that Tukwila will annex the rest of it's PAA aft r the Segale annexation is •complete) is going to council on Monday 11/1. It will includ map. If at all possible, I'd like to know what you think about this before Wednesday at noon, so I can get the map that will go with the resolution changed to follow the road i that makes sense to you. call/email if questions. Thanks. Lisa Verner 206-431-3662 . 04 0 O N O T V w O X Y ♦w T m m a m v) c o (h oca y a E a a ° t L N O m C � 0 O v n — V cti Q � ` O .4, � p o x -- v L W °- � -----__-- a - 0 This page intentionally left blank. I 51 'y, 4s 2 Planning Services �@4QQ W. Gowe o Mail to: 220 4th Avenue South •Kent,WA 98032-5895 RE C� 1�1� L Permit Center(253)856-5302 FAX: (253)856-6412 KENT Sr www.ci.kent.wa.us/permitcenter W♦�NI.i6TOM 41 5 ". 1 lomprehensive . PLANNING SERVICES CITY OF Plan Text and PLANNING SERVICES Zoning/Development Code Please print in black ink only. Amendment Docket /�tUvy7- ,�TciTy yc�irs Application Name: 4i.0Tl4i 'f2 Ad 2! 5_e Ca_7 ocket#: OFFXWZ - OFFICE USE�ON}Y Date Application Received: f 5 Received by: .tom/ Applicant: Name: 1A1,KE AAG F _ C'/7't7 a F b7-TAB Daytime Phone: 6T 4) 4 d'j o Mailing Address: 'A84a .soy A. la? ' S T Fax Number: City/State/Zip: 5e-54-f� U)?t 9 k/ Y or Signature: Professional License No: / E-mail: r114&&ojZj (i� l i• V-A*c- -UAt. l..o- Agent/Conssu��ltant/Aftorney: (mandatory if prim ry contact is different from applicant) _ Name: csl�• 1,4 ��- Sc Daytime Phone: Mailing Address: G[T'r r/F' xEa/T Fax Number: -� City/State/Zip: E-mail: �— r Signature ni.. Suggested comprehensive plan text or zoning/development code amendment language.This can be either conceptual or specific amendatory language. Please be as clear and concise as possible so that your proposal can be adequately evaluated. If specific wording changes are proposed, reference the spe- cific comprehensive plan or code section and show changes in strikeout/underline format, Attach additional pages as needed. FJe�7•c` ,la.- .vOre wY ca/+lhll K °�-. dk � P' Za wlu' errbe� , w Aekvc"-f ou tt. wesfw,v iA 42_1! a S. brfkat Neik,- ,,j �f 14 IJK" MSe* J .�F D iL. ���y. 116c1+wn% &M kAg, Z1 VAW_e IlrcyRQol�f'l»/I% LAr i94o. �ccon�.l�,�y f+ r�.l rd'filA�h ,NQ�O A/W IO'21-`Y.foie� drl�t�T A 21LV5 'fd huy- ftt,bmig" ;N It,, M�.raotk 42�j�fIC 5, &1&x5 q dy�( 51m" ef4Z, ,A1c5wkt. c_ f4..J- u,a3 ,roAJQ 10j) c �94, de"s,4 cR11 A;utll,aFfGs Support for the suggested comprehensive plan text or zoning/development code amendment. Explain the speck reason for the request. If a zoning/development code amendment, describe how it is consistent with the intent of the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan and reference the specific supporting goals and policies. If a comprehensive plan text amendment, describe how it addresses the interests and changed needs of the entire city as identified in the City's long-range planning and policy documents, in- cluding, but not limited to, the Comprehensive Plan. Include any data, research, or reasoning that supports the suggested amendment. Attach additional pages as needed. GHM cdp12888_psd4O98DRAFr•W4/05 p.1 or 3 2 i f I i �} ct(Yt'lbwY 1 u (~,t ♦f r" iq�2..c(a.( tt lco-me.x ULc e")Le_ WUM o-P QZ—(A-t 51 ncfi, �� #�o„f is set F uTeLa(d( weep( +v c"Je i?, f1w- emccss o;� ah►r¢ "Ot-, T1.e a wcs� ti-n +ruv�Tr of 42"'S�'5 be 53 Anderson, Charlene From: Anderson, Charlene Mont: Tuesday,November 16, 2004 11:57 AM 1W o: McCaughan,Jerry Subject: FW: 42nd Avenue South boundary modification Jerry: Have we followed up on this? --ori inal Message----- From: Anderson, Charlene Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 11:08 AM To: McCaughan, Jerry subject: Fw: 42nd Avenue South boundary modification Jerry: How do we now annex the rest of 42nd? (I remember talking to you about this issue as it related to some project we were working on, but I can t remember the project. . .can you???) --original Message----- From: Mike scarey [mail to:mscarey@ci .seatac.wa.us] Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 10:23 AM To: cAnderson@ci .kent.wa.us Cc: Dale Schroeder; Steve Butler Subject: RE: 42nd Avenue South boundary modification Charlene: The city of seaTac's boundaries were originally established by King County Ordinance �820, which described the city limits (in relevant part) as extending to the western argin of 42nd Avenue south between the north margin of S. 216th street and the northwesterly margin of orillia Road South. The city has not changed its boundaries in that particular area since incorporation in 1990. According to the King County Assessor's quarter section map NW 10-22-04, the City of Kent appears to have established its boundary in the middle of 42nd Avenue South. Along a small stretch of 42nd Avenue South where Kent was granted, by three separate quit claim deeds, the full width of the road, the quarter section map still shows Kent's boundary in the middle of 42nd Avenue S. it appears that the City of Kent intended to annex the entire width of 42nd Avenue south but did .not. If that is So, Kent would need to complete the process of annexation, in any case, the city of seaTac's city limits do not extend beyond the western margin of 42nd Avenue South between S. 216th street and S. 212th street. Please let me know if you have any further questions, or need copies of any documentation. Michael Scarey, AICP Senior Planner City of SeaTac Planning Dept. 4800 south 188th St. SeaTac, wA 98188 Phone: (206) 973-4830 email : mscarey@ci .seatac.wa.us � > "Anderson, Charlene" <CAnderson@ci .kent.wa.us> 07/06/04 04:12PM >>> teve: Did you guys ever find out anythin on this??? -----original Messa a----- From: Steve Butler mailto:sbutler@ci .seatac.wa.us] 1 4 Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 1:39 PM To: CAnderson@ci .kent.wa.us cc: Mike scarey Subject: Re: 42nd Avenue South boundary modification Charlene - Mike and i will do some checking into this matter. Steve >>> "Anderson, Charlene <CAnderson@ci .kent.wa.us> 05/21/04 09:36AM >>> Steve: in March of 2000 the City of Kent passed ordinance No. 3506 modifying the boundaries b 42nd Avenue south to remove King county's jurisdiction and thereby include the full wi t of 42nd Avenue south within the boundaries of the city of Kent. The particular concer , as i understand it, related to the time of incorporation and establishment of the city limits of Sea-Tac when the legal description of Kent's McCann Annexation and your established boundaries did not meet in the vicinity of 42nd Avenue south, north of Sou h 216th street and south of South 212th Street, leaving a half-street segment of 42nd Avenue South still within the jurisdiction of King County. it was Kent's intent to fu 1 include the full width of 42nd Avenue south within our boundaries. Do you know if sea a ever took any action (or needed to, if it was discussed) to take care of this issue fr m your end? z 55 164 1�"f 4Y1 f} l S'h'`}'�.4'e �.4Y ' "" •Fh.: 'ty( Lvw 0Planning �Services gI C_r�rd ' °0 W: Gowe•MP e98032-5895 mit Center(253)8 6�02 uth KFAx 1(53)856-6412 www.ci.kent.wa.us/permitcenter KEN Tp 1 WASHINGTON • PLANNING SERVICES cffy o lam. Comprehensive Plan Text and Zoning/Development Code Please Print in black ink only. Amendment Docket ,e�isE ,4)01r191,f i9ay77&- Application Name:�U W- — 70-B(.0 S 4a Docket#: OFFICE USE ONLY r- OFFICE USE O Y � Date Application Received: , 240 Received by: ,' �( Applicant: Name: Ct-L.f oP 146W-FAuu'13ES tAh,9&&6_WWNr Daytime Phone: (Z53)85&-5080 Mailing Address: Z?S) Fax Number: Srib —(0080 City/State/Zip: K_4acr- VVA 98032 Signature: Professional License No: E-mail: Agent/Consultant/Attorney: (mandatory if primary contact is different from applicant) Name: ClAAKwe Llwwcel/ Daytime Phone: Sk*W off. ASorE Mailing Address: .Slt 4&v AS �amw Fax Number: *twW As AtserW. City/State/Zip: sm&ma AS ASoyc E-mail: Signature Suggested comprehensive plan text or zoning/development code amendment language.This can be either conceptual or specific amendatory language. Please be as clear and concise as possible so that your proposal can be adequately evaluated. If specific wording changes are proposed, reference the spe- cific comprehensive plan or code section and show changes in strikeout/underline format. Attach additional pages as needed. -See-See f4'CTl1GHmErt'f aF PhLEG f ovv% K=-W Lonmf9c lw,ctl/e 19 Support for the suggested comprehensive plan text or zoning/development code amendment. Explain the specific reason for the request. If a zoning/development code amendment, describe how it is consistent with-the intent of the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan and reference the specific supporting goals and policies. If a comprehensive plan text amendment, describe how it addresses the interests and changed needs of the entire city as identified in the City's long-range planning and policy documents, in- cluding, but not limited to, the Comprehensive Plan. Include any data, research, or reasoning that supports the suggested amendment. Attach additional pages as needed. C,otr2,rtEGlta�.t af- CAPF�GIzv fi4v�Z {a+2 Cl'ZN Fr�clt.l-n�s As Awyc , dF CeW(,JN<AL C T W- 16,C, Sr SP/tt:E 41/ti %r C494&kSM%*4O IMyNIc%PA(, _�.