HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Land Use and Planning Board - 08/25/2008 (4) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director
PLANNING SERVICES
000 Charlene Anderson, AICP, Manager
KENT
W AS HI N G T 0 N Phone: 253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
AGENDA
LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD
HEARING
AUGUST 25, 2008
7:00 P.M.
LUPB MEMBERS: CITY STAFF
Jon Johnson, Chair Charlene Anderson,AICP, Planning Mgr
Dana Ralph, Vice Chair Kim Adams Pratt, Asst City Attorney
Steve Dowell Erin George, Planner
Alan Gray Katie Heinitz, Assistant Planner
Aleanna Kondelis Pamela Mottram, Admin Secretary
Jack Ottini
Barbara Phillips
This is to notify you that the Land Use and Planning Board will hold a Public
Hearing on MONDAY, AUGUST 25, 2008 in Kent City Hall, City Council Chambers
East and West, 220 4t" Avenue South, Kent at 7:00 P.M. The public is welcome to
attend and all interested persons may have an opportunity to speak. Any person
wishing to submit oral or written comments on this proposed amendment may do
so prior to or at the meeting.
The agenda will include the following item(s):
1. Call to order
2. Roll call
3. Approval of Minutes from the July 28, 2008 Meeting
4. Added Items to Agenda
5. Communications
6. Notice of Upcoming Meetings
7. PUBLIC HEARING:
CPA-2008-2 Cottage Housing
Consideration of a proposed Cottage Housing Demonstration Ordinance
outlining a number of development standard options.
Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the City in Advance for more information.
For TDD relay service for Braille, call 1-800-833-6385, for TDD relay service for the hearing impaired, call 1-800-
833-6388 or cal/the City of Kent Planning Services directly at(253)856-5499(TDD). For further information or a
copy of the staff memorandum contact the Planning Services office at(253)856-5454. You may access the C/"
webs/te for documents pertaining to the Land Use and Planning Board at.-
http://www.ci.kent,wa.us/p/anningZandt lannin-bg oard.
SlPermitlPlan ILUPBI20081AGENOA81082508LUPBHrg Agda.doc
1
LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
JULY 28, 2008
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT/ABSENT:
Chair Jon Johnson, Vice-Chair Dana Ralph, Steve Dowell, Alan Gray, Aleanna
Kondelis - absent/excused, Jack Ottini, Barbara Phillips
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Charlene Anderson, Mike Mactutis, Chad Bieren, Beth
Tan, Kim Adams Pratt
Approval of Minutes
Ottini MOVED and Gray SECONDED a Motion to APPROVE the Minutes of May 12,
2008. Motion PASSED 6-0.
Added Items, Communications, Notice of Upcoming Meetings
None
#CPA-2008-3 Water System Plan/Drainage Master Plan/Wellhead
Protection Program Phase I & II/Capital Facilities Element of Kent
Comprehensive Plan
Water System Plan Engineering Supervisor Chad Bieren stated that the
Department of Health requires the City to update the Water System Plan every six
years. Bieren stated that staff looked at Kent's water system to ensure that Kent
could meet land use requirements for the foreseeable future, that the City's
projected growth is consistent with the Kent Comprehensive Plan, and to make sure
that the water system could sustain the city's growth pattern.
Bieren stated that the water system boundary is not necessarily the same as the
corporate limits of Kent citing that Water District 111, Highline Water District, and
Soos Creek Water and Sewer District also serve different areas of the City.
Bieren stated that Kent has enough water supply to meet future needs. Staff
evaluated the ability of Kent's existing system to handle fire-flow requirements and
other issues regarding the treatment and/or delivery of water to homes throughout
the City. Staff developed a long range plan for improving and developing the
system.
Bieren stated that West Hill's storage capacity is insufficient, and East Hill will have
insufficient capacity once it is built-out. He stated that there are water mains
throughout the city that require replacement within the distribution system, due to
age and/or new fire-flow requirements.
Bieren stated that Kent will construct a new West Hill reservoir near the Armory
south of Military Road, replace the leaking Guiberson Reservoir on Scenic Hill and
build a new 640 zone reservoir near Clark Lake to alleviate storage and fire flow
Land Use and Planning Board 1 of 6
Minutes
July 28, 2008
2
pressure issues on East Hill. The new East Hill reservoir would raise the water
surface elevation from 590 feet to 640 feet above sea level.
Bieren cited additional key improvements such as building a Kent East Hill
Operations Center, and a Tacoma Pipeline Treatment Facility that would allow Kent
to access 12.5 million gallons of water a day. He stated that these improvements
would cost from $150 to $160 million dollars and are necessary improvements.
Bieren submitted Table 11.3 documented as an Exhibit for the record.
In response to Board member Gray, Bieren stated that a water rate increase is
necessary to fund improvements, to handle increasing maintenance operations
costs, and to fund capital improvements related to the Tacoma Pipeline and the new
reservoirs. He stated that the improvements are necessary due to Department of
Health and Department of Ecology requirements.
