Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 76-32A-W - HORST EHMKE - REZONE WAIVERmf 76-32a-w west of and adjacent to 62nd avenue south 300 feet north of southcenter boulevard EHMKE REZONE WAIVER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN PARKS fdCHEAT:0N December 8, 1976 Mr. Horst Ehmke P.O. Box 822 Seahurst, Washington 98062 RE: Waiver request for Resolution 489 Dear Mr. Ehmke: The Council during their regular meeting of December 6, 1976 approved your waiver request authorizing a rezone application to be applied for on the property in Tukwila west of and adjacent to 62nd Avenue South in, the vacinity of Southcenter Boulevard. I realize that you requested that this waiver request be withdrawn, however, since we received no such notification in writing we informed the Council of your statement and they then continued to act on it. This than leaves you the option of making the application for the rezone should you wish to do so. If you are interested in pursuing this rezone application please come in as soon as possible so we can begin processing. Very truly yours, KS /cw CITY of T U KW I L A OFFICE of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT l Ak& K,jell Stoknes, Director Office of Community Development cc: Bruce W. Mecklenburg P.O. Box 822 Seahurst, WA 98062 Frank Todd City Clerk 6230 Southcr:nt:e.r Boulevard n Tukw Washington 9.9166 n (206) 242-2177 file RESOLUTIONS Resolution #562 - Designating Foster & Marshall Bonding Agents (Purchase of Foster Golf Course) Mr. Sowinski, 16050 - 51st Ave. So., noted that they have heard how the City Council's hands are tied in respect to Resolution No. 489 but would like an interpretation of what affect it has on the public response to this. This area is completely single family residential and they don't approve of an apartment house going in. Mayor Bauch stated that he can't say exactly how long the zoning has been on the property but it has been on a long time. Without Resolutior No. 489 the Staff's hands would be completely tied and have to answer the developer in court if they did not issue the Building Permit. It wouldn't be a case of whether the citizens like it or not. Mr. Sowinski asked what the citizens can do now. Is there some action they can take to turn this around? Councilman Hill stated that the letters and petitions submitted by the residents should be turned over to the head of the Planning Department and to the Planning Commission. Mr. Sowinski stated that the petitions involve only about 70% of the people in the area, with a little more time he could probably get 95 %. Councilman Saul noted that you have to live within a certain distance from the property in question. Councilman Traynor asked the City,Attorney if they have 100% objection can the Council change the zoning back to R -1? Attorney Hard stated that he supposed you could after ample Public Hearing but, you have to look at the other side - at what the courts might say. The court would say this person bought that property, it is zoned RMH which is a broader use and has a right. The City might go ahead an rezone then suffer some damages. Dennis Roberts4416038 - 48th Ave. South; expressed concern and questioned that - 1. If you need to grant the waiver and an EIS is involved can the Citizens submit a negative EIS? and 2. What are the applicable laws or statutesand are they available to the public? Attorney Hard continued to explain procedures and courses of action that might happen. He did say the public could submit comments to the EIS. The law, is very clear on whether developments are adversely affecting the environment. " MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY VAN DUSEN, THAT THE WAIVER FROM RESOLUTION NO. 489 BE DELAYED UNTIL DECEMBER 20, 1976 SO THAT CHG INTERNATIONAL CAN BE IN ATTENDANCE. * Gentleman from the audience suggested that December 20 could be a hardship on many people as it is in the middle of the holidays and suggested setting the date after the first of the year. Date changed to January 3, 1977. *MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY VAN DUSEN, THAT THE COUNCIL GRANT THE WAIVER FROM RESOLUTION NO. 489 FOR REZONE AND REFER IT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR REVIEW.. MOTION CARRIED WITH MS. HARRIS AND TRAYNOR VOTING NO. Mayor Bauch introduced a ResolutionAdes'ignating Foster & Marshall, Inc. as the Bonding Agent for the City of Tukwila and authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement. MOVED BY VAN DUSEN, SECONDED BY SAUL, THAT RESOLUTION NO. 562 BE ACCEPTED AS SUBMITTED. * Councilman Harris stated that she would like to have seen letters from other Bonding Agents.as well as Foster & Marshall. *MOTION CARRIED. ens • November 29, 1976 7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL OF COUNCIL MEMBERS APPROVAL OF MINUTES DISCUSSION Appointment to the Park Board - Introduction of Mrs. Mildred Heppenstall Proposed Ord. - re: Disorderly Conduct Waivers to Res. 489 a. Bruce McCann re: Adjacent to and No. of So. 178th St. &. East of and Adjacent to I -5 b. NW corner of So. 180th St. & South - center Pkway. c. CHG Intl. - Vicinity of So. 160th St. & 51st Ave. So. d hmke Property Todd) - 62nd Ave. So. K: ( CITY OF TUKWILA �', City Hall COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING Council Chambers MINUTE 'i Council President Hill callid the Committee of the Whole Meeting to order at 7:45 P.M. GARDNER, TRAYNOR, HILL, SAUL, MS. PESICKA, VAN DUSEN, MS. HARRIS. MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY SAUL, THAT THE NOVEMBER 8, 1976 MINUTES OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING BE APPROVED AS PUBLISHED. CARRIED. Mayor Bauch introduced Mrs. Mildred Heppenstall to the City Council Members. Councilman Traynor asked Mrs. Heppenstall if she was interested in recreation and parks. She replied that she was. Council man Pesicka remarked that since one of the City Council priorities was a park area in McMicken Heights she wondered if Mrs. Heppenstall was interested in that project. Mrs. Heppenstall replied that she was interested in that priority as she lives in McMicken Heights. Larry Hard, Deputy City Attorney, explained the changes he had made in the proposed ordinance. Councilman Pesicka said it appeared to her the restrictions in the ordinance could be abused by some people. Deputy City Attorney Hard said the Police Department had asked for this ordinance. MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY MS. PESICKA, THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE BE TABLED UNTIL A JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS LAW IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL. CARRIED, WITH VAN DUSEN VOTING NO. Council President Hill stated since there were a number of the. audience present for the discussion on waivers to Resolution #489, Item 6 of the Agenda, that matter would be discussed next. Kjell Stoknes, Director of Community Development, pointed out the area on . a wall map stating Mr. McCann had applied for a rezone to R -4. He stated the staff had recommended against this waiver. Councilman Traynor said we are so close to getting the Comprehensive Plan and the Public Hearing that he did not want to remove any more'waivers until he saw the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. McCann, owner of the property, stated he wanted to build multiple housing on his property. MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY MS. PESICKA, THAT ITEMS 6.a. and 6.b. BE ON THE AGENDA OF THE DECEMBER 6, 1976 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. CARRIED. Kjell Stoknes, Director of Community Development pointed out the property involved on a wall map, stating it was located in McMicken Heights. He said the owner wished to construct apartment units. MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY SAUL, THAT ITEM 6.c. BE ON THE AGENDA OF THE DECEMBER 6, 1976 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. * Frank Alberti, representing the owner, stated there will be a very extensive report submitted showing in -depth deep soil tests. *CARRIED. Kjell