Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5881 . . 1((1111111111111 PACIFIC NW ~Jo~9000252 PAGE001 OF 017 as.00 11/29/2004 10'09 .KING COUNTY, WA - - - -...- - - - - -. . - -- -- - - Return Address: Auburn City Clerk City of Auburn 25 West Main St. Auburn, WA 98001 RECORDER'S COVER SHEET Document Title(s) (or transactions contained therein): Rezone and Conditional Use Permit (Ordinance 5881) I'll? r- P'1v~JT Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: W 1l'lQ-Il- DAdditional reference #'s on page of document Grantor(s)/Borrower(s) (Last name first, then first name and initials) Auburn, City of Grantee/Assignee/Beneficiary: (Last name first) 1. Wesley Homes Legal Description (abbreviated: i.e. lot, block, plat or section, township, range) Lot 1 of King County Short Plat number 1181011 [8J Additional legal is on page 17 of document. Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number 172105-9007 and 172205-9228 D Assessor Tax # not yet assigned ORDINANCE NO. 5 8 8 1 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, APPROVING THE REZONE REQUEST FOR 18.38 ACRES AT 10805 SE 320TH STREET IN AUBURN, WASHINGTON FROM LHR-1, LEA HILL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO LHR-2, LEA HILL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A NURSING HOME IN AN LHR-2, LEA HILL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT TO BE LOCATED AT 10805 SE 320TH STREET IN AUBURN, WASHINGTON WHEREAS, Application No. REZ04-0004 and CUP04-0004, dated June 28, 2004, has been submitted to the City of Auburn, Washington, by Kevin Anderson, on behalf of Wesley Homes, requesting approval of rezone request for 18.38 acres at 10805 SE 320th Street in Auburn, Washington from LHR-1, Lea Hill Single Family Residential to LHR-2, Lea Hill Single Family Residential and approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow a nursing home in an LHR-2, Lea Hill Single Family Residential District to be located at 10805 SE 320th Street in Auburn, Washington; and WHEREAS, said request above referred to was referred to the Hearing Examiner for study and public hearing thereon; and WHEREAS, pursuant to staff review, the Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing to consider said petition in the Council Chambers of the Auburn Ordinance 5881 November 9, 2004 Page 1 City Hall on September 21, 2004, of which the Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the Rezone and Conditional Use Permit on October 22, 2004; and WHEREAS, the City Council, on November 15, 2004, considered said request and affirmed the Hearing Examiner's recommendation for preliminary plat based upon the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions, to-wit: FINDINGS OF FACT General FindinQs: 1. The Applicant requests approval from the City of Auburn (City) of a rezone of 18.38 acres from an LHR-1, Lea Hill Single Family Residential designation to an LHR-2, Lea Hill Single Family Residential designation. The rezone is requested in conjunction with the Applicant's request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow a nursing home in a single-family residential district. The Applicant further requests a variance for an increase of six feet of the maximum building height allowed in the single- family district in order to allow the main building of the nursing home to be 36-feet tall. The subject property consists of two parcels located at 10805 SE 320th Street in Auburn, Washington. Exhibit 1, page 1; Exhibit 2, page1; Exhibit 3, page 1; Exhibit 4, Vicinity map. 2. All surrounding property is zoned LHR-1. Land use to the north, east, south, and west consists of single-family residential development, with SE 320th Street to the north and 110th Avenue SE to the east. To the west is 108th Avenue SE, a partially developed right-of-way. Exhibit 1, page 2. The smaller duplex and single-family residential units would be located on the outter perimeter of the project, dispersed over seven acres along 110th Avenue SE and SE 324th Lane. The primary structure would be placed in the northwest portion of the site. Exhibit 1, page 3; Exhibit 15, Site Plan. 3. The proposed nursing home would be built with a campus design including one 178,000-square foot, multiple story primary structure Ordinance 5881 November 9, 2004 Page 2 containing 128 dwelling units (primary structure), two 12-unit 21,000- square foot structures, 20 duplex units, and two single unit structures, all of which would function together to support independent and congregate care for seniors. 4. The Auburn City Code defines a nursing home as a home operated similarly to a boarding house which provides nursing care in addition to room and board to convalescents, elderly, and disabled persons. The nursing care to be provided would not include surgery, maternity care, or other hosptial services, and nursing homes would not house persons who would normally be admitted to mental hospitals or group residential facilities. ACC 18.04.660. The Planning Director determined the proposed project is generally consistent with the definition of a nursing home despite the incorporation of some independent living units. It is permitted in an LHR-2 district if it otherwise satisfies the criteria for CUP. Exhibit 1, page 2; Testimony of Mr. Martin. 