HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Planning-Board of Adjustment - 09/11/1989 • CITY OF �
AGENDA
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
�r caA September 11, 1989
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS:
Robert Jarvis, Chairman
Beth Carroll
Jack Cosby
Tracy Faust
Walter Flue
CITY STAFF MEMBERS:
James P. Harris, Planning Director
Stephen Clifton, Planner
Scott Williams, Planner
This is to inform you that the scheduled meeting of the Board of
Adjustment will take place on Monday, September 11, 1989 at 7 : 30
p.m. in the Kent City Hall, City Council Chambers.
1. Call to order
2 . Roll Call
3 . Approval of August 7 , 1989 Board of Adjustment minutes
4 . Added items to agenda
5. Administration of Oath
6. Variances:
1) South Valley Associates #V-89-2 (SW)
A request for a variance to eliminate the requirement for
15 feet of side yard landscaping on a parking lot as
required in Section 15 . 07.060 (0) (2) of the Kent Zoning
Code.
2) Bank of California/TKE Inc Landscaping #V-89-4 (SC)
A request for a variance from the front yard landscaping
as required in Section 15.07 . 06 of the Kent Zoning Code.
Malw
220 4th AVE.SO.,/ KENT,WASHINGTON 98032-5895/TELEPHONE (206)859-3300
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES
September 11, 1989
The scheduled meeting of the Kent Board of Adjustment was called
to order by Vice Chair Tracy Faust on the evening of Monday,
September 11, 1989 at 7:30 p.m. in the Kent City Hall, City Council
Chambers.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBERS PRESENT:
Tracy Faust, Vice Chair
Beth Carroll
Jack Cosby
Walter Flue
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEMBER ABSENT:
Robert Jarvis
CITY STAFF MEMBERS:
James P. Harris, Planning Director
Kathy McClung, Senior Planner
Stephen Clifton, Planner
. Scott Williams, Planner
Lois Ricketts, Recording Secretary
APPROVAL OF AUGUST 70 1989
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES
Ms. Carroll MOVED and Mr. Flue SECONDED the motion to approve the
August 7, 1989 minutes as printed. Motion carried.
Vice Chair Faust administered the oath to all those who intended
to speak.
SOUTH VALLEY ASSOCIATES #V-89-2
South Valley Associates requested the hearing on their request for
a variance be postponed until the next Board of Adjustment meeting.
Mr. Cosby MOVED and Ms. Carroll SECONDED a motion to continue
#V-89-2 to the October meeting. Motion carried.
BANK OF CALIFORNIA/TKE. INC. , LANDSCAPING #V-89-4
Stephen Clifton presented the request for a front yard landscaping
variance as required in Section 15.07.060 of the Kent Zoning Code.
The site is located at 7123 South 188th Street, is approximately
1. 085 acres in size, and is zoned Ml, Industrial Park. The area
• is used predominantly for warehouses and distribution centers. The
original site plan was approved with two 30-foot entrances off
-- South 188th Street. The building site is currently served by a
J
J
I
Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes
September 11, 1989
135-foot wide entr4nce. The building has ten dock-high loading
doors which face South 188th Street. Trucks and trailers enter the
site off 188th Street and maneuver within the area. The Kent
Zoning Code requires that no maneuvering of trucks take place on
public rights of way, and that earth berms and landscaping be
located between do k-high doors and the street and along the
subject property like. Alaskan Freight applied for a variance in
1984 to have the center berm removed. The request was approved.
In 1985 Alaskan Freight applied for a two-year extension because
they expected to move sometime in the near future. The Board of
Adjustment granted , a one-year extension at that time. This
variance has expired and has not been in effect for three years.
The variance request is subject to review by the Board of
Adjustment as outlihed in Section 15. 09. 040 C entitled Conditions
for Granting a Variance. The first criterion states that the
variance shall not constitute a grant of special privilege. Section
15. 05. 060 F states that no portion of a vehicle taking part in
loading, unloading r maneuvering activities shall project into a
public street, ally or interior pedestrian area. Ingress and
egress points from] public rights of way (driveways) shall be
designed and located in such a manner as to preclude off-site or
on-street maneuvering of vehicles. Section 15. 05.060 D states that
buildings which ut�lize dock-high loading doors shall provide a
minimum of 100 fee of clear maneuvering area in front of each
door. The applicanjt states that no other buildings in this area
which require truckaccess are similarly situated with respect to
such a limited depth in front of the loading doors. This building
was originally designed for smaller trucks and not designed to pull
today' s trucks an tractors of longer length. The 100-foot
requirement remains! as it was in 1984 when Alaskan Freight applied
for this variance. i The building was built in 1977 and therefore
is a legal nonconforming site.
