Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRes 1314 - Findings and Conclusions and Deny Econolodge Moratorium Waiver RequestCity of Tukwila Washington Resolution No. 1314 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DENYING THE REQUEST BY WEN FAN LIN AND VIRGINIA LIN OF ECONOLODGE FOR A WAIVER FROM MORATORIUM ORDINANCE NO 1721, AND ADOPTING FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS. WHEREAS, Wen -fan Lin and Virginia Lin of EconoLodge made application for a waiver pursuant to Section 3 of Ordinance No. 1706, in order to be granted approval to apply for permits to demolish an existing motel and construct a new hotel at 4006 S. 139th Street, and WHEREAS, the City Council held a hearing on December 12, 1994 and adopted Ordinance No. 1721, extending moratorium Ordinance No. 1706 on permitting certain uses on Pacific Highway, and WHEREAS, the City Clerk advertised in the Seattle Times on January 6, 1995, the date, time and place for the public hearing to consider the Lin's request for a waiver, and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on January 17, 1995, to take public testimony, consider the applicants' request for a waiver, and debate the criteria for a waiver decision in light of that testimony, and WHEREAS, upon the close of the public hearing and deliberation, the City Council passed a motion to deny the waiver request; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. FINDINGS 1 Wen -fan Lin and Virginia S. Lin, owners and operators of the property and business at 4006 S. 139th Street, and hereinafter referred to as "applicants subrrutted a petition for a waiver from Ordinance No. 1706, which establishes a moratorium on acceptance of applications, and issuance of new business licenses and building permits, for certain uses. 2. The applicants proposed demolishing a 1940's single story motel complex of 17 units in 6 detached structures on 22,320 square feet and building a new 3 story hotel of approximately 40 units. The site would be managed in association with their existing adjacent EconoLodge hotel. 3. The City of Tukwila published a notice of public hearing in its official publication, the Seattle Times, on January 6,1995 (Exhibit 2) The City Council held its public hearing on January 17, 1995, took testimony and deliberated on the facts and condusions of the waiver request. PROJECT HISTORY 4. Redevelopment of the subject site was initially proposed in 1989 while the site was governed by King County The applicants applied in January 1989 for a building permit from King County In April 1989, during permit processing of that building application, the subject site was annexed into the City of Tukwila. The County discontinued further processing and did not issue a permit for the project. 5. The applicants then went through a City of Tukwila preapplication process in September 1989 They were told at that time that the application with King County was not vested and that they would have to reapply with Tukwila and begin anew Redesign of their project, as proposed to King County, would be necessary to meet Tukwila standards. Necessary Tukwila reviews included SEPA, Board of Architectural Review and building and utility permits. Over five years have lapsed since the site was annexed into the City, four and half years during which the applicants could have pursued the development of the site. The applicants did not pursue development. The project did not vest under Tukwila ordinances. 6. The applicants state that although they pursued financing for site redevelopment, it did not become available until 1994. In September 1994, they attempted to submit to the City of Tukwila a preapplication proposal, at which time, they were apprised of the moratorium on hotel development, which had been enacted by Ordinance No. 1679 on December 6,1993. WAIVER CRITERIA. 7 Ordinance No. 1721, renewing Ordinance No. 1706 on December 12, 1994, establishes criteria for granting a waiver from the restrictions of the Highway 99 moratorium. The criteria established in Section 3 of the ordinance are re- stated below. In the event the moratorium creates an undue hardship with respect to financial, personal or other reasons the interested parties may petition in writing to the City Council. A date to hear that petition will be set by the Council President. In considering the petition, the Council will bear in mind the intent of the moratorium, the best interests of the City weighed against the interests of the individual, the circumstances and the hardship caused by the moratorium, and the damage that could result from strict adherence to the moratorium. DISCUSSION OF CRITERIA. Intent of the moratorium: 8. According to Ordinance No. 1721, the intent of the moratorium is to prevent the development of additional incompatible uses that have proved counter to the goal of neighborhood livability In addition, the moratorium is to allow a period of community review and discussion of what the land uses should be for the subject area, without fear of private actions that could cause further deterioration of the area's livability 9 The ordinance states that the specific uses of motels, hotels, taverns, pool rooms, liquor stores and night dubs have a history of criminal activity detrimental to neighborhood livability and to the public health and safety and are incompatible with the goals and policies of the Draft Comprehensive Plan for this area. 10. Overall, the uses prohibited by the moratorium are considered "regional retail" uses under the City's zoning code. Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan, is currently being revised and the Draft Comprehensive Plan policies indicate that the regional orientation associated with the uses named in the moratorium are not desirable on or within the vicinity of the applicants proposed development site. 11 Approving a waiver request, that would enable the applicants to demolish 17 units built in the 1940's and construct 40 new units, is not consistent with the intent of the moratorium to preclude further hotel development until a final decision on appropriate land uses is made. The City's experience along Pacific Highway is that hotels and motels generate criminal activity and degrade the surrounding neighborhood's livability The intent of the moratorium is to predude new applications that may be contrary to potential changes in the land use regulations for improvement of the area. Best interests of the City weighed against the interests of the individual 12. As discussed above, the interests of the City lie in revising its Comprehensive Plan to better address the subject area's livability Draft policies, that reflect several years of work by the appointed citizen's committee for the City, are referenced in the moratorium Ordinance No. 1721 13. The City has an interest in improving the Pacific Highway area's livability and in improving the compatibility of the commercial properties with the adjacent residential properties. 14. The City has considered the stay of further hotel development as being the community's best short term solution because of the inherent problems they have caused in the Pacific Highway South corridor and the effect these problems have on the viability and livability of the adjacent businesses and residences. The decision of what should finally be allowed for the long term is currently being deliberated in the Comprehensive Plan process. 2 15 The proposed hotel would replace a low value ($1,000 assessed) commercial structure with a higher value, more attractive improvement that would be more compatible with the applicants' existing hotel and would meet the City's current development standards. The proposed demolition and new development could also facilitate other redevelopment in the area that would be a continuation of a pattern that the City currently feels is inappropriate pending the conclusion of the discussion of the Draft Comprehensive Plan. 16. The interests of the applicants are to bring two jointly managed sites up to the same standard, thereby improving overall management and business conditions. The applicants also state that the existing 17 units, because of their physical condition, attract a clientele that is more criminal in nature and that new hotel units would change that existing condition. 17 The applicants assert that they have business expertise in hotel operations and cannot consider other development options for the site. Circumstances and hardship caused by the moratorium. 18. The applicants advise that there are circumstances and hardships that will result if the waiver is denied. personnel hardships from abuse from clientele attracted to the 1940's facility, lost opportunity for financing support for a new hotel structure, loss of AAA and Mobil Travel Guide ratings of existing EconoLodge due to unsavory character /business associated with the subject property, continued escalation of high costs of operating and maintaining the existing 1940's facility, and hardship on applicants' financial and personal life. 19 The applicants argue that due to the existing structure's design and condition, it is marketable only to a limited clientele pool that has a history of creating conflict and is a sharp contrast with their adjacent facility 20. According to the applicants, any alternate use would be less profitable than the continued maintenance and operation of the existing facility Costs of operating and maintaining the site are not known, although the applicant states that it generates annual revenues (not profits) of approximately $30,000. 21 Sale of the site would not result in lessening of the hardships because the site would continue to exist as a nuisance for the neighborhood, the applicants, and their adjacent hotel operation and the applicant indicates that they have been unsuccessful in finding a buyer 22. A possibility exists that the hotel and motel use would become legally non conforming, depending on the pending Comprehensive Plan deliberations and implementing ordinances. 23. The City considered that changing the management operations of the site could possibly ameliorate some of the hardships listed by the applicants. Damage resulting from strict adherence to the moratorium: Damage to the applicants: 24. Strict adherence to the moratorium will result in damage to the applicants due to the inability to expand /upgrade their business operation and the negative economic impact of the older facility on the operation of their new facility and the personal hardships of dealing with a difficult clientele attracted to the older facility Damage to the neighborhood. 25 If this waiver is denied the site will continue as an out -of -date, unattractive motel development that attracts undesirable activity, unless the applicant were to improve the appearance of the site through cosmetic improvements such as minor improvements or the site is redeveloped as another use. 26. The replacement of the older existing motor court with a new multi-story hotel is not necessarily viewed as a favorable trade -off for the neighborhood, merely an aesthetic improvement over the existing condition. 3 Damage to the City 27 If the waiver were approved and a new hotel built, perceptions of and the character of the area will continue as a regional commercial service corridor At this time, the proposed use is inconsistent with what the City currently sees as appropriate and compatible for neighborhood livability SECTION 2. CONCLUSIONS Based on the foregoing Findings, the following condusions are reached. 1 Denial of the waiver request is consistent with the intent of the moratorium to prevent further development of hotel units, which historically generate criminal activity in the Highway 99 area, and to predude expansion of these uses until the Comprehensive Plan is revised and adopted. 2. Denial of the waiver request does not preclude other options available to the property owners. 3. Denial of the waiver request supports the interests of the City to predude further hotel development pending adoption of a revised Comprehensive Plan and implementation package. 4. The hardships and circumstances born by the petitioners are largely within their control and approving the waiver request and allowing redevelopment of the site as a larger hotel would not necessarily decrease the likelihood of crime in the area. 5. The hardship and circumstances surrounding the waiver request have been weighed against the intent of the moratorium and the interests of the City and the individual and the City Council condudes that the intent of the moratorium and the interests of the City outweigh those of the applicants. 6. The City therefore denies the application for a waiver to the moratorium. PASSED BY THE CITY CO NCIL OE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a regular meeting thereof this 6th day of February 1995. .ter T Jv C ft, Council Presnt ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED• J E. Cantu, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM. Office of 'the City Attorney Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council. .2 (o —9 S Resolution Number 5� 4