Stoknes, Director of Community Development, said the applicant had requested a waiver to Res.' #489 allowing him to apply for a rezone on the referenced property from R -3 to R -4. The applicant was proposing to build 48 units on the site - the same number allowed under R -3 zoning - but desires to construct six - plexes instead of four -unit dwellings which require a rezoning to R -4. He said his staff recommended approval of the waiver request. MOVED BY VAN DUSEN, SECONDED BY MS. PESICKA, THAT ITEM 6.d. BE ON THE AGENDA OF THE DECEMBER 6, 1976 AGENDA OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING. CARRIED. DATE: REQUEST: PETITIONER: PROPERTY LOCATION: CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DIVISION CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT 24 November 1976 Waiver to Resolution #489 for rezone Horst Ehmke, prospective owner /developer West of and adjacent to 62nd Avenue South approx- imately 300 feet north of Southcenter Boulevard The applicant requests a waiver to Resolution #489 allowing him to apply for a rezone on the above - referenced property from R -3 to R -4. The appli- cant proposes to build 48 living units on the site — the same number allowed under current R -3 zoning — but desires to construct six - plexes instead of four- unit dwellings which requires a rezoning to R -4. The applicant has indicated his willingness to make the rezone action subject to an approved plot plan. Resolution #489 requires the Planning Division to analyze the following four items in consideration of the waiver request: 1. Is the proposed action consistent with the presently emerging Land Use Policy Plan? STAFF COMMENTS: Although the Land Use Policy Plan is not officially adopted at this time, the Planning Commission has tentatively pro- posed land use for the subject property. According to their propo- sal, the site appears to be classified as about two - thirds High - Density Residential and one -third Medium - Density Residential. Medium - Density Residential is defined as 6 to 16 units per gross acre, High - Density as 17+ units per gross acre. As such, the proposed rezone to R -4 to allow 48 units on 2.5 acres appears to be consistent with resi- dential densities tentatively proposed on the emerging Land Use Map. 2. Does the proposed action represent a unique condition which is insignificant in scale and to which no other apparent alternatives are reasonable? STAFF COMMENTS: There are no special circumstances concerning this property or the request which would identify the proposed action as a unique condition. The proposed action may be said to be of an insignificant scale. The alternative to the proposed action is to develop the property at its current R -3 zoning, i.e., with duplexes, triplexes, or four - plexes. City Council Page 2 Staff Report 24 November 1976 3. If the request for waiver involves grading, excavation, filling or development in geographical areas identified as having potential natural limitations for development, are mitigating measures provided? STAFF COMMENTS: The property is not located in an area which has been identified as having potential natural limitations to development. 4. Do the requirements contained in Resolution #489 impose a special hardship to a site for which a waiver of the provisions would not necessitate a major policy commitment prior to the adoption of the Land Use Policy Plan ?' STAFF COMMENTS: The major policy commitment which would be made by allowing the proposed action would not be related to density. Forty - eight (48) units are allowed on the 2.5 acre site under current R -3 zoning; the proposed action does not call for more than this number. The policy commitment to be made in this instance is that of bulk, i.e., allowing more than four units in one structure. The proposed action requests six -unit structures versus the four -unit buildings allowed under current zoning. Staff does not feel that increasing building size to allow two additional units per structure is a major policy commitment in the area of the waiver request. RECOMMENDATION Staff is not concerned about any major policy commitments with regard to this waiver request for a rezone from R -3 to R -4, provided the applicant agrees to limit the number of units to 48 and that no single structure contain more than six - units. Staff recommends the Council approve the waiver request contingent upon a rezone application which reflects these conditions. (4xJfxJ eo,urf/ /0(1 G / 7' Y oF- /, ti% //z n &Z0 59 ' ,a1 / 7 //e. (cam /G4 11. 