-r GuI W i,44 WAS t bTCC >SLtLIHTL!,/ AgIJIWt T),V l AL-r L4 LA'PAGt-rd/_ GHI-1 cdp12888_psd4098DRAFT•8l14105 p.1 of 3 6 CAPITAL FACHJIZ�S ELEMENT ` CHAPTER EIGHT unit and capacity for three, and Station 77 (Kentridge), with one fire/aid unit in service and capacity for two. The geographic locations of the Fire and Emergency Services facilities are found on Figure 8.1. POLICEYM TRAINING CENTER The Police/Fire Training Center is located on East Hill at 24611 116th Avenue SE. The Center, housed in an 8,000 square foot building, provides audio and visual equipment and other facilities for in-service training for City of Kent police officers and fie fighters. Instruction is conducted by Kent Police and Fire Department personnel, and by nationally knoVvn instructors from organizations such as the International Association of Police Chiefs RW the State Fire Service. In addition to providing a facility for training city of Kent personnel, the training center also accommodates a satellite training program sponsored by the Washington State Criminal Justice Training commission. ti The geographic locations of the police/fire training facilities are found on Figure 8.1. CITY AD1V MSTRATIVE OFFICES - GENERAL GOVERNMENT The City of Kent Operations Department manages several facilities and buildings 3 necessary to the administrative and maintenance functions of the City. These include City Hall and the City Council Chambers, leased offices in the Centennial Center, the i Municipal Court facility, and City maintenance shops. The table below lists the name, location and capadity of each facility: Vkj NAME' ]LOCATION CAPACITY (Square Feet) 00 City Hall 220 4th Avenue South , Centennial Center 400 West Gimm 1&,46& 71l b OD (Leased) Municipal Court 302 West Gowe 0,51 (Leased) The geographic locations of the City administrative facilities are found on Figure 8.1. 8-8 KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN i CHAPTER EIGHT CAPITAL FACAMES ELEMENT 57 1 (12) The City Council formally adopts LOS as part of the CFP. - (13) Every year, as required by the Growth Management Act, department service providers reassess land use issues, level of service stardards, and projected revenues to determine what changes, if any are needed. CURRENT FACILITIES INVENTORIES CORRECTIONAL FACILITY The Kent Correction Center is managed by the Kent Police Department. The current inventory of the Correctional Facility totals 130 beds. The Center is located at 1201 ICentral in.the City. An intergovernmental contract with the Federal Marshall's Office currently allows the City to provide approximately 20 beds for Federal prisoners. The geographic location of the Correctional Facility is found on Figure 8.1. i• t FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES The Kent Fire Department is responsible for delivering fire protection and emergency medical services to the City, and to the geographic area within King County fire District #37.11ie City owns 4 fire stations: Station 71 (south); Station 73 (west); Station 74 (east); and Station 76 (north). Each station is equipped with one fire/aid unit which consists of a pumper truck with emergency medical service/rescue equipment and manpower, and each station has a future capacity for three units. The table below lists each station, fire/aid units in service, total capacity, and average response time: Name of Twe/Aid Units Total Capacity Laca�p�y Station in Service (Bays) Station 71 1 3 South Station 73 1 3 West Station 74 1* 3 East Station 76 1 3 orth *Ladder Truck King County Fire District#37 owns three f tations: 72 (Meri ' ), with two fine/aid units in service and capacity for ; Station 7 ( , with one fine/aid KENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 8-7 This page intentionally left blank. yy 59 J ': do ri,F.h �e. „Y.�„T : 'E? "� ♦ Y -'�' • ys^a N "Planning Services ., tjfiD ,4QQW, Gowe •Mail to:220 4th(Avenue South•Kent,WA 9)032-5895 �+ C ��/ JLl�'jLJ Permit Center 253 856-5302 FAX: 253 856-6412 KEN T www.ci.kent,wa.us/permhcenter w..","•,•. SEP _ i 2 PLANNING SERVICES CITY °comprehensive Plan Text and PIJ4NNI1 S,"OIIEg Zoning/Development Code Please print in black ink only. Amendment Docket Application Name: L*0YcC QaoAflT 0 Docket#: OFFICE USE ONLY OFFICE USE ONLY Date Application Received: SEl' - 6 Zed Received by: Applicant: Name: &�it�IrV Sr�l. S;,AFF-C- G� Daytime Phone�Z —S Mailing Address: Fax Number: City/State/Zip: Signature: J'al Professional License No: E-mail: Agent/Consultant/Attorney: (mandatory if primary contact is different from applicant) Name: Daytime Phone: Mailing Address: Fax Number: City/State/Zip: E-mail: Signature Suggested comprehensive plan text or zoning/development code amendment language.This can be either conceptual or specific amendatory language. Please be as clear and concise as possible so that your proposal can be adequately evaluated. If specific wording changes are proposed, reference the spe- cific comprehensive plan or code section and show changes in strikeout/underline format. Attach additional pages as needed. 1 AC S S S C c;tW c u ND /Jsc /3 OT Cori 14S 4401 L RP/ Lv- .Z R� a C17y Cd?/�JGlL'' JS "1�E7�T a r1 CdUnl7r1"' 1�EFiM7/dnl5 DF 11146USE ' ZayzT- & 7'3 N4Z44qA''6 Support for the suggested comprehenslve plan text or zoning/development code amendment. Explain the specific reason for the request. If a zoning/development code amendment, describe how it is consistent with the intent of the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan and reference the specific supporting goals and policies. If a comprehensive plan text amendment, describe how it addresses the interests and changed needs of the entire city as identified in the City's long-range planning and policy documents, in- cluding, but not limited to,the Comprehensive Plan. Include any data, research, or reasoning that supports the suggested amendment. Attach additional pages as needed. • TNC L4VD usE 61-&-P Ejr-r sy3 swir Faro 77fr pft0A9j1yE A4Af� 7HC OF Off e." WTHI, l ��Y -tW .4AVeiPA-WO L4N4 L66 C644IJ4E FR& !JUE JAB 4N A5 X/ZY 151y��(zA ZVL�f=T) low—c 4ff4,JdE 7W 4&VC '&_j7eAf3 •5rAtGE' VE 4414 M USED 43y �c L D��z7HcEN1`s f� n! v D R Age e"4 ?Asl rPvac'-' IS �HPQzTbn1T. GHl-1 cdp12888_sd4098DRAFr•8/24105 p.1of3 6 � I I InRfl; ��d Avy 407hM 7T/POs o& D cD nE�Ti s �c=��(EI� fJ11KT�f vPagrl WC7 I I I 0 0 N O U O ?C f0 (0 N d O O Q C O coN m cd W N C C N m H N 'D -0 N O ttJJ C @ U — (p 'O N (aN 0a 3 L 1z 00 co CE=Von c 0 c N 9� • . L L L CL p W Q QC N w L�� n �2 This page intentionally left blank. I I I I I I I 63 Plalnmrrg} aoler,vi.ces Location: 400 W,Gowe Mail to:220 41h Avenue SoUth+'Kent,WA 98032-5895 e RECEIVED D�y Permit Center(253)856-5302 FAX: (253)856-6412 Z000KENT www.cl.kent.wa.ustpermitcenter WASHINGTON PLANNING SERVICES SEP t 200Comprehensive Plan Text and CITY OF KEW Zoning/Development Code PLANNING SERVICES Please print in black ink only. Amendment Docket R�1/tsc ,�2'AE'��d�✓�'� Application Name:�pqL�' _i�cE D�16A6gFLOPocket #: OFFICE USE ONLY OFFICE USE ONLY Date Application Received: NPoo!!L— / , 2,6V Received by: Applicant: 1�4� IAI?! e�GE3 �`Tiq F� r '- Name: Daytime Phone: Mailing Address: G PF � ,fMt/ 3Fax Number: \ City/State/Zip: Signature: Professional License No: E-mail: Agent/Consultant/Attorney: (mandatory if primary contact is different from applicant) Name: Daytime Phone: Mailing Address: Fax Number: City/State/Zip: E-mail: . Signature Suggested comprehensive plan text or zoning/development code amendment language.This can be either conceptual or specific amendatory language. Please be as clear and concise as possible so that your proposal can be adequately evaluated. If specific wording changes are proposed, reference the spe- cific comprehensive plan or code section and show changes in strikeout/underline format. Attach additional pages as needed.E ,aw V n F..✓S,�� M*;r- e,44 4 C aa14AAZr)oA(5 7F 40&JSM 45 OE 21A91-16Z_y Ad" A6tJ72J I" Support for the suggested comprehensive plan text or zoning/development code amendment. Explain the specific reason for the request. If a zoning/development code amendment, describe how it is consistent with the intent of the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan and reference the specific supporting goals and policies. If a comprehensive plan text amendment, describe how it addresses the interests and changed needs of the entire city as identified in the City's long-range planning and policy documents, in- cluding, but not limited to,the Comprehensive Plan. Include any data, research, or reasoning that supports the suggested amendment. Attach additional pages as needed. • Ah n fF Sp �s d qe- is A 1IV rC c6 T a al�4v� �u�iRl�✓�-�TA� s�r�a�n�rn�s, �� ,so»tE RR� PR-��n/ri-y o�i-�L�z}� r.�Flc.� t ic�rar,>�/ ' hsl is �gS rnA� � iYriNf n0itl . • lE ?1Fis �iE4k ; t�' AIWI-� fi T ��� uPdA 1�3 �R 7XtE 4+ Use )Scovc � GH1-1 _ cdp12888_psd4098DRAFr-04105 p.1 of o � -91 ID r� -E RD r.C!lld IT T. 65 LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OCTOBER 24, 2005 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Jon Johnson, Vice Chair Dana Ralph, Steve Dowell, • Kenneth Wendling BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Tim Gimenez, David Malik, Elizabeth Watson; All Excused STAFF MEMBERS: Charlene Anderson, William Osborne, Kim Adams Pratt, Pamela Mottram Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers. Approval of Minutes Steve Dowell Moved and Dana Ralph Seconded a Motion to approve the Minutes of September 19, 2005. Motion Carried. Added Items None Communications Planning Manager Charlene Anderson stated that a tour of Comprehensive Plan Amendment sites will be scheduled for sometime in November and she will notify the Board when the date is set. 2005 Annual Docket Report Planning Manager Charlene Anderson explained the new docketing process used to consider proposals received throughout the year. She presented seven(7) docket items. Ms. Anderson stated that rather than consider the substance and merits of each docket item individually, the intent of this evening's meeting is for the Board to decide whether to move forward the docket items for further action, along with the three amendments presented by William Osborne. 