Loading...
P-08-16 Staff Report.pdf CITY OF EDMONDS 121 - 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 PLANNING DIVISION FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENATION To: Hearing Examiner From : Mike Clugston, AICP Planner Date: May 6, 2008 File: P-2008-16 EDMONDS ARBOR COURT TOWNHOMES 35-lot Formal Plat (Townhouse Subdivision) Hearing Date, Time and Place: May 15, 2008, at 3:00 PM Council Chambers, Public Safety Building th 250 – 5 Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020 Applicant: Steve Smith Development, LLC 9500 Roosevelt Way NE #300 Seattle, WA 98115 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................2 A.Application........................................................................................................................................2 B.Recommendation on Subdivision......................................................................................................2 II. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS...................................................................3 A.Compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance....................................................................................3 B.Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan........................................................................................5 C.Compliance with the Zoning Code....................................................................................................6 D.Compliance with the Flood Plain Management Provisions...............................................................6 E.Environmental Assessment................................................................................................................6 F.Critical Areas Review.......................................................................................................................6 G.Technical Comments.........................................................................................................................6 H. Public Comments...............................................................................................................................6 III. RECONSIDERATIONS AND APPEALS..........................................................................7 A.Request for Reconsideration.............................................................................................................7 B.Appeals.............................................................................................................................................7 C.Time Limits for Reconsideration and Appeals..................................................................................7 IV. LAPSE OF APPROVAL.....................................................................................................7 V. NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR..................................................................................7 VI. EXHIBITS............................................................................................................................7 VII. PARTIES OF RECORD......................................................................................................8 Edmonds Arbor Court Townhomes File No. P-08-16 Page 2 of 8 I.INTRODUCTION The applicant is proposing a 35-lot formal plat at parcels addressed as 23800 – 23824 Edmonds Way (Exhibit 2). The site is currently developed with six single-story duplex buildings for 12 total units. These will be removed and the site will be redeveloped into 35 townhouse units in 13 three-story buildings. The design of the project was reviewed and approved by the Architectural Design Board in file ADB-07-12 (Exhibits 3 and 4). Civil and structural improvements are currently under review with the associated building permit (BLD- 2007-1108). The civil improvements are generally described on the Preliminary Development Plan submitted with this application (Exhibit 5). Nothing in this proposed subdivision plat will change what the previously approved project will look like nor how it will be built. The City’s intent with the townhouse subdivision process is to facilitate design review and some site improvements prior to creating individual lots due to the close proximity of the structures, thereby minimizing the possibility that conditions in the field could require significant adjustment to interior lot lines. As a result, the townhouse subdivision is more of an administrative matter related to the future ownership of the individual townhouse units on the site. A.Application 1.Applicant: Steve Smith Development, LLC 2.Site Location: 23800 – 23824 Edmonds Way 3.Request: To divide an existing 55,502 square foot parcel into 35 fee-simple lots through a townhouse subdivision in a Multi-Family residential zone, RM-1.5. 