Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Text Amendments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public hearings held on three citizen-sponsored zoning text amendments; one record left open
Summary
The Queen Anne's County Commissioners on June 10 heard public testimony on three citizen-sponsored zoning text amendments: building-height changes in the suburban commercial district (25-03), adding daycare centers to the airport-protection district permitted uses (25-04), and permitting limited reconfiguration of parcels with transferred development rights (25-07).
Queen Anne's County Commissioners on June 10 conducted public hearings on three citizen-sponsored text amendments under Tab 7. Each hearing opened the record for testimony and included staff and Planning Commission recommendations.
Ordinance 25-03 proposed increasing the maximum nonresidential building height in the Suburban Commercial (SC) district from 30 feet to 40 feet by amending the county code (section 18-121(e)(2)d2). The Planning Commission gave a favorable recommendation at its April 10 meeting. Jay Falstad spoke in opposition, saying he hoped the county would "keep the height restrictions where they are" to preserve county scale; Ryan Showalter, speaking for the applicant, and other local business representatives said the change would allow design flexibility without increasing floor area ratio or parcel massing. Written materials and staff reports were made available for public review.
Ordinance 25-04 would allow daycare centers as a permitted use in the Airport Protection and Kennewick Gateway (APKIG) district by amending section 18-1134(b). Joe Stevens, representing the applicant, said the change would allow a licensed learning center to serve children under age 2 in existing commercial space that otherwise would be constrained by the airport zone's current use list. He said the use would be state-certified and inspected. Planning staff and the Planning Commission recommended approval.
Ordinance 25-07 sought to allow subdivision or reconfiguration of parcels from which development rights had been transferred under certain circumstances while prohibiting creation of additional lots, by amending section 18-11101A-1. The Planning Commission issued an unfavorable recommendation at its May 8 meeting. Jay Falstad urged the commissioners to reject the amendment, citing concerns that it would "open up Pandora's box" and allow reconfiguration contrary to the intent of transfer of development rights programs. Attorney Jeffrey Thompson, representing the applicant, said he was seeking a narrow administrative subdivision authority that would not create new lots or change land-use restrictions and asked the board to review additional examples; the record was left open and commissioners said they would keep the record open for two weeks and vote thereafter.
No final votes on the three amendments were taken that night; 25-03 and 25-04 were heard with planning recommendations noted and 25-07 received an unfavorable planning recommendation and an extended record.