2005 Annual Comprehensive Plan & Zoning Map Amendments #CPA 20052(A-CV#CPA-2005(13 Planner William Osborne presented three (3) applications received from private property owners this • year for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning map; known as the Bohannon, Millenium-Kangley Building II and Safeguard Self-Storage Phase 4 amendments. Mr. Osborne cited the location and intent for each proposal. Chair Jon Johnson opened the Public Hearing. Robert Parnell, 4422 187th Place SE, Kent, WA 98027 spoke on behalf of the Bohannon amendment. He explained why they have requested specific zoning for the site located at 11407 SE 248th Street. Mr. Parnell stated that he believes SF-6 zoning would be compatible with surrounding property, that a plat development would provide upgrades to the road at 114th , and that 248th Street would be developed to City standards. Joel Kessell, 5700 1001h St. SE, Suite 630-166, Lakewood, WA 98199 spoke on behalf of the Millennium-Kangley Building II amendment. He addressed access issues for the subject property located at 26046 110h Avenue Southeast. Steve Dowell Moved and Dana Ralph Seconded a Motion to close the Public Hearing. Motion Carried. Steve Dowell Moved and Dana Ralph Seconded a Motion to move the docketed items forward for consideration with the exception of the 42nd Avenue item which will be part of the Public Works 2006 work program. Motion Carried. Adiournment Dana Ralph Moved and Steve Dowell Seconded a Motion to adjourn the meeting. Motion Carried. Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 7:30 p.m. Charlene Anderson, A1CP, Planning Manager Secretary of the Board S:)PermitIPlaniLUPBI20051MinutesU02405min.doc Land Use and Planning Board Minutes October 24,2005 6 This page intentionally;left blank. I 67 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fred N. Satterstrom,AICP, C.D.Director PLANNING SERVICES Charlene Anderson,AICP,Manager Phone:253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 WAE N ON WASHINGTON Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent,WA 98032-5895 November 14, 2005 To: Chair Tim Clark and Planning & Economic Development Committee Members From: William D. Osborne, Long-Range Planner Re: 2005 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments #CPA-2005-2(A-C) /#CPZ-2005-(1-3) MOTION: I move to accept/modify the Land Use &Planning Board's recommendation to act on the three applications for 2005 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments. SUMMARY: The city received three (3) applications from private property owners this year for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and the Zoning Map. These applications are included in the 2005 Annual Docket Report. • BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: Proposal A - Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from SF-3 to SF-6 and Zoning Map from SR-3 to SR-4.5 for property located at 11407 SE 248th Street (Bohannon) Proposal B - Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from SF-6 to MU and Zoning Map from SR-6 to O-MU for property located at 26046 - 1161h Avenue Southeast (Mi lien ium-Kangley Building II) Proposal C - Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map from MHP to MU and Zoning Map from MHP to GC for property located at 509 Washington Avenue North (Safeguard Self-Storage Phase 4) WO\pm S:\Permit\Plan\CompPlanAmdments\2005\2052831-cpa2005-2a-c-pedcl l2105.doc Enc: October 17 staff memo to LUPB w/attachments;Minutes of 10-24 LUPB hearing cc: Fred N.Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Manager William Osborne,Planner Parties of Record Project Files �8 This page intentionally left blank. 69 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Fred N. Satterstrom,AICP,C.D.Director PLANNING SERVICES Charlene Anderson,AICP,Manager Phone:253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 KENT WASH.N G T ON Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kern,WA 98032-5895 October 17, 2005 TO: JON JOHNSON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE LAND USE AND PLANNING BOARD FROM: WILLIAM D. OSBORNE, LONG-RANGE PLANNER RE: 2005 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS #CPA-2005-2(A-C)/#CPZ-2005-(1-3) Land Use &Planning Board Public Hearing—October 24, 2005 INTRODUCTION The city received three (3) applications from private property owners this year for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and the Zoning Map, the location and intent of each is described below. Proposal A — Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 11407 SE 2481h Street (Bohannon) Applicant (Agent): Robert Parnell, P.E. Existing Designation Proposed Change Comprehensive Plan LAND SF-3 (Single Family 3 SF-6 (Single Family 6 USE Map Dwelling Units/Acre) Dwelling Units/Acre ZONING Districts Map SR-3 (Single Family 3.63 SR-4.5 (Single Family 4.53 Dwelling Units/Acre) Dwelling Units/Acre The 2.35 acre Site consisting of one (1) tax parcel is located at the southeast comer of SE 248th Street and 114t1' Avenue SE. According to City GIS, the terrain of the northern portion of the Site is generally flat, with a downward slope near the southern boundary where the headwaters of the north fork of Upper Mill Creek are located. The Site contains a residence and detached outbuilding near SE 248th Street. The Site and most parcels in the immediate vicinity are designated SF-3/SR-3. Areas of planned higher density residential are located further to the south, west, southwest, and east (see Attachment D-1). Issues: Site drainage and other development impacts on the north fork of Upper Mill Creek, and vehicular access via 1141h Avenue SE, which is not built to public road standards, are issues of concern. �o Proposal B — Chang&in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 26046 - 1161h Avenue Southeast (Millenium- Kangley Building II) Applicant(Agent): Joel!Kessell, Engineered Solutions, LLC Existing Designation Proposed Change Comprehensive Plan LAi D SF-6 (Single-Family 6 MU (Mixed Use) USE Map units/acre ZONING Districts Map SR-6 (Single-Family 6.05 O-MU (Office-Mixed Use) units/acre) The 0.62 acre Site consists of one (1) tax parcel and is located north of the intersection of 1161h Avenue Southeast and Keot-Kangley Road Southeast, and contains one residential structure and one detached garage. The terrain of the Site can be characterized as sloping gently downward from east to west. The parcel is currently designated as Single-Family Residential, Six (6.05) Units per Acre for land use and zoning (SF-6 and SR-6, respectively), as are most parcels abutting the northern and pastern boundaries of the Site. To the south of the Site, a parcel was designated Mixed Use (MU) for land use, and Office-Mixed Use (O-MU) for zoning as part of the 2004 Comprehensive Phan Amendment process. Parcels located directly across 116`h Avenue SE from the Site are designated as Single-Family Residential, Eight (8.71) Units per Acre for both land use and zoning:(SF-8 and SR-8, respectively). The southwest corner of the Kent- Kangley/1161h Avenue SEintersection is designated for low-density multi-family residential for both land use and zoning (LDMF and MR-G,respectively). Issues: Site access restrictions, on-site parking (and possible vehicular queuing), site drainage and utilities locations are some of the issues of concern. The fact that Kent-Kangley Road is also a State Route (S.R. 516) means that vehicular access of the Site is restricted. To maintain traffic flows on Kent-Kangley Road/S.R. 516, the preferred access would be on 116ei Avenue SE, but the north boundary of the Site is less than one hundred fifty feet (150') north of the intersection. The City of Kent Public Works Development Assistance Brochure, Access Management (DAB 6-3) (see Attachment B, page 6), establishes a minimum corner clearance standard of three hundred feet (300'), with driveways being allowed only when alternative access is not available. The status of a water feature indicated by the City geographic information system (GIS) as bisecting the Site could also affect site access and developable area. A sanitary sewer service connection crossing Kent-kangley Road will be required. The Comprehensive Plan includes policy language (Goal LU-13, and Policies LU-13.3 and LU- 13.4) to encourage orderly and efficient commercial growth in existing commercial districts. Additionally, a 2001 Urban Land Institute publication entitled Ten Principles for Reinventing America's Suburban Strips (see Attachment C) previously provided to the Board, recommends limiting expansion of commercial zones when existing commercially-zoned land is underdeveloped. The buildable lands inventory for housing (population growth) would also need to be revised to reflect a decrease in capacity. Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing October 24,2005 Page 2 of 3 71 Proposal C — Change in Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map for property located at 509 Washington Avenue North (Safeguard Self- Storage Phase 4) Applicant (Agent): Wayne Carlson, AICP, AHBL, Inc. Existing Designation Proposed Change Comprehensive Plan LAND MHP (Mobile Home Park) MU (Mixed Use) UsE Ma ZONING Districts Map MHP (Mobile Home Park) GC (General Commercial) The 1.52-acre Site is contains one (1) tax parcel fronting on Washington Avenue (S.R. 181) approximately midway between James Street and Smith Street. The Site of this proposal is generally flat, and contains a number of small structures and an office associated with an existing residential use. The street frontage of Washington Avenue was recently improved. The parcels to the north, east, and south are generally zoned GC, although one parcel located across Washington Avenue to the southeast is zoned MHP. A large property immediately to the west of the Site is designated as MDMF/MR-M (Multi-Family Residential-Medium Density). A number of other parcels to the north along James Street are designated as medium- or high- density multi-family residential. A few self-storage complexes and a number of automobile- oriented service and retail businesses are located near the Site. Issues: The City of Kent Housing & Human Services Office has determined that the applicant is not required to file a mobile home park closure relocation assistance report and plan. Access restrictions, on-site parking (and possible vehicular queuing), site drainage and utilities locations are issues of possible concern. Enclosed are code excerpts related to standards of review for amendments to the comprehensive plan and criteria for granting a rezone (Attachment A). Staff will be available at the October.2e hearing to highlight the location of each application (see Attachment D). A detailed review and discussion of each application will be presented. If there are any questions prior to the hearing, please contact me at (253) 856-5437. WO\pm S:\Permit\Plan\CompPlanAmdments\2005\2052831-cpa2o05-2a-c-LUPBhearing102405.doc Enc: Attachment A:KCC 12.02.050 Standard of Review,and KCC 15.09.050(C)Amendments Attachment B:City of Kent Development Assistance Brochure 6-3(Access Management) Attachment C:Urban Land Institute,Ten Principles for Reinventing America's Suburban Strips,(pages 8-9) Attachment D:Maps of CPA-2005-2(A-C)/CPZ-2005-(1-3) Attachment E:Summary Matrix of 2005 Comprehensive Plan Amendments cc: Fred N.Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Manager William Osborne,Planner Parties of Record Project Files Land Use and Planning Board Public Hearing October 24,2005 Page 3 of 3 2 This page intentionally left blank. I 73 12.02.050 Standard of review. The planning department may recommend and the city council may approve, approve with modifications or deny amendments to the comprehensive plan text or map designations based upon the following criteria: 1. The amendment will not result in development that will adversely affect the public health, safety and general welfare; and 2. The amendment is based upon new information that was not available at the time of adoption of the comprehensive plan, or that circumstances have changed since the adoption of the plan that warrant an amendment to the plan; and 3. The amendment is consistent with other goals and policies of the comprehensive plan, and that the amendment will maintain concurrency between the land use, transportation, and capital facilities elements of the plan. (Ord. No. 3237, § 1, 7-6-95) 15.09.050 Amendments. • C. Standards and criteria for granting a request for rezone. The following standards and criteria shall be used by the hearing examiner and city council to evaluate a request for rezone. Such an amendment shall only be granted if the city council determines that the request is consistent with these standards and criteria and subject to the requirements of Ch. 12.01 KCC. 1. The proposed rezone is consistent with the comprehensive plan. 2. The proposed rezone and subsequent development of the site would be compatible with development in the vicinity. 3. The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system in the vicinity of the property with significant adverse impacts which cannot be mitigated. 4. Circumstances have changed substantially since the establishment of the current zoning district to warrant the proposed rezone. 5. The proposed rezone will not adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the city. S:\Permit\Plan\CompPlanAmdments\2005\StandardsOfRevie W_KCC.doc ATTACHMENT A October 24,2005 Land Use & Planning Board Hearing 4 This page intentionally left blank. I �I I 75 15 CITY OF KENT DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE 6-3 T KENT BROCHURE ACCESS MANAGEMENT The City of Kent has developed a Comprehensive Transportation Plan and a Master Plan of Roadways, indicating existing and proposed streets and their functional classifications. The City of Kent has also adopted the City of Kent Construction Standards which contain the basic elements of access management.This document provides some background information on access management and also provides guidelines for access management decisions. What is Access Mana_ement? Access management is the process of balancing the competing needs of traffic movement and land access. Access management provides access to land development while simultaneously preserving the safe and efficient flow of traffic on the roadway system. It applies traffic engineering principals to the location, design and operation of access drives (driveways) serving activities along the roadway. It evaluates the suitability of providing access to a given road, as well as the suitability of a site for land development. It addresses the basic questions—when and where access should be located; how it should be designed; and the procedures needed to implement the program. In a broad context, it is resource management, since it is a way to anticipate and prevent safety problems and traffic congestion. Access management includes:(1)classifying roadways based upon functional criteria which reflect the importance of each roadway to City mobility; (2)defining allowable levels of access for each classification of roadway, including criteria for the spacing of intersections and driveways with and without traffic signals;(3)applying appropriate geometric design criteria and traffic engineering analysis to the allowable accesses; and (4) adopting appropriate regulations and administrative procedures. In the City of Kent,the highest levels of access location and design are applied to Principal Arterials, and the least access control Is applied to local Residential Streets. Why Do We Use Management Access?, David Solomon, in his"Accidents on Main Rural Highways Related to Speed, Driver, and Vehicles," Public Roads, July 1964, recognized the need for access management as indicated by the following: "When conventional highways are constructed on new rights-of-way, initially there are few commercial driveways and the safety record is good. As the highways get older, the traffic volume builds up, roadside businesses develop, more and more commercial driveways are cut, and the accident rate gradually increases! ATTACHMENT B Page,1 of 8 October 24, 2005 Land Use & Planning Board Hearing 6 Solomon concludes, "This demonstrates the importance of maintaining control of access when either two-land or multi-lane highways ire built on new locations. Increased numbers of either intersections or driveways alone will also increase the accident rate. Intersections should be restricted to those essential for the highway, and the right (of direct) access from abutting businesses should be severely limited." While Solomon's article referred to rural highways, the same principal that an increase in the number of driveways results in an increasje in the number of crashes (currently,the transportation and traffic communities use the word "crashes or collisions" in lieu of the word "accidents")on suburban and urban streets as well. In addition to the increase in the number of crashes, increasing the number of street intersections and/or driveways along a street also results in a loss of capacity for the public roadway. This condition is most often referred to by drivers as, "traffic congestion", "poor traffic flows", or the "moving parking lot." What Are The Symptoms of Poor Access Management? The symptoms of poor access management include the following: high collision rates and a large number of collisions; poor traffic flow and congestion; numerous brake light activation's by drivers in through lanes; unsightly strip devdlopment; neighborhoods disrupted by cut-through traffic; pressures to widen an existing street or to build a bypass; and a decrease in property values. What Are The Benefits of Access Management? Safety: Fewer and less severe collisions; and less auto-pedestrian, auto-bicyclist conflicts. Longer driveway spacing results'in fewer locations at which traffic conflicts occur, and drivers have time to respond to one access conflict at a time. Conflicts between turning vehicles and other traffic is reduced. Variation in the speeds of vehicles in the traffic.stream is reduced. Pedestrians and bicyclists have fewer and less complex conflict areas with autos. Efficiency: Less stop-and-go traffic,, reduced traffic delay; increased and preserved capacity; reduced fuel consumption; and preservation of investment in the roadway system. Turbulence in the traffic stream is reduced and there is less"stop-and-go" traffic. Traffic delays and well as travel times are reduced because of less stops for entering or existing vehicles. Roadway capacity is increased; every time a vehicle stops in a through lane, all of the vehicles behind it must also stop, this effectively removes one or more lanes from service. Fuel consumption is reduced, and smoother',traffic flows and reduced delays result. The public investment in the roadway system is preserved since the traffic capacity of the roadway is maintained. The need for costly and disruptive arterial widening or the construction of bypasses are greatly reduced or entirely, eliminated. Page 2 of 8 77 Livable Communities:.Enhances community character; preserves neighborhood integrity; preservation of private investment in abutting properties; and lower vehicular emissions. Community character is enhanced, both visually and functionally by a functionally designed street system. Land use patterns and land values are preserved. Cut through traffic is eliminated or greatly reduced. The resulting low traffic volumes and slower speeds contribute to safe and tranquil residential areas.Arterial streets can be designed to carry high traffic volumes safely and efficiently. Investment in commercial office and retail development does not become obsolete due to deterioration in the quality of service on arterial streets and a shrinking market value as travel times and delays increase until the point where bypass roadways are built and traffic volumes drop on the original arterial street. . How Can We Manage Access? The City of Kent manages access by using the following tools: medians, auxiliary lanes, signal spacing, number of driveways, driveway location and design, driveway separation, corner clearance, joint & cross access; and reverse or alternative frontage. Medians: Wide nontraversable medians provide shelter for vehicles making left turns to and from the street. They also provide refuge for pedestrians attempting to cross wide streets. Consequently, collision rates on major streets with wide nontraversable medians have been found to be substantially lower than undivided streets or streets having a continuous Two Way Left Turn Lane (TWLTL). Medians can also be landscaped as part of a corridor beautification program.As with driveways, the spacing and design of median openings is important