Strip mall appeal challenges zoning layout
After a proposal for a retail plaza on East Main Street was denied, an appeal could allow LRC Realty to move on with the project.
The exact address, 1005 East Main Street is now a vacant lot after the demolition of the funeral home that was there prior.
The project in mind would allow a potential Starbucks drive-thru, among other businesses, creating more traffic.
The Kent Planning Commission turned down the retail plaza following a large crowd of residential neighbors attending and speaking at their regularly-scheduled meeting in May.
The main concerns of the project are the increase in volume of traffic, safety of pedestrians and the removal of mature trees on the site.
LRC Realty says that the building plans are within zoning codes and has incorporated Davey Tree Company to work with the property and trees on the plot.
The zoning for the site in question is multi-family commercial in the C-R zoning, which means use of the site is permitted for all uses.
Related Kent Zoning Laws
Kent began a comprehensive review of its zoning code in 2008, updating and changing many of them
Chapter 1113- Site Plan Review
Projects which involve the substantial construction of buildings, site improvements, changes in use, parking lots, or large activity areas will be required to undergo a Site Plan Review.
Chapter 1109 Board of Zoning Appeals
The board of zoning appeals consists of five members appointed by city council, they have the powers and duties prescribed by law and the zoning ordinance.
Chapter 1121 Architectural Design Review Overlay Districts
All projects subject to review shall obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Architectural Review Board prior to submitting applications for other additional reviews which may be required, including Site Plan Review, Conditional Zoning Certificates, Sign Permits, Zoning Permits or Building Permits.
Kent Board of Zoning Appeals and Planning Commission have final say unless business/developer wants to appeal their decision and take it to court.
“We have been before the zoning board before and we’ve been through numerous meetings as well as to the Architectural Review Board. So what we’re trying to do is develop the plan around no variances. We’ve done that,” said Gary O’Nesti, special projects director with Kent Investors, LLC at the Planning Commission meeting on May 16.
Although the building is within zoning codes the strong backlash from the neighbors is what drove the Planning Commission to turn down the project.
The residents surrounding the proposed retail plaza hired Attorney Dale Markowitz to represent them.
“I think that the zoning was incorrectly districted in that parcel for use that really wasn’t appropriate for that [area],” Markowitz said. “The site just doesn’t lend itself to being a safe site because of the way the traffic flows through there.”
When the Planning Commission reconvened in June a large part of the meeting was the discussion of the amount of traffic a drive-thru would create. However, Chuck Wooster of Dave E. Wooster and Associates assured the commission that drive-thrus are self-regulating and would not create the traffic jam the residents are implying.
When asked for a prediction Markowitz said, “I believe that the planning commission’s decision can be upheld by the court, and I believe that if the case is properly presented to the court they will affirm the action of the planning commission.”
However, with no codes actually being broken the matter is being taken to court and there is no solution in the near future.
Kent Investors LLC filed an administrative appeal and the case is pending before Judge Becky Doherty. The case lists the city of Kent, the planning commission and chairwomen, Amanda Edwards as the defendants.
Troy Lee, Julian Wissinger and Paige Brown
