Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5940 . ---r- . \' :\.--> "'^. \, '{'.J'.- \.1'"-"..... "./' ,-;- / , ~ / , I.IIIIIII~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1I1III111 , 200510060089 11 PGS 10-06-2005 10:33am $42.00 PIERCE COUNTY. WASHINGTON ---------...- ------ 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 (Ordinance 5940) 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) I 1. Lakeland East LLC Legal Description (abbreviated: i.e. lot, block, plat or section, township, range) See Pierce County Parcel Numbers I8l Additional legal is on page 11 of document Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number 052005-3015,052005-3040, 052005-3028,052005-2037, 052005-3034, 052005-3016, 052005- 3035,052005-2035,052005-6022,052005-3052, 052005-3006, 052005-2039, 052005-6017, 052005-2036,052005-3053,052005-3041, 052005-1036, 052005-2034, 052005-014, 052005- 1001 o Assessor Tax # not yet assigned $Bicl documEllll(6) W619 filed for r<<lClIll by Pacffic Northwll6l Title as lIOQClIIllllOda only. II hall not been 9lU.lIId.toP"ll*~~or .1D......IJIOIl... W;~, Co''''''' ORDINANCE NO.5 940 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, APPROVING THE REQUEST TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY SEVENTY SEVEN ACRES FROM R1 SINGLE FAMILY-RESIDENTIAL TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (LAKELAND HILLS SOUTH SPECIAL PLAN AREA) WITHIN THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON WHEREAS, Application No. REZ05-004 dated June 6, 2005, has been submitted to the City of Auburn, Washington by Lakeland East LLC, through its agent Martin D. Waiss, requesting approval of a rezone request for approximately 77 acres from R1 Single Family Residential to Planned Unit Development District (Lakeland Hills South Special Plan Area) in Auburn, Washington. WHEREAS, said request above referred to was referred 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 City Hall on August 9, 2005, of which the Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the rezone on August 25, 2005; and WHEREAS, the City Council, on September 6, 2005, considered said request and affirmed the Hearing Examiner's recommendation for preliminary rezone based upon the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions, to-wit: Ordinance No. 5940 September 1, 2005 Page 1 of 9 FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Lakeland East LLC (Applicant), through its agent Martin D. Waiss, requested approval of a rezone of approximately 77 acres of property recently annexed to the City of Auburn. The rezone would reclassify the property from R-I Single Family Residential to Planned Unit Development (PUD). In addition, the Applicant requested a major amendment to an existing PUD, the Lakeland Hills PUD. 2. Notice of the public hearing was posted on the property on July 28, 2005. Notice of the public hearing was mailed to all property owners located within 300 feet of the affected site and published in the King County Journal on July 29, 2005. The notice provided in this matter only stated that a public hearing was being held on the rezone of the property and made no reference to the proposed major amendment to the PUD. Exhibit f, 6, 7, and 8. 3. No public comment on the rezone application or PUD major amendment was received in advance of the hearing nor was public testimony was presented at the hearing. 4. The rezone and the major amendment to the Lakeland Hills South Special Area Plan were consolidated into one proceeding at the public hearing. A. REZONE FINDINGS 1. The Applicant, through its agent Martin D. Waiss, requested approval of a rezone of approximately 77 acres from R-J Single Family Residential to Planned Unit Development District (Lakeland Hills South Special Plan Area). The property is located east of Old Man Thomas Road and south of Lake Tapps Parkway, lying just west of the Lakeland Hills Planned Unit Development (PUD). Lakeland East LLC is the same developer who has been constructing the Lakeland Hills PUD since the early 1 990s. Exhibit 1, Staff report page 2; Testimony of Mr. Pilcher. 2. Pursuant to Auburn City Code (ACC) 18.68.020(A)(I), a rezone is an amendment to the Zoning Map and may be initiated by a request from one or more property -owners. The Applicant is the owner of the property involved in this rezone and filed an application with the City on June 6,2005. ACC 18.68.020: Exhibit 3, Rezone Application. 