Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-21-2000HEARING EXAMINER MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 The meeting of the Auburn Hearing Examiner was held on March 21, 2000 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: Lynn Rued 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 HEARING: 1. APPLICATION NO. REZ0001-00 Assistant Planning Director Rued presented the staff report. Bruce & Heidi Elliott and George & Cindy Codiga requested to rezone property located at 28418 85th Avenue to M-l, Light Industrial. Using an overhead, he pointed out the subject property which is outside the City. The property annexation is currently before the Council. He then pointed out an island of unincorporated King County and surrounding land uses. The subject site is 1.5 acres in size and contains a single family home. The RCW allows the site to be prezoned even though it is not now a part of Auburn. The rezone would not become effective until annexation occurs. The unincorporated island has access via 85th Avenue which is a narrow substandard street which serves the neighborhood. Property to the south is zoned M-1 and is currently being developed as Emerald Corporate Park. He showed another overhead of this adjacent development known as Emerald Corporate Park. The applicant will be required to dedicate a street for their project. The City intends that C Street connect to Auburn Way North, but this is several years in the future. Emerald Corporate Park did not own all property up to subject parcel. There is an intervening parcel which will have to dedicate 30 feet of its western property in order for the subject parcel to have access to a standard public street. Hearing Examiner asked if Emerald Corporate Park is located in Auburn. Assistant Planning Director Rued replied yes and pointed out the City limits boundary. The City's Comprehensive Plan says the subject parcel is appropriate for Light Industrial designation and the M-1 zoning. However, the infrastructure to serve the property are not adequate to serve an industrial use. If the property is developed, all access and utilities will come from the south so as not to affect the neighborhood to the north. Access from the north would adversely impact the residential neighborhood. Staff recommends approval of the rezone because it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and adjacent zoning. He reviewed the two conditions. Hearing Examiner asked Assistant Planning Director Rued to explain what M-l, Light Industrial, is, and what additional review will be done by the City. Assistant Planning Director Rued commented that adjacent property to the south is developed as Emerald Corporate Park for warehouses, light manufacturing, and storage. If the fezone is approved, it does not guarantee that the site will be built upon. The applicant will have to submit construction plans, storm drainage plans, water and sewer, and environmental review for any construction of the site. There are many City requirements and standards to be met for the site to be developed as an M-1 use. Dennis DeLaHunt, 55 Bell Street, Seattle, is the applicant's representative, and is in agreement with staff recommendation. He is sympathetic to City concerns regarding use of 85th Avenue. It is a residential street that would be impacted by M-1 uses and they accept limitations placed on the property. The intervening property will be developed in the near future and the subject property could be developed at the same time. He pointed out property to the east of the rezone property that was developed as self-storage. The site is bordered on two sides by commercial. The parcel PAGE 1 HEARING EXAMINER MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 is the last property of residential finger that will limit impacts to the neighbors to the north. The rezone is a logical extension of commercial and meets the Comprehensive Plan designation for the area. - Hearing Examiner indicated that she did not have questions for Mr. DeLaHunt. Bill Dixon, 28227 85th Avenue South, Kent, referred to the road not being extended now, but in the future. He measured a strip of pavement and it is 50 feet from sidewalk to sidewalk and a lot of property will be lost. He spoke with Chris Vance before and was assured by Vance that the road would not be used for access to light industrial property. He was told by Keith Niven, former City planner, that Vance was incorrect. He is concerned that in a couple years trucks will be going down the street. Kids play on the street which has been a dead end street. He feels that Auburn is trying to move them out. Retired people live on the street. Assistant Planning Director Rued stressed that he does not envision the road being extend through the neighborhood until the neighborhood becomes another use. When this happens and the need for wider street becomes apparent, then the street will be extended. Property owners have their destiny in their hands. If they do not want to sell, the neighborhood will remain residential..The City requires full standard street for new development. Hearing Examiner asked the width of 85th Avenue. Assistant Planning Director Rued replied the map says there is a 40 foot right of way and at least 65 feet of right of way is needed for commercial access. Garland Fortenberry, 28208 85th Avenue South, Kent, referred to a buffer zone adjacent to his property and wants to make sure the project has a nice buffer zone. James McBride, 28215 85~h Avenue South, Kent, gave .a background on himself. He likes the neighborhood, but is concerned about tractor trailers coming down 85th Avenue. If the street becomes a through street, then trucks will come down it all the time. He referred to the phrase "narrow substandard street" in item 8 of the agenda bill and read it. Children play on the street. When site starts to develop, they will bring in fill and Emerald Corporate Park is now 6 feet higher than surrounding land. He spoke of foundation problems on his house. The ditch on 85~h Avenue is plugged. If M-1 is on the property and intervening property, what will happen with fill that is brought in. He complained about not seeing the sign posting. Hearing Examiner asked the record to reflect that audience complained about flooding in the area. City Rebuttal: Assistant Planning Dire~;tor Rued referred to buffer zone/additional landscaping and stated that additional setbacks and landscaping will be required to buffer the adjoining residential neighborhood. An additional 30 feet of setback will be provided along the north property line and along the frontage of 85th Street. Each setback area will be landscaped as required in the Zoning Ordinance. A maintenance bond will be required to guarantee the trees. The City will inspect to ensure trees are planted at certain size and callper. Assistant Planning Director Rued remarked that storm drainage facilities are to be provided on site when the property is filled and when developed. The City has standards for these facilities which will be inspected by City engineers. If flooding is an issue in the neighborhood, they should contact the City Public Works Department and inform them of the issues. Public Works will then determine if there is a remedy. PAGE 2 HEARING EXAMINER MINUTES MARCH 21,2000 Hearing Examiner commented that if there are storm drainage issues, it may be helpful for Public Works Department to have pictures and dates. Hearing Examiner asked if the City or applicant has any other rebuttal. Assistant Planning Director Rued commented that the City is responding to the annexation request and rezone request of the property owners. If any adjacent homeowners wish to keep their homes, this is their destiny. The City accepts annexations as they come and annexations are at the request of the property owner. The applicant did not have additional comments. Hearing Examiner closed the public hearing and indicated the written dedision will be issued on or before April 7th. ADJOURNMENT: With no further items to come before the Hearing Examiner, the meeting was adjourned at 7:40 p.m. HE\MIN~vllN03-2000 PAGE 3