PLN-2009-0041 Staff Report with attachments.pdfCITY OF EDMONDS
121 - 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020
PLANNING DIVISION
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION
To: File PLN-2009-0041
From:
Mike Clugston, AICP
Planner
Date: April 13, 2010
File: PLN-2009-0041
Applicant: Redwood, LLC (rep. Mike Smith of LSA, Inc.)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
I.
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 2
A. Application....................................................................................................................................... 2
B. Decision 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. Analysis of Modification Request..................................................................................................... 7
D. Compliance with the Zoning Code.................................................................................................... 7
E. Compliance with the Flood Plain Management Provisions... ............................................................ 7
F. Environmental Assessment............................................................................................................... 7
G. Critical Areas Review....................................................................................................................... 8
H. Comments......................................................................................................................................... 8
III.
APPEAL.............................................................................................................................. 9
IV.
LAPSE OF APPROVAL.....................................................................................................9
V.
NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR..................................................................................9
VI.
ATTACHMENTS...............................................................................................................9
VII.
PARTIES OF RECORD......................................................................................................9
Redwood Shod Plat
File No. S-09-41
Page 2 of 9
I. INTRODUCTION
The applicant is proposing a two -lot short plat of the parcel addressed as 7631 201" Street SW (Attachment
1). The site is located in a Single -Family Residential (RS-8) zone that allows lots with a minimum area of
8,000 square feet. The proposed lot layout is shown on the subdivision map (Attachment 2) and the
preliminary development plan is shown on Attachment 3. The existing house is proposed to remain on Lot 1.
In order to retain the house, two modifications are requested: 1) a reduced rear setback on Lot 1 of 8.5 feet,
and 2) a reduced lot width of 60.5 feet for Lot 2 (Attachment 4).
A. Application
1. Applicant: Redwood, LLC
2. Site Location: 7631 201s` Street
SW
3. Request: To divide one lot with
a total area of 17,078 square feet
into two lots in a Single -Family
Residential (RS-8) zone.
4. Review Process: Short plats are
Type II permits. Following a
public comment period, the
Director makes an administrative
decision.
5. Major Issues:
a. Compliance with Edmonds
Community Development
Code (ECDC) Section
16.20.030, site
development standards for
the RS-8 zone.
b. Compliance with ECDC
Title 18, public works
requirements.
c. Compliance ECDC Chapter
20.01,
development permit review
200TH S
i •
•
201ST ST SW
RM-3
202ND ST S W W
City of Edmonds Zoning Map, November 18, 2008
requirements.
d. Compliance with ECDC Chapter 20.75, subdivision requirements.
Note: All code sections referenced in this report can be viewed via the City's website at
www.ci.edmonds.wa.us.
B. Decision on Subdivision
Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and Attachments submitted with the application
and during the comment period, the following is the decision of the City of Edmonds Planning
Division:
The subdivision as proposed is APPROVED with the following conditions:
1. The existing shed on proposed Lot 2 shall be removed.
2. The existing carport shall be removed in its entirety or reduced in size so that the
remaining portion meets the reduced 8.5' rear setback which is approved with the
associated modification request (see Section I.Q. A building permit is required for the
removal of any part of the carport.
3. The City encourages retention of the four fir trees at the northeastern corner of proposed
Lot 2. Civil improvements and any future house on that lot should be located to safely
Redwood Short Plat
File No. S-09-41
Page 3 of 9
allow for their retention according to the performance standards found in ECDC
18.45.050.
4. Prior to recording, the applicant must complete the following requirements:
a) Civil plans must be approved or a bond must be posted for their completion. In
completing the civil plans, the applicant must address the Engineering Division
conditions listed "Required Prior to Recording" in Attachment 7.
b) Make the following revisions to the plat:
(1) Add to the face of the Plat: "Conditions of approval must be met and can be
found in the final approval for the short subdivision located in File PLN-
2009-0041 in the City of Edmonds Planning Division."
(2) Include on the plat all required information, including owner's certification,
hold harmless agreement, and staff s approval block.
(3) If setbacks are to be included on the plat, add the following statement to the
face of the plat: "Setbacks shown are for reference only and vest no right."
c) Make sure all documents to be recorded meet the Snohomish County Auditor's
requirements for recording, including all signatures in black ink.
d) Submit two copies of the documents to be recorded for the Planning Division and
Engineering Division's approval. Once approved, the applicant must record the
documents with Snohomish County Auditor's office.
e) Submit an updated copy of the title report (short plat certificate) with the documents
proposed to be recorded.