'Note: All exhibits referenced herein are exhibits attached to the Hearing Examiner's Findings of Fact and Conclusions, which exhibits are incorporated herein, Ordinance No, 5940 September 1, 2005 Page 2 of 9 3. Applicant's rezone application includes 20 parcels that are the subject of this rezone. All parcels are located within Pierce County and are referenced by Pierce County Tax Assessor's parcel numbers 0520053015, 0520053040, 0520053028, 0520052037, 0520053034, 0520053016, 0520053035, 0520052035, 0520056022, 0520053052, 0520053006, 0520052039, 0520056017, 0520052036, 0520053053, 0520053041, 0520051036, 0520052034, 0520056014, and 0520051001, and range in size from 0.40 acres to 24.11 acres. Exhibit 3, Rezone Application; Pierce County Tax Assessor. 4. According to Pierce County Tax Assessor records, the total acreage for all parcels is approximately 105.72 acres. Based on the Site Map, Exhibit 2 it appears that Parcel No. 0520051036 (1.48 acres), Parcel No. 0520051001 (4.51 acres), and the northern portion of Parcel No. 0520052039 are not part of this rezone and will retain the R1 zoning designation. With the subtraction of these parcels, the acreage is more in agreement with the Applicant's proposed 77 acre rezone. Exhibit 2, Site Map; Exhibit 3, Rezone Application; Testimony of Mr. Pilcher. 5. The subject parcels are within unincorporated Pierce County but contained within the City's potential annexation area (PM). At the date of the public hearing (August 9, 2005), the City was in the process of annexing the property subject to the rezone.' The Staff conditioned approval of the rezone on the annexation of the subject property. On August 1, 2005, the City Council passed Ordinance 5932, annexing the area to the City effective August 15, 2005. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 2 and 5; Exhibit 12; Exhibit 12A; Testimony of Mr. Pilcher. 6. The R-I zone is intended to create a living environment of optimum standards for single- family detached dwellings by limiting development to relatively low degrees of density. This district allows for I dwelling unit per 8000 square foot lot. The Lakeland Hills South PUD zoning district is intended to offer enhanced flexibility for developing a site by utilizing innovative and alternative development standards and allowing for a greater range of residential densities. PUD density is based on the planning area where the property is located. Applicant seeks to rezone the property within the 'moderate density residential planning area which would allow for 2 to 14 dwelling units per acre. ACC 18,12.010; ACC 18. 76.010; 18.76.060(B). 7. Pursuant to the requirements of RCW 36.70A, the City conducted a review of their Comprehensive Plan in 2004. During this review, the public could submit requests for changes to both the text of the Comprehensive Plan and the Comprehensive Plan Map (the Map). Applicant submitted such a request, seeking to amend the Map from Single Family Residential to Moderate Density Ordinance No. 5940 September 1, 2005 Page 3 of 9 Residential for certain properties within and outside of the Lakeland Hills South Special Plan Area, including the parcels pertaining to this rezone. On December 20, 2004, after much discussion on the issues of traffic, housing density, topography, parks, and policy considerations, the City Council passed Ordinance 5891 amending both the map and the text of the Comprehensive Plan designating the property as Moderate Density Residential. RCW 36.7004; Exhibit 10; City Council Minutes, Dec. 20, 2004. 8. City of Auburn Ordinance 5891 approved and enacted the Comprehensive Plan Amendments as set forth in its attached documents and maps identified as "Exhibit A". Exhibit A, entitled "CPM#1", included a Site Map with areas affected by the amendment shown by 'hatch markings.' Comparing the CPM#1 Site Map 'With the Applicant's rezone application (Exhibit 3) and the Site Map (Exhibit 2), it appears the Parcel No. 0520052039 and Parcel No. 0520051036 were not included in Ordinance 5891. Exhibit 2; Exhibit 3; Ordinance 5891 - CPM#1 Proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment 9. As part of the text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, the City Council established a condition that the northernmost area, approximately 20 acres, adjacent to and contiguous 'With the neighborhoods of "Evergreen" and "Eastpointe" will not be developed as "for rent," "semi-detached," or "attached" housing and will be restricted to utilizing development standards which are no more intense than the Single Family Detached provisions found in ACC 18.76. The purpose of the restrictions are to provide for transition between residential areas of varied densities. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 2-3; Exhibit 10, Ordinance 5891; Testimony of Mr. Pilcher. 10. ACC 18.68.030(8)(1) requires the Director of Planning and Community Development to review a rezone application for consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan. If the Director determines that the application is consistent, it shall be scheduled for a public hearing. The Director determined that the application was consistent and the required public hearing was scheduled to be held on August 9, 2005. ACC 18.68.030; Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 4. 