Bieren stated that the City needs both a rate increase and bonds to get those
projects built earlier, with the rate increase covering repayment of some of those
bonds. He stated that it is necessary for the City to retain a 60 to 90 day cash
reserve to sustain a healthy water system and to keep bond ratings low. Bieren
stated that at this time, the City has only a 20 day reserve which needs to be built
up to maintain bond ratings at an optimum level.
Drainage Master Plan Environmental Engineer Beth Tan stated that the Drainage
Master Plan (DMP) was last updated in 1985. Since that time, Kent has annexed
areas and implemented Capital Improvement Plans. Staff has taken a
comprehensive look at the infrastructure system within Kent for drainage.
Tan stated that much of Kent's drainage system pipe infrastructure was built before
1980. She stated that staff has taken a comprehensive look at Kent's streams, the
flooding risks, and how Kent can reduce potential damages due to flooding through
our creek systems. Tan stated that staff looked at the city's localized drainage
system, citing that staff is considering how to improve water storage capacity along
Mill Creek.
Tan stated that an element of the DMP is water quality, which is dependent on an
unfunded mandated program called the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System Phase Two Permit, implemented by the Department of Ecology.
Tan stated that another element staff looked at was habitat, fish passage, wetland
preservation and restoration. She stated that staff looked at the drainage
component of Kent's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). She stated that
for the past few years, the drainage utility has paid for part of the transportation
program related to storm water and water quality facilities, and curb, gutter,
sidewalk infrastructure that are part of major road expansions.
Land Use and Planning Board 2 of 6
Minutes
July 28, 2008
3
Tan stated that staff looked at the Green River Levee repair and replacement work
that is needed and which will be shown on preliminary updated Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) maps.
Tan stated that some of Kent's major projects include Upper Mill Creek Dam off of
104t", restoration work along Mill Creek on Smith to James, and from James to
Chandler Bay needed to decrease flooding along James St. and the surrounding
local areas. She cited Green River Natural Resource area improvements,
replacement of culverts and restoration work on 76t" Avenue and Mill Creek, 228t"
area conveyance work, monitoring the total maximum daily load requirements on
Lake Fenwick to reduce the total phosphorus leaving the lake, and the East Hill
144t" Avenue SE culvert replacement.
Tan stated that staff has added Goals 22 and 23 to the DMP; pertaining to the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program that Kent is required to
follow, and to implement low-impact development for the design and construction
of projects within Kent.
Tan stated that she has added a supplement to the DMP to include the Green River
Duwamish Ecosystem Restoration Program; an ongoing cost sharing partnership
between Kent and the Army Corp of Engineers. She stated that staff added two
additional East Hill projects; SE 236t" Street culvert replacement, and stream
restoration work on Meridian Valley Creek at 240t" and 132nd
Bieren stated that a few changes to the Capital Facilities Element within the Water
Plan section are similar to ones in the previous version of Kent's Comprehensive
Plan, with language added to update them; citing changes to CF-27, 28 and 29.
Bieren stated that staff intends to take these plans to the Public Works Committee
August 4t", to the Planning & Economic Development Committee August 11t" and to
the City Council for implementation and adoption on August 19t"
Bieren stated that any question concerning rates will be addressed separately
following adoption of the plans.
Chair Johnson opened the public hearing.
Ms. Charlie King, 26201 Military Rd. S, voiced her concerns with drainage issues.
She stated that she experienced water damage twice in the fall of 2007 from
flooding runoff which caused erosion to her property. She stated that she built a
retaining wall to repair the damage.
Ms. King stated that her neighbor Lois Steinborg's culvert was built in 1970 and has
eroded away. A small creek has formed that flows into the eroded culvert which
can no longer handled runoff from even a small rain. Ms. King stated that her
neighbors would like to know how the City can help them maintain proper flow from
the runoff.
Land Use and Planning Board 3 of 6
Minutes
July 28, 2008
4
King stated that the culvert running under Military Road flows into a lidded holding
tank located at the top of her driveway then goes underneath her driveway into the
creek. She stated that she feels the holding tank had not been properly maintained
since the previous rainfall, that the holding tank blew its top, causing a geyser at
the top of her driveway and within minutes 240 gallons of muddy water flowed
through her window well onto her new parquet floors. Ms. King stated that 911
was unable to assist her. She stated that she called people to pump out the water
who did so by candlelight due to power outages.
Ms. King stated that she spoke with Kent staff who came to her home, sandbagged
her house, cleaned the driveway of mud and debris, and filled in the erosion that
was washed out under her driveway. She stated that the damage to her property
was over $10,000. King expressed appreciation on behalf of herself and her
neighbors for the opportunity to voice their concerns.
Tan stated that the DMP addresses future road-widening projects along Military
Road, stating that the storm water system would be updated and massaged at that
time. Chair Johnson asked staff to consider how they could resolve this problem.
Tan stated that it might just be an issue of having the City's storm water crew
adding that area to a more frequent scheduling of maintenance and making sure
that the catch basin is cleaned out.
Charles Findley, 26425 Military Rd. S, stated that he owns the property at 26505
Military Rd. S. He stated that a pipe runs under Military Road from the east to the
west side of the road. He stated that there is a pretty good running stream during
a heavy rain, otherwise the rain seeps into the ground by the fire station at 26512
Military Rd. S.
