HomeMy WebLinkAbout6022
RECORDER'S COVER SHEET
Document Title(s) (or transactions contained therein):
~ LG\>."-i \.;'-.
--- u.-....-\\'
\\
1111I
-- -- ---
IT
~~J3- \'d
ge)
Return Address:
Auburn City Clerk
City of Auburn
25 West Main St.
Auburn, WA 98001
1111111111111111111
20060616002694
PACIFIC NW TIT ORD 42 00
PAGE001 OF 011 .
06/16/2006 15:43
KING COUNTY, WA
1. Rezone (Ordinance No. 6022)
Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released:
DAdditional reference #'s on page _ of document
Grantor(s)/Borrower(s) (Last name first, then first name and initials)
CITY OF AUBURN
Grantee/Assignee/Beneficiary: (Last name first)
Centioli Family LLC
Legal Description (abbreviated: i.e. lot, block, plat or section, township, ran
That portion of Lots 13 and 14, Block 15 CD Hillman's Auburndale Addition
l':8J Additional legal is on page -1L- of document.
Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number
333990-0631, 333990-0775, and 333990-0780
D Assessor Tax # not yet assigned
ORDINANCE NO.6 0 2 2
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AUBURN, WASHINGTON, APPROVING A CHANGE OF ZONING
FOR THE CENTIOLl FAMILY LLC FROM R-2 SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL AND R-4 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO C-
1 LIGHT COMMERCIAL.
WHEREAS, the City of Auburn received an application for a change in
zoning from the existing R-2 Single Family Residential Zone (tax parcel 333990-
0631) and R-4 Multiple Family Residential (tax parcel 333990-0775 and the
eastern half of tax parcel 333990-0780) to C-1 Light Commercial for properties
commonly known as 722 - 1ih St. NE and 711 and 721 - 10th St. NE (City File
No. REZ05-0005); and
WHEREAS, on March 21, 2006, the Hearing Examiner conducted a duly
noticed public hearing on the matter and on March 31, 2006, issued a decision
recommending the City Council approve the rezone, with no conditions; and
WHEREAS, final approval is appropriate for City Council action; and
WHEREAS, based on the review given this conditional use permit by the
Hearing Examiner, the City Council hereby makes and enters the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The Applicant requests a rezone of all or part of three tax parcels to Light
Commercial (C-1). Tax parcel 333990-0631 is zoned Single-Family
Residential (R-2) and is 19,180 square feet in size. The property is vacant
and is located at 722 - 12th Street NE, Auburn, Washington. Tax parcel
333990-0775 is zoned Multi-Family Residential (R-4) and is 8,850 square
feet in size. The property is developed with a single-family residence and
Ordinance No. 6022
April 26, 2006
Page 1 of 9
is located at 721 - 10th Street NE. Tax parcel 333990-0780 has split
zoning codes. The eastern portion of the parcel is zoned R-4 and the
western portion of the parcel is zoned C-1. The Applicant seeks only to
rezone the eastern portion of the parcel, or approximately 4,315 square
feet, from R-4 to C-1. The propert~ is developed with a single-family
residence and is located at 711 - 10 h Street NE. Exhibit 1, Staff Report,
Pages 1-2; Exhibit 2a, Site Map; Testimony of Mr. Pilcher.
2. Pursuant to Washington's State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW
43.21 C, the City of Auburn acted as lead agency for the identification and
review of the environmental impacts caused by the proposed rezone and
the future commercial development. The City issued a Determination of
Non-Significance (DNS) on February 21, 2006. Exhibit 1, Staff Report,
Page 3; Exhibit 9, DNS.
3. Surrounding land use of the parcels includes vacant land and a Kentucky
Fried Chicken restaurant to the west, multi-family residential to the south,
a mixture of single and multi-family residential to the east, and a
commercial parking lot to the north. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, Page 2.
4. The City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan designation for the subject
property and surrounding properties to the north and west is Light
Commercial. Surrounding properties to the south and east are designated
as High Density Residential and/or Single-Family Residential. Exhibit 1,
Staff Report, Page 2.
