HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-28-2014 Items SubmittedPCDC 4/28/14 Pg 4
IV. B. ZOA14 -002
Submitted by: Jeff D.
�Ic
CTI'YOF
A T T� �TUB.tJ -t r MEMORANDUM
WASHINGTON
TO: Councilmember John Holman, Chair, Planning and Community Development
Committee
Councilmember Largo Whales, Vice - Chair, Planning and Community
Development Committee
Councilmember Yolanda Trout, Member, Planning and Community
Development Committee
CC: Mayor Backus
Kevin Snyder, Community Development and Public Works Director
Jeff Tate, Assistant Community Development Director
Elizabeth Chamberlain, Planning Services Manager
FROM: Jeff Dixon, Principal Planner
DATE: May 27, 2014
RE: ZOA14 -0002, Revised Code for Industrial Zones — Scenarios related to
continuation or resumption of a warehousing and distribution use.
As part of the public testimony at the Planning Commission public hearing on May 6,
2014, a property owner's attorney, Brent Carson, requested that the City:
1) Identify the specific properties eligible for the code provisions being changed;
and
2) Provide narrative on scenarios based on the proposed code change being in
effect.
In response to this request, the Planning Commission deliberated on whether to
postpone their recommendation until additional information was available. Then, the
responsive public testimony asked the Planning Commission not to postpone their
recommendation. The following is in response to this request.
1) On the first item, regarding identification of specific properties, the attached map
has been prepared (See attached map). The map shows:
a. Yellow - The 12 yellow - colored properties had a building permit for a
warehousing & distribution use or a manufacturing use issued prior to the
EP zoning establishment.
b. Pink - The pink - colored properties did not have a building permit for a
warehousing & distribution use or a manufacturing use issued prior to the
EP zoning establishment.
c. Blue - The 9 blue - colored properties require more research to determine if
building permits for a warehousing & distribution use or a manufacturing
use were issued prior to the EP zoning establishment. The research is
more complicated due to such factors as longtime existence of the
building, number changes in the building usage over time, less accuracy
of the historical permit records and the fact that the intended use is not
always specified at original building permit.
2) On the second request for the City to provide in written format some possible
scenarios based on the proposed code changes being in effect. The specific
scenarios requested were as follows (shown in italics):
• The building being developed for a warehousing and distribution use prior to the
EP zone and now being vacant for 2 -3 years and then the property owner
seeking to resume a warehousing and distribution use.
Under the proposed code change, the buildings originally developed for
warehousing & distribution uses or developed for manufacturing uses prior
to the effective date of the EP, Environmental Park zoning enactment (Ord
# 6036, 8 -17 -2006) would be considered permitted uses and not subject to
the non - conforming use regulations (ACC 18.54). These buildings would
always be allowed to resume warehousing and distribution uses since for
these, the use is considered allowed. The buildings could also be
resumed as manufacturing (light and medium intensity manufacturing) as
allowed in the EP zone.
• The building developed for a warehousing and distribution use prior to the EP
zone being destroyed and then the property owner seeking to re -build and
resume the warehousing and distribution use.
Under the proposed code change, the buildings originally developed for
warehousing & distribution uses or developed for manufacturing uses prior
to the effective date of the EP, Environmental Park zoning enactment (Ord
# 6036, 8 -17 -2006) would be considered permitted uses and not non-
conforming uses. As permitted uses, these buildings would not be subject
to the re -build limitations of the city's code chapter on non - conforming use
regulations. (ACC 18.54)
• The building developed for a warehousing & distribution use prior to the EP zone
and then occupied by a different permitted use and after that the property owner
seeks to reoccupy with a warehousing and distribution use.
Under the proposed code change, the buildings originally developed for
warehousing & distribution uses prior to the effective date of the EP,
Environmental Park zoning enactment (Ord # 6036, 8 -17 -2006) would be
considered permitted uses and not non - conforming uses. Any such
warehouse & distribution facility in the EP zone being abandoned or re-
occupied by any another use in the EP zone and thereafter re- occupied by
a warehousing and distribution use is not typical of the City's non-
conforming use regulations (ACC 18.54).
The footnote could be amended to provide this relief if desired by the City
Council. However, this special relief from the typical way code approach
lends itself to a special mechanism such as a contract rezone or
development agreement rather than through the standard zoning that
applies throughout the zone. Otherwise, this atypical provision would
require review and reconstruction of the historical building usage on a
case -by -case basis each time in the future and could pose some concerns
to administer uniformly.
Attachments: Map of Properties in EP Zone, ZOA14 -0002
N
A
w-�
4
A
ZOA14 -0002, Properties in EP Zoning District
?5TH ST NW
SR 18 -NEST
Legend
F7Had a Building Permit Issued As Warehouse & Distribution Use Or Manufacturing Use Buildings
Did Not Have Building Permits Issued As Warehouse & Distribution Use or Manufacturing Use Boundary Of EP, Environmental Park Zoning District
F7More Research Is Required To Determine Status F7 Parcel Boundaries
IV LFrCL I IV L V/-11 L VF VItV INIiIVI,L tf OVJD kO/ I/ / LVVVI