11. Surrounding land uses consist of residential development and vacant lands. Residential development is low and moderate densities in the north and south and an existing higher density PUD development of Lakeland Hills to the west. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 2. 12. The subject parcels have been zoned Moderate Density Single Family (MSF) 2 under Pierce County's zoning ordinance since 1995 and will be assigned R-I Single Family Residential zoning upon annexation to the City unless zoning is assigned concurrently with the annexation. Ordinance 5932 Ordinance No. 5940 September 1, 2005 Page 4 of 9 annexed the Applicant's parcels as of 12:01 am August 15, 2005. No zoning was assigned at the time of annexation and the property assumed an R-I zoning. PCC 18.25; ACC 18.02.050; Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 2 and 4; Exhibit 12A; Ordinance 5932. 13. In considering a rezone, the Applicant has the burden of proof to demonstrate that conditions have substantially changed since the original zoning and that the rezone bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, morals, or genera] welfare. A variety of factors may be utilized to satisfy a change in circumstances including changes in public opinion, local land use patterns, and on the property itself. In the instant rezone application, Applicant provided no specific evidence as to a change in conditions except that the property abuts an existing PUD community, is topographically challenged and more suitable for flexibility PUD zoning district has to offer, complies with the goals of the GMA, and would create compatibility between the existing community and the proposed development. The City asserted that, given the fact that the property would be annexed and has maintained R-I zoning only since August 15, 2005, Applicant's burden to show a substantial change should be based on Pierce County" s MSF zoning. Both the Applicant and the City seek to justify the rezone on changes in the surrounding land uses, primary the neighboring Lakeland Hills development and its associated infrastructure, a community that the Applicant themselves developed. City asserts that the property was already anticipated to handle the expansion and proposed zoning under the Comprehensive Plan amendments. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 4; Exhibit 3; Rezone Application; Testimony of Mr. Pilcher. 14. The City recommended, as a condition for approval of a rezone, that the Applicant enter into an amended agreement for the Lakeland Hills South development. The City staff representative testified that without this agreement, the City would not recommend approval. Applicant had no objection to this condition. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 5; Testimony of Mr. Pilcher; Testimony of Mr. Hanburg. 15. An Environmental Impact Statement was done to the Lakeland Hills South PUD in 1991. The City of Auburn reviewed the environmental impacts identified in the Year 2004 Comprehensive Plan amendments, including the Lakeland Hills South PUD Map Amendment (SEP04-0025), and issued a Determination of Non- Significance (DNS) for the amendments. On July 12, 2005, after review of the request for rezone, the City issued an Addendum to the Final DNS for the Lakeland Hills South Comprehensive Plan map amendment with no modifications to the Final DNS. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 4; Exhibit 4, SEPA Addendum; Testimony of Mr. Pilcher. Ordinance No. 5940 September 1, 2005 Page 5 of9 CONCLUSIONS Jurisdiction: Pursuant to Auburn City Code 18,66, the Hearings Examiner is granted jurisdiction to hear and make recommendations to the City Council. Jurisdiction for the Hearings Examiner to make recommendations for an application for rezone is pursuant to Auburn City Code 18.68.030 and a major amendment to the Lakeland Hills South PU D is pursuant to Auburn City Code 18.76.130. Criteria for Review: Along with the requirements set forth by the Washington Supreme Court, in order to approve a rezone, the Hearings Examiner must find that the following criteria, as set forth in Auburn City Code 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 will not result in a more intense zone than the one requested. Conclusions Based on Findinqs A. REZONE CONCLUSIONS 1. The rezone was initiated by the Applicant-Property Owner and not the City. Pursuant to ACC 18.68.030(B)(I), in order for the Hearing Examiner to hold a public hearing and consider a rezone request, the rezone must not be initiated by the City. The Applicant in this matter is the owner of the property subject to the rezone. Rezone Findings of Fact Nos. 1 and 2. 