5. The purpose of the C-1 zone in Auburn is to provide for a grouping of uses
that are considered compatible uses and the uses have common or similar
performance standards in that they represent types of enterprises
involving the rendering of services, both professional or to the person, or
on-premises retail activities. This zone encourage leisure shopping,
provides amenities conducive to attracting shoppers, and represents the
primary commercial designation for small to moderate scale commercial
activities that attract pedestrian-oriented activities. ACC 18.26.010;
Exhibit 1, Staff Report, Page 3.
6. The requested rezone would facilitate future commercial use of the subject
property. Near the location of the subject properties, the Applicant owns a
total of eight parcels, including the parcels subject to this rezone. The
total acreage for all of the parcels is 2.6 acres. The Applicant has
proposed future development of the eight parcels with three buildings,
Ordinance No. 6022
April 26, 2006
Page 2 of 9
totaling approximately 25,000 square feet of retail space. The Applicant
asserted that in order to attract national chain retailers, additional land was
required to accommodate the required parking and associated
landscaping that both the future tenants and the City would require.
Exhibit 1, Staff Report, Page 2-3; Exhibit 3, Rezone Application;
Testimony of Mr. Pilcher.
7. The parcels are all located approximately one block from Auburn Way
North, a major arterial. During SEPA review, public comments were
received in regards to potential traffic impacts on the surrounding
residential neighborhoods. In particular, concern was raised about the
possibility of 11th Street NE providing access to the commercial
development. City Staff stated that 11 th Street NE is not a through street
and terminates prior to reaching the Applicant's property. As depicted on
Exhibit 2, several privately held intervening lots would prevent access to
the site from 11 th Street NE. Further review of traffic impacts would occur
during site plan review for the commercial development. Exhibit 1, Staff
Report, page 3; Exhibit 2, Vicinity Map; Testimony of Mr. Pilcher;
Testimony of Ms. Moore, Testimony of Mr. Moore, Testimony of Ms.
Haugen.
8. The Applicant's eight parcels are bordered on the north by 12th Street NE
and on the south by 10th Street NE; both streets are designated as local
access streets. To the east of the site, 12th Street NE is closed at its
intersection with Harvey Road, an arterial, thereby limiting traffic flow on
this street. A connection is provided between Harvey Road and Auburn
Way North via 10th Street NE, which, unlike 12th Street NE, has no access
restrictions. Access to the future commercial development would be from
Auburn Way North. The Applicant stated that they have no intent to
provide access to the site from either 10th Street NE or 1 ih Street NE.
Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 3; Testimony of Mr. Popelka; Testimony of
Mr. Moore.
9. In order to screen the commercial use from residential uses, ACC
18.26.040(1) requires landscaping within the C-1 zone. ACC
18.50.050(D) requires a five-foot wide, Type III landscaped strip along
street frontages and a five-foot wide, Type II landscaped strip where the
site is adjacent to a R-2 or R-4 zoning district. Type II landscaping is
intended to create a visual separation between different uses or zones
and is to consist of evergreen and deciduous trees (50% or less may be
deciduous). Type III landscaping is intended to provide a visual separation
Ordinance No. 6022
April 26, 2006
Page 3of9
of uses from the street and compatible uses and is to consist of evergreen
and deciduous trees (75% or less may be deciduous). ACC 18.50.050(0);
ACC 18.50.040(B)-(C); Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 3; Testimony of Mr.
Pilcher.
10. All existing structures would be demolished to accommodate future
commercial development of the parcels. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, Page 2.
11. Public comments were received on the proposal. Comments pertained to
the transformation of this area of Auburn from residential to commercial
development, traffic impacts, and an increase in crime. Mr. Curtis Moore
and Ms. Dora Moore, tenants at the existing residence located at 721 -
10th Street (Parcel 333990-0775), testified that the residence was
constructed in 1947 and that the surrounding neighborhood is residential,
not commercial. They urged denial of the rezone and protection of the
residences in the area. Testimony of Ms. Moore, Testimony of Mr. Moore,
Testimony of Ms. Haugen.
12. The Applicant asserts that the rezone is justified because: (1) the City's
Comprehensive Plan designation for the site is Light Commercial; (2) the
site is located across the street from properties which are subject to the
North Auburn Business District Plan, adopted in 1982; (3) traffic on
Auburn Way North has substantially increased over the year making the
area less desirable for single-family living. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, Pages
3-4; Exhibit 3, Rezone Application.