Findley stated that he would like to see a pipe installed in the V-shaped ditch
fronting his property at 26505 Military Rd, running that pipe to the edge of the
property and possibly to I-5. He stated that he would like the ditch filled in to even
out his property, so he can safely mow his lawn.
Tan stated that as part of the Drainage Master Plan, staff looked at the needs within
Kent to increase maintenance on these drainage systems, open ditches, and storm
water ponds. She stated that Kent's facilities do not meet the National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System Permit requirements. Tan stated that Public Works
would like additional staff to handle those maintenance needs and the need for
additional staffing is addressed in the Plan.
Roseanne Torgerson, 26015 Military Rd. S, submitted a layout of pictures
documented as an Exhibit for the record. She stated that she frequently cleans up
litter and a drainage ditch that fronts Military Road. Torgerson stated that despite
clearing the ditch and opening the ends of the culverts, the road edge around the
bus stop in front of her property is muddy and flooded whenever it rains.
Land Use and Planning Board 4 of 6
Minutes
July 28, 2008
5
Torgerson stated that when it rains, a creek runs down her main driveway and
ponds in front of her house. She stated that when road crews trim the grass along
Military Road, they leave debris behind which creates a berm along the road's edge
and causes her driveway to become the lowest point along Military Road.
Torgerson stated that a developer has been filling and grading his property to the
rear of their property for years. She stated that he has graded his property toward
the wetland, which drains into the wetland, and has created a pond at the rear of
her property.
Torgerson stated that road clearing equipment are damaging fire hydrant
protectors, then not clearing those areas and continuing on. She stated that
hydrants need to be accessible and cleared of debris.
Torgerson stated that there is a lot of development going on north of her on both
sides of Military along South 259t" and Reith Road. She stated that trucks haul in
fill and rocks; have lost those rocks, launching many of them onto her property as
they went by.
Dowell recommended that Torgerson contact the City's Engineering Department to
see if the developer behind her property has been issued a permit for fill or grading.
Pam Cobley, Roth Hill Engineering, stated her firm represents Water District No.
111. She stated that she was notified on Tuesday of last week, that the Planning
Board would be holding a public hearing on the 2008 Draft Water System Plan. She
stated that prior to this they were not notified that a draft plan was available as a
public review document. She stated that given that the District is within the City's
water service area, the District wishes to review the City's Draft Water System Plan.
Ms. Cobley stated that they have not had enough time to provide a thorough review
and are letting the Board know that they will be reviewing the plan and providing
comments as soon as possible. Ms. Cobley submitted a letter into the record
documented as an exhibit.
Dowell MOVED and Gray SECONDED a Motion to accept the letter into the record.
Motion Carried 6-0.
Giles Hulsmann, 923 Shaw Rd, Puyallup stated that he represents King County
Drainage District #1. He voiced his appreciation that staff has kept them informed
of this process since they are part of the storm drainage system within the valley.
He stated that they look forward to the continuing review of this master plan and
would like to be a party of record.
Heidi Campbell, 725 2nd Avenue S stated that she lives a couple blocks south of
Willis. She stated that it was discovered that the water main in front of her
landlord's property had been leaking and seeping up through the surface of the
roadway. She stated that the City Water Department patched the area and staff
stated that this was the third time they had come out to fix this eroding water main
Land Use and Planning Board 5 of 6
Minutes
July 28, 2008
6
and that it needs to be replaced. Campbell emphasized that it is critical that this
water main be repaired prior to the rainy season and would like clarification that
this will happen.
Bieren stated that he would follow up to determine if this main is scheduled for
replacement this year.
Ottini MOVED and Dowell SECONDED a Motion to accept the documents described
as Table 11.3 submitted by Bieren and pictures submitted by Ms. Torgerson into the
record. Motion CARRIED 6-0.
Seeing no further speakers, Gray MOVED and Ottini SECONDED a Motion to close
the Public Hearing. Motion CARRIED 6-0.
Ottini commended staff on the excellent job they did in presenting the information
that was discussed by the Board at previous workshops, in terms that laymen could
understand. He stated that these are ongoing projects that need to be completed
for Kent as a growing city, and that staff crafted a carefully thought out plan.
Ottini MOVED to accept CPA-2008-3; 2008 Water System Plan, Drainage Master
Plan, Wellhead Protection Program Phase I & II and Capital Facilities Element of
Kent's Comprehensive Plan including amendments presented by staff. Ralph
SECONDED the Motion. Motion CARRIED 6-0.
Adjournment
Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 8:00 p.m.
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager
Secretary of the Board
S:\Permit\Plan\LUPB\2008\MIN UTES\072808_LUPB_M in.doc
Land Use and Planning Board 6 of 6
Minutes
July 28, 2008
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 7
Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Director
PLANNING SERVICES
Charlene Anderson, AICP, Manager
KENT
WASH INGTON _ Phone: 253-856-5454
Fax: 253-856-6454
Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S.