5. The subject property, rectangular in shape, contains two wetlands, an open water stream, and steep slopes in the ravine which acts as a natural buffer for the stream. The size and location of these sensitive areas limits the buildable area. Exhibit 3, page 2; Exhibit 15, Preliminary Site Plan; Exhibit 14, MONS. 6. Some loss of existing vegetation would occur during construction: up to ten trees could be removed. The site is visible from adjacent rights-of- way and neighboring residential developments. The Applicant would be required to retain the maximum amount of native vegetation and install perimeter trees to mitigate visual impacts of the project. Exhibit 14, MONS. 7. Vehicular access to the site would be from driveways off SE 320th Street and 110th Avenue SE. Proposed frontage improvements to SE 320th Street would include pavement widening and construction of a two-way center turn lane to allow left turns into but not out of the driveway on SE 320th Street; a left turn lane at 109th Avenue SE; vertical curb and gutter; a five-foot sidewalk; and, a five-foot planter strip. Left turns onto SE 320th Street from the nursing home complex would be prohibited. Testimony of Mr. Schramm. Proposed improvements to 110th Avenue SE would include installation of a 16-foot median for existing utility poles; Ordinance 5881 November 9, 2004 Page 3 one 14-foot travel lane on the project side; vertical curb and gutter; a five-foot sidewalk; and, a five-foot planter strip. Sidewalks would be installed along at least one side of all new interior roads. A total of 2,850 linear feet of sidewalks are proposed within the site to accommodate pedestrian travel. Exhibit 11, Transportation Impact Study, page 1; Exhibit 20A. 8. Based on figures from the Institute of Tranportation Engineers traffic generation manual, the project is anticipated to generate an average of 450 weekday vehicle trips, 22 A.M. peak hour trips, and 39 P.M. peak hour trips. According to the study submitted by the Applicant's transportation engineers, this level of increased traffic would not significantly adversely impact SE 320th Street or 100th Avenue SE. All intersections in the immediate vicinity are anticipated to maintain their current Level Of Service (LOS) during the AM and PM peak hours. The Applicant would be required to pay traffic impact fees, estimated to be $144 for each of the 172 senior housing units. Exhibit 11, Transportation Impact Study, page 1; Testimony of Mr. Schramm. The City reviewed the Applicant's transportation study, requested follow up reports and comments, and accepted the study. Testimony of Mr. Martin; Exhibit 11. The ITE manual is the industry-wide standard for estimating trip generation of new development, and the City acted reasonably in approving the Applicant's traffic study, which was based on figures from the ITE manual. Testimony of Mr. Balmelli; Testimony of Mr. Welsh; Testimony of Mr. Martin. 9. The City provided reasonable notice of the September 21, 2004 public hearing. Testimony of Mr. Martin; Exhibit 9. Rezone Findinos: 10. The rezone is requested to support the Applicant's simultaneous request for CUP to locate a nursing home on site. Exhibit 2, page 2. The subject property's current LHR-1 zoning was established when the site was annexed by the City of Auburn in 2000 in City Ordinance 5346. Exhibit 2, page 2. Uses permitted outright in the LHR-1 district are single-family residential development, accessory structures for single-family development, municipal parks, and in-home daycare. Conditional uses allowed by permit in the LHR-1 district include daycare, government Ordinance 5881 November 9, 2004 Page 4 facilities, private country clubs and golf courses, religious institutions, utility substations, and homeowners' associations neighborhood recreational facilities. ACC 18.12.020 and .030. The Applicant desires to locate a nursing home on the subject property. Nursing homes are not allowed in the LHR-1 zone, but are allowed upon conditional use permit approval in the LHR-2 district. ACC 18.14.020 and .030. 11. The subject property has a Comprehansive Land Use Plan Map designation of "Single-Family Residential." Exhibit 2, page 3. Because the rezone is tied to a specific project, the project must be reviewed for consistency with the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan in analysis of the rezone request. Auburn's Land Use Policy 35 encourages that projects of higher density should be limited to areas already containing, or capable of containing, the support structures and services necessary to serve the higher density development. It further encourages pedestrian and bicycle access to be prioritized and the buffering of single-family development from higher density development. Land Use Policy 35. The proposed nursing home is large enough to provide a variety of on-site support services. It is located on an arterial with service by Metro Bus Route 181. Exhibit 2, page 2. In addition, Land Use Policy 39 requires that maintenance and enhancement of the residential character of neighborhoods be prioritized and stipulates that single-family residential neighborhoods should be protected from intrusion by non-residential or multi-family uses. At the same time, the City acknowledges the role of public facilities and limited scale quasi- public uses, such as churches and day care centers, in enhancing residential neighborhood character. Land Use Po/icy 39. With full environmental review and with conditions ensuring appropriate buffering and site design, locating a nursing home on-site would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's goal of protecting and enhancing residential neighborhood character. Exhibit 2, page 2; Testimony of Mr. Martin. 12. The overall population of older people in the United States has increased steadily over the last decade and is expected to continue increasing. The need for senior housing is anticipated to increase accordingly. Testimony of Mr. Anderson; Exhibit 13. 