13. As required by RCW 36.70A.106, notice of the rezone application was
provided to the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and
Economic Development and other state agencies on August 24, 2005. No
comments have been received from any state agency. Exhibit 1, Staff
Report, Page 3.
14. Notice of the open record hearing was mailed to properties within 300 feet
of the site on March 9, 2006; posted on the subject property on March 10,
2006; and published in King County Journal on March 11, 2006. Exhibits
4, 5, 6, & 7 - Notice.
Ordinance No. 6022
April 26, 2006
Page 4 of 9
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Jurisdiction
The Hearing Examiner is granted authority to make a recommendation to the
Auburn City Council on rezone applications pursuant to RCW 35.63.170 and
ACC 18.68.130.
Criteria for Review
In order to approve a rezone, the Hearings Examiner must find that the following
criteria, as set forth in ACC 18.68, are satisfied:
1. The rezone shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The rezone was initiated by a party, other than the City, in order for the
Hearing Examiner to hold a public hearing and consider the request.
3. Any change or modification to the rezone request made by the Hearing
Examiner or the City Council shall not result in a more intense zone than
the one requested.
In addition to the criteria set forth in the Auburn City Code, the rezone application
must be consistent with state law. In the decision Parkridge v. Seattle, 89 Wn.2d
454 (1978), the Washington Supreme Court identified the following general
criteria for rezone approval:
1. There is no presumption of validity favoring the action or rezoning;
2. The proponents of the rezone have the burden of proof in demonstrating that
conditions have changed since the original zoning;
3. The rezone must bear a substantial relationship to the public health, safety,
morals, or welfare.
In more recent decisions the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals have
identified an exception to the second Parkridge criterion that is relevant to this
case. In Bjarnson v. Kitsap County, 78 Wash. App. 840, 846 (1995), the court
held that "where the proposed rezone ... implements policies of the
comprehensive plan, changed circumstances are not required." The court
adopted the rationale from the earlier decision Save Our Rural Environment v.
Snohomish County that:
If such implementation were not allowed to occur until physical or
developmental circumstances in the area had changed, the new
comprehensive plan might never be fulfilled: if an area is presently
undeveloped and newly amended comprehensive plan calls for industrial
Ordinance No. 6022
April 26, 2006
Page 5of9
development, no industrial development may occur until al least one
rezone has been granted.
Bjarnson, 78 Wash. App. at 846 (quoting Save Our Rural Environment v.
Snohomish County, 99 Wash.2d 363, 370 (1983)). Because the City of Auburn
criteria for rezone approval require that the rezone be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, no analysis of changed circumstances is required.
Conclusions Based on Findinqs
1. The proposed rezone is consistent with the City of Auburn
Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designation of the subject
property is Light Commercial. The requested C-1 zoning would implement this
designation and provides justification for an assertion of "changed
circumstances." Finding of Fact No.1, 4, 12; Bjarnson v. Kitsap County, 78
Wash. App. 840, 846 (1995)
2. The City of Auburn did not initiate the proposed rezone. The property
owners, Centiolj Family LLC, initiated the proposed rezone in order to
facilitate future commercial development of the site. Finding of Fact NO.1.
3. No modification of the proposed rezone is required. The requested C-1
zoning is compatible with the zoning of surrounding properties to the north
and west and the Comprehensive Plan. The subject parcels are located
within one block of Auburn Way North, a major arterial within a commercial
corridor. The contemplated use of the site is compatible with the C-1 zoning
designation and existing uses along the Auburn Way North corridor. Neither
the City nor the Hearing Examiner is proposing any modification so the
rezone. Findings of Fact Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.
4. The proposed rezone bears a substantial relationship to the public
health, safety, morals, or welfare of the community. The subject parcels
are in an area that is characterized by commercial development.
Development of the site with retail commercial development would provide
shopping opportunities that could assist in meeting the increasing demands of
the community. Landscaping required by ACC would screen the commercial
development from adjacent residential communities. Traffic impacts would be
limited due to restricted access on local roadways. Environmental review was
conducted pursuant to SEPA and a DNS was issued. Site specific
development conditions would occur during site plan review of the
Ordinance No. 6022
April 26, 2006
Page 6 of 9
commercial development. Findings of Fact Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12;
Parkridge v. Seattle, 89 Wn.2d 454 (1978).