Kent, WA 98032-5895
August 14, 2008
TO: Chair Jon Johnson and Land Use and Planning Board Members
FROM: Erin George, Planner; Katie Heinitz, Assistant Planner
RE: Draft Cottage Housing Demonstration Ordinance
[CPA-2008-2/KIVA #RPP6-2081199]
Staff Report for the August 25, 2008 LUPB Hearing
SUMMARY: On August 11, 2008 staff met with the Land Use and Planning Board
to discuss the proposed draft Cottage Housing Demonstration Ordinance. Cottage
housing developments typically consist of small detached single family residences
clustered around a common open space, with garages and parking located away
from the houses. The discussion was prompted by interest in bringing cottage
housing to Kent, as expressed by City Council, along with several homeowners and
the Cottage Company (a builder of these developments in the Puget Sound region).
In response to this interest, staff studied cottage developments in the region, and
has developed a draft Cottage Housing Demonstration Ordinance to allow a limited
number of these developments in Kent. The Board's comments from the workshop
are incorporated into the draft attached to the agenda packet.
BACKGROUND: Within the draft Cottage Housing Demonstration Ordinance, staff
has outlined a number of options for various development standards, which are
highlighted in red. The staff recommendations are highlighted in blue; however, all
portions of this document are open for discussion. The draft Demonstration
Ordinance was reviewed by the City Attorney's Office and the managers of
Development Engineering, Fire Prevention, Environmental Engineering and Planning
Services, whose comments are incorporated into the draft. The draft was also sent
out to several members of the development community for review, including the
Cottage Company, Master Builders Association and various individual developers.
The SEPA Responsible Official has determined that SEPA is not required for this
Demonstration Ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Cottage Housing
Demonstration Ordinance with the options highlighted in blue.
EG/KH/pm :S:\Permit\Plan\COMP_PLAN_AMENDMENTS\2008\CPA-2008-2_Cottage_Housing\LUPB\08-25-2008\HrgRpt.doc
Attach: Draft Cottage Housing Demonstration Ordinance
Comments from Linda Pruitt of the Cottage Company
cc: Fred Satterstrom,AICP,CD Director
Charlene Anderson,AICP, Planning Manager
Project File
8
DRAFT COTTAGE HOUSING DEMONSTRATION ORDINANCE
Section 1. General Authority
A. Purpose
The purpose of this demonstration ordinance is to allow development
of a limited number of projects that demonstrate a housing choice not
currently available in Kent's single family neighborhoods. The City will use
this interim ordinance to allow for construction of demonstration projects to
assess the viability of cottage housing in Kent. Adoption of a permanent
cottage housing ordinance will be discussed upon completion of the
construction of demonstration projects.
B. Goals
The goals of this ordinance are to:
(a) Provide a housing type that responds to changing household sizes
and ages (e.g., retirees, small families, single person households);
(b) Provide opportunities for ownership of small, detached dwelling
units within a single-family environment;
(c) Encourage creation of more usable open space for residents of the
development through flexibility in density and lot standards;
(d) Promote high quality design;
(e) Allow flexibility in site and design standards while promoting
projects that ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing
single-family developments;
(f) Implement goals and policies of the Kent Comprehensive Plan,
particularly in the areas listed in item C below.
C. Comprehensive Plan Support
The proposed amendments are consistent with, and substantially implement,
the following comprehensive plan goals and policies:
Goal LU-10:
Provide opportunities for a variety of housing types, options, and
densities throughout the City and the Potential Annexation Area to
meet the housing needs of the Region's changing demographics.
Policy LU-10.5: Allow cottage housing in all multifamily land use
areas and high density single-family land use areas (e.g., SF-8, MRT-
12, and MRT-16), and as demonstration projects as infill on small
parcels in other single-family land use areas.
Goal LU-11:
Revise development regulations to encourage single-family and
multifamily development that is more flexible and innovative in terms
of building, street standards for private roads, and site design.
- 1 -
9
Policy LU-11.3: Allow more flexibility in single-family and multifamily
residential setbacks, vehicle access, and parking, particularly on small
lots, to encourage more compact infill development and innovative site
design.
Goal LU-12:
Encourage high-quality site and building design for all residential
developments.
Policy LU-12.4: Develop design standards for compact innovative
single-family housing (e.g., cottage, cluster, and attached), where
allowed, to ensure high quality development integrates well into
surrounding neighborhoods in terms of bulk, scale and design.
Goal H-2:
Promote the organization and enhancement of neighborhoods, and
provide the opportunity for comfortable and well-maintained housing
for all citizens.
Policy H-2.2: Support housing with appropriate amenities for
individuals, families and children.
Policy H-2.3: Provide an appropriate mix of housing styles and
choices, allowing for different types of housing from neighborhood to
neighborhood.
Goal H-3:
Promote quality design that harmonizes with existing neighborhoods
for new development and rehabilitation efforts.
Policy H-3.1: Promote diversity in style and cost by allowing
innovative mixtures of housing types and creative approaches to
housing design and development.
Policy H-3.2: Assist in and promote the development of innovative
and affordable demonstration housing projects by exploring alternative
design, land development, and construction techniques.
Goal H-5:
Increase housing opportunities through a diversity of housing types
and the innovative use of residential and commercial land.
