Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-22-2003HEARING EXAMINER MINUTES APRIL 22, 2003 The meeting of the Auburn Hearing Examiner was held on April 22, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Auburn City Hall. Those in attendance were as follows: HEARING EXAMINER: Diane L. VanDerbeek STAFF: David Osaki, Shirley Aird, Mitzi McMahon and Patti Zook Ms. VanDerbeek called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. explaining the order of procedures and swore in staff and those in the audience intending on testifying. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. APPLICATION NO. REZ03-0002 Hearing Examiner opened the public hearing. Planner Aird presented the staff report. Andy Benedetti has requested to rezone property located at 509 M Street SE and 1123 - 6th Street SE from R-2, Single Family Residential to R-3, Two Family (Duplex) Residential. Applicant indicated probable development as duplexes; however, no proposal is under review. Staff recommends approval of the rezone as it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and adjacent zoning. The applicant was present and did not provide testimony other than to request that the rezone be approved. Hearing Examiner closed the public hearing. There was no public testimony. The written decision will be issued within 10 days. Hearing Examiner indicated that she will recommend approval of the rezone request. 2. APPLICATION NO. MIS03-0002 Hearing Examiner opened the public hearing. Planner McMahon presented the staff report. Leanne Schultheis has requested a special home occupation permit to allow a massage therapy business inside her home located at 11523 SE 319th Street. The City has determined that massage therapy business is considered similar to personal service shop. The City has approved several similar requests over the years. She explained the days and hours of operation. The in-home business will not have signage or any alterations to the home. There will be no impacts to the neighborhood. The City received a letter in support of the request from Walter and Sylvia Wheeler which the Hearing Examiner marked as Exhibit 2. The applicant was present and did not object to the condition. Jarett Clark, 31913 115th Avenue SE, just moved into the neighborhood. He moved to the neighborhood because of security and spoke about incidents in his former neighborhood. He appreciates the need to have a business and create an income, but a patron driven business is not appropriate in a residential neighborhood. There will be impacts related to safety and security because of the business. Even though there is a Iow number of clients this could be a precedent for other in-home businesses. He talked to a neighborhood who also had concerns. He believes there will be an increase in traffic and thinks the customers will have trouble finding the home and will turn around in front of his house. There will be uncontrolled volume of traffic and clients. He spoke again about his former neighborhood and its problems which is why he moved to present neighborhood. He talked about child safety. Patron driven businesses should be separated from residential uses and is not appropriate in residential areas. The PAGE 1 HEARING EXAMINER MINUTES APRIL 22, 2003 business will encourage other businesses and if you allow one situation this will encourage others. He looked in the development's CCRs and referred to section 6.2 and read a portion related to home occupations not having a disturbance or unduly increasing traffic. He believes this application will create a disturbance because of safety issues. He is concerned about any increase in traffic. He asked that the permit not be granted. City Rebuttal: Planner McMahon pointed out that the intensity of this land use is compatible with single family residential district. The applicant meets 11 of the required 11 criteria necessary to allow special home occupation permit. The use is similar to a personal service shop and there will be very Iow number of clients. Ms. Schultheis moved to the neighborhood at the end of summer. She was not prepared to defend her request. She had an in-home business at her previous residence and the business did not have any effect on the neighborhood. In fact, the City has a support letter from the Wheelers attesting to this fact. She is single and already has less traffic than her neighbors. The business will not create any problems. She spoke to member of the homeowners association who said the business would not be a problem. Hearing Examiner will take this matter under advisement and will issue the written decision within 10 days. The public hearing was closed. 3. APPLICATION NO. VAR03-0002 The request of Muckleshoot Housing Authority for a variance from the required rear yard setback on property located at 3625 Juniper Court SE. 4. APPLICATION NO. VAR03-0003 The request of Muckleshoot Housing Authority for a variance from the required rear yard setback on property located at 5535 - 37th Court SE. 5. APPLICATION NO. VAR03-0004 The request of Muckleshoot Housing Authority for a variance from the required rear yard setback on property located at 3605 Juniper Court SE. Hearing Examiner joined the three variance applications and opened the public hearing. Community Development Administrator Osaki presented the staff reports. The variance requests are similar in nature, have the same applicant, same request to reduce the rear yard setback from 25 to 18 feet, located in the same subdivision called Swan Flats. The applications have similar Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Recommendations. The lots are similar in characteristics. He spoke of problem with siting two story homes on these lots. The applicant is not attempting to over build on the lots or to create situation where the variance is needed. Staff recommends approval of the three variances. The applicant was present and available to answer questions, but did not provide testimony. Hearing Examiner closed the public hearing. There was no public testimony. The written decision will be issued within 10 days. Hearing Examiner indicated that she will approve the variance requests. ADJOURNMENT: With no further items to come before the Hearing Examiner, the meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. HE~AGND'WIIN 04-2003 PAGE 2