2. The rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Ordinance 5891 amended the Comprehensive Plan, designating the Applicant's property as Moderate Density Residential - Lakeland Hills South Special Planning Area. The rezone to a PUD zoning district will allow for development which is consistent with the proposed zoning district. Rezone Findings of Fact Nos. 1,6,7,8,9,12, and 13. 3, Conditions in the area have substantially changed and the rezone bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare. In considering a rezone, the Applicant has the burden of proof in demonstrating that conditions have substantially changed since the original Ordinance No. 5940 September 1, 2005 Page 6 of9 general welfare, In considering a rezone, the Applicant has the burden of proof in demonstrating that conditions have substantially changed since the original zoning and that the rezone bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare. Parkridge v. Seattle, 89 Wn, 2d 454; 573 P.2d 359 (1978). A variety of factors may be utilized to satisfy a change in circumstances including changes in public opinion, local land use patterns, and on the property itself. Bjornson v. Kitsap County. 78 Wn. App. 840,846; 899 P.2d 1290 (Div. 1, 1995). Both the Applicant and the City seek to justify the rezone based on changes in the surrounding land uses, primary the neighboring Lakeland Hills development and its associated infrastructure. However, a more effective argument is that a rezone which implements the City's Comprehensive Plan satisfies the burden of proof. Save Our Rural Environment v. Snohomish County, 99 Wn.2d 363. 370-71; 662 P.2d 816 (1983), The proposed rezone implements policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan and therefore the required burden of showing a substantial change in circumstances was documented in the City's amendment to its Comprehensive Plan. Ordinance 5891 provides the justification for the rezone. Rezone Findings of Fact Nos. 7, 8, 9, 10, and 13. 4. The Hearing Examiner is not recommending any change or modification to the rezone request that will result in a more intense zone than the one requested by the Applicant. DECISION Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the Hearing Examiner recommends to the Auburn City Council that the request for approval of a rezone of 77 acres from R- 1 Single Family Residential to PUD be GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. Future development within the project are shall require separate environmental (SEPA) review and project conditioning, through the appropriate mechanism for the type of development proposed. 2. The northernmost portion of the project area, approximately 20 acres, that is adjacent to the established Lakeland Hills neighborhoods of "Evergreen" and "Eastpointe" shall be no more intense than the development standards of the Single Family Detached-5 Planning Area, as specified in ACC 18.76.060(8)(2). No development of "for rent;' "semi-detached," or "attached" housing will be permitted. 3. The Applicant shall enter into an amended agreement for the Lakeland Hills South Development prior to the rezone becoming effective. Ordinance No. 5940 September 1, 2005 Page 7 of 9 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Approval. The Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision of the Hearing Examiner are adopted herein by this reference, and the request is hereby approved to rezone approximately 77 acres from R1 Single Family Residential to Planned Unit Development District (Lakeland Hills South Special Plan Area), and as legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto, subject to the conditions as outlined above. Section 2. Severabilitv. 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. Recordina. 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 Pierce County Auditor. 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. Ordinance No. 5940 September 1, 2005 . Page 8 of g 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 bylaw. ATTEST: ~a.J)!2 Il.--L Dan Ie E. Daskam, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: (J);/ 11_ I / . ! ~ ! . I { I //!./~Qj '( '~"i \ ~.'" Daniel B. Heid>-----v ~; City Attorney \ \ '~ PUBLISHED 9-1 () 'OJ- Ordinance No. 5940 September 1, 2005 Page 9 of g INTRODUCED: SEP 6 - 2005 PASSED: SFP 6 - 2005 APPROVED: SEP 6- 2005 ~U"~ ~, PETER B. LEWIS MAYOR Pierce County Parcel Numbers 0520053015 0520053040 0520053028 0520052037 0520053034 Exhibit "A" Ordinance No. 5940 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY 0520053016 0520053035 0520052035 0520056022 0520053052 0520053006 0520052039 0520056017 0520052036 0520053053 0520053041 0520051036 0520052034 0520056014 0520051001