4.Review Process: Staff reviews the application and produces a report for the Hearing Examiner who conducts a public hearing and makes the final decision on the preliminary plat. The final plat is approved by the City Council. 5.Major Issues: City of Edmonds Zoning Map, May 1, 2008 a.Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 16.30, RM-Multiple Residential b.Compliance with ECDC Title 18, Public Works Requirements c.Compliance with ECDC Chapter 20.15A, Environmental Review (SEPA) d.Compliance with ECDC Chapter 20.75, Subdivisions e.Compliance with ECDC Chapter 20.100, Hearing Examiner and City Council Review f.Compliance with ECDC Chapter 23.40, Environmentally Critical Areas B.Recommendation on Subdivision Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and Exhibits submitted with the application and during the comment period, the following is the recommendation of the City of Edmonds Planning Division: The subdivision as proposed should be APPROVED with the following conditions: 1.This application is subject to the applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance with the various provisions contained in these ordinances. EXHIBIT 1 P-08-16 Edmonds Arbor Court Townhomes File No. P-08-16 Page 3 of 8 2.Prior to approval of the final subdivision, the applicant must complete the following requirements: a)Complete the improvements found on the approved civil plans. b)Submit copies of the recording documents to the City for approval. These documents shall include on the plat all required information including, owner’s certification, hold harmless agreement, and staff approval blocks. c)Submit to the Planning Division a title report which verifies ownership of the subject property on the date that the property owner(s) sign the subdivision documents. 3.After recording the plat, the applicant must complete the following: a)Provide the City Planning Division with three copies of the recorded plat, with the recording number written on them. The subdivision will not be considered complete until this requirement is met. II.FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS A. Compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance Introduction 1. a.Setting: The 1.26 acre parcel is roughly triangular in shape and is bounded on the east by Edmonds th Way and on the north by 238 Street SW. The abutting parcel west is a single-family zoned parcel (RS-8) developed with condominiums. To the south are two RS-8 zoned and developed lots. There is an RM-1.5 zoned and developed parcel to the southeast. The site currently consists of six single-story duplex buildings (12 units total), which were built in 1960 according to the County Assessor’s records. b.Topography and Vegetation: The subject site is essentially flat. Vegetation on the parcel consists of typical residential landscaping, including grass, small trees, and shrubs. The site will be landscaped as approved by the Architectural Design Board (ADB-07-12). c.Lot Layout: The proposed lot layout is shown on the preliminary plat map (Exhibit 2). The ADB approved the design of the site and buildings in file ADB-07-12. The thirteen 2- and 3-unit structures and other site improvements will be constructed according to the building plans submitted in file BLD-2007-1108. Environmental Resources 2. a.Subdivisions should be designed to minimize significant adverse impacts where environmental resources exist (such as trees, streams, ravines, or wildlife habitats). There are no significant environmental resources on the site as identified through a waiver from critical area studies in file CRA-2007-0028. b.The proposal minimizes grading because the site is basically flat. c.No hazardous conditions, such as flood plains, steep slopes, or unstable soil or geologic conditions exist at this site. d.Drainage for the site is addressed through civil plans submitted by the applicant in support of building permit BLD-2007-1108. e.Views in this location are local. It does not appear that they will be negatively impacted by this proposal. EXHIBIT 1 P-08-16 Edmonds Arbor Court Townhomes File No. P-08-16 Page 4 of 8 Lot and Street Layout 3. a.This criterion requires staff to examine whether the proposed subdivision is consistent with the dimensional requirements of the zoning ordinance. This proposal is based on the concept of the townhouse subdivision. According to ECDC 21.100.040, a townhouse is a multiple dwelling unit meeting the following criteria: • No dwelling unit overlapping another vertically; • Common side walls joining units; • Not more than six dwelling units in one structure; • Coverage shall not exceed the aggregate coverage of the individual structures as defined in the zoning code; • Lot area per unit for purposes of subdivision may be as small as the coverage of the individual unit, so long as the overall density meets the zoning on the site. Portions of the site not subdivided for individual units shall be held in common by the owners of the