to the safe and efficient operation of the street. Safety benefits are reduced when median openings have inadequate storage for left turns, or when the openings are too close together. Narrow nontraversable medians (typically C curbs) provide shelter for vehicles making left turns to and from the street and prevent unsafe left turns onto the street. Narrow nontraversable medians do not provide all of the benefits of wide nontraversable medians, but require only.very—minor_physical changes in the street to accommodate their construction. Narrow nontraversable medians also require less right-of-way and may be used more often where rights-of-way are limited. Auxiliary Lanes: Left-tum and right-turn lanes minimize the conflict between turning vehicles and vehicles attempting to continue in through traffic lanes. They also provide storage space where vehicles can safely wait to perform the turn maneuver. This results in smoother traffic flow, increased capacity and greatly increased safety. Signalized Intersection Spacing: Long uniform intersection spacings on arterial streets facilitate the use of traffic signal timing plans which can respond to peak and off-peak traffic flow conditions. Long and uniform spacings improve the progress of traffic flow and increases the number of vehicles that flow the traffic signal on a given green light timing. Capacity of the intersection and the arterial street is increased, fuel consumption and traffic emissions are decreased and traffic safety in improved. Page 3 of 8 i Number of Driveways: The totall.number of driveways along a public street affects the efficiency of the public street. The number of driveways that each parcel should have should be limited as much as possible. Single-family residential lots, for example, are permitted to have only a single driveway unless they can demonstrate a need based upon lot constraints beyond their control. Commercial properties should be limited to a single driveway unless they can demonstrate that their development generates more than 2,000 vehicles per day. When a parcel has frontages on two (or more) public streets with different street classifications and functions, then the parcel should be limited to access on the lower classification of street. Driveway Location and Design: Driveway location and design affects the ability of a driver to safely and easily enter into and exit a site. If driveways are not properly located, exiting vehicles may be unable to see on-coming vehicles, and motorists on the street may not have adequate time to stop. If driveway widths are too narrow, or have an inadequate turning radius, drivers will be unable to maneuver safely and comfortably on and off the street and may have to use more than one traffic lane in order to make the desired turn. In addition, if there is a vehicle attempting to leave the driveway and the driveway width is too narrow, the entering vehicle will have to wait in a through lane of traffic. On the other hand, if the turning radius and/or driveway width are excessive, the large expanse of intersection area can be confusing and a hazard for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. Drivers need time to respond to vehicles entering and leaving the street and to safely maneuver their vehicles accordingly. Therefore, the minimum distance needed between driveways is greater as speed limits and driving speeds increase. This is why driveway separation standards are more stringent for arterial streets than they are for collector streets, and why they are more stringent on collector streets than they are for residential streets. Driveway separation or spacing standards are derived from traffic engineering principles, driver behavior, and vehicle dynamics. Considerations in establishing separation standards include street function and classification, driving speeds, location of adjacent streets and driveways, the volume of trucks, driver expectancy, and the separation and reduction of motorist, bicyclist, and pedestrian conflicts. Corner Clearance: Comer clearance is the distance from an intersection of a public or private street to the nearest access connection,or driveway. Corner clearance standards preserve good traffic operations at intersections, as well as the safety and convenience of access to and from corner parcels. Assuring an adequate lot size with appropriate comer clearance will protect the development potential and market value of comer properties. It will also help assure that these properties do not experience access problems as traffic volumes grow on the adjacent streets. If a driveway is located too close to an intersection which has a traffic signal, for example, the vehicles stopped for a red light may prevent successful entry into, or exit from, the site. Page 4 of 8 79 Joint and Cross Access: Joint and cross access requirements consolidate driveways serving more than one parcel and provide circulation between adjacent parcels. This allows vehicles to circulate between adjacent businesses without having to re-entering public streets. Joint access requirements are used to connect major developments and to reduce the number of driveways that would otherwise be required to serve abutting parcels. Joint driveways are also used to improve driveway spacing or separation, and sometimes permits more than one driveway to serve a single parcel where separation standards would not otherwise permit more than one driveway. This permits intensive development along a corridor while maintaining traffic operations and safe and convenient access to businesses. Property Owners unable to meet minimum driveway separation standards are typically required to provide for joint and cross access easements whenever feasible. Abutting properties under different ownership are encouraged to comply, but are generally not required to comply until they develop or redevelop their property. Flexibility is needed on an administrative level to work with the unique circumstances of each development site. The City of Kent, for example, relaxes the minimum driveway separation standards for properties that agree to consolidate accesses, or to provide for a joint access driveway. Reverse Frontage or Alternative Access: When land is subdivided for small commercial or residential uses, the lots abutting arterial streets should not be allowed direct vehicular access to the arterial street. Instead, an interior street which provides access to the arterial street should be required. This eliminates the conflicts between high-speed traffic and traffic entering and exiting at closely spaced driveways.Access to the arterial street is provided at a location which can meet separation and corner clearance standards, and which can then be designed to safely handle the traffic generated by the development. When a parcel has frontage on more than one public street, and one of those streets has a higher street classification and function than the other street, then the property should be required to obtain access solely from the street having the lower (or lowest) classification and function. When one of the public streets is an arterial street , and the other street is of a lower classification, such as a collector street, then access to the arterial street should not be permitted. Minimum storage, stacking space, or queue lengths: In designing driveways, adequate storage (or driveway queue length) must be provided on commercial sites to prevent entering vehicles from having to stop in the public streets, and to prevent exiting vehicles from blocking internal circulation aisles. This problem is most evident with drive-in service developments that generate high traffic volumes and require motorists to wait in their vehicles while being served, or until service begins. Such developments shall be carefully analyzed to assure that the Site Plan provides adequate storage. Specific storage areas shall be determined on an individual basis; however minimum storage lengths are required to be provided before any crossing or turning conflicts can be permitted. Page 5 of 8 0 The City of Kent Access Management Standards: 1. Minimum Driveway to Driveway Separation Standards; measured from closest edge of driveway to closest edge of driveway:; a. For parcels abutting a Residential Street: 15-feet b. For parcels abutting a Residential Collector Street: 50-feet. c. For parcels abutting a Residential Collector Arterial Street: 200-feet. d. For parcels abutting an!Industrial or Commercial Street: 100-feet. e. For Parcels abutting an Industrial or Commercial Arterial Street: 200-feet. f. For Parcels abutting a Minor Arterial Street: 200-feet. g. For parcels abutting a principal Arterial Street (when alternative access is not available only): 300-feet. 2. Minimum Corner Clearance Standards;measured from the nearest edge of driveway to the point of curvature for the curb return on the adjacent street intersection: a. For parcels abutting a Residential Street: 50-feet. b. For parcels abutting a Residential Collector Street: 100-feet. c. For parcels abutting a Residential Collector Arterial Street: 200-feet. d. For parcels abutting an Industrial or Commercial Street: 50-feet. e. For Parcels abutting an Industrial or Commercial Arterial Street: 100-feet. f. For Parcels abutting a Mir or Arterial Street: 200-feet. g. For parcels abutting a Principal Arterial Street (driveways are permitted only when alternative access is not available): 300-feet. h. For parcels adjacent to a traffic signal controlled intersection: 300-feet is the desired minimum separation from the intersection, and shall be used unless an approved Traffic Study successfully demonstrates that the affective area of the subject intersection is less than 300-feet from the intersection. 