By Brian Beckley
The Courier-Herald
The property owners of Bonney Lake's "Area 41" feel they are being punished because of the Brookside single-family home development built to the north of their commercially-zoned land.
"They came in knowing - all the developers knew - (Area 41) was commercial," Judy Reano told the Bonney Lake Planning Commission during an informational meeting March 30 at the Public Safety Building.
Area 41 is one of several pieces of land being considered for rezoning because its current zoning is inconsistent with the city's future land use map.
The future land use map was created as part of the state-mandated update of the city's comprehensive plan in 2003.
"When the city undertook its big update," Planning Manager Steve Ladd said before discussions, "it's an almost stem to stern questioning of how land should be utilized."
The planning commission is reviewing the inconsistent areas and will make a recommendation to the city council. Zoning may only be changed through council action.
Reano and her neighbors joined more than 35 other property owners from the city's Midtown District, which stretches from Fennel Creek to 214th Avenue, to discuss their concerns with the proposed rezoning plan.
Area 41, located near the Albertsons shopping center, is one of the most contentious of the properties to be rezoned. Currently, the land is zoned C1/C2, or commercial/light manufacturing. Under the new comprehensive plan, the land would become medium-density residential.
Ladd said the change was made to make the area more consistent with the residential neighborhoods surrounding it. The Brookside development was rezoned from a high-density residential area to a low-density residential area when it was developed with single-family residences.While high-density residential zoning allows for single family homes, state law requires zoning to sustain current neighborhoods, precipitating the change.
Property owners, however, complain that they agreed to be annexed into the city in 1998 as a commercial property before the residential neighborhoods were built and a "downzone" will greatly reduce the value of their land.
"Why are we being punished because they chose to buy a home next to commercial (property)?" asked Carol Archuleta. "They need to live with their choice."
All 10 residents of the area in attendance opposed the zoning change.
The Brookside development is also posing problems for residents of Area 37, located north of state Route 410, behind Bonney Lake Collision. Area 37 is scheduled to be "upzoned" from medium-density residential to high density residential to compensate for the downzoing of Brookside from high density to single-family residential.
"The purpose of that was to increase the amount of high density residential to allow Bonney Lake to meet the Growth Management Act requirements," Ladd said, adding that the area was chosen because of its proximity to the highway.
"The intention is to encourage development there in the future," Planning Commission Chairman Steve Burnham said.
None of the 15 Area 37 residents in attendance favored the change.
According to Pierce County Assessor Ken Madsen, the zoning change will not necessarily affect the land value and therefore tax assessment of properties in the zone.
Madsen said the county sets land values based on sales of surrounding property and not how the land is zoned. Madsen said property taxes would not be affected until several property owners sell their land.
"One sale does not set the market," Madsen said.
After the meeting, Burnham said he appreciated the comments from citizens and said the potential zoning changes were still in question.
"We wouldn't be having the meeting if it wasn't in question," he said.
Brian Beckley can be reached at bbeckley@courierherald.com.