5. 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 City will not consider the subdivision
complete until this is done.
b) Complete the Engineering Division conditions listed "Required with Building
Permit" on Attachment 7.
C. Decision on Modification Requests
Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, and Attachments submitted with the application
and during the comment period, the following is the decision of the City of Edmonds Planning
Division:
The modification requests to reduce the minimum required rear setback on Lot 1 from 15
feet to 8.5 feet and to reduce the minimum required lot width of Lot 2 from 70 feet to 60.5
feet are APPROVED. The reduced 8.5 foot rear setback on Lot 1 applies to the existing
structures; any new structures built on Lot 1 shall comply with all regular zoning
requirements.
II. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
A. Compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance
Introduction
Setting
The subject property at 7631 201" Street SW is located in the Single -Family Residential (RS-
8) zone and is surrounded by similarly zoned and developed lots on the north, south and west
(Attachment 2). To the east along 76`h Avenue West, are parcels zoned and developed
Multifamily Residential (RM-3.0).
Redwood Short Plat
File No, S-09-41
Page 4 of 9
b. Topography and Vegetation
The subject site is fairly level with a small slope from the middle of the parcel off to the
northwest. Vegetation consists of typical urban -residential landscaping, including grass, trees
and shrubs.
C. Lot Lam
The proposed lot layout is shown on the preliminary plat map (Attachment 2). Proposed Lot
2 will be a flag lot. Both lots will gain direct access from 201" Street SW.
2. Environmental Criteria
a. Section 20.75.085 of the Edmonds Community Development Code states that where
environmental resources exist such as trees, streams, ravines or wildlife, the proposal shall be
designed to minimize significant adverse impacts to the resources. There are a handful of
large trees toward the northeast corner of proposed Lot 2 that the applicant has indicated will
be removed. The City promotes the retention of as many trees as practicable and encourages
the placement of the eventual building area more toward the middle of Lot 2 with the goal of
retaining as many of the trees as possible. Any trees retained must be protected during
development in accordance with the performance standards in ECDC 18.45.050.
b. The proposal shall be designed to minimize grading by using shared driveways and by
relating street, house site and lot placement to the existing topography. The short plat
proposes approximately 800 cubic yards of grading; as a result, a SEPA threshold
determination is required (see Section II.F. of this report). Use of shared drives is impractical
in this case since the existing house on Lot 1 will remain and the existing driveway is not
well -located to be shared with the new access (Attachment 3).
C. A subdivision of hazardous land (flood plains, steep slopes, unstable soils or geologic
conditions) shall be denied unless the condition can be permanently corrected. No hazardous
conditions, such as flood plains, steep slopes, or unstable soil or geologic conditions exist at
this site (see Section II.G. of this report).
d. A drainage plan must be submitted to the Engineering Division when a building permit is
applied for on this site. Any proposed development on the site must be designed to meet
current code and minimize off -site drainage impacts. All new impervious surfaces must be
connected to an on -site detention system.
C. Views in this location are local. It does not appear that they will be negatively impacted by
this proposal.
3. Lot and Street Layout
This criterion requires staff to examine whether the proposed subdivision is consistent with
the dimensional requirements of the zoning ordinance and that the lots would ultimately be
buildable. Based on a review of the project and the analysis in this section, a two -lot short
plat is a reasonable use of the property.
b. Lot sizes and dimensions:
Lot Area:
Required
Lot Area
Proposed
Gross s . ft
Proposed
Nets . ft
Lot 1
8,000
8,032
8,032
Lot 2
8,000
9,046
9,046
Lot Width:
The required lot width in the RS-8 zone is 70 feet. Proposed Lot 1 meets this requirement.
Lot 2 is subject to a modification request to have a lot width of 60.5 feet in order to arrange
the lots in such a way as to retain the existing house on Lot 1.
Redwood Short Plat
File No. S-09-41
Page 5 of 9
Safe Walk provisions:
The subject parcel is primarily served by three area schools: College Place Elementary,
College Place Middle School, and Edmonds-Woodway High School. According to
information available on the Edmonds School District website:
http://webquery.edmonds.wednet.edu/edulog/webquery/ (accessed April 12, 2010), all three
schools are within walking distance of the site. While there are currently no sidewalks on
201" Street (except for that installed as part of this subdivision), sidewalks do exist on both
sides of 76 Avenue West and several signaled cross -walks are also available for crossing 761h
Avenue West and 212`h Street SW.
