Loading...
CU-98-208.pdfSt. 18`x' CITY OF EDMONDS 250 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771-0220 • FAX (206) 771-0221 HEARING EXAMINER BARBARA FAHEY MAYOR RECEIV�t- MAR Tc FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION pLAIN, ger 0 E71 ® OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF EDMONDS APPLICANT: Peter Carletti representing Sound Urological Associates CASE NO.: CU 98-208 LOCATION: 21822 & 21830 76th Avenue West APPLICATION: Conditional Use Permit approval to allow a medical office use in a Multi -Family Residential zone. REVIEW PROCESS: Following the SEPA appeal, the Hearing Examiner holds a public hearing and issues a decision. MAJOR ISSUES: (1) Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 16.30. permitted uses in the RM zone. (2) Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 20.05, conditional use permits. (3) Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 20.15A SEPA SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION AND DECISION: Staff Recommendation: Approve with conditions Hearing Examiner Decision: Approve with conditions PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the official file which included the Planning Division Staff Advisory Report; and after visiting the site, the Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing on the application. The hearing on the application was opened at 9:30 a.m., March 4, 1999, in the City Hall, Edmonds, Washington, and closed at 9:32 a.m. Participants at the public hearing and the exhibits offered and entered are listed in this report. A verbatim recording of the hearing is available in the Planning Division. Incorporated August 11, 1890 Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan Hearing Examiner Decision Case No. CU 98-208 Page 2 HEARING COMMENTS: The following is a summary of the comments offered at the public hearing. From the City: Karissa Kawamoto entered the staff report into the record. From the Applicant: Peter Carletti, Architect for the Applicants, said he had read the staff advisory report and concurred with the recommended conditions of approval. From the Community: No one from the general public attended the public hearing. WRITTEN COMMENTS: No written comments were submitted by members of the general public. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS A. Site Description: Site Development, Neighboring Development, and Zoning: a) Facts: 1. Size: The subject property is approximately 19,050 square feet in size. 2. Land Use: The property currently consists of two separate lots, each developed with a single family residence. 3. Zoning: The zoning of subject site is RM -2.4. 4. Terrain and Vegetation: The property gently slopes up from east to west. The majority of the site is fairly flat. Several extremely large evergreen trees exist on the site. The homes are surrounded by some residential landscaping and lawn. 5. Surrounding Development and Zoning: North: Zoned RM 2.4 but is occupied by a medical office building. South: Zoned RM 2.4 but developed with a single family residence. East: Zoned RM 2.4 and developed with a medical office building. West: Zoned and developed by a single family residence (RS -8) 6. Compliance with Multi -Family Residential Zoning: ECDC Section 16.30.010 permits "Offices" as a primary use with an approved Conditional Use Permit. Compliance with specific dimensional standards, other City codes and ADB requirements will be reviewed at the design review stage. C. Hearing Examiner Decision Case No. CU 98-208 Page 3 Environmental Assessment: Is this site identified on the City's Environmentally Sensitive Areas Map? No. Is an Environmental Checklist and Determination required for this application? Yes. Conditional Use Permits are not exempt from SEPA. A SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) issued February 2, 1999. No appeals were filed. Critical Areas Review: Critical Areas Review number: CA -98-288 Results of Critical Areas Review: A waiver from the requirement to complete a study was issued. Compliance with the Conditional Use Permit criteria: Comprehensive Plan: The proposed use must be consistent with the comprehensive plan. Applicant Response: The site is currently occupied by two single family residences. These residences will be demolished and removed and a new medical clinic facility of approximately 5,300 square feet (since revised to 4,600 square feet) will be constructed with associated parking and site improvements. To the north and east, there exist numerous medical and dental clinic facilities. Most of the lots are either vacant land, zoned commercial, or are chiropractic medical or dental facilities. Directly to the south of the property are properties that contain single family residences. In checking with the Comprehensive Plan designation for the property, it was found that the property along 76th Avenue West has been designated as Medical Highway 99 Activity Center Corridor. Proposing a medical clinic for this area would be consistent with other uses for properties that are located within the immediate vicinity of our site. Staff Response: The site is within the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Medical/Hwy 99 Activity Center for mixed use commercial. The proposed use would be consistent with the pattern of development evolving in the