13. Because the rezone is requested to allow the proposed nursing home, if the CUP for the nursing home use is denied, the rezone is no longer Ordinance 5881 November 9, 2004 Page 5 necessary. A condition of approval is required to ensure that the rezone is only approved if the nursing home use is also approved. Testimony of Mr. Martin. CUP Findinos: 14. The impact of the nursing home on surrounding roads and infrastructure would be less than the impact of single-family development. Seniors generally have fewer automobiles, drive less frequently, and tend to be retired. They would be less likely to contribute to peak hour traffic than residents of typical single-family development. The nursing home campus would provide a variety of on-site services, further reducing the number of vehicle trips generated by nursing home residents for shopping trips and other services. Exhibit 1, page 3. There is no evidence to indicate that the proposed nursing home would create a public nuissance. Exhibit 1, page5; Testimony of Mr. Martin. 15. The project would provide significantly greater amounts of open space than would single-family residential development of the subject property. Because nursing home dwelling units are condensed in area, and because group housing requires less paving for street access, more space would be left for open space, recreation, and nature than would be available if the subject property were developed with single-family residences. Exhibit 1, page 3. 16. The main building of the proposed nursing home campus is larger than the typical structure in the surrounding neighborhood. The Applicant has designed the building to minimze the impact of the building's size when viewed from the street. The design of the main structure includes a central core with three wings, which would reduce the total length of continuous wall and roofline. In addition, the exterior design incorporates typical residential elements and materials to appear more consistent with single-family home rather than institutional design. The use of the two 12-unit buildings, 20 duplexes, and 2 single-dwelling unit structures further prevents the intrustion of an institutional atmosphere and appearance into the residential district. Further, off-street parking would be provided in parking structures, underground garages, and smaller surface lots, rather than in continuous, large surface lots, and the surface lots would be screened from surrounding development through setbacks Ordinance 5881 November 9, 2004 Page 6 and the use of landscaping to minimize the visual impacts of parking on the neighborhood. Exhibit 1, pages 3-4; Testimony of Mr. Anderson. Conditions of approval would be necessary to ensure adequate buffering around the primary structure as well as around the two 12-unit structures to be located nearer to adjacent single-family development. With adequate landscaped buffers, the nursing home campus would not be inharmonious with or inappropriate for the surrounding residential development. Exhibit 2, page 5; Testimony of Mr. Martin. 17. Off-street parking regulations for nursing homes require one parking space for every two employees, as well as one parking space for every three beds. ACC 18.52.020.0.1. With 128 beds and 170 employees, the primary structure would require 43 spaces for residents and 85 spaces for employees. The project would include a 48 stall surface parking lot serving the main structure as well as a parking garage to be located under the main structure which would provide at least 80 stalls. Off-street parking for other stuctures on the campus would be provided through construction of garages, underground parking for the two 12-unit structures, and small surface lots adjacent to those buildings. Exhibit 2, page 3. Proposed parking would meet or exceed the off-street parking requirements of the ACC. Testimony of Mr. Martin; Exhibit 2, page 3. 18. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21C, the City of Auburn was designated as the lead agency for review of any environmental impacts resulting from the proposed rezone and CUP. After consideration of all available environmental documents, the City issued a Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) for the proposed rezone on August 31, 2004. An MDNS is a determination by the City that all probable significant adverse environmental impacts caused by the proposed project can be mitigated adequately. WAC 197- 11-340. Conditions required by the MDNS pertain to storm drainage management, a storm water easement agreement, design continuity, sensitive area conservation, landscape design, and access control onto SE 320th Street. Exhibit 14, SEPA MONS. No appeals of the threshold determination were filed and it is final. Testimony of Mr. Martin. Ordinance 5881 November 9, 2004 Page 7 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW A: Rezone: Auburn City Code Chapter 18.68 provides certain criteria for a rezone approval. For a rezone application to be approved, the Applicant must show the following: 1. The rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; 2. The rezone was initiated by someone other than the City; and 3. Changes or modifications to the rezone by the Hearing Examiner or City Council will 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 landmark decision Parkridge v. Seattle, 89 Wn.2d 454, 573 P.2d 359 (1978), the Washington Supreme Court identified the following criteria: 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. B. Conditional Use Permit Pursuant to ACC 18.64.040, to recommend approval of a conditional use permit, the Hearing Examiner must find that: 1. The proposed use is permitted within the zone; 2. The use will have no more adverse effect on the health, safety or comfort of persons living or working in the area and will be no more injurious, economically or otherwise, to property or improvements in the surrounding area than would any use generally permitted in the district; Ordinance 5881 November 9, 2004 Page 8 3. The proposal is in accordance with the goals, policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan; 4. The proposal complies with all requirements of this title; 5. The proposal can be constructed and maintained so as to be harmonious and appropriate in design, character, and appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity; 6. The proposal will not adversely affect the public infrastructure; and 7. The proposal will not cause or create a public nuisance. Conclusions Based on Findinos A. Rezone: 1. The proposed rezone is consistent with the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map designation of "Single-Family Residential" supports the rezone. The proposed zoning designation would permit uses that are contemplated by and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Findings of Fact Nos. 10and11. 2. The City of Auburn did not initiate the proposed rezone. The Applicant requested approval of proposed rezone. Finding of Fact NO.1. 3. Changes or modifications to the rezone by the Hearing Examiner will not result in a more intense zone than the one requested. The Hearing Examiner will not require changes to the proposed rezone. Findings of Fact Nos. 1 through 26. 4. Circumstances have changed substantially since the establishment of the current zoning district, which warrants the proposed rezone. The growing population of seniors necessitates additional senior housing. Finding of Fact No. 12. Ordinance 5881 November 9, 2004 Page 9 5. The proposed rezone bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare of the community. The rezone will allow development of a not-for-profit nursing home complex that will provide necessary housing and nursing care for seniors in the community and which has been designed to be visually consistent with the development scheme in the area. The rezone will allow substantially more open space than would be anticipated from single-family residential development of the subject property. Findings of Facts Nos. 1, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, and 17. B. Conditional Use Permit: 1, The proposed use is permitted within the zone. Nursing homes are permitted in the LHR-2 zone with the approval of a CUP. Finding of Fact No. 10. 2. The use will have no more adverse effect on the health, safety, or comfort of persons living or working in the area and will be no more injurious, economically or otherwise, to property or improvements in the surrounding area than would any use generally permitted in the district. The nursing care facility will generate fewer average daily trips, and fewer PM peak hour trips, than single-family residential development consistent with density requirements of the zoning district. On-site services will further reduce daily trips. The exteriors of all buildings on-site are designed to be consistent with the residential character of the surrounding area, including the pitched roof on the primary structure. As conditioned, landscaped buffers will mitigate visual impacts from the building size and placement. The nursing home campus will retain more open space and will generate less paved surface than would single-family residential development of the subject property. Findings of Fact Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 11, 14 - 18, 25, and 26. 3, The proposal is in accordance with the goals, policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designation of "Single-Family Residential" is intended to include some public uses, such as churches and schools. The proposed nursing home use accords with the policy and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan designation for the subject property, and specifically with Land Use Policies 35 and 39. Finding of Fact No. 11. Ordinance 5881 November 9, 2004 Page 10 4. The proposal complies with all requirements of this title. This title, the Zoning Ordinance, allows nursing homes in the LHR-2 district when a CUP is issued. Finding of Fact No. 10. 5. The proposal can be constructed and maintained so as to be harmonious and appropriate in design, character, and appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity. The Applicant has designed the nursing home campus to be compatible with the character of the surrounding single-family development. Underground parking and landscaping will serve to shield surrounding development from the visual and other impacts of parking areas. The proposed pitched roof and exterior design scheme are intended to provide a residential character to an oversized building. Use of varying sized structures, rather than a single large building, also provides a more residential feel to the complex and its neighbors. As conditioned, landscaped buffers will mitigate the visual impacts of the building size and placement. Sensitive areas will be retained and large areas of open space will be retained. Frontage improvements and the payment of traffic impact fees will mitigate impacts of the increase in area traffic resulting from this development. Findings of Fact Nos. 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 15, 16, and 17. 6, The proposal will not adversely affect the public infrastructure, The public infrastructure, including roads, would be less affected by the proposed senior care complex than by single-family development of the subject property. There will be less new impervious surface and more open space than would be created in typical single-family development. Findings of Fact Nos. 14 and 15. 7. The proposal will not cause or create a public nuisance. There is no indication that the use will cause or create a public nuisance. Finding of Fact No. 14. Ordinance 5881 November 9, 2004 Page 11 DECISION For each of the above reasons, the Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the Rezone and the Conditional Use Permit to the Auburn City Council, subject to conditions set forth below: 1. The rezone to LHR-2, Single Family Residential shall become effective upon subsequent approval of a conditional use permit requested by the Applicant (City File No. CUP04-0004). In the event that the conditional use permit is denied or becomes void as outlined under Auburn City Code 18.64.060, the zoning will revert to the LHR-1, Single Family Residential district. 2. The Applicant shall provide the landscaping buffers shown on "Landscaping Requirements" prepared by Insite Architects (Exhibit 17) and submitted in support of the proposal except as follows: a. To reduce the visual impacts of the larger twelve (12) unit structures on the adjacent parcels, the Applicant shall provide a twenty (20) foot Type II landscape buffer (Auburn City Code 18.50.040(B)) along the western 225-feet of the south property line and the southern 325-feet of west property line. b. To reduce the visual impacts of the principal structure (the 128- unit building) a twenty (20) foot Type II landscape buffer shall be provided along the west property line adjacent to the projected northern and southern limits of the principal structure (if extended west). c. To reduce the visual impacts of the primary structure (the 128-unit building), in addition to buffer plantings, the Applicant shall provide trees, approximately 15 feet triangular spaced, adjacent to the east edge and west elevations of the structure to assist in the visual reduction of the structure's bulk as viewed from the street and adjacent parcels. The Applicant shall also provide a similar treatment east of the garage entrance and internal corridor to screen the entrance from sight as viewed from the east. Planting within the wetland buffer, as required by the final MDNS, can be utilized if the same level of screening can be achieved. Ordinance 5881 November 9, 2004 Page 12 d. To reduce the visual impact of a surface parking lot, a minimum of three (3) evergreen trees shall be provided at the north end of each row of a parking in northern parking lot (servicing the principal structure) such that a visual screen is provided between the parking area and the public right-of-way. A five (5) foot width of Type II landscaping shall be provided along the east edge of the same parking lot where stalls are proposed north of the building wing (and visible from the public right-of-way to the east). e. The Applicant shall submit a final landscape plan for the review and approval of the Planning Director that notes the plant material, size, and spacing for the required buffer and supplemental planting requirements of the CUP. The plan shall also indicate how the expansive green spaces will be planted to create a more unified design of the campus type project as a single complex. 3. Approval of the CUP and rezone shall be subject to compliance with the conditions in the MDNS issued by the Responsible Official on August 31, 2004. 4. The Applicant shall be required to install "no parking" signs, to be approved by the City, along the subject property frontage on 108th Avenue SE and shall instruct staff, guests, and residents not to park there. 5. The variance shall be specific to conditional use permit associated with City file CUP04-0004 and shall only apply to the primary structure containing 128-units, as noted on the Applicant's site plan (Exhibit 15) constructed to the same setback as shown on the site plan. The other structures within the complex shall observe the height limit of the LHR-2 district unless a subsequent variance application is requested and granted. Ordinance 5881 November 9, 2004 Page 13 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN as follows: Section 1. The Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision of the Hearing Examiner are adopted herein by this reference, and the rezone request for 18.38 acres at 10805 SE 320th Street in Auburn, Washington from LHR-1, Lea Hill Single Family Residential to LHR-2, Lea Hill Single Family Residential is hereby approved and Conditional Use Permit to allow a nursing home in an LHR-2, Lea Hill Single Family Residential District to be located at 10805 SE 320th Street in Auburn, Washington, is hereby approved. Section 2. Severability, The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Section 3. RecordinQ. 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, Division of Records and Elections. Ordinance 5881 November 9, 2004 Page 14 Section 4. Implementation. The Mayor is hereby authorized to implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directions of this legislation. Section 5. Effective date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force five days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. _B \...-'/1 _.. _ L ^ , DATED and SIGNED this E day of I' ((7~~ ,2004. -- . --- ETER B. LEWIS MAYOR ATTEST: "\~ A " 1 ; .. } \' ;:\ ,12 ;/ C~.d.d./< Da ielle E. Daskam, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ie B. '. " . City Attorney' /) " /JuL,,&/I- /9 t)c.f _________________________~--~w~- Ordinance 5881 November 9, 2004 Page 15 . LEGAL DESCRIPTION King County Parcel Nos. 172105-9007, 172205-9228 Lot 1 of King County Short Plat number 1181011, as recorded under Auditor's File Number 8203020644, records of King County, Washington. Exhibit A Ordinance No. 5881