NOW THEREFORE, based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and
Conclusions, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON,
DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Approval. The requested to rezone tax parcel 333990-0631
from Single Family Residential (R-2) and tax parcel 333990-0775 and the
eastern half of tax parcel 333990-0780 from Mutli-family Residential (R-4) to
Light Commercial (C-1) is APPROVED, with no conditions. The properties are
identified in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein.
Section 2. Constitutionality or Invalidity. If any section, subsection
clause or phase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or
unconstitutional such invalidity unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or
constitutionality of the remaining portions of this Ordinance, as it is being hereby
expressly declared that this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence,
clause and phrase hereof would have been prepared, proposed adopted and
approved and ratified irrespective of the fact that nay one or more section,
subsection, sentence, clause or phase be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Ordinance No. 6022
April 26, 2006
Page 7 of 9
Section 3. Recording. Upon the passage, approval and publication of
this Ordinance as provided by law, the City Clerk of the City of Auburn shall
cause this Ordinance to be recorded in the office of the King County Auditor.
Section 4. Implementation. The Mayor is hereby authorized to
implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the
directives of this legislation.
Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in .
force five (5) days from and after its passage, approval and publication, as
provided by law.
INTRODUCED:
MAY 1 2006
MAY 1 2006
PASSED:
~1 z~ ?
PE ER B. LEWIS, MAYOR
Ordinance No. 6022
April 26, 2006
Page 8 of9
ATTEST:
A)tM~ t2~~
Danielle E. Daskam,
City Clerk
\l.b \ l -s~ e~' (h "-5 s I 2'-<:0 c.,
Ordinance No. 6022
April 26, 2006
Page 9 of 9
"
1. J 1
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
PAKChL jj39w-v631:
TIIAT PORTION OF LOTS 13 AND 14, BLOCK 15, C.D. HILLMAN'S AUBURNDALE ADDmON TO THE CITY OF
SEATILE DMSION NO.2, ACCORDING TO THE PlAT TIIEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 13 OF PLATS, PAGE
92, IN KING COUNTY, WASHlNGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOllOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORm LINE OF SAID LOT 13 WHICH IS DISTANT 1.78 FEET EAST OF TIIE
NORlHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT;
TIIENCE SOUTIIERL Y TO A POINT ON THE sourn LINE OF SAID LOT 13 WHICH IS DISTANT 1.87 FEET EAST
OF 1HE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT;
TIIENCE EAST, ALONG TIlE SOlITH LIEN OF SAID LOTS 13 AND 14, TO A POINT 10 FEET WEST OFlHE
SOUfHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 14;
TIIENCE NORTII, ON A LINE PARALLEL TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 14, TO A POINT ON THE NORm LINE
OF SAID LOT 14;
TIffiNCE WEST, ALONG THE NORm LINE OF SAID LOTS 13 AND 14, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL 333990-07S0:
TIlE sourn 150 FEET OF LOT 43 AND THE sourn 150 FEET OF THE WEST HALF OF LOT 42, BLOCK 15, cn.
HILLMAN'S AUBURNDALE ADDffiON TO THE CITY OF SEATILE DIVISION NO.2, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT
TIIEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 13 OF PlATS, PAGE 92, IN KING COUNTY, WASIDNGTON; .
EXCEPT THE SOUTII 2.50 FEET TIIEREOF AS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF AUBURN BY DEED RECORDED
UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9501310580.
PARCEL 333990-0775:
LOT 41 AND TIlE EAST HALF OF LOT 42, BLOCK 15, C.D. HlLLMAN'S AUBURNDALE ADDITION TO THE CITY
OF SEATILE DIVISION NO.2, ACCORDING TO THE PlAT TIIEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 13 OF PLATS,
PAGE 92, IN KING COUNTY, WASlllNGTON;
EXCEPT THE NORm 150 FEET THEREOF; AND
EXCEPT THE SOUTII 2.50 FEET TIIEREOF CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF AUBURN BY STATIJTORY WARRANTY
DEED RECORDED JANUARYO 12,1994, UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 9410121873;
(ALSO KNOWN AS PARCEL B, CITY OF AUBURN LOT LINE ADmSTMENT NUMBER 84-148, RECORDED UNDER
RECORDING NUMBER 8403140210).