3. Driveway Design Standards: a. Residential Driveway Approaches shall be constructed as shown in Standard Detail 6-5(a) from the City of Kent Construction Standards. b. Commercial Driveway Approaches shall be generally constructed as shown in Standard Detail 6-5(b) from the City of Kent Construction Standards, except that the required radius and minimum (and maximum) driveway throat width combination shall be determined by a Vehicle Maneuvering Diagram provided by the Applicant for the appropriate Design Vehicle. c: Wherever feasible, a 5.0-foot wide planting strip located between the front of the sidewalk and the back of curb is desired to provide a visual cue to drivers as to where the driveway is located along the street, and to reduce the amount of sidewalk work required to meet ADA requirements. 4. General Access Provisions: a. In general, all properties abutting public streets are permitted at least one safe access to the public street system. b. On properties with multiple public street frontages, the City reserves the right to restrict vehicular access solely to'the public street having the lower roadway classification, and/or to the safest access location: c. Development proponents wanting more than one driveway access to a public street will be required to justify the second driveway on the basis of development generated trips. A general rule of thumb based upon created trips and used by the City of Kent is that developments creating less than 4,000 trips per day will be limited to a single driveway. Page 6 of 8 81 d. Where the driveway location does not meet minimum City separation criteria, or where a safe driveway location can't be found, the City requires.appropriate mitigation measures to provide for as safe a driveway as is feasible. 05. Common Mitigation Measures for Developments Which Can't Meet the Minimum Driveway to Driveway, or Driveway to Intersection Separation Criteria: a. Moving the proposed driveway as far from the closest driveway, or intersection, as possible. This is the minimum mitigation measure that will be accepted by the City, and in some instances this is not an adequate mitigation in and by itself. b. Along arterial streets, the creation of a new deceleration lane/.1 right-turn pocket is often acceptable to provide a safe pullout for turning vehicles. This often requires significant off- site street improvements, and occasionally the purchase of additional right-of-way from adjacent properties in order to construct those improvements. c. Acquiring a cross-easement for ingress and egress from an adjoining property, and then using an existing driveway for the new development. d. Acquiring a binding agreement from an adjoining property to remove an existing adjacent driveway in order to meet the minimum driveway to driveway separation criteria; and then removing that superfluous driveway. Depending upon the trip generation characteristics of the subject development and the traffic volumes on the subject street, this mitigation measure (the removal of an existing driveway)may be considered adequate mitigation even when the full driveway to driveway separation distance that results doesn't fully meet the minimum driveway separation criteria. 6. The minimum protected queue (or on-site storage lane length) must be provided for the number of vehicles indicated below to prevent any potential turning conflicts within their lengths. These are the minimum lengths that will be permitted unless an approved Traffic Study includes a site and project specific queuing study showing that either more or less storage length is required to serve the subject development: a. For single-lane drive-in banks: storage to accommodate a minimum entering queue of 6 vehicles for a single window; banks having two windows need to accommodate a minimum entering queue of at least 9 vehicles per window; and banks having more 4 or more windows shall have storage to accommodate a minimum of 13 vehicles for each service lane. b. For vehicle wash facilities: facilities having a single service bay shall provide entering storage to accommodate a minimum of 12 vehicles;facilities having multi-bay designs shall have a minimum entering storage space of at least 6 vehicles for each service bay. c. For fast-food restaurants with drive-in window service: entering storage to accommodate a minimum of 8 vehicles per service lane shall be provided, but a minimum of 15 vehicles is suggested. Storage lengths for fast food restaurants is measured from the order board to the first service window. d. For service stations: a minimum entering and exiting storage length to accommodate a minimum of 2 vehicles shall be provided between the pump islands and the public right-of- way, unless Expresso stands with drive-through windows are included on the site, in which case the minimum Expresso stand storage requirements will prevail. e. For shopping centers (50,000 square feet or more of gross leasing area): a minimum entering and exiting storage length to accommodate a minimum of 4 vehicles shall be provided before any crossing, or turning conflicts can be permitted between the parking lot and the public right-of-way. Shopping centers having 100,000 square feet or more of gross leasing area shall provide a site and project specific queuing analysis to determine their.. appropriate entering and exiting storage lengths. Page 7 of 8 8 f. For all commercial developments (less than 50,000 square feet of gross leasing area): a minimum entering and exiting storage length to accommodate at least 2 vehicles shall be provided between the parking lot and the public right-of-way before any crossing or turning conflicts can be permitt,d. Note: the City may require a site and project specific queuing analysis to determine the appropriate storage lengths when the commercial development includes one or more drive through facilities. g. For all Expresso stands'with drive-through windows: entering and exiting storage lengths shall accommodate a minimum of 4 vehicles per window; but provisions for at least 15 vehicles is strongly suggested.. h. For pharmacies with drive-through windows: entering and exiting storage lengths shall accommodate a minimum of 5 vehicles per window. NOTE: Unless othelrwise approved by the Transportation Engineering Section of the Department of Public Works, each vehicle above shall be deemed to have a length of 25-feet for the purpose of calculating minimum storage lengths. Last revised on May 2, 2001 Page 8 of 8 83 • Tee Principles for . Reinventing erica's Suburban Strips Michael D. Beyard *chaeL Pawlukiewicz Bankof America. �i ATTACHME NT C The Urban Land Institute gratefully acknowledges the financial support October 10, 2005 of Bank of America in underwriting this project Land Use & Planning Board Workshop r84 rune ac@ R� a"I Zoned. an he zoning technique used by most suburban communities is to designate everything along the arterial highway strip for commercial uses and wait for retailers and developers to gradually fill in all of the individual sites. In this type of environment, new development sprawls outward even as sites closer to the city remain vacant and older retail centers deteriorate. Retail overzoning thus has had the effect of extending strips prematurely in discontinuous and inefficient ways as developers leapfrog over one another onto sites farther and farther away from the city. When economic conditions change, as they constantly do, some strips, or parts of strips, are left to deteriorate even before they have been fully developed. This leaves them unfinished indefinitely, at risk to competition from newer and more enticing shopping environments, and difficult to revitalize because of their char- acteristic sprawl and lack of focus. By pruning back the amount of land zoned for retail, suburban communities can stimulate retail growth, encourag revitalization, and improve the quality of their shopping strips. It simply is not necessary for every major parcel along every arterial to be zoned for commercial or retail use. Suburban communities should take the following steps: ~ . P Limit the quantity of commercially .. zoned land along emerging suburban strips to give landowners and retailers x the incentive and economic strength to maintain a high-quality environment, react more swiftly to societal trends, and evolve on site as the retailing .world changes. 13 Rezone excess commercial land in older strips to encourage reinvestment and improve the quality of existing retail properties. 0 3 N Q •.rr;'r Fsra 1 '1 1• 1 1 1 I / '1 •1 t��'i ��rY,..nsk+.'� r f� f4i.�Y {�rj y� 1 A� µ N / 1 1 ' 1 1 1 - 1 1 I • � T. II ' 1. 1 1 /• 1 / 11 1, <�LN t �,�..•A�"@ t �� 888��` �,r J.Y S� -ti°` �" ar m` J '�j�r V" �. "`" i�.. ># 4 r Y v #' jY r♦.e� d ��f�(_ —G , Mj"yr 'yx� FFF it 't5.[I.i P! r r G t 47 (.. •!L ,�y� r ,. X d4 .A J, �� ('`rT� 1 t+ �� Y 1 > � r � `,'lj r'q kl' c.-;L � r �✓ ::t �� �. r t�°j✓vrr -fir t ffi7 � a,v3,t. 1's� �k f Y c r W!cs�'�'' a� x. v 'Ot r�2re /t4�.E c'✓+''S'� crs 1 �f �r r e.`t'f F t�. '•�.tpa \ ��9 � ``•�, ,�"r,.` . r y � `{"'YI�Ic Jh ._ /j'•tr f s Y 'f �+„�rt�.. � Y� � �..a ✓Ry r3.,� rx Y�..(` i? 'tll."�" i _ A✓r - - �'�-.{Y - ,r r�hD14'' - v f .:sof,:� .r1�"b, - f 66 This page intentionally left blank. I i 87 ATTACHMENT D October 25 , 2005 Land Use & Planning Board Hearing COMP PLAN AMENDMENT PROPOSALS SITE MAPS 8 This page intentionallyi left blank. 89 u o f� c N a+ s z N O� W `� � c� o aQ uC N a S V _ U Q d V � , � a - J AV t, 1 c 1 S 3AV i/ _ qiltj06 I J LU 3S 3AY080L: r L9l US a S 3AV V6! � o AMH d3'7lbA 1S`d3 tp N - - a.....�,..,.. S 3AV$L 1 21S `. .SAVE S �_ L9l 21S U 1 N : 1< J._ a to f� N Via TI E�� 66 s t 91 L d Q y `o 41 W 01 LN O !� mH MN O N c Ln w �3000 e° c �" ° c � t 3 � 3L. � W z � � YZ cn °° (P a .Ea„.i °N r oC c c a � a U. U A o vc tQN ML L --- U E ti ` coUU US AO a �' 1 �� �► ° a a �{of o. —1c 0 e r w >6� Q, E9 _ L - ' �d d Otu lY � x O �X� d c_ ''� L r e ell co Fo y 1Awl live G 'S 31 — a 11 Q ow j T.A'IN Ly �O � �W ��X ✓�\ 'i .MS m S F��$= 1 _y Y11gs o�g 0uj ��86a 93 ro ~ m L 7 C IM W! 1 1 1 dy £ � yy my N mel7 £ m M Ln m 3 d ?� d c� d Y •Z a � O O op ayi c 0 'E o � o y w z 7 p O �. y �, ar L. o +. o « +� E rn �� d N N ? 0 � R c °� - � aa10i � d a c oa a � rn pf 1 1 m a �. 3 f o-i S a f IL in of m O E CQN ya ;c , c Y V V a N � ,b FL o fl q Q -41 —77n F7Tf. ✓ IT g V 1�X �� �Q �_- 0 [ICJ / ;' OPO Q QCox €� ED NG AAAA� , 04 LLJ 3� ion 5 m ND ass 95 �a V L L 0 V �zu N V y d ° ° W N O W M M V a.r iCn t�op �04' YC o m 1A FA uLf N1 ° " ° LU 2 6tv ° ° � a z ° o Eae sfcr, 1 IL LL� N�V 'c asaa ac) cnx FL N AV NOSIOt/W sr� -"Tr1O0Nn --- o I - N AV _ `dM ©p J �0 IRS- rob Pv S — O —� al Cl) 1 o L 0 S Id L9 NI S3wbT M lO S3NVvr lil¢ffi 1� x cm x I � g ny 99 o _gSa o f7 Lf"�h�11f1 t1nC1 L' tS.Y -M -Id s3wdr M� tl ©moo �Iar � t� 7 _T 121� H NI dl N H 91 dl H �1 H dl �I dl a dl•)L'N 4[41 Q{� Fes` e a § � » ( ) � \ m � f I j _ _ \ - { » 0. IL _ j ( - - cr Mo §/t ) k) ( + kE § 0 a (0 o N §§ CL * k � § 2 § ■ « 41 j \ �cli \ , ! 2 IL IL-{ { { _ { - r - r LU CL § /{ k \ s \\ k \ k 0 z, f , _ E ƒ¥ . ; , E CL 7 o § \ ! i ! , ! N _ ! o ; A ; z § FA \ k 0 ` . } a- / ƒ ) ) ) § } ) = " z ; & ; d ) $ § ( \ ) ) § } \2it § § ) § j k § ; § u b ® k b ' ° | 5 ! 2 \ tm / E ) 7 _ § Cl) m ! ( _ ! il 9 This page intentionally:left blank. I I 99 ` LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OCTOBER 24, 2005 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Jon Johnson, Vice Chair Dana Ralph, Steve Dowell, • Kenneth Wendling BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Tim Gimenez, David Malik, Elizabeth Watson; All Excused STAFF MEMBERS: Charlene Anderson, William Osborne, Kim Adams Pratt, Pamela Mottram Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers. Approval of Minutes Steve Dowell Moved and Dana Ralph Seconded a Motion to approve the Minutes of September 19, 2005. Motion Carried. Added Items None Communications Planning Manager Charlene Anderson stated that a tour of Comprehensive Plan Amendment sites will be scheduled for sometime in November and she will notify the Board when the date is set. 2005 Annual Docket Report Planning Manager Charlene Anderson explained the new docketing process used to consider proposals received throughout the year. She presented seven (7) docket items. Ms. Anderson stated that rather than consider the substance and merits of each docket item individually, the intent of this evening's meeting is for the Board to decide whether to move forward the docket items for further action, along with the three amendments presented by William Osborne. 2005 Annual Comprehensive Plan & Zoning Map Amendments #CPA-2005-2(A�y#CPA-2005(1-3 Planner William Osborne presented three (3) applications received from private property owners this year for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and Zoning map; known as the Bohannon, Millenium-Kangley Building II and Safeguard Self-Storage Phase 4 amendments. Mr. Osborne cited the location and intent for each proposal. Chair Jon Johnson opened the Public Hearing. Robert Parnell, 4422 1871h Place SE, Kent, WA 98027 spoke on behalf of the Bohannon amendment. He explained why they have requested specific zoning for the site located at 11407 SE 248th Street. Mr. Parnell stated that he believes SF-6 zoning would be compatible with surrounding property, that a plat development would provide upgrades to the road at 114th , and that 248`h Street would be developed to City standards. Joel Kessell, 5700 1001h St. SE, Suite 630-166, Lakewood, WA 98199 spoke on behalf of the Millennium-Kangley Building II amendment. He addressed access issues for the subject property located at 26046 116th Avenue Southeast. Steve Dowell Moved and Dana Ralph Seconded a Motion to close the Public Hearing. Motion Carried. Steve Dowell Moved and Dana Ralph Seconded a Motion to move the docketed items forward for consideration with the exception of the 42nd Avenue item which will be part of the Public Works 2006 work program. Motion Carried. Adiournment Dana Ralph Moved and Steve Dowell Seconded a Motion to adjourn the meeting. Motion Carried. Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 7:30 p.m. Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager Secretary of the Board S:IPermit IPlanIL UPB1200511VinutesV 02405min.doc Land Use and Planning Board Minutes October 24,2005 i LO Z v U cc as ao�n a � W W �_ j m c6 co y c� a p m W d M o6 L 00 `i �� DONU 04 � r z Z c c x L L W ,r CN N ow a)n _ c � Q Ja yY ti y a �aQ E- Z m � Z � ¢ a m N . oco V z a L u � Q W � M ui W LU Cl) Z � 0 0 � 0- � N � Z � W W a U a i- a.0 W N W = i � z vi y 0 w 0 w in a otS z Z a a J IL � N L VD C o W �y I W_ \' c\v��o Z� •z z t OP = z < a � E 0 N LL 0 �9 ^� Z V V N w W W W a W Co m W W > > F-• y N z 61 CITY OF KENT ( T6 I OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Planning and Econ. Dev.Committee Agenda Pkts Sent on 11/15/05 TO: Brenda Jacober,City Clerk FROM: Pamela Mottram SIGNATURE: Pamela A X0074M Copies of the 11/21/05 PLANNING&ECON. DEV. COMMITTEE Agenda Packets were distributed as follows: City Council Members- Full Packet'(7) Deliver to City Clerk's Office—(7)Hard Pam Mottram Tim C, JulieP, BruceW, RonH, LesT,DeborahR,DebbieRaplee Copies)in Cncl Mmbers Mail Boxes TomB, RobertN, FredS. CharleneA, KimM, Gloria GouldWessen, Email Note: Distribute Hard Copies to: Pam Mottram BrendaJacober, Bill Osborne, KimP, ReneeC Full Packet—(10) FS/CA/KP/RC/BJ >'(5)—hd copies) Web Page —Mary Simmons Agenda &Full Packet Email: Front Page Mary Simmon: King County Journal Place in Box @-City Clerks- Full Packet FAX: 9-872-6611 >>Agenda Pam Mottram Kent Reporter, Graham Black Agenda EMAIL:graham.black@repodernewspapers.com Pam Mottram Marcella Pechler,, Chamber of Commerce Agenda Email: MpechlerCDkentchamber.com Pam Mottram Garrett Huffman,SKOyMgr 425451-792DEA236 Agenda Email: ghuffman(d-)mbaks.com Pam Mottram Master Blders Assoc,335 116th Ave SE, Bellevue,WA 98004 Don Stialkr,KertCARE.S,2070NoM St,SeatkWA98103 Agenda US Mail (1) William T. Miller,827 W.Valley Hwy#95, Kent 98032 Agenda US Mail (KBAB) Pam Mottram Ryan Zulauf,24502 98 Ave.S.,Kent 98030 Agenda US Mail Pam Mottram Jennifer Gorman/Warren Perkins Agenda Email: warren.perkins@gwest.com Pam Mottram Qwest Communications,23315 66th Ave S, Kent WA 98032 JStorment„EdCrawford,LBlanchard, GGill, MGillespie, JHodgson, Email: Pam Mottram BLopez,RGivens,KSenecaut, KSprotbery, MayorWhite, BColeman, BHutchinson, NTorgelson,TWhite,JSchneider, AGENDAS(37) MHubner, SMullen, LFlemm, BBilodeau, CHolden,JMorrow, CBarry, SHeiserman, MGilbert,CHankins, KHanson, DHooper,J- Immacolato, LMoorehead, LUPB Members:Jon Johnson, Dana Ralph, Kenneth Wendling, AGENDAS (7) • Steve Dowell, David Malik, Elizabeth Watson,Tim Gimenez Seattle Post Intelligencer(P.I.) Agenda Email:citvdeskOseattlepi.com Pam Mottram Kelly Snyder, Roth Hill Engineering Agenda Email: ksnyder(a)rothhill.com Pam Mottram Pam Cobley, Roth Hill Engineering Agenda Email: pcobley@rothhill.com Pam Mottram 14450 NE 29"PI,Suite 101, Bellevue,WA 98007 Shaunta Hyde,The Boeing Co., 206-655-3640 Agenda Email: shaunla.r.hvde(cDboeing.com Pam Mottram Local Gvmt Relations Mgr. POB 3707 MC 14-49,Sea,WA 98124 Ted Nixon, Campbell/Nixon Assoc. Agenda Email:ten@cn-architects.com Pam Mottram 10024 SE 2401h, Suite 102, Kent 98031 Doug Corbin, Puget Sound Energy, Agenda Email::doualas.corbin(oilpse.com Pam Mottram 3130 S 38"St.,TAC-ANX,Tacoma,WA 98409 PH:1-800-321-4123/395-6867 Lobby of City Hall Agenda POST Pam Mottram Kent.Downtown Partnership PO Box 557,Kent WA98035. Agenda Email: kdp(a)kentdowntown.org Pam Mottram (Jacquie Alexander) Ph:253-813-6976 Sam Pace, Seattle K.C.Assc of Realtors, Kirkland,WA Agenda Mail: 12015 115 Av NE, Stel95 98034 David Hoffman,2533445 Ave S,Kent,98032-4223 Agenda Email: David.W.Hoffman@Boeing.com Pam Mottram (KBAB) Hm:253-852-4683 Wk:253-773-2861 Melvin L. Roberts,9421 S. 2415 St., Kent 98031 Agenda Email: Melvin.L.Roberts(cDBoeing.com Pam Mottram (KBAB) Hm:253-854-0952 Wk:425-865-3695 Jacob W.Grob, 5408 S. 236 St., Kent 98032-3389 Agenda Email:Jacob.W.Grob a()Boeing.com Pam Mottram (KBAB) Hm:253-813-3809 Wk:425-234-2664 Steven M. Nuss,26220 42" Ave. S, Kent, 98032 Agenda Email: Steve NussaRedDotCorp.com Pam Mottram • (KBAB) Hm:253-854-7561 Thomas Hale, 23327 115rnPI SE, Kent 98031-3426 Agenda Email: sthale2(&comcast.net Pam Mottram (KBAB) Hm:253-854-0734 Aaron Renner, (KBAB) Kent,WA 98032 Agenda Email: aaron rennerft yahoo.com Pam Mottram 13 Full Packets+2 for Mtg (7 Dry.Luttd Agda Covers for CC)4 Hd copy Agdas )Revsd 10113/05) SAPermltTlanTlanning Commlttee120051DistrlbutionlPC-distribution)l2105.doc PARTIES OF RECORD: '1 Agenda and staff report mailed to these parties of record via USPS or Email on Tues& Weds, November 15& 16, 2005. 1) # -2005-3 Commercial Motor Vehicles in Residential Zunin Districts: �{�4�fLJyL � V Barry N. Bender,Jr., benderbimv dnetzeromet, 360.362.2616 — kp Si; y1� r u�5W Margaret Bauer, 15410 SE 272"d St., Sp 108,Kent,WA 98042 margaret-bauergwebtv.net Andre and Tanya Reeves,26818 27'4 Place S,Kent,WA 98032 Tanya.reeves(�seattle.eov t ✓4. Robert Bray, 10604 SE 244'h St., Kent,WA 98030 253.852.2150 1/5. Tom Sharp,PO Box 938,Maple Valley,WA 98038 ✓6. Judy Hanford,24736 1361h Ave. SE,Kent,WA 98042 Jerry Sanders,23102 112`h Place SE, Kent,WA 98031 A. Dick Staples, 14629 SE 267"St.,Kent,WA 98042 ✓9 Ralph Linderman, 14029 SE 194" St., Renton,WA OX3. Ron Amtson,24423 137"'Ave SE,Kent,WA 98042 arntson7@aol.com Janet Lewis, 13507 SE 250t"St.,Kent,WA 98042 jlewis@cgisp.net or ianetlewisriindermere.com `� Eric Pfaff,29204 124°i Ave SE,Auburn,WA 98092 Scott Floyd, 9645 S 232"d St.,Kent, WA 98031 2) #ZCA-2005-7 Shipping Containers in Residential Zoning Districts: Jerry Sanders,23102 112' Place SE, Kent,WA 98031 ✓2. Robert Bray, 10604 SE 244'h St.,Kent,WA 98030 i "f "v/3. Erik Pfaff,29204 1241h Ave SE,Auburn,WA 98092 i 3) 2005 Annual Docket Report e ' 1. Paul Morford,PO Box 6345,Kent,WA 98064 ✓2. Jon Napier,Kent Fire Dept,400 W. Gowe S.,Kent,WA 98032 inayier@ci.kent.wa.us ci.kent.wa.us .J� tsa Verner,Tukwila Planning Dept, 6200 Southcenter Blvd,Tukwila,WA 98188 Iverner�a ci.tukwila.wa.us 4 eke Scarey, SeaTac Planning Dept, I arevrcilci.seatac.wa.us `f�L'L� /55 Charlie Lindsey,Kent Facilities Mgmt,220 4'h Ave S,Kent,WA 98032 clindsey�ci.kent.wa.us yb. Gloria GW,Kent Planning Services, 220 4'h Ave S.,Kent,WA 98032 G Wessenci.kent.wa.us • 4) 2005 Com rehensive