individual units. b.Lot area and density: The table below lists the area for each lot. The entire project parcel comprises 55,502 square feet. In an RM-1.5 zone, a total of 37 units would be possible (55,502/1,500); 35 units are proposed. For this project, each lot contains an individual dwelling unit as well as some greenspace and some area used for access (Exhibit 2). Proposed Proposed Proposed Lot Area (sf) Lot Area (sf) Lot Area (sf) Lot 1 2,273 Lot 13 1,255 Lot 25 2,203 Lot 2 1,562 Lot 14 1,526 Lot 26 1,965 Lot 3 1,225 Lot 15 1,288 Lot 27 1,342 Lot 4 1,225 Lot 16 1,304 Lot 28 1,355 Lot 5 1,809 Lot 17 1,555 Lot 29 1,123 Lot 6 1,591 Lot 18 1,516 Lot 30 2,068 Lot 7 1,350 Lot 19 2,160 Lot 31 1,162 Lot 8 1,349 Lot 20 2,743 Lot 32 1,343 Lot 9 1,347 Lot 21 1,706 Lot 33 2,074 Lot 10 1,346 Lot 22 1,620 Lot 34 1,347 Lot 11 1,628 Lot 23 1,350 Lot 35 1,618 Lot 12 1,826 Lot 24 1,350 Setbacks and Coverage 4. a.Typical setbacks for lots in the RM-1.5 zone are: Street setback - 15 feet Side setback - 10 feet Rear setback - 15 feet Using the townhouse subdivision model, the exterior of the project site must meet the underlying zoning setbacks. In this case, the exterior setbacks conform with the underlying RM-1.5 requirements (Exhibit 2). With respect to internal setbacks, attached units will have lot lines along common walls whereas individual buildings are separated by a minimum of 10 feet. b.Lot Coverage: Because this is a townhouse subdivision, lot coverage cannot exceed the aggregate coverage of the individual structures on the site. In the RM-1.5 zone, maximum lot coverage is 45%. EXHIBIT 1 P-08-16 Edmonds Arbor Court Townhomes File No. P-08-16 Page 5 of 8 In this case, since the site is 55,502 square feet, the maximum lot coverage would be 24,976 square feet. The following table indicates the coverage in square feet for each building. Coverage (sf) 1,600 Building 1 1,600 Building 2 986 Building 3 1,836 Building 4 1,224 Building 5 1,717 Building 6 1,836 Building 7 986 Building 8 1,600 Building 9 1,600 Building 10 1,600 Building 11 986 Building 12 1,600 Building 13 The total coverage of the buildings is 19,171 square feet yielding a lot coverage for the entire site of approximately 34.5%. Dedications 5. a.No dedications were required as part of this subdivision. Improvements 6. a.See the enclosed Preliminary Development Plan (Exhibit 5). The civil improvements on the site are currently under review with the associated building permit (BLD-2007-1108). Final plat approval should be conditioned on the completion of the civil improvements. Flood Plain Management 7. a.This project is not located in a FEMA designated Flood Plain. B.Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan 1.Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies: The Comprehensive Plan has the following stated goals and policies for Residential Development that apply to this project. Residential Development B. Goal. High quality residential development which is appropriate to the diverse lifestyle of Edmonds residents should be maintained and promoted. The options available to the City to influence the quality of housing for all citizens should be approached realistically in balancing economic and aesthetic consideration, in accordance with the following policies: C. Goal. A broad range of housing types and densities should be encouraged in order that a choice of housing will be available to all Edmonds residents, in accordance with the following policies: C.2. Multiple. The City’s development policies encourage high quality site and building design to promote coordinated development and to preserve the trees, EXHIBIT 1 P-08-16 Edmonds Arbor Court Townhomes File No. P-08-16 Page 6 of 8 topography and other natural features of the site. Stereotyped, boxy multiple unit residential (RM) buildings are to be avoided. The City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan, pages 18-23, reviews the land capacity of the City and addresses the City’s strategy for meeting the population and employment targets set by the County and the State. The preferred strategy is termed ‘Designed Infill’. Due to the overwhelming feedback to the City from its citizens which stated generally “Preserve the single family character of Edmonds. Don’t rezone areas to higher densities.” the City adopted this strategy. At its core, Designed Infill encourages infill development under the existing densities with design controls to ensure that new development will fit into existing neighborhoods. This proposal involves removing an existing 12-unit multifamily complex in the RM-1.5 zone and replacing it with a 35-unit complex in order to nearly maximize the underlying density of the zone. For this reason, and because the site is already well-served by existing infrastructure, the proposal meets requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. C.Compliance with the Zoning Code 1.The proposed subdivision