HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning-Board of Adjustment - 07/08/1991 CITY OF �IL11Y4nIT
Dan Kelleher, Mayor
James P. Harris, Planning Director
The City of Kent Celebrates its First 100 Years
AGENDA
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
July 8 , 1991
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS:
Jack Cosby, Chair
Ron Banister
Walter Flue
Raul Ramos
CITY STAFF MEMBER:
James P. Harris, Planning Director
This is to inform you that the scheduled meeting of the Kent Board
of Adjustment will take place on Monday, July 8, 1991 at 7 p.m. in
the Kent City Hall, City Council Chambers.
1. Call to order
2 . Roll Call
3 . Approval of April 1, 1991 Board of Adjustment minutes
4 . Added items to agenda
5. Administration of Oath
6. Variance:
MOODY VARIANCE #V-91-2
Request for a variance from Section 15. 04 . 020
(H4) of the Kent Zoning Code which requires a
minimum 20-foot front yard setback in a Single
Family Residential Zone.
n
220 4th AVE.SO., /KENT,WASHINGTON 98032-5895/TELEPHONE (206)859-3390/FAX#859-3334
KENT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES
July 8, 1991
The scheduled meeting of the Kent Board of Adjustment was called to
order by Chair Cosby on the evening of Monday, July 8 , 1991 at 7: 00
p.m. in the Kent City Hall, City Council Chambers.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS:
Jack Cosby, Chair
Ron Banister
Raul Ramos
Walter Flue, excused
CITY STAFF MEMBERS:
Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager
Carol Proud, Senior Planner
Lois Ricketts, Recording Secretary
APPROVAL OF THE APRIL 1. 1991 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES
• Mr. Banister MOVED that the minutes of the April 1, 1991 meeting be
approved as printed. Mr. Ramos SECONDED the motion. Motion
carried.
Chair Cosby administered the oath to all who intended to speak.
MOODY VARIANCE #V-91-2
Carol Proud presented the applicants' request for a variance from
Section 15. 04 . 020 (H4) of the Kent Zoning Code which requires a
minimum 20-foot front yard setback in a Single Family Residential
Zone. They are requesting a 10-foot setback from the street.
The property is located at 11070 SE 248th Street. The subject
property is approximately 36, 025 square feet ( . 82 acres) and is
zoned R1-12, Single Family Residential. A vacant single family
residential home is located to the east, a church is located to the
west, vacant land for an elementary school playground is located to
the north, and a multifamily residential development is located to
the south. The proposed site was annexed into the City of Kent in
1987. It was a portion of three adjacent lots purchased by the
Kent School District for development of an elementary school. A
lot line adjustment was completed to create one legal lot for the
school and two smaller single family residential lots. An
environmental review was initiated for the Kent Elementary Site #25
. project, and the subject property was included in this process.
The applicant was denied a request for a short subdivision to
divide the subject property into two single family residential
Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes
July 8 , 1991
lots. Both of the existing homes are currently on stilt
foundations. They were originally located on the school district
property. The applicant applied for permits to move both homes
onto the subject site. One permit was issued and the other was
held pending approval of a proposed short subdivision. Since the
short plat was denied, the second house relocation permit will not
be issued; therefore one of the houses needs to be moved to
another location. Variances are categorically exempt from SEPA,
but any development on this property is subject to the overall
review of the enitire school site. A Final Declaration of
Nonsignificance (#ENV-90-70) for Kent Elementary Site #25 was
issued on December 7, 1990, and a revised DNS was issued on
December 28, 1990 Conditions number 7, 91 10 and 13 of the
revised DNS address wetland preservation activities. Several
conditions that required mitigating measures were identified in
this review. Condition number 10 was specifically pertinent to
this variance request:
10: Permanent fencing shall be placed along the average
fifty ($0) foot setback from the wetland to
preserve the wetland's integrity, discourage
trespassing, and limit liability during wet
weather. '
The short plat application for the proposed site was denied in
order to the protect value and function of the identified wetlands.
Fencing along the; 50-foot buffer is required as part of the
environmental mitigation for the school site to guarantee
protection of the wetlands. Disruption to the wetlands will limit
its function as a natural drainage course and water quality
improvement capabilities. The lot line adjustment which created
the lot was approved before the final Determination of
Nonsignificance for the proposed site was issued. Therefore, the
limitations for future development created by the 50-foot buffer
and fencing requirements were unknown at the time the lot lines
were approved. Thils site is situated at the headwaters of Garrison
Creek and acts as 4 natural buffer. If a house is located within
the buffer, the value and function of the existing wetlands and
natural drainage course would be reduced significantly.
The following criteria from Section 15. 09. 040 (C) must be considered
before granting a variance:
1. The variance ; shall not constitute a grant of special
privileges inconsistent with a limitation upon uses of other
properties in 'the vicinity and zone in which the property, on
behalf of which the application was filed, is located.
2
• Kent Board ' of Adjustment Minutes
July 8, 1991
Staff felt that this variance does not constitute a special
privilege for the applicant because the preservation of the
wetlands will benefit the entire community. The reduced
setback is not a privilege granted to the applicant, rather a
compromise sought to provide development rights and to
guarantee maximum protection of the wetlands.
2 . Such a variance is necessary because of special circumstances
relating to the size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings of the subject property, to provide it with use
rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the
vicinity and in the zone in which the subject property is
located.
The identified wetlands and the required buffer create the
special circumstance necessitating this variance. The
applicant purchased two homes from Kent School District which
were formerly located on the elementary school site. It was
the intent of the applicant to short plat the property and
move both homes to the site. The short plat denial prohibits
permanent placement of both homes on the subject property.
• The size of the home to be placed on this site cannot be
altered because the home was purchased and is located on the
site. The proposed 10-foot front yard setback would allow
placement of the acquired house on the edge of the wetlands
buffer. Placement of the home directly at the wetlands buffer
edge does not offer a perfect solution, because access from
the north side of the home will be limited by the required
buffering fence. However, reducing the front yard setback to
ten feet represents a compromise to permit placement of a
single family home on a legal lot and provides protection of
an identified wetland.
3 . That the granting of such variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to the
property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the
subject property is situated.
Staff felt that the proposed variance, with recommended
conditions, will benefit public welfare by protecting the
identified wetlands.
Staff recommends approval of this variance with the following
conditions:
1. The owner/developer of the project site shall
• comply with condition number ten of the
3
Kent Board of Adju$tment Minutes
July 8 , 1991
revised Determination of Nonsignificance
issued On December 28, 1990 for the Kent
Elementary Site #25 (ENV 90-70) by placing a
permanent fence along the portion of the
fifty-fodt wetlands buffer located on the
subject ; property. The fence shall be
maintained in perpetuity. The type and height
of the fence shall be approved by the City of
Kent Watibr Quality Engineer.
2 . Future development of accessory units or any
impervious surfaces are prohibited within the
identified wetlands or its fifty-foot buffer.
3 . The wetlands and its designated fifty-foot
buffer $hall be retained in its natural
vegetative state. No additional landscaping,
gardening, or mowing shall take place within
this designated area.
4. One of the houses temporarily stored on the
subject property shall be removed from the
site by July 31, 1991.
Mr. Ramos asked who made the determination regarding the 50 or 25-
foot buffer.
Ms. Proud responded that the SEPA official made this decision.
Mr. Ramos asked if the City of Kent had different levels of
wetlands.
Ms. Proud responded that at this time the City has adopted interim
wetland guidelines. These are administered through the State
Environmental Polipy Act, so they are policy at this time. The
City is in the procCess of developing an ordinance.
Mr. Ramos asked who is responsible to put the permanent fencing
around the wetland ', area.
Ms. Proud thought that the school district would be responsible for
the fence.
Steven Moody, co-owner of the property, 5223 NE 187th, Seattle, is
in general agreement with the conditions to the variance, but the
applicants would hive preferred to have the property subdivided.
For the past year !his partners, Laura and Bill Krieger and Anna
Moody, his wife, have purchased investment properties. He was
4
Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes
July 81 1991
assured, by the house mover and contractor that the houses could be
moved and short platted without a problem. His greatest concern
was that the house must be moved from the property by July 31. The
applicants have found a site for the new location for the house,
but they have been unable to obtain a building permit because of
the lengthy waiting period. He felt it could take up to five or
six weeks to obtain a building permit after the plan is submitted
to the Building Department.
Mr. Banister asked if the 50-foot buffer requirement varied within
the City.
Ms. Proud responded that each is handled case-by-case. Fifty feet
is the Department of Ecology's minimum standard, which is currently
being used by the City.
Mr. Moody commented that the school district had stated to them
that it would have to build a bridge over the wetlands between the
school and the playground. No comment was made until after closing
that the subject site had wetlands on the property.
Mr. Ramos was concerned about street dedication.
• Ms. Proud responded that the school district was required to
provide five-foot shoulders along the road, and the owners of the
subject site would have to execute no-protest LID covenants. She
assumed that the applicant had all the necessary agreements in
place.
Mr. Banister asked if the condition recommended by the City was
acceptable except the date for removal of the second house. He
wondered how the date was established.
Ms. Proud explained that it is a zoning violation to have two homes
on a single lot. This condition was included to remind the
applicant that it is a violation. She explained that originally
there were three lots with completely different configurations.
The school district bought one and created the two smaller lots.
There was a wetlands that showed up in the SEPA review, but since
the subdivision had not been recorded, the applicant was not aware
of the wetlands.
Mr. Cosby asked the applicant if there were any other conditions
that would make compliance difficult.
Mr. Moody responded that they could live with the conditions. They
have a building permit on hold until the variance is approved.
• 5
Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes
July 81 1991
Mr. Ramos MOVED that the Board approve the staff recommendation
with the modification to condition #4 which would change the
removal date from July 31 to August 31, 1991. The applicant had
met all the criteria for granting a variance. The variance did
not constitute a grant of special privilege. It was necessary
because of special surroundings of the property. Granting the
variance would n't be detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to the property or improvements in the' vicinity.
Mr. Banister SECONDED the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Ramos MOVED ghat the meeting be adjourned. Mr. Banister
SECONDED the motion. Motion carried. Chair Cosby adjourned the
meeting at 7 :50 p.1n.
Respectfully submitted
ti
Ja s P. Harris, Secretary
6