Plan&ZoningMay Amendments#CPA-2005-2 A-C /#CPA-2005- 1-3 1. Robert Pamell,PE.,Consultant,4422 187'h PI SE,Issaquah,WA 98027 ;/2. Elissabeth Bohannon,PO Box 5062,Kent,WA 98064 A Joel Kessell, P.E., S.E. Engineered Solutions, 5700 100'h St. SW, Suite 630-166, Lakewood,WA 98499 .i4. Jeff&Connie Hurley, 815 E. Main St.,Auburn,WA 98002 ✓5. George Allen,Millennium Investment Group, 10903 Valley Ave E.,Puyallup,WA 98372 A. Wayne Carlson, AICP,AHBL Inc.,2215 N 30'h St., Suite 300, Tacoma,WA 98403 fl. Doug Hutchens, 1311 Central Ave S, Kent,WA 98032 Declaration of Delivery On 106,2005,under penalty of perjury and pursuant to the laws of the State of Washington,I hereby state nd declare olvthis date I caused to be delivered via regular I"Class mail, a true and correct copy of � concern- to these Parties of Record. pwq Executed at K t, Washington on this ( h day of , 200 Dec arant: Pamela Mottram Mottram, Pamela From: Mottram, Pamela Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 4:09 PM To: ✓Barry N Bender Jr. (benderbjmv@netzero.net); Margaret Bauer(margar< Andre&Tanya Reeves (Tanya.reeves@seattle.gov); Ron Arntson (arnts Lewis Qanetlewis@windermere.com); Mike Scarey(mscarey@ci.seatac. Perkins, Qwest Communications; Corbin, Doug; Puget Sound Energy; D (Theralphs4@msn.com); David Malik (dpmalik@hotmail.com); Elizabeth Huffman, SKC Mgr; Jon Johnson Qonkjohnson@attbi.com); Kenneth We (kenwendling@hotmail.com); Kent Downtown Partnership (Jacquie Alex; Malakoff, Kent Reporter Newspaper; Pam Cobley, Roth Hill Engineering. KBAB; Seattle Post Intelligencer(P.I.);Snyder, Kelly Roth Hill Engr; Sto @msn.com); Ted Nixon; Tim Gimenez, LUPB Member; White, Tammy; . Asst City Attorney; Anderson, Charlene; Planning Manager; Barry, Cathy Planning Services; Bilodeau, Bernie Admin Secretary, Planning; Bockeli Tom, City Attorney; Cameron, Renee; Civil Legal Assistant; City Council; Crawford, Ed; Flemm, Lori; Gilbert, Matt, Planning Services; Gill, Gary; C Development Mgr, PW; Givens, Rosalie; Gould-Wessen, Gloria; Grob, J Hale, Thomas KBAB; Hankins, Chris, Planning Services; Hanson, Ku Heiserman, Steve Prod. Assist. Multimedia; Hodgson, John; Hoffman, E Lori; Holden, Chris, Admin Secretary, Planning Services; Hooper, DamlE Hubner, Mike; Hutchinson, Robert;Jacober, Brenda; City Clerk; Larry Bl: Lopez, Barbara; Marousek, Kim; Principal Planner; Mary Simmons, City Michael Hubner, Suburban Cities Consultant, Planning Services; Mooret Judy, Admin Sec., Planning Services; Mullen, Steve Transp Engr Mgr, t' Nuss, Steven M KBAB; Osborne, William; Planner; Pechler, Marcelle- Commerce; Peterson, Kelly; Pulliam, Julie; Roberts, Melvin L KBAB; Director; Schneider, Jim; Senecaut, Kathleen; Shaunta Hyde, the Boeinc Kevin; Storment, Jim; Thomas A. Goeltz; Torgelson, Nathan; White, Jim Subject: AGENDA Packet-for the 11/21/05 Planning & Economic Dev.Committe Hearing and Meeting Importance: High Please find ATTACHED the Agenda Packet for the PEDC public hearing and meeting scheduled for P 21, 2005. gn PEDC_Packet_112 105.pdf(7 MB) Please contact me if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Pavvueta A. MottravvL Advv,i; EstratLvesecretnv� PLawvu.n servLoes p h o vtie: 253-25C�-.5454 fax: 253-850-0454 e-vv�aCL:pw�ettravu@ci,.revLt.wa.us • 1 11/15/2005 4:10 PM 4:10 PM Mottram, Pamela From: Pamela Wednesday, Sent: Wedness day, November 16, 2005 8:43 AM To: Lisa Vernier(Lverner@ci.tukwila.wa.us); Napier, Jon; Lindsey, Charles Subject: AGENDA PACKET-for the 11/21/05 Planning & Economic Dev. Committee (PEDC) Public Hearing and Meeting Importance: High To Parties of Record: Please find ATTACHED the Agenda Packet for the PEDC public hearing and meeting scheduled for Monday, November 21, 2005 at 4:00 pm. PEDC_Packet_112 105.pdf(7 MB) This packet includes a section on the "2005 Annual Docket Report' which includes your Docket application submittal. Please contact me if you should have any questions or if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, T>OV elbt A. MottrpvA ALAvutAtstvattve SeevetGtvu PLaAni, q Sewtees • phoAe:2b3-850-54s4 f G2: 25S-25C-(0454 e-w,.Gtil: pwiottravv�@c"�.i�ewt.wa.us 1 11/16/2005 8:44 AM 8:44 AM Mottram, Pamela From: Mottram, Pamela Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 9:03 AM To: Warren Perkins, Qwest Communications; Corbin, Doug; Puget Sound Energy; Dana Ralph (Theralphs4@msn.com); David Malik (dpmalik@hotmail.com); Elizabeth Watson; Garrett Huffman, SKC Mgr; Jon Johnson (jonkjohnson@attbi.com); Kenneth Wendling (kenwendling@hotmail.com); Kent Downtown Partnership (Jacquie Alexander); Morris Malakoff, Kent Reporter Newspaper; Pam Cobley, Roth Hill Engineering; Renner,Aaron T. , KBAB; Seattle Post Intelligencer(P.I.); Snyder, Kelly Roth Hill Engr; Steve Dowell (dowell16 @msn.com); Ted Nixon; Tim Gimenez, LUPB Member; White, Tammy; Adams Pratt, Kim; Asst City Attorney; Anderson, Charlene; Planning Manager; Barry, Cathy, Admin Sec., Planning Services; Bilodeau, Bernie Admin Secretary, Planning; Bockelie, Marit; Brubaker, Tom, City Attorney; Cameron, Renee; Civil Legal Assistant; City Council; Coleman, Bonnie; Crawford, Ed; Flemm, Lori; Gilbert, Matt, Planning Services; Gill, Gary; Gillespie, Mike, Development Mgr, PW; Givens, Rosalie; Gould-Wessen, Gloria; Grob, Jacob W. KBAB; Hale, Thomas KBAB; Hankins, Chris, Planning Services; Hanson, Kurt, Planning Services; Heiserman, Steve Prod. Assist. Multimedia; Hodgson, John; Hoffman, David KBAB; Hogan, Lori; Holden, Chris, Admin Secretary, Planning Services; Hooper, Damien, Planning Services; Hubner, Mike; Hutchinson, Robert; Jacober, Brenda; City Clerk; Larry Blanchard, PW Director; Lopez, Barbara; Marousek, Kim; Principal Planner; Mary Simmons, City Clerk's Office; Michael Hubner, Suburban Cities Consultant, Planning Services; Moorehead, Lydia; Morrow, Judy, Admin Sec., Planning Services; Mullen, Steve Transp Engr Mgr; Nachlinger, Robert; Nuss, Steven M KBAB; Osborne, William; Planner; Pechler, Marcelle- Kent Chamber of Commerce; Peterson, Kelly; Pulliam, Julie; Roberts, Melvin L KBAB; Satterstrom, Fred; CD Director; Schneider, Jim; Senecaut, Kathleen; Shaunta Hyde, the Boeing Co.; Sprotbery, Kevin; Storment, Jim; Thomas A. Goeltz; Torgelson, Nathan; White, Jim Subject: AGENDA-for the 11/21/05 Planning & Economic Dev. Committee (PEDC) Public Hearing & Meeting My initial attempt to send the complete AGENDA PACKET for the Monday, November 21, 2005 PEDC public hearing and meeting scheduled at 4:00 p.m. failed. Please find attached the Agenda. Copies of the Packet are available upon request and will be available at the meeting. in PEDC_Agenda_112 105.pdf(88 KB)... Please contact me with any questions you may have or if I can be of further assistance. Thank you, Pavv.eLa A. Mottvaw. Adw%vdstrntive•Secretaru u PLnvww� ServLces p In o we: 2.53-8.5 h-5454 faX: 253 856-6454 e-v�a%L: pwCttvawi@c%.IZewt.wa.us 1 11/16/2005 9:03 AM 9:03 AM f Mottram, Pamela a�u{�aYI-- W : Mottram, Pamela mt; Wednesday, November 10 2004 11:11 AM To: Ted Nixon, Camp a ixon Assoc.; Jeffrey Barker, Seattle P.I.; Kelly Snyder, Roth Hill Engineering; Mary Ausburn (mausbu@puget.com); Pam Cobley, Roth Hill Engineering; Wickstrom, Don; Aaron T. Renner, KBAB; Alexander, Jacquie, Kent Downtown Partnership; Barry, Cathy, Admin Sec., Planning Services; Bilodeau, Bernie Admin Secretary, Planning; Coleman, Bonnie; Crawford, Ed; Flemm, Lori; Gilbert, Matt, Planning Services; Gill, Gary; Givens, Rosalie; Grob, Jacob W. KBAB; Hale, Thomas KBAB; Hankins, Chris, Planning Services; Hanson, Kurt, Planning Services; Heiserman, Steve Prod. Assist. Multimedia; Hodgson, John; Hoffman, David KBAB; Holden, Chris,Admin Secretary, Planning Services; Hooper, Damien, Planning Services; Hutchinson, Robert; Kristiansen, Ryan ; Lopez, Barbara; Martin, Mike; Simmons, Mary; Michael Hubner, Suburban Cities Consultant, Planning Services; Morrow, Judy, Admin Sec., Planning Services; Mullen, Steve Transp Engr Mgr; Nachlinger, Robert; Nuss, Steven M KBAB; Roberts, Melvin L KBAB; Schneider, Jim; Senecaut, Kathleen; Shaunta Hyde, the Boeing Co.; Sprotbery, Kevin; Storment, Jim; Torgelson, Nathan; White, Jim; White, Tammy; Marcelle Pechler (mpechler@KentChamber.com); White, Bruce; Anderson, Charlene; Brubaker, Tom; Cameron, Renee; Clark, Tim; Gould-Wessen, Gloria; Harmon, Ron; Huffman, Garrett SKC Mgr, Master Blders Association; Jacober, Brenda; Marousek, Kim; Osborne, William; Peterson, Julie; Pratt, Kim Adams; Ranniger, Deborah; Raplee, Debbie; Satterstrom, Fred; Thomas, Les; Kenneth Wendling; Dana Ralph (Theralphs4@msn.com); Elizabeth Watson; Greg Worthing (gaworthing@yahoo.com); Steve Dowell (E-mail); David Malik (E-mail); Jon Johnson (E-mail) Subject: AMENDED - 11/15/04 Planning & Economic Dev. Committee Meeting Agenda Packet To All Parties of Interest, phase find attached an AMENDEDAgenda Packetfor the upcoming Planning & Economic Dev. Committee scheduled day, November 15, 2004 at 4:00 p.m. gn 111504PEDC-Agen daPacket.pdf(1... If you should need any further assistance, please contact me. Thank you, 'PavK61n A. MottravA AdvA.CvLCstrative seeretavu� Pi,ay.vi.%wG� Servcces PN'o vve: 253-950-5454 fox: 253-850-0454 e-vua%l: pvuottravu@e:.hewt.wa.us • 1 11/10/2004 11:12 AM 11:12 AM J Date: To: k,,,iq Fax; Re: {��Cd4c2► Send�r: YOU SHOULD RECEIVE_ PAGE(S), INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE RAGES, PLEASE CALL 253.856-5454. PAA13MINIF0RM3wAX00vMdoc 1199 ZL8 £SZ TS :ZT 6 'AON V09 W03 N NO Z00 .0£ •00 .0 NOIIVNI.LS30 3WIYJ31V0 Xi 'ON 300W lins3s 'Sod NOIlvAn0 palaldmoo (s) uollowsuga,L uoTssTmsug4i INOd Sll NOIIOVSNV'dl I00 'd T+Sb9 998 £9Z :131 ONINNV'Id .LN3A Z9: ZT (3R.L) b0 .60- 'AON Date: 0 , • Fax: (mil_} ?.b eC C7I�C��77 C Sender: f YOU SHOULD RECEIVE .� PAGE(S),INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET. IF YOU DD NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL 263466-64541 PlADMINIFORMSIMCOVER.doc 9Z09L£b6 897'AONASRH 000NOI.LtldR❑ NOI,LtlNI.LS30 3W (s) agad ao.[aa puas-ad :dOdd3 VOI SS[UI5UB,I J, .LdOd3d N0110 'SNVd.L i i00 'd bSb9 9S8 £SZ�131 ONINNV'ld ,LNSN 63:ZI (Stll) 1,0 .60- 'AON