The Monroe Planning Commission heard more than three hours of public testimony regarding the city's proposal to amend the comprehensive plan and rezone 43 acres of property in east Monroe from Limited Open Space (LOS) to General Commercial (GC).
After the commission closed the Oct. 12 public hearing, it took no further action due to the late hour, having given attendees the opportunity to testify. The commission ordered that the public hearing be reconvened at 7 p.m. Monday, Oct. 19.
The east Monroe rezone property owned by Heritage Baptist Church is located east of Woods Creek on the north side of U.S. 2. The 42.8-acre piece of property consists of five contiguous parcels located near the city's eastern boundary ' the east edge of an adjacent LOS parcel marks the eastern city limits. The property contains environmentally protected habitat, streams, wetlands and floodplain, and is framed by steep slopes on the north side.
Kirkland firm PACE Engineers conducted an environmental impact statement (EIS), and the property was rezoned on Dec. 26, 2013. A group of Monroe residents won an appeal to-áthe Washington State Growth Management Hearings Board, which sided with petitioners on several points.
The GMHB found the EIS failed to comply with state RCW 43.21C.030 and GMA Planning Goal 10, which directly relates to environmental concerns. The board also found the EIS failed to consider a lawful range of development alternatives; an area that opponents say still has not been remedied.
The rezone ordinances were sent back to the city as invalid on Aug. 26, 2014. PACE conducted additional environmental study, creating a supplemental environmental impact statement, which has been available for review since the end of August.
Pastor Thomas Minnick spoke on behalf of Heritage Baptist, saying the church has gone above and beyond what is normally required for a non-project environmental study, meaning that the analysis done by PACE has been extensive despite no development being planned for the site. Minnick said that it's "very rareGÇ¥ that such extensive study be completed on a non-project action.
He urged planning commissioners to recommend approval of the rezone.
"We believe this is not only a good use of this property, we believe it's the only use that makes sense,GÇ¥ Minnick said.
Commissioner Steve Jensen questioned Minnick's belief that General Commercial is the best designation for the property. According to Monroe Municipal Code, the LOS designation generally applies to property that is impacted by critical areas and lacks availability of services like water and sewer. Under LOS, one residential dwelling per five acres is allowed, as well as community facilities like parks or gyms.
"As there's not a project tied to this request to change, I'm not seeing how services get added here,GÇ¥ Jensen said. "That's making it difficult for me to understand how general commercial fits, where that definition for limited open space currently fits so well.GÇ¥
Several local farmers spoke against the rezone, including Vicki and Scott Furrer, Jerry Labish and Wiard Groeneveld. Labish and his wife, Stacy, have owned a beef farm near Sultan since 1989 and Groeneveld's third-generation dairy farm has been family-owned since 1938. The Furrers own a farm located two miles east of the site where Vicki has lived for 57 years.
"It's not consistent with the surrounding area,GÇ¥ Scott Furrer said. "There would be, basically, an island of commercial property with city property just to the east of it that's still zoned open space and being used for agriculture.GÇ¥
Misty Blair was one of the petitioners on the appeal to the GMHB. She responded to Minnick's statement that such extensive environmental study on a non-project action was "rare.GÇ¥
"I'd just like to point out that it's also rare that you have an area-wide rezone being put forward for one property owner. Generally an area-wide rezone is a city initiative and it's to meet a city objective and it involves multiple property owners,GÇ¥ Blair said. "Also, it's rare to have a property go from the lowest intensity development zone you have to your highest intensity development zone.GÇ¥
Blair asked the commissioners to look into "spot zoning.GÇ¥ East Monroe can be considered an area-wide rezone, since it's being initiated by the city and requires a comprehensive plan amendment, but Blair said it also bares resemblance to a site-specific rezone, which are typically project-oriented and initiated by the property owner.
"In reality, it is requiring us to go in and change text that is written specifically to prohibit this type of activity and I'm not sure if that is legal,GÇ¥ Blair said. "Spot zoning is not legal in Washington state.GÇ¥
Spot zoning occurs when the property being rezoned is neither contiguous nor adjacent to other property under the same zoning.
According to the Municipal Research and Services Center, illegal spot zoning has been defined by the courts as "arbitrary and unreasonable zoning action by which a smaller area is singled out of a larger area or district and specially zoned for use classification totally different from and inconsistent with the classification of the surrounding land, not in accordance with the comprehensive plan.GÇ¥
The text Blair referred to exists in the city's current comprehensive plan, which states the east Monroe area "was annexed some years ago, primarily as a means of "protecting' the City's scenic gateway from the east along U.S. 2 and to prevent the proliferation of strip commercial uses along U.S. 2.GÇ¥
That text was removed from the updated comp plan, which the city has been working on for more than two years. Councilmembers will be voting on the new plan within the next few weeks.
"The red flags for site-specific rezones are when you don't have another adjacent parcel that's of the same zone, and another red flag is if the property is all under one ownership,GÇ¥ Blair said, urging commissioners to look into the matter further. "So, you've got two of those.GÇ¥
And the SEIS continues to fall short in its examination of development alternatives, said Blair, which is one of the reasons the GMHB invalidated the city's ordinances last August. Based on state law, environmental studies must include "meaningful alternatives,GÇ¥ including development based on the site's existing conditions.
The Washington State Department of Ecology echoed many of Blair's concerns in a comment letter sent to Monroe Community Development Director Dave Osaki, including the concern about insufficient development alternatives.
Ashley Sellers, a resident of the bluff north of the east Monroe property, expressed concern about the increased risk of landslides, pointing out a landslide occurred there earlier this year. And the location of the slide, she said, is incorrectly identified in the DSEIS. She said she was frustrated by the new geotechnical studies, which did not include samples taken from the upper part of the hillside.
She pointed out that page nine of the geological hazards report states, "we were not able to observe much of the upper slope because of access restrictions.GÇ¥
"I've only lived here a year and a half, and I can tell you the names of eight-plus people that will let you have access to their properties to determine this risk. Absolutely guaranteed, hands-down, no problem,GÇ¥ Sellers said. "That's my one huge issue. That's just a false statement.GÇ¥
She cited other concerns including sprawl, traffic and inconsistencies in the DSEIS.
"I guess my biggest argument to this whole thing is it seems like so much has been done on the city's part to represent a landowner, and yet so little has been done to protect those of us that live on that bluff,GÇ¥ Sellers said. "I think that's a huge issue and I think it's something you should really consider.GÇ¥
During rebuttal, Minnick gave commissioners a rare glimpse into the history of the rezone proposal, which has been ongoing for more than a decade. He said the church purchased the property with the understanding a rezone would not be a problem and there had been an oral agreement with the city, but councilmembers living on the bluff reneged on the deal.
He refuted the idea that commercial development would lead to an increased risk of landslides, pointing out that development would occur in the same location on the property whether it was a box store or a church.
"Right now we could build a church facility on that property in the same place that commercial development could happen. We don't have to locate parking lots or a church building further away than a Walmart would have to be from that property,GÇ¥ Minnick said. "It still has to be hundreds of feet away from the base of that slope.GÇ¥
Blair disagreed, saying the property will be open for more expansive development with a general commercial rezone. While PACE's studies have found only about 11 acres of the 42.8 suitable for development based on environmental concerns, Blair said there are no Monroe Municipal Codes that outright prohibit development in environmentally sensitive areas.
Former planning commissioner David Demarest has been consistently opposed to the rezone.
"I believe it's a bad direction for the city to go. It doesn't make sense for the city,GÇ¥ Demarest said. "When you look at it environmentally, commerce or any other number of different ways, it just doesn't make sense.GÇ¥
Planning commissioners asked for additional information prior to making a recommendation, including clarification on the location of the landslide and information about spot zoning and liability.
Comments
Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.
Sign in to comment