Section 2. Definitions
Changes to definitions and development and design standards since the August 11,
2008 Land Use and Planning Board workshop are noted in yellow highlight.
- 2 -
10
Carriage Unit - A single-family unit, not to exceed 800 square feet in gross floor
area, located above a garage structure.
Cottage - A detached, single-family dwelling unit containing [1,200; 1,500; 1,800]
square feet or less of gross floor area.
Cottage Housing Development - An alternative type of development made up of
detached small single-family residences (cottages) clustered around a common
open space with garages and parking located away from the houses.
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) - The gross building square footage divided by the site area.
The site area shall not include critical areas and their associated buffers.
Section 3. Applicable Use Zones
The housing types described in this chapter may be used only in the following single
family and multifamily zones: SR-4.5, SR-6, SR-8, MR-D, MR-T12, MR-T16, MR-G,
MR-M, MR-H.
Section 4. Selection and Permit Process for Cottage Housing
Demonstration Projects
Following adoption of the Ordinance, Planning Services shall publish a Notice of Call
for Proposals. Notice will be sent to the Kent Reporter, posted on the website, sent
to local engineering companies, media contacts, Master Builders Association and
others to get the word out. There will be a 180 day timeframe (submittal period)
during which proposals may be submitted.
The City shall use the following process to review and select cottage housing
demonstration projects:
A. Pre-submittal meeting requirements
1. Potential applicants must schedule a pre-submittal meeting with
City staff prior to submitting a formal proposal. This meeting will
give City staff the chance to review with the applicant the
requirements for stormwater, roads, open space, parking, cottage
design, etc.
B. Following the pre-submittal meeting, the applicant shall submit a full and
complete proposal to Planning Services which includes the following:
1. A completed City of Kent application form. The form shall include
owner and applicant information, as well as the name and contact
information for the builder and any design professionals involved in
the project.
2. A conceptual site plan of the proposed development.
- 3 -
11
3. Conceptual drawings of the proposed cottage houses, including
building footprints, elevations, and floor plans.
4. A description of how the proposed development minimizes adverse
impacts to the surrounding neighborhood. For example, describe
what was considered during site layout and building selection to
enhance the neighborhood and minimize adverse impacts to the
surrounding community.
5. A description of how the proposed development complies with all
criteria and development standards for a cottage housing
demonstration project as described in the Ordinance.
6. General information about the site including the number of allowed
and proposed dwelling units, parking, open space, pervious and
impervious surface, building heights and sustainable development
techniques.
7. Photographs of the site and adjacent properties.
8. Any additional information or material specified at the pre-submittal
meeting.
C. Proposal Selection Process
1. Evaluation of the proposals shall be based on the following
selection criteria:
(a) Demonstration that the project has been designed to
enhance and minimize adverse impacts to the surrounding
neighborhoods and community.
(b) Demonstration that the project impacts are substantially
equivalent to or less than the adverse impacts expected to
be associated with development of conventional housing on
the subject property, in regards to parking, building height,
building bulk, setbacks, lot coverage, open spaces,
screening, and aesthetics.
(c) Demonstration that the project will result in a unique cottage
style community that is distinct from typical single family
developments in Kent. This community shall incorporate a
high level of quality and originality throughout the
development, including but not limited to the following
areas:
1. Site design
2. Architectural design
3. Building materials
4. Open space
5. Parking
6. Landscaping
7. Sustainable development
- 4 -
12
(d) The proposal provides elements that contribute to a sense of
community within the development by including elements
such as front entry porches, common open space, and
common buildings.
(e) The structures proposed for the cottage housing
development are diverse in appearance, yet remain
connected through use of architectural style, details, color,
and materials.
(f) Examples of previous developments done by those involved
in the project and explanation of related experience.
(g) Demonstration that the selected site for the cottage housing
community supports Smart Growth techniques by
accessibility to commercial services, alternative
transportation modes, and recreational opportunities.
2. Upon expiration of the submittal period (180 days), the Cottage
Housing Committee shall convene to review all submitted
proposals. The committee will be made up of the following
members (or as otherwise appointed by the Planning Manager or
designee):
-Planning and Economic Development Committee Chair
-Land Use and Planning Board Chair
-Planning Manager
-Development Engineering Manager
-Economic Development Manager
All five members of the committee shall be present for a decision to
be made on selection of a proposal.
From the proposals, the committee may select up to three
demonstration projects that demonstrate exceptional design quality
and consistency with the selection criteria. If no proposals are
submitted, or the proposals do not meet the selection criteria, the
timeline for proposal submittals may be extended another 180
days, as determined by the committee. Extensions beyond this
period require City Council approval. The committee's decision,
selecting cottage housing developments to advance to the formal
application phase, shall be in writing and shall be the final decision
of the City.
D. Permit Process
1. Once a proposal has been selected by the committee, the applicant
shall have 90 days to submit a formal application to Planning
Services. The applicant may request in writing a maximum
extension of three months, subject to the approval of the Planning
Manager.