4'8 /88 ,(11 cz , ilieve s7/e/ //f/t/ / /� 4 Pr2vsPI paecy4 ©A f�, 7 72o e�/2 fY H /Cy /5 4964 /il �`i� � / / /,(// f Y eaF 2 .vo - 7V ;e e- 3 ,Q.tla %u ,'We Az .e.4 fG y Ce,..ciSivE'7ZD fro,/ /Ai G 7 4 1 46 7'/4/4 7 G/t . ,V,4 576 ©, /i /2 - / -/e t/ /G .� / a a'/ 7 ,r1,4,e c7/3 5.' -i '4 7 /v./..s /.� ilp 0 okt/id 1s _5 ,�r� 2 yo//2 C.49,1/S it .c/e47 4,/* , 4 5E/O l'i4 7A/ ,t'/ /A1 /, /d e Y " ��o� -. - 41 7 5 fuo/5. 7.41 //CM/ 4F.4 4"A Y CU/ t. 4 GLOl.4 ' 4"8 - L / /.w l%,(// fS ‘/A/f/7 i 7 fo 4Y4//7'J P4 ' ' &/ 27/ / , d,ar 4' "JAW t c I lv.C/ 7D 7 i // /Ezzi 7`/�t G , A/4,vFt/z /0,Q/1//.e 4,v A / 7` /orl 7`1-7 ,/if/ 94 ,Z 7477'E ,- X / 5 7 2cv,t/ //4/4 / f /7/A... P 4 c'4/f /2 /4. /4/4 424 7 L/7`7 ,= z- A-/ / . /7`y Q .fi 71 / 7/ -• GG�SE .c% ‘PP 7 / //D /.z/ /.,4."; 4G / ZJ /GC. ,3 Gc.G/C '7 U /�Lv „=/ 44 5U /Go /4/4'5 ; .r,V /, /Z' 4.01/ L / f 7G - I, f /8 , / l2 ,ftNptz • • ,10 H •6 si W • 4 °A :< ? 2i`ro o Ja" n ' , q 7 Z. c //1 /''// 7 /4r/,7/r_7 j/' //r/F,4 ne /ri4 7`Y 4Z.. .714 c 7/.1 - / �t c _g/ys /7afr� V g . /r r2 ./Y/ e7/1 at) V7 c//VP' (72-7/n / v7 t 7 d 5'g / / //j'j' ' /7/ a:.. 5 3?f /V/ s/ //y .7 /7 A fry cite / /�d7 '€ 2 .�. V)4' s r ',/y77/7'o /r//yo ' / 4/ Z7 ; 1 o // %L /'1 rYYCJ`7 V 1 -V -7 vr)o2,/ccd 7 7 / / Yy� ��,� Sa � '/7 / V/ 1-4 / 7 7 4i`1/ We: ?/aa ?moo / / ; ;L / /7 9 7t 7 a 7'7o� '/r0/ /'b /V/ 0ir0 . 4' S d 77V/77 S d Sa- /124. C/ Xg 7(/Y, /It'd I/ -7r yo S /,4/ ,L ' N.v Y /Y / 9 -o ,I C//Ya $pC �/ v7 ddd' /vgd 0 - V7/0/1/ d. 5 /7/7_1 /ilY/7 /r,‘ C V /i,vis/r- 9!)// -- 314/v* . w/ do 5 V /C/ -7//79 c' '7/va v'w/t!e, 92/ 77i2o CI //7 $ / //YO � /V / ,7/ 7 - c07� P' c?7 /762/77 I-124 ,f4' //r - air P, o 217' 11'0 LEGAL DESCRIPTION "That portion of Tract 11, Interurban addition to Seattle; according to the Plat recorded'in Volume 10 of Plats, page 55, in King County, ,!'Washington, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the east line of Tract 11 which is 162.79' north of the southeast corner thereof ;'thence continuing north 0° 8' west 359.88' to the northeast corner of said Tract 11; thence south 89 52' west along the north - erly'line thereof 300.86'; thence south 0 8' east 398.14'; thence : north 89° 52' east 141.65'; thence north 0° 8' west 38.26'; .thence 'north 89 cast 159.21' to the point of beginning." Natural Conditions: (Source: Data Inventory: Tukwila Planning Area.) a. Geology: The site is composed of sedimentary and volcanic 'rock (bedrock) which has good seismic, .foundation, and slope stability. However, care is recommended when slopes are in difa.ed to guarantee continued stability of the slope. b. Soils: The majority of this site is till soils over bedrock 'which has a high bearing capacity, slight erosion hazard, .and fair internal drainage and arability. c. Slope: The.gradient of the slopes vary from 5 to 25 percent. A more close analysis of the property, however, shows the majority of the land to be sloped southerly from 11 - 13 percent. Drainage: The property would be drained by 62nd Avenue South which has an open ditch drainage system. . .Vegetation: The primary vegetation on the property is black : berry bushes with some trees. . Wildlife: . B:ird and animal species which inhabit the subject property are typical of those generally found in the Tukwila arca. Although no field studies have been done, it is assumed that such birds as robins, sparrows, crows and quail use this 'area for foraging. - Smaller mammels like skunk, weasel, raccoon, . and rabbit are assumdd to use this area also. .,Circulation :' Access to the property is from Southcenter Blvd, via 62nd Avenue South. Access from the east via South 153rd Street presently is not public right -of -way. '..62nd Avenue South is paved for two traffic lanes and has open ditch drainage. Utilities: a.'' Sanitary sewers are presently available for connection in Southcenter however, they have not yet been extended up 62nd Avenue South. A six inch water main presently serves the property with a . hydrant located at the corner of.South 153rd Street and 62nd Avenue South. . .1 •••••■••••••••••••••• CITY LIMITS Vicinity map - t1 2 P.