HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Land Use and Planning Board - 03/14/2016 (2)
For documents pertaining to the Land Use and Planning Board, access the City’s website at:
http://kentwa.iqm2.com/citizens/Default.aspx?DepartmentID=1004.
Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the City Clerk’s Office in advance at (253) 856-
5725. For TTY/TDD service call the Washington Telecommunications Relay Service at (800) 833-6388. For
general information, contact Economic & Community Development Department, Planning Division at (253) 856-
5454.
ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Ben Wolters, Director
Phone: 253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032-5895
PUBLIC HEARING & WORKSHOP
AGENDA
LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD
MARCH 14, 2016
7:00 P.M.
LUPB MEMBERS: Randall Smith, Chair; Barbara Phillips, Vice Chair; Frank Cornelius;
Katherine Jones; and Jack Ottini
CITY STAFF: Charlene Anderson, AICP, Long Range Planning Manager; Matthew Gilbert,
AICP, Current Planning Manager; Hayley Bonsteel, Long Range Planner; Jason Garnham,
Planner; David Galazin, Assistant Civil Attorney.
This is to notify you that the Land Use and Planning Board will hold a Public Hearing
followed by a Workshop on MONDAY, MARCH 14, 2016 at 7:00 p.m. These meetings
will be held in Kent City Hall, City Council Chambers, 220 Fourth Avenue S, Kent, WA. The
public is invited to attend and all interested persons will have an opportunity to speak at the
Hearing. Any person wishing to submit oral or written comments on the proposed
amendments may do so at the hearing or prior to the hearing by email to Matthew Gilbert
at: mgilbert@kentwa.gov. No public testimony is taken at the Workshop, although the
public is welcome to attend.
The agenda will include the following item(s):
1. Call to order
2. Roll call
3. Approval of the January 25, 2016 Minutes
4. Added Items
5. Communications
6. Notice of Upcoming Meetings
7. PUBLIC HEARING:
PLAT EXTENSIONS [SCA-2016-1]
Consideration of a subdivision code amendment, amending Kent City Code 12.04.221
to allow preliminary plats approved in 2008 one additional year to record the final
plat – Matthew Gilbert
8. NOMINATION AND ELECTION OF OFFICERS
9. WORKSHOP:
OPIATE SUBSTITUTION TREATMENT FACILITIES [ZCA-2016-3]
Second workshop to discuss development of zoning code amendments that pertain
to the location and operation of opiate substitution treatment facilities -
Hayley Bonsteel
M1 INDUSTRIAL PARK DISTRICT ALLOWED USES [ZCA-2016-4]
Discussion of a proposed zoning code amendment to expand the uses permitted in
the M1 Industrial Park District to include a limited array of retail and service uses -
Jason Garnham
Land Use & Planning Board Minutes
Page 1 of 7
January 25, 2016
LAND USE AND PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES
JANUARY 25, 2016
1. Call to Order
Chair Smith called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm
2. Roll Call
LUPB Members: Randall Smith, Chair; Barbara Phillips, Vice Chair; Frank
Cornelius; Katherine Jones; and Jack Ottini were in attendance.
City Staff: Charlene Anderson, Long Range Planning Manager; Matt Gilbert,
Current Planning Manager; Hayley Bonsteel, Long Range Planner; Erin George,
Senior Planner; David Galazin, Civil Attorney were in attendance.
3. Approval of Minutes
Board Member Cornelius MOVED and Board Member Phillips SECONDED a Motion to
Approve the Minutes of October 26, 2015. MOTION PASSED 5-0.
4. Added Items
None
5. Communications
None
6. Notice of Upcoming Meetings
None
7. Public Hearing
Elder Care Facilities Zoning Code Amendment [ZCA-2015-4]
Hayley Bonsteel, Long Range Planner, explained that the original intent of the docket
request was to permit assisted living facilities without a commercial component in a
commercial zone. Staff was directed by the Board to analyze independent senior living
facilities (ISLF) as well. The Board formed a subcommittee, touring a number of facilities to
understand the issues involved. The proposed amendment adds a new category for ISLF;
separating those ISLFs (that provide at least one meal per day) from other independent
senior housing.
The proposed amendment also addresses the commercial component issue by providing a
new conditional use option for elder care facilities to be located in commercial zones without
a commercial component on-site; the applicant must show that commercial services are
available within one quarter mile (walking distance) of amenities in at least three of the
following categories: a public park or trail, school, indoor recreation centers, places of
worship, cultural arts centers, or retail services. The intent of this proposal is to increase
choices and quality of life by providing easy access to amenities and services.
Staff recommends approval of amendments to Title 15 of Kent City Code (KCC) to include
clarification of definitions in KCC 15.02 and amendments to use tables and development
conditions in KCC 15.04.
Concluding staff’s presentation, Chair Smith Opened the Public Hearing.
1
Land Use & Planning Board Minutes
Page 2 of 7
January 25, 2016
April Mackoff, 701 5th Avenue, Suite 6600, Seattle, WA 98104 attorney with McCullough,
Hall, Leary. On behalf of Sante Partners we strongly support ZCA-2015-4, thanking the
Board members and staff for their hard work regarding this matter. We look forward to
adoption of this ordinance.
J.B. Ruth, 420 W Smith Street, #214, Kent, WA 98032 spoke in opposition to the quarter
mile distance requirements, stating that placing these facilities in CC-MU zoning districts
would not work and stating that siting these facilities needs to be determined on a case by
case basis.
Khalid Husain, 26859 129th Avenue SE, Kent, WA stated that this is a highly regulated
industry. He spoke in opposition to the restrictive regulations including the quarter mile
requirement.. He recommended the addition of a category of services that would include
pharmacies, dental clinics and pet clinics. Husain opined that he would like to encourage
development of more adult foster home facilities for the elderly which house six or less
residents as these facilities only require licensing and are not regulated by the City.