2. A formal application shall include the following items:
1. A completed City of Kent application form;
- 5 -
13
2. An environmental checklist (if applicable);
3. A site plan of the proposed development which includes all
applicable items noted in the City of Kent DEVELOPMENT
ASSISTANCE BROCHURE #2;
4. Drawings of the proposed cottage houses, including
building footprints, elevations, and floor plans. Design
review for the buildings will be evaluated at this stage for
consistency with the cottage housing criteria;
5. Tree Preservation Plan;
6. Stormwater Technical Information Report;
7. Critical areas studies, as required by the City of Kent Public
Works department;
8. Narrative on how the project meets Low Impact
Development standards, if applicable.
3. Applications for projects with nine or less residential lots shall be
subject to the Process II standards, as outlined in KCC 12.01 for
short plats. Applications for projects with ten or more lots shall be
subject to the Process III standards, as outlined in KCC 12.01 for
subdivisions. Applications for condominium projects shall be
processed in the same manner as a short plat, as outlined in
Process II in KCC 12.01, in regards to public notice, administrative
approval, and validity.
Section 5. Development and Design Standards for Cottage Housing
Demonstration Projects
In order to meet the goals of the cottage housing demonstration program, there
may be flexibility with regard to some typical application regulations and
requirements. Parameters identified in this section will apply to cottage housing
demonstration projects only and will prevail if they conflict with the regulations
specified in Kent City Code Title 12 and 15.
Options for several standards are given below, noted in red. Staff recommended
options are highlighted in blue.
A. Development Standards
Cottage Carriage'
Option A: 1,200 square
feet
Max Unit Size Option B: 1,500 square 800 square feet
feet
Option C: 1,800 square
feet
- 6 -
14
Cottage Carriage'
Density Bonus Option A:
For single family zones: allowable density is the same as the
underlying zone, unless the Low Impact Development (LID)
techniques listed in 2.j are incorporated, then:
Option A: 1.5 times the maximum number of dwelling units allowed
in the underlying zone
Option B: 2 times the maximum number of dwelling units allowed
in the underlying zone, up to 12 units per acre
For multifamily zones: allowable density is the same as the
underlying zone and LID techniques listed in 2.j are required for
cottage housing developments.
Density3,4 Density Bonus Option B:
For single family zones: Low Impact Development (LID) techniques
listed in 2.j are required for any cottage housing development
project and the density bonus is:
Option A: 1.5 times the maximum number of dwelling units allowed
in the underlying zone
Option B: 2 times the maximum number of dwelling units allowed
in the underlying zone, up to 12 units per acre
For multifamily zones: allowable density is the same as the
underlying zone and LID techniques listed in 2.j are required for
cottage housing developments.
Minimum Lot Size per None
unit
Max Floor Area Ratio .35
Min. 6 units
Max..
Option A: 12 units
Development Size Option B: 18 units Allowed when included in a cottage
Option C: 24 units project.
Minimum cluster 7: 6 units
Maximum cluster: 12 units
Option A: 1.8 spaces per unit (same as PUD standards)
Parking Requirements$ Option B: 1.8 spaces per unit if on-street parking is provided, 2 if
(See Section 2.g) there is no on-street parking
Option C: 2.25 spaces per unit
Minimum Development Front: 20'
Perimeter Setbacks9 Other: 10'
Maximum Impervious o
Surfaces10 50 /o
Maximum Height 25', where minimum roof slope of 6:12 for all parts of the roof
above 18' are provided. Otherwise, 18'.
- 7 -
15
Cottage Carriage'
Tree Retention Standards contained in KCC 15.08.240 for Tree Retention shall
apply. Cottages shall be designed around significant trees.
Development Options Subdivision
Condominium
Accessory Dwelling Not permitted as part of a cottage development.
Units (ADUs)
1 This housing type is only allowed where it is included in a cottage project and is counted towards the
development density.
Z Any additions or increases in unit sizes after initial construction shall be subject to the cottage
housing development standards. Cottages may not be more than 1000 square feet on the main floor.
3 Existing detached dwelling units may remain on the subject property and will be counted towards the
density. Existing dwelling units shall be remodeled to be consistent with the exterior architectural
design elements of the development. The dwelling unit may not exceed the existing square footage or
the maximum square footage allowed for a new cottage, whichever is greater.
4 When determining the maximum allowed number of units for a cottage housing development, all site
area may be included in the calculation. If calculations result in a fraction, the fraction shall be
rounded to the nearest whole number as follows: fractions above one-half (1/2) shall be rounded up,
fractions of one-half (1/2) and below shall be rounded down.
5 FAR regulations are calculated using the entire development site. FAR for individual lots may vary.
6 Carriage units may be included within a cottage housing proposal, provided that the number of
carriage units do not exceed:
Option A: 20 percent of the total number of units in the project.
Option B: 25 percent of the total number of units in the project.
Option C: 30 percent of the total number of units in the project.
7 Cluster size is intended to encourage a sense of community among residents and the homes within a
cluster generally orient toward each other, community open space, or pathways and are not separated
by roads or critical areas. A development site may contain more than one cluster, with a clear
separation between clusters. Furthermore, clusters shall be connected via pedestrian pathway(s).
8 Garages may count towards the parking count if, through a covenant, they are reserved only for the
parking of vehicles.
9 Perimeter setback areas are to be designated for landscaping, in accordance with Section 2.i.
10 Maximum impervious surface is calculated using the entire development site. Lot coverage for
individual lots may vary.