area. Several medical office complexes are located along 76th Avenue West. Zoning: The proposed use, and its location, is consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the purposes of the zone district in which the use is to be located, and that the proposed use will meet all applicable requirements of the zoning ordinance. Hearing Examiner Decision Case No. CU 98-208 Page 4 Applicant Response: At present, the property is zoned RM — Multiple Residential. Per Section 16.30.O10C, Primary Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit, Item 1: Offices, the clinic proposed would meet requirements under those primary uses requiring a Conditional Use Permit. In addition, several other Conditional Use Permits have already been granted for various medical, dental and chiropractic facilities that are located within the approximate vicinity of our site. The proposed project will meet all of the proposed and applicable requirements of the zoning ordinance for the RM- Multiple Residential zone. Staff Response: Office uses are allowed in the RM zone with an approved Conditional Use Permit. It appears the project will meet or can be conditioned to meet the minimum requirements of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Architectural Design Board review will also be required prior to building permit application. Not Detrimental: The use, as approved or conditionally approved, will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, and to nearby private property or improvements unless the use is a public necessity. Applicant Response: The use, as proposed, would not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or to the nearby private property. It is compatible with other surrounding uses that are similar in type of services offered, that have been located within the approximate vicinity of our site. Staff Response: The site is adjacent to a single family residence to the west. The proposal is to fence and landscape along that property line to buffer the neighborhood from the parking and structure. The medical building is only one-story tall, which will also lessen the impact to the neighbors. A traffic study has been provided that indicates the addition of the medical office would not significantly affect the level of service of the nearby intersections. Transferability: The Hearing Examiner shall determine whether the conditional use permit shall run with the land or shall be personal. The transferability of this conditional use permit should run with the land, as the owners intend to build a permanent medical facility on it. Staff Response: Staff concurs with the applicant's request to have the office use approval run with the property. III. COMMENTS: City staff provided the following input: a) Fire Department: A fire hydrant may be required dependent upon building type and fire flow. b) Engineering Division: The City Engineer must approve a site plan prepared by a licensed civil engineer with the building permit. Storm water runoff from the Hearing Examiner Decision Case No. CU 98-208 Page 5 proposed impervious surfaces must be contained and released in accordance with ECDC 18.30. Commercial businesses must have a 7 -foot wide sidewalk with curb and gutter along the adjacent right-of-way frontage per ECDC 18.90.030. DECISION Based upon the foregoing findings and conclusions, the request for a conditional use permit is approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. A lot line adjustment processed through the City must be completed prior to building permit issuance to remove the property line currently dividing the two homes. 2. The site plan and exterior elevations are subject to review and approval by the Architectural Design Board (ADB) prior to building permit submittal. 3. The applicant is responsible for obtaining the proper Architectural Design Board approvals and building permits necessary for construction. 4. Traffic mitigation in the amount of $3,808 is due prior to building permit issuance. 5. The Conditional Use Permit is valid for medical office use only and shall run with the land. Any proposed used other than medical offices may require new Conditional Use permit review and approval. Entered this 5th day of March, 1999, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearings Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of Edmonds. 0� OA—( Ron McConnell Hearing Examiner Appeals Section 20.105.040 provides for appeals of hearing examiner decisions. Appeals must be made in writing within 14 calendar days after the date of the decision. The request must cite specific reasons why the person appealing believes the decision to be wrong. Hearing Examiner Decision Case No. CU 98-208 Page 6 Lapse of Approval Section 20.05.020 states, "Unless the owner obtains a building permit,... within one year from the date of approval, the conditional use permit shall expire and be null and void, unless the owner files an application for an extension of the time before the expiration date." EXHIBIT: The following exhibit was offered and entered into the record. A. Planning Division Advisory Report PARTIES of RECORD: Peter Carletti Carletti Architects, P.S. 2204 Riverside Drive, Suite 270 Mount Vernon, WA 98273 Sound Urological Associates, P.S. 21600 Highway 99, Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds Planning Division