Alyssa Arly, 6515 66 Street NE, Marysville, WA 98270 stated that as a consultant her
primary focus is working to find placement facilities for the elderly, stating that she
operated an adult and family home for close to 14 years. She stated that Kent is in need of
assisted living facilities that can allow aging in place. The first baby boomers are now 70
years old and beginning to enter our facilities with the silent generation (from 71 to 93
years of age) declining from our facilities. Many of the facilities in Kent were designed as
independent living facilities. She spoke in opposition to the inclusion of a quarter mile
boundary. Arly asked that the City allow for more assisted living facilities to be built in Kent.
With no further speakers, Chair Smith Closed the Public Hearing.
Galazin explained that assisted living facilities differ from other facilities regulated within the
City, such as residential facilities with health care and group homes. Currently in Kent City
Code, there is a 25 percent commercial component requirement associated with assisted
living facilities. Staff’s proposal includes language where that commercial component can be
waived if certain amenities are provided on site or if the facilities are located within a
specific proximity of a number of identified amenities.
Chair Smith called for a motion.
Board member Jones MOVED to recommend that the City Council approve the
proposed elder care facilities zoning code amendment [ZCA-2015-4] to Title 15 of
the Kent City Code including clarifications to definitions in KCC 15.02 and
amendments to use tables and development conditions as presented by staff.
Board Member Smith Seconded the Motion. Discussion ensued.
Board member Ottini moved to amend the original motion to delete the quarter
mile requirement with Board Member Phillips seconding that motion.
Discussion ensued.
2
Land Use & Planning Board Minutes
Page 3 of 7
January 25, 2016
Galazin addressed questions and concerns raised by the Board related to the quarter mile
regulation, siting of these facilities, how best to meet the Growth Management Act
requirements, and the 25 percent commercial component.
Bonsteel stated that if the quarter mile requirement is removed, then Section A on page 20
requiring that the facilities be located within a quarter mile of amenities will be removed.
Galazin clarified the main motion as amended for the record as: To recommend to the
City Council modification of the proposed code amendments to Title 15 of the Kent
City Code including clarifications to definitions in KCC 15.02 and amendments to
use tables and development conditions in KCC 15.04 as presented by staff, as
amended to do away with the quarter mile requirement that is on page 20 of your
packet, so that the motion will read to approve assisted living facilities, residential
facilities with healthcare and independent senior living facilities when not
combined with commercial or office uses, require a conditional use permit and are
subject to the requirements of KCC 15.09.045 for multifamily design review and
mixed use design review, as well as area specific design review such as the
Midway, Downtown and along the Meeker Street Corridor.
Galazin stated that everything beyond that point has been stricken. The Board’s
recommendations will move forward to City Council for their consideration.
Chair Smith than called for the vote with Board Members Ottini, Phillips, Smith and
Cornelius voting YEA and Board Member Jones voting NAY to delete the quarter
mile requirement. Motion PASSED 4-1.
Concluding Deliberations;
Chair Smith called for the vote with Board Members Ottini, Phillips, Smith and
Cornelius voting YEA approving the main motion as amended and Board Member
Jones voting NAY in opposition. Motion PASSED 4-1.
Emergency Shelters Zoning Code Amendment [ZCA-2016-1]
Erin George, Senior Planner submitted two exhibits for the record; defined as Exhibit 1, an
email comment letter from Pastor Carol Kirkpatrick; and Exhibit 2, an email comment letter
from Dave Mitchell.
Board Member Phillips MOVED and Board Member Ottini Seconded a Motion to
accept the two exhibits into the record. Motion PASSED 5-0.
George reported that city leadership was recently approached by human service providers
with a request to consider expanding zoning options for emergency housing, citing an
increasing need for such facilities in Kent. These facilities have tried to locate downtown in
the past, but have encountered opposition from neighboring businesses. George stated that
staff reviewed the “One Night Count” conducted on January 23, 2015, which showed 10,047
homeless people in King County ; of those 3,772 people were on the street. That was a
21% increase from 2014. In Kent, 135 people were unsheltered and 36 people were
sheltered.
3
Land Use & Planning Board Minutes
Page 4 of 7
January 25, 2016
George described the existing emergency housing facilities in Kent, all of which are housed
in existing churches. Holy Spirit Parish provides an overnight shelter for women with a
maximum capacity of 15 women, from October through May. The rotating men’s overnight
shelter is shared among a variety of churches who take turns for a month at a time, housing
up to 25 men. George visited several of these churches and found no exterior indications of
homeless housing.
George explained that Kent City Code (KCC) 15.02.131 defines emergency housing and
emergency shelters together in one definition, and limits emergency housing to a 90-day
period per individual or family. Staff is not proposing to change this code definition.
Emergency housing and emergency shelters are currently allowed in all commercial and
industrial zones with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP).
Staff compared Kent’s regulations with Renton, Des Moines, Federal Way, Tukwila and
Auburn and found that every city defines and regulates emergency housing differently;
allowing them within both commercial and residential zones. Most cities limit residential to
multi-family zones only, and no one requires a church association. Tukwila only allows
shelter facilities for domestic violence and runaway minors. Proximity to transit and services
are common requirements. In talking with planners at these other cities, she found that
nearly all emergency housing in those cities is located inside existing churches. In looking at
our multifamily residential districts, one zone came up as a likely candidate: Duplex Multi-
Family Residential (MR-D). It’s one of the smaller zoning districts in Kent, but all MR-D
areas are within close proximity to transit and commercial areas.
Comments received from Pastor Kirkpatrick, Kent First Presbyterian Church expressed that
liability for running the shelters should be shared between churches and those operating the
shelters. Comments from the Union Gospel Mission asked for some changes to the proposed
code language, including a preference for the term ‘religious organization’ versus ‘church’,
‘square footage” rather than ‘footprint,’ would like a one acre minimum requirement, allow
the lot to be immediately adjacent, and request that Section D be deleted with regard to
church liability. A phone call from Donna Lee (living next to Kent First Presbyterian)
expressed concern about having a shelter located near her home.
Staff recommends allowing emergency housing in MR-D zone with a CUP in addition to
several special criteria: the emergency housing facility must be on the same lot with an
actively-operating church, upon a minimum lot size of 2 acres, within a permanent enclosed
building not to exceed the building footprint of the church, with the church liable for
operation and maintenance of the facility as well as the conduct of the residents. Staff
suggests adding one additional criterion to comply with setbacks and landscaping for
churches as contained in KCC 15.08.020.
In response to questions from Chair Smith, George explained that the 90 day limitation is
intended for families residing in more of a traditional house setting, while a larger facility
will have different residents every night and there is no good way for the City to monitor
that. Galazin added that there hasn’t been an issue of individuals trying to game the
system, but should the issue come up, we would address it then. Galazin stated these
facilities are allowed with a conditional use within a number of different zones. All that is
being proposed tonight is adding one additional zone, MR-D, a multifamily residential zone
along with a couple specific conditions. This proposal is a slight expansion of what already
4
Land Use & Planning Board Minutes
Page 5 of 7
January 25, 2016
exists in Kent City Code, is a specified need, and does not impose a wholesale change
across the City. These facilities would be sited where they would least impact the
community.
Board Member Ottini expressed support for staff’s recommendation. At the completion of
staff’s presentation, Chair Smith Opened the Public Hearing.
Patricia Gray, 14036 SE 237th Place, Kent, WA 98042 submitted her presentation for the
record, defined as Exhibit 3 on Kent HOPE. She stated that Kent HOPE has been in
operation since 2013 in partnership with over twenty churches, other faith-based groups,
and community supporters. Their day center on Canyon Road helps a daily average of 29
homeless women and 3 children with resources and case management to lead them back to
a productive life. They currently partner with churches to provide overnight shelter for 30
women, but are unable to house children at these churches. Since opening, they have
helped 238 women and children find housing and helped 108 women find jobs. She stated
that they are in need of a larger permanent facility to realize their vision to shelter women
and children overnight. In response to a question from Board Member Phillips, Gray
explained that the proposed facility would be a new, separate building located on the
grounds of Kent First Presbyterian Church. In response to questions from Chair Smith, Gray
explained that the day center provides showers and laundry facilities at the day center, as
well as play areas for children. She also explained that no men, even fathers, are allowed on
the premises for security reasons. Chair Smith expressed concerns regarding the potential
need for increased police response at the facility.
Board Member Jones MOVED and Board Member Phillips seconded a motion to
accept Exhibit 3 from Patricia Gray into the record. Motion PASSED 5-0.
Dave Mitchell, 14516 SE 266th St, Kent, WA 98042 submitted his presentation for the
record, defined as Exhibit 4 related to Kent HOPE and Seattle’s Union Gospel Mission (UGM).
Mitchell stated that King County is experiencing a major increase in homelessness, such
that Dow Constantine and Seattle Mayor Murray have both declared a state of emergency.
UGM has considered sites within the Downtown DCE areas for siting their facilities which
would be allowed with a conditional use permit. Business owners opposed these facilities
and UGM felt it best not to pursue those locations. Mitchell showed a map of the proposed
facility location at Kent First Presbyterian Church, as well as a photo of how they want the
building design to look. UGM’s directive to an architect would be to have the building fit well
with the surroundings. Mitchell spoke in support of staff’s recommendations with suggested
modifications as submitted by UGM. To address Chair Smith’s prior question, Mitchell
described the 2015 police reports for the Kent HOPE day center. Out of 15 police reports, 3
were perpetrated by clients of the day center, but in the other 12 reports the clients were
the victims. None of the reports had to do with loitering, panhandling, drug use, littering or
the other issues that are sometimes associated with homeless shelters.
Board Member Phillips MOVED and Board Member Ottini seconded a motion to
accept Exhibit 4 from Mr. Dave Mitchell into the record. Motion PASSED 5-0.
Marvin Eckfeldt, 24205 116th Ave SE, #210, Kent, WA informed that in 2011 Kent City
Council assembled a task force comprised of church and community leaders to look at the
homelessness issue. A movement began to establish temporary shelters and permanent
5
Land Use & Planning Board Minutes
Page 6 of 7
January 25, 2016
shelters. In 2013 Kent HOPE hosted a forum with 33 human service agencies in South
County and Kent (already providing homeless services). It came to light that these agencies
were able to provide services to homeless but didn’t have facilities available in central
locations. Ekfeldt stated that he spoke with Police Chief Thomas who voiced his support of
this proposal and furthermore had no concerns with enforcement issues.
Reverend Carol Kirkpatrick, 9425 S 248th St., Kent, WA 98030 stated that Kent First
Presbyterian Church has served the community by providing shelter for men 2 months a
year and women 1 month a year for 17 years. There have been no complaints from
neighbors. One neighbor called to thank them, saying that when the homeless are housed
on the church property, they are well supervised. Three neighboring churches support this
effort and provide volunteers. Kent First Presbyterian Church is within walking distance of
downtown, a public bus line and school bus stop, as well as medical and other service
facilities.
Layne Hammond Champion, 2408 10th Ave E, Seattle, WA stated that she oversees the Kent
HOPE Day Center and several other shelter facilities for Union Gospel Mission. She spoke
about the reasons why women and children end up in shelters, such as domestic violence,
lack of healthcare coverage, job loss or terminated relationships.She also explained why
there is a cultural stigma of fear associated with the homeless. Kent HOPE uses an intensive
intake process including criminal background checks and mental health and drug use
history.
Jennifer Jeffries, 3802 S Othello St., Seattle, WA 98118 gave her personal testimony
related to her experience of how Kent HOPE has been instrumental in giving her the tools
needed to get back on her feet and become a productive member of society.
Jacob Dreifus, 11328 SE Kent Kangley Road, Kent, WA spoke in support for more of these
facilities, citing 500 kids in the Kent School District who are considered homeless, which
includes those living in hotels or staying with a friend.
Leslie Amada, 28026 189th Ave SE, Kent, WA 98042 submitted two exhibits for the record,
defined as Exhibit 5 - describing the homelessness problems, and Exhibit 6 – King County
One Night County 2015 Data Summary. She stated that she has been involved with the
homeless for over ten years; serves as an emergency assistance director for Kent United
Methodist Church, served on the Human Services Board for the City of Covington , served on
the Washington State Board of Corrections in the City of Kent dealing with prisoners,
incarcerations and released felons; and served a term with Kent HOPE. She spoke about the
disparity with homeless people of color and other cultures. This proposal will allow
expansion of these facilities without requiring any funding by the City.
Board Member Phillips MOVED and Board Member Ottini SECONDED a Motion to
accept Exhibits 5 and 6 from Leslie Amada into the record. Motion PASSED 5-0.
Galazin announced that this item will move forward to the City Council’s Economic &
Community Development Committee for further consideration. He encouraged the public to
attend that meeting to make their opinions known.
Seeing no further speakers, Chair Smith Closed the Public Hearing and called for a Motion.
6
Land Use & Planning Board Minutes
Page 7 of 7
January 25, 2016
Board Member Jones MOVED and Board Member Phillips SECONDED a motion to
recommend to the City Council approval of amendments to KCC 15.04.020 and
15.04.030, Residential Land Uses, as presented by staff. Motion PASSED
unanimously 5-0 with all members voting YEA in favor.
8. Adjournment
Chair Smith adjourned the meeting at 9:40 pm
___________________________________________________
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Long Range Planning Manager,
LUPB Board Secretary
7
8
ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Ben Wolters, Director
Phone: 253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
March 7, 2016
TO: Chair Randall Smith and Land Use & Planning Board Members
FROM: Matt Gilbert, AICP, Current Planning Manager
RE: Preliminary Plat Validity Periods [SCA-2016-1]
For March 14, 2016 Hearing
MOTION: Recommend to full City Council approval of amendments to Kent
City Code (KCC) 12.04.221 Subdivision Preliminary Plat Expiration as
proposed by staff and shown on page two of the March 7th memo.
SUMMARY: 2012 legislation lengthened the validity period for preliminary plats in
order to ease the effects of the housing market collapse on owners of subdivision
development projects. The longer validity periods gave developers more time to
finish their projects under the rules in effect when they applied for preliminary plat
approval. Some of the projects that benefitted from the extension are unfinished
and approaching expiration. Based on direction from City Council, staff has
prepared an amendment to the subdivision code that would allow additional time
for projects approved in 2008.
BACKGROUND: A preliminary plat is the City’s initial approval for a subdivision
development that proposes to create 10 or more lots. Preliminary plats show a
layout of new lots along with the streets, sidewalks, storm pond, utilities and open
spaces that will serve the new neighborhood. When a preliminary subdivision is
approved, it is allowed a time period after approval during which a developer may
clear the land and construct the project as approved, under the land development
rules in effect when the project was first proposed to the City. This is known as the
preliminary plat validity period, which begins on the date the project receives
approval from the Hearing Examiner. When a validity period expires, the only way
for a subdivision to move forward is for the owner to submit a new preliminary plat
under current development rules, which may require a new design, at a cost of tens
of thousands of dollars.
Before the Great Recession (which began in late 2007), preliminary plats were
allowed a five year validity period. This time period was generally more than
enough for developers to install roads, utilities and meet other conditions of
approval before recording the plat. When financial institutions began limiting
available credit during the recession, developers struggled to construct and record
plats within the five year window. As this issue was widespread, the state
legislature intervened in 2010, then again in 2012 when it created a schedule of
new, longer validity periods designed to provide relief for developers until the
housing market improved. This schedule creates a range of validity periods for
preliminary plats, based on the approval date of an individual project. The state
legislation includes a provision that enables cities to grant more time than state
schedule indicates. Based on this provision, Kent allows one additional year.
9
The table below depicts the state schedule, plus Kent’s additional year:
Preliminary Plat approval date Total validity period
Before December 31, 2007 11 years
January 1, 2008 – December 31, 2014 8 years
January 1, 2015 forward 6 years
Per these timelines, six plats that were approved in 2008 are scheduled to expire in
2016. Three of the six plats have made no progress since 2007-2008, and are very
likely to expire this year. The remaining three projects are proceeding towards
completion.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the City Council have received interest in
examining whether or not the dates and associated validity periods are appropriate
to meet the purpose of the extensions. At least one developer of a project approved
in 2008 has indicated that he is still struggling to recoup his investment.
Accordingly, staff has prepared a minor change to Kent City Code 12.04.221, which
addresses long subdivision preliminary plat expiration. This change would grant a
one-year extension to projects approved in 2008, just after the beginning of the
Great Recession. This extension would apply to a maximum of six development
projects.
PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT:
12.04.221 Subdivision preliminary plat expiration.
A. Subdivision preliminary plat approval shall remain valid for that period of time
specified in Chapter 58.17 RCW, plus one (1) year. During this period, an applicant
must submit a final plat based on the preliminary plat, or any phase thereof, and
meeting all of the requirements of this chapter and Chapter 58.17 RCW, to the city
council for approval, or the preliminary plat shall lapse and become void.
B. For preliminary plats approved between January 1, 2008 and December 31,
2008, one (1) extension of one (1) year shall be granted to an applicant who files a
written request with the planning department prior to the expiration of the
preliminary plat validity period.
Staff will present this information at the March 14, 2016 LUPB hearing and be
available to answer questions.
MG:pm S:\Permit\Plan\SUBDIVISION_CODE_AMENDMENTS\2016\SCA-2016-1 Plat Extensions\LUPB\3-14-16 LUPB Plat Extensions
Hrg Memo .docx
cc: Ben Wolters, Economic & Community Development Director
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Long Range Planning Manager
10
ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Ben Wolters, Director
Phone: 253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032-5895
March 7, 2016
TO: Chair Randall Smith and Land Use and Planning Board Members
FROM: Hayley Bonsteel, Long Range Planner & GIS Coordinator
RE: Opiate Substitution Treatment Facilities Zoning Code Amendment
[ZCA-2016-3]
For March 14, 2016 Workshop
SUMMARY: State law places responsibility for certification and approval of opiate
substitution treatment facilities under the jurisdiction of the Department of Social and
Health Services, which may only certify facilities in accordance with local land use
ordinances. Given that such facilities are not currently defined or addressed in Kent ’s
zoning code, staff has developed a new definition and associated development
conditions to regulate opiate substitution facilities. The proposed amendment would
allow opiate substitution facilities in the Commercial Manufacturing-1 (CM-1) zone with
a conditional use permit and various other requirements, including execution of a “good
neighbor” contract agreement.
BACKGROUND: Opiate substitution drugs are used in the treatment of opiate
dependency, and are administered by opiate substitution treatment facilities. The goal
of opiate substitution treatment is total abstinence from chemical dependency for the
individuals who participate in the treatment program, but the opiate substitution drugs
themselves can be addictive. Opiate substitution treatment facilities have been
associated anecdotally with land use impacts such as loitering, litter or other crime, but
the few existing studies conducted through peer-reviewed research have found no
conclusive evidence linking opiate substitution treatment facilities to incidence of crime.
However, given anticipated concerns over the siting of these facilities due to known
potential or perceptions of impacts, staff has prepared proposed conditional use permit
requirements, as outlined on pages 9, 10 and 11 of the attached draft ordinance.
Staff notes that this proposal includes a 500-foot spacing requirement, ensuring that
facilities are reasonably distributed within the CM-1 district in which they are proposed
to be allowed. Staff will be available at the workshop meeting to answer questions
related to the proposal.
HB:pm S:\Permit\Plan\ZONING_CODE_AMENDMENTS\2016\ZCA-2016-3 Opiate Substitution Treatment Facilities\03 14 16 LUPB workshop OSTF
Memo.doc
Encl: Draft Ordinance
cc: Ben Wolters, Economic & Community Development Director
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager
David Galazin, J.D., LL.M., Assistant City Attorney
11
12
1 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, amending Chapters
15.02 and 15.04 of the Kent City Code, to define
“opiate substitution treatment facilities” and adopt
appropriate land use controls to regulate them.
RECITALS
A. The state of Washington has declared that while opiate
substitution drugs used in the treatment of opiate dependency are
addictive substances, they nevertheless have several legal, important, and
justified uses and that one of their appropriate and legal uses is, in
conjunction with other required therapeutic procedures, in the treatment of
persons addicted to or habituated to opioids.
B. Because opiate substitution drugs, used in the treatment of
opiate dependency are addictive and are listed as a schedule II controlled
substance in chapter 69.50 RCW, the state of Washington has the legal
obligation and right to regulate the use of opiate substitution treatment.
The state of Washington has declared its authority to control and regulate,
in consultation with counties and cities, all clinical uses of opiate
substitution drugs used in the treatment of opiate addiction.
13
2 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
C. Washington state law places responsibility for the licensing
and location approval of opiate substitution treatment facilities under the
jurisdiction of the state department of social and health services. Pursuant
to RCW 70.96A.410, the department may only certify clinics that are in
compliance with local land use ordinances.
D. The Kent City Code does not currently define “opiate
substitution treatment facilities” or provide any specific land use
regulations related to the zoning of these facilities beyond those generally
applicable to all medical and other health-care related clinics.
E. Opiate substitution treatment facilities have land use impacts
that differ from other types of medical clinics, including, but not limited to:
a high volume of patients receiving daily medical treatment during a short
window of time; the distribution of medications that have the potential for
unauthorized re-sale by their intended recipients; and increased loitering in
and around the facilities themselves.
F. RCW 70-96A.410(1)(b) specifically provides that cities may
require conditional or special use permits, with reasonable conditions,
related to the location and operation of opiate substitution treatment
facilities.
G. The Kent City Council declares and finds that it is appropriate
and necessary, and in the interest of the public health, safety and welfare,
to define and classify opiate substitution treatment facilities and adopt land
use controls to regulate these facilities.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
14
3 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
ORDINANCE
SECTION 1. – New Section. Chapter 15.02 of the Kent City Code,
entitled “Definitions,” is hereby amended to add a new section 15.02.307,
entitled “Opiate substitution treatment facility,” to read as follows:
Sec. 15.02.307. Opiate substitution treatment facility. Opiate
substitution treatment facility means an agency, business, clinic or other
facility that administers opiate substitution treatment services, including
the dispensing of approved opioid agonist treatment medication used in
the treatment of opiate dependency, in accordance with RCW 70.96A.400
through 420, and WAC 388-877B-0400, et seq.
SECTION 2. – Amendment. Chapter 15.04.090 of the Kent City
Code, entitled “Service land uses,” is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 15.04.090 Service land uses.
Zoning Districts
Key
P =
Principall
y
Permitte
d Uses
S =
Special
Uses
C =
Condition
al Uses
A =
Accessor
y Uses
A-
10
A
G
SR
-1
SR
-3
SR
-
4.5
SR
-6
SR
-8
M
R-
D
M
R-
T1
2
M
R-
T1
6
M
R-
G
M
R-
M
M
R-
H
M
HP
NC
C CC DC DC
E
MT
C-1
MT
C-2
MC
R
CM
-1
CM
-2 GC M1 M1
-C M2 M3
Finance,
insuranc
e, real
estate
services
P
(2
2)
P P
(1
)
(1
2)
P P P P P P P P P
(2
)
Persona
l
services
P
(2
2)
P P
(1
2)
P P P P P P P
(1
0)
P
(1
0)
P
(2
)
15
4 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
Zoning Districts
Key
P =
Principall
y
Permitte
d Uses
S =
Special
Uses
C =
Condition
al Uses
A =
Accessor
y Uses
A-
10
A
G
SR
-1
SR
-3
SR
-
4.5
SR
-6
SR
-8
M
R-
D
M
R-
T1
2
M
R-
T1
6
M
R-
G
M
R-
M
M
R-
H
M
HP
NC
C CC DC DC
E
MT
C-1
MT
C-2
MC
R
CM
-1
CM
-2 GC M1 M1
-C M2 M3
:
laundry,
dry
cleaning
,
barber,
salons,
shoe
repair,
launder
ettes
(1
0)
Mortuari
es
P
(1
2)
P P P
Home
day-
care
P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P
Day-
care
center
C C C C C C C P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P
Busines
s
services
,
duplicati
ng and
blue
printing,
travel
agencie
s, and
employ
ment
agencie
s
P
(1
2)
P P P P P P P P P
(2
)
Building
mainten
ance
and
pest
P P P P P P P
(2
)
16
5 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
Zoning Districts
Key
P =
Principall
y
Permitte
d Uses
S =
Special
Uses
C =
Condition
al Uses
A =
Accessor
y Uses
A-
10
A
G
SR
-1
SR
-3
SR
-
4.5
SR
-6
SR
-8
M
R-
D
M
R-
T1
2
M
R-
T1
6
M
R-
G
M
R-
M
M
R-
H
M
HP
NC
C CC DC DC
E
MT
C-1
MT
C-2
MC
R
CM
-1
CM
-2 GC M1 M1
-C M2 M3
control
Outdoor
storage
(includi
ng
truck,
heavy
equipm
ent, and
contract
or
storage
yards as
allowed
by
develop
ment
standar
ds, KCC
15.04.1
90 and
15.04.1
95)
P P A A A A
C
(9
)
P
Rental
and
leasing
services
for cars,
trucks,
trailers,
furnitur
e, and
tools
P P P P P P P
(2
)
Auto
repair
and
washing
services
(includi
ng body
work)
C P P P P P P
(2
1)
(2
3)
17
6 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
Zoning Districts
Key
P =
Principall
y
Permitte
d Uses
S =
Special
Uses
C =
Condition
al Uses
A =
Accessor
y Uses
A-
10
A
G
SR
-1
SR
-3
SR
-
4.5
SR
-6
SR
-8
M
R-
D
M
R-
T1
2
M
R-
T1
6
M
R-
G
M
R-
M
M
R-
H
M
HP
NC
C CC DC DC
E
MT
C-1
MT
C-2
MC
R
CM
-1
CM
-2 GC M1 M1
-C M2 M3
Repair
services
: watch,
TV,
electrica
l,
electron
ic,
upholst
ery
P P
(1
2)
P P P P P P P
(2
)
Professi
onal
services
:
medical,
clinics,
and
other
health
care-
related
services
P
(2
0)
P P P P P P P P P P
(2
)
Opiate
substitu
tion
treatme
nt
facility
C(
3)
Heavy
equipm
ent and
truck
repair
P P P C
(9
)
P
Contrac
t
constru
ction
service
offices:
building
constru
P
(1
6)
P P P
(1
6)
P
(1
7)
P
(1
7)
P
(2
)
(1
7)
P
18
7 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
Zoning Districts
Key
P =
Principall
y
Permitte
d Uses
S =
Special
Uses
C =
Condition
al Uses
A =
Accessor
y Uses
A-
10
A
G
SR
-1
SR
-3
SR
-
4.5
SR
-6
SR
-8
M
R-
D
M
R-
T1
2
M
R-
T1
6
M
R-
G
M
R-
M
M
R-
H
M
HP
NC
C CC DC DC
E
MT
C-1
MT
C-2
MC
R
CM
-1
CM
-2 GC M1 M1
-C M2 M3
ction,
plumbin
g,
paving,
and
landsca
ping
Educati
onal
services
:
vocation
al,
trade,
art,
music,
dancing
,
barber,
and
beauty
P P P P P P P P P
(2
)
Churche
s
S
(
4
)
S
(4
)
S
(4
)
S
(4
)
S
(4
)
S
(4
)
S
(
4
)
S
(
4
)
S
(
4
)
S
(
4
)
S
(
4
)
S
(4
)
S
(4
)
S
(4
)
S
(4
)
S
(4
)
S
(4
)
S
(4
)
S
(4
)
S
(4
)
S
(4
)
S
(4
)
S
(4
)
Adminis
trative
and
professi
onal
offices –
general
P P
(1
2)
P P P P C P P P P P
(2
)
Municip
al uses
and
building
s
P
(1
3)
P
(1
3)
P P
(1
3)
P
(1
3)
P
(1
3)
P
(1
3)
P
(1
3)
P
(1
3)
P
(1
3)
P
(1
3)
P
(2
)
(1
3)
P
(1
3)
Researc
h,
develop
P C P P P P P P
(2
)
P
(1
4)
19
8 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
Zoning Districts
Key
P =
Principall
y
Permitte
d Uses
S =
Special
Uses
C =
Condition
al Uses
A =
Accessor
y Uses
A-
10
A
G
SR
-1
SR
-3
SR
-
4.5
SR
-6
SR
-8
M
R-
D
M
R-
T1
2
M
R-
T1
6
M
R-
G
M
R-
M
M
R-
H
M
HP
NC
C CC DC DC
E
MT
C-1
MT
C-2
MC
R
CM
-1
CM
-2 GC M1 M1
-C M2 M3
ment,
and
testing
Accesso
ry uses
and
structur
es
customa
rily
appurte
nant to
a
permitt
ed use
A A A
(7
)
(2
4)
A
(2
4)
A
(2
4)
A
(2
4)
A
(2
4)
A A A A A A A
(1
8)
A
(1
8)
A
(1
9)
A
(1
9)
A
(1
9)
A
(1
9)
A
(1
9)
A
(1
8)
A
(1
8)
A
(1
8)
A A A A
Boardin
g
kennels
and
breedin
g
establis
hments
C C C
Veterina
ry
clinics
and
veterina
ry
hospital
s
C P
(8
)
P
(8
)
P
(8
)
P
(8
)
P
(8
)
Adminis
trative
or
executiv
e offices
which
are part
of a
predomi
nant
P P P P P
20
9 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
Zoning Districts
Key
P =
Principall
y
Permitte
d Uses
S =
Special
Uses
C =
Condition
al Uses
A =
Accessor
y Uses
A-
10
A
G
SR
-1
SR
-3
SR
-
4.5
SR
-6
SR
-8
M
R-
D
M
R-
T1
2
M
R-
T1
6
M
R-
G
M
R-
M
M
R-
H
M
HP
NC
C CC DC DC
E
MT
C-1
MT
C-2
MC
R
CM
-1
CM
-2 GC M1 M1
-C M2 M3
industri
al
operatio
n
Offices
incident
al and
necessa
ry to
the
conduct
of a
principal
ly
permitt
ed use
A A A A A
SECTION 3. – Amendment. Section 15.04.100 of the Kent City
Code, entitled “Service land use development conditions,” is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Sec. 15.04.100 Service land use development conditions.