B. Design Standards
a. Orientation of Dwelling Units
Dwellings within a cottage housing development shall be oriented to
promote a sense of community within the development. The planning
manager shall have the authority to waive or modify specific
- 8 -
16
requirements for dwelling unit orientation to insure this intent is met
and to allow for flexibility and innovation in design.
1) Each dwelling unit shall have a primary entry and/or covered porch
oriented to the common open space or pathway connecting to the
common open space.
2) Each dwelling unit abutting a public right-of-way (not including
alleys) shall incorporate fagade modulation, windows, and roofline
variations to avoid blank walls that orient to the public right-of-
way.
b. Variation in Unit Sizes, Building and Site Design
Cottage projects shall establish building and site design that promote
variety and visual interest.
1) Projects shall include a variety of unit sizes within a single
development.
2) Proposals shall provide a variety of building styles, features, colors,
and site design elements within cottage housing communities.
Dwellings with the same combination of features and treatments
shall not be located adjacent to each other. Identical elements
shall not be repeated in more than 25% of the cottages in the
development.
3) Design of carriage units shall be of similar character with that of
the cottages included in the project.
4) Cottages may not be more than 1000 square feet on the main floor.
c. Community Buildings
Community buildings are required in cottage developments.
1) Community buildings shall be at least 500 square feet on the main
floor and shall be of similar architectural character to the dwelling
units.
2) Building height for community buildings shall be the same standard
as for cottages.
3) Community buildings must be located on the same site as the
cottage housing development, and be commonly owned by the
residents.
d. Storage Space
If garages are reserved only for the parking of vehicles through a
covenant, alternative storage space onsite shall be provided. The
- 9 -
17
development shall include 30 square feet of storage space per dwelling
unit. The storage space shall be in one or more of the following forms:
1) Detached sheds, designed in similar character of that of the
dwelling units. May be individual or shared sheds.
2) Storage space within the detached parking structures (additional
rooms, area for shelving, etc.) that does not conflict with the
parking of vehicles in the garages.
3) Storage space within the dwelling unit, accessible only through
an external door.
4) Designated storage space attached to the community building
that is not counted towards the 500 square foot minimum.
5) Other storage space options approved in writing by Planning
Services
e. Required Common Open Space
Common open space shall provide openness, visual relief, and
community for cottage developments. It must be located outside of
critical areas and their buffers. The common open space shall be of a
general character similar to single family residential yard areas and
provide similar opportunities for use. Elements of the single family
residential yard areas that may be included in the common open space
are lawns, community garden space, patio/seating and cooking areas,
etc.
1) Each area of common open space in each cluster shall be in one
contiguous and usable piece with a minimum dimension of 20 feet
on all sides.
2) Required common open space may be divided into no more than
one separate area per cluster of dwelling units.
3) Common open space shall be located in a centrally located area and
be easily accessible physically and visually to all dwellings within
the development.
4) Fences may not be located within or around required common open
space areas.
5) Landscaping located in common open space areas shall be designed
to allow for easy access and use of the space by all residents,
accommodate principles of Crime Prevention through
Environmental Design (CPTED), and facilitate maintenance needs.
Existing mature trees shall be retained in this area, as appropriate
for site design.
- 10 -
18
6) Unless the shape or topography of the site precludes the ability to
locate units adjacent to the common open space, the following
standards must be met:
a) The open space shall be located so that it will be surrounded by
cottages or common buildings on at least three sides;
b) At least 50 percent of the units in the development shall abut a
common open space. A cottage is considered to "abut" an area
of open space if there is no structure, road, or critical area
between the unit and the open space.
f. Private Open Space
Each cottage unit must have a covered porch with a minimum area of
64 square feet per unit and a minimum dimension of 7' on all sides.
Porches shall be associated with primary point of entry.
Each carriage unit shall have a deck or balcony, oriented toward the
common open space.
In addition to porches, at least 300 square feet of private, contiguous,
usable open space adjacent to each individual dwelling unit shall be
provided to contribute positively to the visual appearance of the
development, promote diversity in planting materials, and utilize
generally accepted good landscape design. The private open space
shall be oriented toward the common open space as much as possible
and shall have no dimension less than 10 feet. The private open space
shall define private residences from common areas, trails, and parking
areas. Fences surrounding these spaces shall be a maximum height of
three feet and shall be wrought iron, cedar split rail, picket, or similar
fencing material.
g. Pedestrian Flow through Development
Pedestrian connections shall link all buildings to the:
1) Public right-of-way;
2) Common open space;
3) Parking areas;
4) Other cottage clusters in the development
The pedestrian walkways shall meet International Building Code
requirements for accessibility.
h. Shared Detached Garages and Surface Parking Design
Parking areas shall be located so their visual presence and associated
noise are minimized, both within and outside the development. These
areas shall also maintain the single-family character along public
streets.
- 11 -
19
1) Shared detached garage structures may not exceed four single-car
garage doors per building. Carriage units are preferred above
these garage structures.
2) For shared detached garages, the design of the structure must be
of similar character to that of the dwelling units within the
development.