must comply with the provisions of the Zoning Code. See Sections II.A.3 and II.A.4 above. D.Compliance with the Flood Plain Management Provisions 1.The proposed project is not located in a Flood Plain. E.Environmental Assessment 1.Is this site within a shoreline area (within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of the Puget Sound)? No. 2.Is an Environmental Checklist Required for this application? Yes. A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued as part of the Architectural Design Board review of the project (ADB-07-12) because more than four units were being proposed. That decision was adopted as part of this formal subdivision application (Exhibit 6). F.Critical Areas Review 1.Critical Areas Review number: CRA-2007-0028. Results of Critical Areas Reviews: The property does not appear to contain any critical areas as defined by ECDC 23.40. As a result, a waiver from the requirement to complete a study was issued. G.Technical Comments The Engineering Division and the Fire, Public Works, and Parks and Recreation Departments have reviewed this application as well as the related design board application and building permit. Throughout the process, the Fire Department and others had a concern regarding the lack of overflow parking being provided onsite in anticipation that guests will then park in the fire lanes. Unfortunately, the Edmonds Community Development Code currently does not require overflow or guest parking to be provided on multifamily sites. It is anticipated this inadequacy in the code will be addressed during the current code rewrite process. In the short term, the fire lanes will be marked conspicuously as ‘No Parking’ areas. H.Public Comments No public comments were received regarding this subdivision application. EXHIBIT 1 P-08-16 Edmonds Arbor Court Townhomes File No. P-08-16 Page 7 of 8 III.RECONSIDERATIONS AND APPEALS The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing reconsiderations and appeals. Any person wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should contact the Planning Department for further procedural information. A.Request for Reconsideration Section 20.100.010.G allows for the Hearing Examiner to reconsider his/her decision if a written request is filed within ten (10) working days of the posting of the notice required by this section. The reconsideration request must cite specific references to the findings and/or the criteria contained in the ordinances governing the type of application being reviewed. B.Appeals Section 20.105.020 describes how appeals of a Hearing Examiner decision shall be made. The appeal shall be made in writing and shall include: the decision being appealed along with the name of the project, the date of the decision, the name of the individual or group appealing the decision, their interest in the matter, and reasons why the appellant believes the decision to be wrong. The appeal must be filed with the Community Development Director within fourteen (14) calendar days after the date of the decision being appealed. C.Time Limits for Reconsideration and Appeals The time limits for Reconsiderations and Appeals run concurrently. If a request for a reconsideration is filed before the time limit for filing an appeal has expired, the time “clock” for filing an appeal is stopped until a decision on the reconsideration request is completed. Once the staff has issued his/her decision on the reconsideration request, the time clock for filing an appeal continues from the point it was stopped. For example, if a request is filed on day 5 of the appeal period, an individual would have 9 more days in which to file an appeal after the staff issues their decision on the reconsideration request. IV.LAPSE OF APPROVAL Section 20.75.100 states, “Approval of a preliminary plat or preliminary short plat shall expire and have no further validity at the end of five years, unless the applicant has acquired final plat or final short plat approval within the five-year period.” V.NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR The property owner may, as a result of the decision rendered by the staff, request a change in the valuation of the property by the Snohomish County Assessor’s Office. VI.EXHIBITS 1.Staff Report 2.Preliminary Plat Map 3.Staff report ADB-07-12, dated May 30, 2007 4.ADB meeting minutes synopsis, dated June 6, 2007 5.Preliminary Development Plan 6.Environmental Adoption Notice, dated April 23, 2008 7.Affidavits of Publication, Posting and Mailing EXHIBIT 1 P-08-16 Edmonds Arbor Court Townhomes File No. P-08-16 Page 8 of 8 VII.PARTIES OF RECORD Planning Division Northwest Townhomes, LLC Engineering Division th 1316 NE 80 Street, #203 Fire Department Seattle, WA 98115 Public Works Department Jean Morgan Steve Smith Development, LLC Morgan Design Group, LLC 9500 Roosevelt Way NE, #300 11207 Fremont Avenue N Seattle, WA 98115 Seattle, WA 98133 EXHIBIT 1 P-08-16