1. Banks and financial institutions (excluding drive-through).
2. Uses shall be limited to 25 percent of the gross floor area of any
single- or multi-building development. Retail and service uses which
exceed the 25 percent limit on an individual or cumulative basis shall be
subject to review individually through the conditional use permit process. A
conditional use permit shall be required on an individual tenant or business
basis and shall be granted only when it is demonstrated that the operating
21
10 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
characteristics of the use will not adversely impact onsite or offsite
conditions on either an individual or cumulative basis.
3. [Reserved].Opiate substitution treatment facilities are permitted
only with a conditional use permit, and must provide indoor waiting areas
of at least 15 percent of the total floor area. In addition to the general
requirements of KCC 15.08.030, all applications shall contain and be
approved by the city based on the following information:
a. A detailed written description of the proposed and potential
services to be provided, the source or sources of funding, and identification
of any applicable public regulatory agencies;
b. A written statement of need, in statistical or narrative form,
for the proposed project currently and over the following ten-year period;
c. An inventory of known, existing or proposed facilities, by
name and address, within King County, or within the region, serving the
same or similar needs as the proposed facility;
d. An explanation of the need and suitability for the proposed
facility at the proposed location;
e. An analysis of the proposed facility’s consistency with the City
of Kent Comprehensive Plan and development regulations, and plans and
policies of other affected jurisdictions, including but not limited to the King
County Countywide Planning Policies;
f. Documentation of public involvement efforts to date, including
public and agency comments received, and plans for future public
participation; and
22
11 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
g. A proposed “good faith” agreement for neighborhood
partnership. This agreement shall state the goals of the partnership and
address loitering prevention steps the facility owner/operator will take as
well as frequency of planned maintenance and upkeep of the exterior of
the facility (including, but not limited to, trash and litter removal,
landscape maintenance, and graffiti). The agreement shall serve as the
basis for a partnership between the City, facility, and local businesses, and
will outline steps partners will take to resolve concerns.
No opiate substitution treatment facility may be located within 500 feet of
an existing opiate substitution treatment facility.
4. Special uses must conform to the development standards listed in
KCC 15.08.020.
5. [Reserved].
6. [Reserved].
7. Other accessory uses and buildings customarily appurtenant to a
permitted use, except for onsite hazardous waste treatment and storage
facilities, which are not permitted in residential zones.
8. Veterinary clinics and animal hospitals when located no closer than
150 feet to any residential use, provided the animals are housed indoors,
with no outside runs, and the building is soundproofed. Soundproofing
must be designed by competent acoustical engineers.
9. Those uses that are principally permitted in the M3 zone may be
permitted in the M2 zone via a conditional use permit.
23
12 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
10. Personal services uses limited to linen supply and industrial laundry
services, diaper services, rug cleaning and repair services, photographic
services, beauty and barber services, and fur repair and storage services.
11. [Reserved].
12. The ground level or street level portion of all buildings in the
pedestrian overlay of the DC district, set forth in the map below, must be
pedestrian-oriented. Pedestrian-oriented development shall have the main
ground floor entry located adjacent to a public street and be physically and
visually accessible by pedestrians from the sidewalk, and may include the
following uses:
a. Retail establishments, including but not limited to
convenience goods, department and variety stores, specialty shops such as
apparel and accessories, gift shops, toy shops, cards and paper goods,
home and home accessory shops, florists, antique shops, and book shops;
b. Personal services, including but not limited to barber shops,
beauty salons, and dry cleaning;
c. Repair services, including but not limited to television, radio,
computer, jewelry, and shoe repair;
d. Food-related shops, including but not limited to restaurants
(including outdoor seating areas and excluding drive-in restaurants) and
taverns;
e. Copy establishments;
24
13 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
f. Professional services, including but not limited to law offices
and consulting services; and
g. Any other use that is determined by the economic and
community development director to be of the same general character as
the above permitted uses and in accordance with the stated purpose of the
district, pursuant to KCC 15.09.065, Interpretation of uses.
13. Except for such uses and buildings subject to KCC 15.04.150.
14. Conducted in conjunction with a principally permitted use.
15. [Reserved].
16. Contract construction services office use does not include contractor
storage yards, which is a separate use listed in KCC 15.04.040.
25
14 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
17. Outside storage or operations yards are permitted only as accessory
uses. Such uses are incidental and subordinate to the principal use of the
property or structure.
18. Includes incidental storage facilities and loading/unloading areas.
19. Includes incidental storage facilities, which must be enclosed, and
loading/unloading areas.