> /4;2. .?;c70 . f-,( G - C SG — t' ;G �' N 4 S - i i u 7 J ►.I 1 -!- ITT • r- - 13 PS • • X10 :.; p r4 S tt - C. J .. - `A/, ;..1 L r•-.1 . ! i.!:. 1 - 1 t C 4 1 ? G. t • 1' • 4 • City:Seahurst, Wash. flailing Address: P.O. Box 822 arrangement. CITY OF TUKWILA APPLICATION FOR WAIVER From the Provisions of Resolution Number 489 Zip: 98062 Ownership Interest in Property: Proposed purchaser • Legal Description of Property Affected: (See attached) approx. 300 feet' north of Southcenter Blvd.. Application for Rezone be accepted. (Please type or print) Date of Application: Nov. 22, 1976 Horst Ehmke,•Ehmke Const, Bruce W. Mecklenburg Name of Applicant:Prospective owner /developer _- Architect Phone: 242-3735 General Location of Property: west of and adjacent to 62nd Ave So. 1. State specifically the action in Resolution No. 489, Section 4 to which you are requesting a waiver: • _ 2. Describe specifically the action you are proposing, including dimensional infor- mation about the development, site maps, etc., if available: Submit Rezone'Application requesting change of zone from R -3 to R -4 (subject to Plot Plan Approval) for the purpose of building 48 living units as now allowed except that instead of being limited to 12 buildin, of 4 L.U. each that 8 buildings of 6 L.U. each be allowed in order to provide more space between buildings and more flexibity in. building • . ■ • • • • 11 . • • • 3. What is your justification for your request:. (Please refer to items 1-4 on the cover sheet and respond to them.) 1. Proposed action is consistant with the emerging Land Use Plan. 2. There are other alternatives however, the action requested would result in a better solution than if developed under existing zoning rpc+rir +inns. 3. No natural limitations are apparent, however development under existing north. • • , • . 11 • • • under the existing R -3 zoning but would enhance the development thru mnrp nppn spsce, +here fnrP wnsi I rLnot he i n n i g .t t with th8 existing and proposed Land Use Policies. (attach additional sheet, if necessary) 4. What other factual evidence is relevant to your request for waiver (such as exist- ing development in the vicinity of your property, soils and geologic investiga- tions, etc.): See attached (Attach any information available which substantiates your request) Frank Todd Date of City Council Action: (for office use only) Date Received.: Received by: Date scheduled before City Counci A40/0044.- /i74 Action of City Council: to • J1 1 0 IIITHS !NW 1 2 , :N■■■•i (4 ; ' ' '' ) .? ! . . 4( fL:15 - it 17 ' ..',.. ' 1, •"%.' . %• • , • , i4=••,•• ' • * . . 4 • I ';;;,z,',7:`,c •— • _ •5; ; . ••• • • ‘• • •.0•• •:A 7 ,4,..^•-• ••••-"-..1-•• • ••■.;„,.• • .! 5 6 7 FLEXIBLE RULER -302 AW ..... IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS n CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT '''''''' ri 0 t."1"C" 1 2 • • N./ met trr,a`r.... : ' • • j" • „ . IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS 3 4 5 6 7 , CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO . 'THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT -9 I Of il;r74 F .. '�'. y, Mlt. ! ;.fiT3 Id,'•: ��i�'�'it'.'�'.:✓•v } � Y• N ^ y r y jk " �e ` • .r;a ns c . : • •:sc•`• ,�.. t ir3��r''. 'r' :;' -. �u ..i ic: aks',• y 4. J; 1,',1"7 i'xe' E `5 w:'r,9n7c. yt „} Y 4 d�.s• +. •iiIIIIIlIIIIIiIIII :lII I I ��� i �� �� is ��� i ������ ili � 'ili 0 N7NfINCN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8, FLEXIBLE RULER -302AW •NN•N 16X ,IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT •