Proposed changes to the city’s non-conforming use standards provided for lively discussion at Thursday night’s Mountlake Terrace City Council work/study session.

Steve Osguthorpe, the city’s Community and Economic Development Director, outlined for council members possible adjustments to the Mountlake Terrace City Code that the council will be considering. The proposals were also reviewed by the City Planning Commission on Oct. 26 and Nov. 23.

The reason why the city developed non-conforming use standards has to do with the Town Center plan approved by the council in 2007. The plan includes the development of new stores, restaurants, offices and housing in the 68-acre downtown zone. The  development standards apply to new buildings only, so existing buildings are deemed non-conforming, meaning there are city-imposed limits on how they can be developed.

The goal, Osguthorpe reminded the council, is “that eventually those buildings will be replaced,” allowing the city to “reach compliance with what your comprehensive use or vision is, rather than perpetuating what you eventually want to have phased out.”

One of the most controversial aspects of the proposal is provisions that do not allow a nonconforming use to be “intensified.”  Osguthorpe explained intensification as “a use that’s not expanding the footprint. It’s taking an existing building, for example, and wanting to get a more intense use of that existing building.” Two examples were provided: a manufacturing operation not permitted in a certain zone that increased its capacity by installing new machinery to increase its output. or a church also not permitted in a certain zone that installs additional seating in its existing sanctuary.

The intensification issue is one that has raised the ire of several Mountlake Terrace churches located in the Town Center. Church representatives came to the microphone during the work/study session’s public comment period and accused the city of trying to drive the churches out of the area by preventing them from making improvements to their buildings.

“It’s clear to me as a pastor that this is directed squarely at houses of worship in the City of Mountlake Terrace and perhaps in particular at Bethesda Lutheran Church,” said Bethesda Pastor Kathleen Anderson. She pointed out that the church, located in the 23400 block of 56th Avenue West “in the heart of the town center,” is “where the congregation has worshipped for 63 years. The intensification proposal “will essentially guarantee that any house of worship in the city is considered a legal non-conformance,” she said.

“If this ordinance becomes law it will be effectively tying the church’s hands and preventing the worship from being able to thrive or even survive,” Anderson added.

Osguthorpe, however, assured the council that the ordinance “was not drafted with churches in mind. It was drafted broadly. It was a city-wide issue that affects non-conformities of all kinds throughout the city.”

He did admit that he did have one church in his thoughts when drafting changes to the non-conforming standards, but it had nothing to do with the intensification issue. It was instead directed at the Mt. Zion Church, located at 21428-44th Ave. W., which suffered extensive damage in a May 2014 fire.

The fire at the Mt. Zion Church resulted in the need for significant repairs to make the building fit for occupancy. The church wished to do more improvements than were needed to bring the building back to its pre-fire condition including the addition of fire sprinklers. However, those additional improvements were not needed under code and they would have resulted in the cost of repairs exceeding the allowed 25 percent.

Councilmember Bryan Wahl agreed with Osguthorpe that the Mt. Zion fire situation was “very frustrating.”

“In general we want to see the city revitalize but at the same time when property is damaged through no fault of their own — through fire, natural disaster, whatever — that they are able to repair and recover what they once had and basic improvements to protect what they once had should be allowed,” Wahl added.

The proposed code changes also include provisions for improvements that can be made to keep nonconforming buildings reasonably viable in today’s market without adding so much value in improvements that the properties will never be redeveloped as otherwise envisioned for the Town Center. The maximum value of “improvement” is set at a cumulative value of 25 percent of the building’s value at the time of the latest proposed improvement.

“That does give some opportunity to make some improvements,” Osguthorpe told the council. “If someone has a house and they want to upgrade their kitchen, they can do so without exceeding that 25 percent valuation,”

In addition, the proposal defines “exempt improvements,” which will not be included in the valuation of improvements allowed on nonconforming buildings. As an example, Osguthorpe pointed to “a restaurant that may have their booths or walk-in refrigerators that would add value to the property but are considered personal property.” Those types of items would be exempt “as long as those things can be readily removed if they vacate the premises without causing any structural changes,” he said.

Another point discussed at length Thursday night was the proposal to increase the abandonment/termination period from the current six-month time period to a 12-month period. City staff believe this will allow a more reasonable time frame for marketing nonconforming properties before they can no longer be reoccupied.

Mayor Pro Tem Lora Sonmore asked about the former Arctic Circle/Red Onion Burgers space on 56th Avenue West, which was damaged by fire Oct. 1, 2012 and has been vacant ever since.

“That’s probably one of the best examples of what is happening to non-conforming buildings under our current code,” Osguthorpe said. “First of all, it raises the issue of the six-month provision. Although they were trying as best they could to get that thing back occupied as they worked through the fire issues and did their marketing…they went beyond the six months, and our code is explicit that if it’s vacant for more than six months for any reason, it cannot be reoccupied.”

Reoccupying the former Red Onion building now “would require some drastic changes” and isn’t likely to be economically feasible, he said. “For example, it doesn’t conform to the requirement to be closer to the street, so they’d have to put an addition on the front. It doesn’t have the required number of stories so they’d have to put an addition on the top. The parking lot doesn’t comply with landscape standards, so the list just goes and on and on with improvements they’d need to make.”

Had the 12-month provision been in place, it might have given the building owners the time they needed to overcome that hurdle, he said.

Mayor Jerry Smith explained that the ordinance requiring the six-month limit came about following an arson fire in the Town Center area in the early 1990s, when an owner of a damaged building took four years to clean up his property. “I still have heartburn with the banks repo’ing buildings and houses and leaving them sit in our city because everybody thinks we’re the dump,” Smith said, adding that he would not be in favor of extending the six-month limit to 12 months.

Wahl said the city faces “a careful balancing act as I see it,” between revitalizing the city and promoting change and “protecting property owners and what they have.”

While the city doesn’t want vacant buildings, “at the same time by not extending it does that mean that a building ends up being vacant for several years rather than several months?” Wahl asked.

From Oguthorpe’s point of view, all of the proposed changes “would be a benefit to the owners of these non-conforming buildings except the intensification issue. That could certainly be an issue for some types of uses that may want to intensify their buildings.”

The council plans to hold a public hearing on the proposed changes to non-conforming use standards at its Dec. 21 meeting.

The council also discussed and put on the consent calendar for its Dec. 7 business meeting the following:

• Adoption of Resolution Establishing Recreation and Park Fees for 2016-2020. The fees will mostly stay the same, with a few minor increase. You can see the complete schedule here.
• Adoption of Community and Economic Development Permit Fees Schedule and Resolution
• Approval of Lake Ballinger Watershed Forum Interlocal Agreement Second Amendment

— By Teresa Wippel