20. Shall only apply to medical and dental offices and/or neighborhood
clinics.
21. Auto repair, including body work, and washing services are
permitted only under the following conditions:
a. The property is also used for heavy equipment repair and/or
truck repair; and
b. Gasoline service stations that also offer auto repair and
washing services are not permitted in the M3, general industrial zoning
district.
22. Any associated drive-up/drive-through facility shall be accessory and
shall require a conditional use permit.
23. Auto repair, including body work, and auto washing services shall be
allowed in the general industrial (M3) zoning district as follows:
a. For adaptive reuse of existing site structures, all of the
following conditions must apply:
i. The site is not currently served by a rail spur; and
26
15 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
ii. Existing site structures do not have dock high loading
bay doors, where the finished floor is generally level with the floor of
freight containers; and
iii. All ground-level bay doors of existing structures have a
height of less than 14 feet, which would generally impede full access to
freight containers; and
iv. Existing site structures have a clear height from
finished floor to interior roof trusses of less than 20 feet; and
v. Maximum building area per parcel is not greater than
40,000 square feet.
b. For proposed site development, all of the following conditions
must apply:
i. The site is not currently served by a rail spur; and
ii. Based on parcels existing at the time of the effective
date of the ordinance codified in this section, the maximum parcel size is
no greater than 40,000 square feet.
24. Accessory structures composed of at least two walls and a roof, not
including accessory uses or structures customarily appurtenant to
agricultural uses, are subject to the provisions of KCC 15.08.160.
SECTION 4. – Severability. If any one or more section, subsection,
or sentence of this ordinance is held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this
ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 5. – Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon
approval of the city attorney, the city clerk and the code reviser are
authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the
correction of clerical errors; ordinance, section, or subsection numbering;
27
16 Amend KCC 15.02, 15.04 -
Re: Opiate Substitution Development Conditions
or references to other local, state, or federal laws, codes, rules, or
regulations.
SECTION 6. – Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and
be in force thirty 30 days from and after its passage, as provided by law.
SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED: day of , 2016.
APPROVED: day of , 2016.
PUBLISHED: day of , 2016.
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No.
passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved
by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
RONALD F. MOORE, CITY CLERK
p:\civil\ordinance\amend 15.02 and 15.04 opiate treatment center.docx
28
ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Ben Wolters, Director
Phone: 253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
March 7, 2016
TO: Chair Randall Smith and Land Use & Planning Board Members
FROM: Jason Garnham, Planner
RE: M1 Industrial Park District Permitted Uses Code Amendment [ZCA-2016-4]
For March 14, 2016 Workshop
SUMMARY: On October 20, 2015, the City Council approved the Annual Docket
Report, which placed in the 2016 work program for Planning Services a request to
expand commercial opportunities in the industrial area. ECD staff proposes
consideration of an amendment to the zoning code to expand the allowable uses in
the M1 Industrial Park District to include those uses permitted under the “C”
designation, while retaining both the M1 and M1-C zoning designations.
BACKGROUND: The City of Kent is home to one of the region’s most significant
industrial and warehousing districts. Retaining and attracting the businesses that
rely on industrial zoning and supportive land uses is essential to the economic
vitality of the City and to the Puget Sound Region. Within the context of an
increasingly globalized industrial economy that is ever-changing in regards to
technology, methods of production, and competition for skilled labor, the needs of
industrial and warehouse businesses have evolved to include an expanded array of
amenities to support both business functions and the staff who work, live, and
recreate in industrial areas. In response to these changes, and in an effort to retain
and attract highly competitive and essential industrial businesses, staff is proposing
an amendment to expand permitted uses in the M1 Industrial Park District.
On October 20, 2015, the City Council approved a staff-recommended docket item
which proposed to “expand commercial opportunities at strategic locations in the
industrial area” by considering amendments to the Land Use Plan and Zoning
Districts Maps. As part of its analysis, staff determined that the M1-C zoning district
added only a small number of allowed uses to what otherwise would be allowed in
the M1 zoning district, and the more significant differences between the two zoning
districts were in the minimum lot area required and allowable signage for
commercial uses.
Therefore, this proposed zoning code amendment would broaden the commercial
uses permitted in the M1 Industrial Park District. If the proposed zoning code
amendment were approved, the land uses permitted in the M1 zoning district would
be expanded to include:
29
2
15.04.070 Wholesale and retail land uses:
Bakeries and confectioneries
Food and convenience stores (retail)
Apparel and accessories (retail) as an accessory use, under the condition
(8) where development plans demonstrate a relationship between this
and the principal industrial use of the property
Eating and drinking establishments with drive-through
Miscellaneous retail (drugs, antiques, books, etc) as accessory uses,
under the condition (8) where development plans demonstrate a
relationship between this and the principal industrial use of the property
Liquor stores
Computers and electronics (retail)
Hotels and motels
15.04.090 Service land uses
Auto repair and washing services (including body work)
15.04.110 Cultural, entertainment, and recreation land uses
Performing and cultural arts uses, such as art galleries/ studios
The separate M1-C Industrial Park District/”C” Suffix zoning designation would be
retained and would allow those nodes of commercial activity to be developed at a
higher density than in the M1 zoning district. The development standards in Kent
City Code 15.04.190 specify a minimum lot area in M1-C of 10,000 square feet,
whereas the minimum lot size in the M1 zoning district is one acre (43,560 square
feet). ECD staff believes that maintaining the zoning distinction between M1 and
M1-C zoning encourages retention of the larger land areas required by industrial
business uses, while the proposed zoning change in the M1 zoning district supports
limited service and retail businesses that are supportive of modern and high-quality
industrial enterprises and their employees.
JG:pm S:\Permit\Plan\ZONING_CODE_AMENDMENTS\2016\ZCA-2016-4 M1 Permitted Uses\031416_LUPB_Workshop_memo.doc
cc: Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager
30