The second criterion states that such a variance is necessary
because of special' circumstances relating to the size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings, etc. As stated by the
applicant's representative during the 1984 hearing, the problem was
caused by the applicant' s inability to recognize the facility's
limitations. The; facility was not originally designed to
accommodate the lager trucks and trailers that are currently in
use; therefore, he hardship was not caused by special
circumstances relating to the size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings of tho subject property, but instead by the need to
expand and maintain operations using larger trucks at the facility.
The third criterionlstates that granting such a variance will not
be materially detrimental to the public welfare. The applicants
claim the approv 1 of the variance request will continue to
2
i
Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes
September 11, 1989
eliminate congestion on 188th Street caused by trucks trying to
maneuver in the street. They also claim that maneuvering of trucks
now takes place efficiently and safely on company property. The
Kent Planning Department 'has not received any complaints since the
two previous applications were approved; however, this does not
mean that no problem exists or will not exist in the future. The
Planning and Public Works Departments do not support this request.
One of the reasons is that existing parking spaces on the west side
of the property will not be allowed because they do not meet the
City's maneuvering requirements. Those were allowed to be put in
with the first and second variance approval; however, the Public
Works Department requires that parking stalls be located 50 feet
away from any area where maneuvering takes place. Also, the 100-
foot dock-high maneuvering requirement has not been' met. Mr.
Clifton also mentioned that there were areas on the site where
weeds were predominant, and that these areas should be covered with
ground cover and irrigated. Staff recommended denial of the
variance.
David Sprinkle, Lasher Holzapfel Sperry and Ebberson, Attorneys at
Law, 6000 Westland Building, 100 South King Street, Seattle, WA
98104, represented Leonie Barnes, legal owner of the properties
held in trust with the Bank of California as equitable owner. He
• pointed out that the hardship was not only for the current tenant
but also for the owners who are trying to lease the property. When
the property was developed, the length of the trailers was shorter
and the building could be utilized as it was intended. Now that
the trailers are longer, the building is functionally obsolescent
unless the current tenant is allowed to operate on the property.
The building was designed for short trucks. The truckers now need
to be close to the Port of Seattle, and the big truckers want to
be in the Valley; however, the facility doesn't provide adequate
maneuvering area for the larger trucks. Over a period of six
months the broker has found there is no market for a facility for
small truckers in the Valley.
Lawrence Campbell, Architect, 1609 South Central, Kent, submitted
the original variance request for Alaskan Freight in 1984. He
explained that the planter was originally in front of the building.
There are 10 loading doors across the front and additional doors
at the back of the building. This is a cross-dock loading
facility. Trucks bring items in; these are consolidated and then
taken out again. In 1984 it was proposed that the planter be
removed and additional planting be added. With the planter in
place only 7 of the 10 loading doors were functionally operative.
Alaskan Freight had added landscaping in every place that was not
occupied by either required parking or truck maneuvering. The
landscaping was increased, but it has been placed in a configura-
tion that does not meet the requirements of the code in terms of
• 3
i
I
Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes
September 11, 1989
i
screening off the s�reet. This was permitted to allow the trucks
to use the doors an not tie up the street. The facility functions
well but does not and
to the code. He felt that if the planter
were returned, trucl�s would stack in the street. He was concerned
that the facility would be abandoned because of the change in use
of trucks in the Valley area. He pointed out that the variance was
granted in 1984 and then extended for one year. Currently the
facility is operat�ng without a variance. The applicant was
willing to make same alterations to allow this building to
continue to be used, but it could not conform totally. If the
planter had to be replaced, the building would be vacant. It was
the intention of Alaskan Freight to restore the site, but they
abandoned the facility and are now out of business. The owners
have tried unsuccessfully to lease the facility for a use other
than a cross-dock facility. He asked that the variance request be
granted to allow th4 use to continue until the use is changed. He
did not sense any community objection to this request.
Al Burrows, Terminal Manager of the Kent facility for TKE,
explained that theyput 27-foot trailers in the back. The 45-foot
trailers from the Mid West and the East Coast dock on the front
side because they dd not fit in the back area. They cross-dock the
contents into smallor trailers.
Gregg Herrell, Kidder Matthews and Segner Inc, 12886 Interurban
Avenue South, Seattle, WA 98168, stated that TKE was the only kind
of firm that could Utilize this type of facility.
Janice Dimick, Ass stant Vice President and Trust Real Estate
Officer, The Bank of California, 910 Fourth Avenue, Seattle,
Washington 98164, jconcurred with Mr. Campbell that they were
willing to work with the Planning Department regarding this
variance request. ! She realized that the landscaping needed
attention. This has been arranged previously but she added that
additional work would be done. There is an irrigation system on
the site but it is currently being repaired. She pointed out that
they would lose their tenant if the variance was not granted.
Al Burrows pointed out that the facility has worked well for them.
The facility is open 24 hours each day. Most of his trucks come
in during the nightj, between 2 a.m. and 5 a.m. , when there is no
traffic on the streets. These cross-country loads park the
trailers into the dock at the center doors. The cabs are taken to
a motel where the d ivers sleep. The trucks are reloaded early the
next morning. Only 25 percent of the large rigs maneuver on the
property between 7: 0 a. .m. and 7 : 00 p.m.
David Sprinkle sugjgested a one-month continuance in order to
present a proposal that would be less nonconforming.
4
i
Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes
September 11, 1989
Mr. Herrell emphasized that if the berm had to be replaced, the
facility would be functionally obsolescent. This would be a
hardship for the owner.
Mr. Clifton felt it was unfortunate that the tenant was currently
in the building without a variance. He submitted a letter from
Western Paper, located west of the subject site, which requested
that the landscaping be brought up to code. They frequently have
meetings in a room that views out on the subject property and would
like the landscaping to be improved. He suggested that if the
variance were approved, he would like to work with the applicant
in getting the landscaping up to code. He suggested additional
ground cover on areas not currently covered with ground cover. He
also suggested that the applicant consider painting the building
if the variance were granted.
Acting Chair Faust asked if it would be possible to eliminate the
parking spots in the corner.
Mr. Clifton responded that the Public Works Department requires
parking to be located 50 feet from the property line. For 1, 200
square feet of office space and 10,000 square feet of warehouse,
the applicant would need 10 or 11 stalls. He felt the applicant
could eliminate the stalls along the western side and still have
enough parking on the east side.
Ms. Carroll asked Mr. Sprinkle to explain what special
circumstances relating to size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings were involved in this request.
Mr. Sprinkle responded that the special circumstances involved the
topography and shape, not as it exists today, but as it was
designed in 1970 for a particular purpose. The design had worked
well for the short trucks, but it does not work well with the
present needs and economic conditions.
Ms. Carroll did not feel that the location of the building was one
of the conditions that could be considered in this request.
Mr. Campbell felt the special circumstances involved inadequate
room to maneuver the trucks. This was caused by the size and shape
which are unique to the facility.
Acting Chair Faust asked if the special circumstances were not
created by the owner.
Mr. Campbell responded that this had been done unknowingly for a
different market. That market does not exist at the present time.
• 5
i
Kent Board of Adjustment Minutes
September 11, 1989 j
Mr. Flue MOVED and *r. Cosby SECONDED a motion to close the public
hearing. Motion caieried.
i
The Board members adjourned for executive session.
After reconvening ; Acting Chair Faust stated that the Board
appreciated the problems that the owners and the tenant have
experienced, but thj Board denied the variance (3 to 1 decision) .
Written findings of1fact and conclusions of law would be mailed at
a later time. The $oard wished the applicants well but were bound
by the three condi ions that must be met. The Board found that
i there were no specal circumstances relating to the size, shape,
topography, locatio#i or surroundings of the subject property. They
understood that thepbsition of the building on the property made
it difficult to d what the applicant wished to do with the
property, but the condition had to do with the property itself, not
where the building had been located. They understood that the
building worked well at the time it was erected, but the Board must
look at the condition of the property itself as compared to the
surrounding properties to establish eligibility for a variance.
The Board had to d0y the request on the basis that it would be a
grant of special privilege that none of the surrounding properties
have. The Board dick not have a problem with Criteria 3 even though
there was not 100i feet of maneuvering area in front of the
building. They did, not feel that this was materially detrimental
to the public welfalre or to the people or property nearby. They
understood that remOving the berm actually helped the drivers from
running over the cubs of the nearby property. The Board could not
grant this variance !because there existed no special circumstances.
To grant this variance would be a grant of special privileges.
ADJOURNMENT
Ms. Carroll MOVED tb adjourn the meeting. Mr. Cosby SECONDED the
motion. Motion carded. The meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
!
Jame P. Ha ris, Planning Director
!
i
6