3) Shared detached garage structures and surface parking areas must
be screened from streets outside the development and adjacent
residential uses by landscaping or architectural screening.
4) If garage structures are counted toward the required number of
parking stalls, these structures shall be reserved through a
covenant for the parking of vehicles owned by the residents of the
development. Storage of items which preclude the use of the
parking spaces for vehicles is prohibited.
5) Surface parking areas may not be located in rows of more than:
Option A: four spaces.
Option B: six spaces.
Parking rows must be separated by a distance of at least 20 feet.
i. Landscaping
The intent of these landscaping requirements is to enhance to overall
appearance of the cottage housing development and to give the
development an appearance of establishment.
Cottage housing developments shall incorporate a landscape master
plan, designed and stamped by a professional landscape architect, and
include the following elements:
1) All landscaped areas (except that which is in private open spaces)
shall be densely planted with a variety of decorative trees, shrubs,
groundcovers, and other plants.
2) Landscaping shall be located adjacent to all pathways and common
open spaces and shall screen parking areas.
3) Perimeter setback areas shall be landscaped in a manner that
results in a dense landscape screen.
4) Perimeter trees shall be maintained and incorporated in the master
landscape plan.
5) Landscaping shall be included within private open space, which
shall be consistent with the overall landscape concept.
6) The landscape design shall exhibit sensitivity to principles of Crime
Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED).
- 12 -
20
7) Maintenance of landscaping (except that which is in private open
spaces) shall be the responsibility of the Homeowners' Association.
Standards contained in KCC 15.08.240 for Tree Retention shall apply.
Cottages shall be designed around significant trees. Within perimeter
setbacks, all significant trees which do not constitute a safety hazard
shall be retained.
j. Low Impact Development
Option A (in conjunction with Option A listed in the chart under
Density' on page 2): For single family zones, density bonuses will only
be granted if all of the following low impact development (LID)
techniques are met. LID techniques are not required if the proposal
does not include a density bonus. LID techniques are required for
cottage housing developments in multifamily zones.
When required, the proposed site design shall incorporate the use of
LID strategies to meet stormwater management standards.
Option B (in conjunction with Option B listed in the chart under
Density' on page 2): For all cottage housing developments in single
family and multifamily zones, the following low impact development
(LID) techniques must be met. The proposed site design shall
incorporate the use of LID strategies to meet stormwater management
standards.
LID is a set of techniques that mimic natural watershed hydrology by
slowing, evaporating/transpiring, and filtering water, which allows
water to soak into the ground closer to its source. The design shall
implement the following objectives:
1) Grading disturbance limited to roadway and building pad
preparation. Removal and compaction of topsoils shall be
minimized and soils may be amended to facilitate LID techniques.
The replacement of topsoils on all pervious areas disturbed by
construction shall be replaced.
2) Use of pervious materials for a portion of non-public driving and
walking surfaces if soil type allows for infiltration.
Option A: minimum 30 percent of surfaces are pervious material
Option B: minimum 50 percent of surfaces are pervious material
Option C: minimum 70 percent of surfaces are pervious material
3) Treatment of stormwater in numerous small, decentralized
structures, which include the use of multifunctional open drainage
systems such as vegetated swales or filter strips which also help to
fulfill landscaping and open space requirements.
- 13 -
21
4) Other options meeting the intent of this section and approved in
writing by Planning Services and Public Works.
Draft Ordinance Updated 8/14/08
S:\Perm it\Pla n\CO M P_PLAN_AM E N D ME NTS\2008\C PA-2008-2_Cottag e_Housi n g\LU PB\08-25-2008\082508_DraftDemoOrd.doc
- 14 -
22
Here's some points to integrate:
1. Call the code Compact Housing Demonstration Program'. This would
distinguish for other/old cottage housing codes and helps to reflect the larger
house sizes allowed.
2. Sensitive areas - Exclude sensitive areas (wetlands, steep slopes, etc.) from
FAR computation. Otherwise, the projects could be too dense. This is
important and Kirkland has amended their code to catch this loophole.
3. Garages - there is no limit on garage size.
4. Community building - need a more specific size - maybe 40sf per home with
a 400 sf minimum. Danielson Grove is 572 sf or 36 sf per home. Greenwood
Avenue Cottages is 400 sf, or 50 sf per home.
5. Clusters of parking - confusing. Maybe it needs to be no more than 8 with
any building with more than 4 garages at least 20 feet apart.
6. Pervious pavement - needs to be subject to soils that will infiltrate.
Re: two stories, better to restrict the overall height and specify roof pitch. Even
those seniors who want to live on a single level are often not happy with just N
800 SF footprint and appreciate the extra space the 2nd floor presents - even if
they don't use daily. Make sense? BUT, make sure to restrict footprint, SF and
overall height. Don't want tall skinny houses.
I look forward to the new draft version.
Thanks, Linda
Linda A. Pruitt
www.cottagecompany.com
206-525-0835 (Office)
206-852-3755 (Cell)
S:�Permit�Plan\COMP PLAN AMENDMENTS�2008�CPA-2008-2_Cottage Housing�LUP8�08-25-2008�082508LindaPruittComments.doc