4. Setbacks and Lot Coverage
a. In order to approve a subdivision, the proposal must meet all requirements of the zoning
ordinance, or a modification must be approved. Based on the development standards for the
RS-8 zone, setbacks for the lots should be as follows:
Lot 1: Street Setback (25 feet) from the south property line adjacent to 20151 Street
Side Setback (7.5 feet) from the west and east property lines
Rear Setback (15 feet) from the north property line
Lot 2: All side setbacks (7.5 feet)
Existing Structures / Encroachments: The existing 1,144 square foot house on Lot 1 will
remain. An existing shed on proposed Lot 2 must be removed. An existing 240 square foot
carport on Lot I is also proposed to be removed as indicated on Attachment 3. In order to
retain the existing house, a modification request was submitted to employ a reduced 8.5-foot
rear setback on Lot I instead of the normally required 15 feet. It appears that the existing
house also encroaches into the 25-foot street property line setback at 212`h Street SW.
Corner Lots: Neither of the proposed lots are considered corner lots.
b. Flag or Interior lot determination: Lot 2 is a flag lot.
Lot Coverage of Existing Buildings on Proposed Lots: The house on Lot 1 will remain and
cover approximately 14% of the lot. When the shed is removed from Lot 2, there will be no
structures on that lot and therefore it will have zero lot coverage. Any future buildings or
structures will be allowed to cover no more than 35% of either lot.
5. Dedications
a. No dedications were required for the proposed subdivision.
6. Improvements
a. The applicant had requested a waiver of the requirement to install frontage improvements
(Attachment 5). This waiver was denied (Attachment 6). The applicant will be required to
make all the improvements noted in the approved Engineering Requirements (Attachment 7).
7. Flood Plain Management
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
Redwood Short Plat
File No. S-09-41
Page 6 of 9
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:
B.1. Encourage those building custom homes to design and construct
homes with architectural lines which enable them to harmonize with
the surroundings, adding to the community identity and desirability.
B.3. Minimize encroachment on view of existing homes by new
construction or additions to existing structures.
B.4. Support retention and rehabilitation of older housing within Edmonds
whenever it is economically feasible.
B.S. Protect residential areas from incompatible land uses through the
careful control of other types of development and expansion based
upon the following principles:
B.S.d. Private property must be protected from adverse
environmental impacts of development including noise,
drainage, traffic, slides, etc.
B.6. Require that new residential development be compatible with the
natural constraints of slopes, soils, geology, vegetation and drainage.
2. Compliance with the Residential Development goals and policies. The proposal involves
creating a new single family building lot and retaining an existing house on a separate lot. This
action increases the potential amount of housing within the City while retaining older housing at
the same time. As a result, this proposal meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
C. Analysis of Modification Requests
1. The applicant has requested two modifications as allowed in ECDC 20.75.075 in order to retain
the existing house on Lot 1: 1) a reduced rear setback on Lot 1 of 8.5 feet, and 2) a reduced lot
width of 60.5 feet for Lot 2. All criteria of a variance must be met if the requested modifications
are to be approved. These criteria are:
a. Special Circumstances:
That, because of special circumstances relating to the property, strict enforcement of the
zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other
properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. Special Circumstances should not be
predicated upon any factor personal to the owner such as age or disability, extra expense
which may be necessary to comply with the zoning ordinance, the ability to secure a scenic
view, the ability to make more profitable use of the property, nor any factor resulting from
the action of the owner or any past owner of the same property.
b. Special Privilege:
That the approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in
comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning.
C. Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance:
That the approval of the variance will be consistent with the intent of the comprehensive plan,
the zoning ordinance and the zoning district in which the property is located.
d. Not Detrimental:
That the variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be significantly detrimental
to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the
vicinity and the same zone.
C. Minimum Variance:
That the approved variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner the rights enjoyed
by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning.
Redwood Short Plat
File No. S-09-41
Page 7 of 9
2. The applicant submitted a narrative in support of the modification requests (see Attachment 4).
3. Conclusions:
a. Because the applicant wishes to retain the existing house on Lot 1, a special circumstance
does exist. As noted previously, the Comprehensive Plan encourages retaining existing
housing stock and the only way to subdivide this parcel and retain the house is through
modification relief.
b. The applicant would not be receiving special privilege if the modification requests were
approved. The parcel could be subdivided into two lots by complying with the regular
zoning standards for lot width, setbacks and the like. However, in order to retain the existing
house, the two modifications are being requested.
C. As mentioned previously, the Comprehensive Plan encourages the creation of new single
family dwelling opportunities as well as the retention of existing housing. This project, with
the modification requests, satisfies both of those goals. With the noted modification requests,
the proposal would satisfy the requirements of the zoning ordinance.
d. The proposed modification would not be detrimental to property owners in the immediate
vicinity. Zoning remains single-family residential (RS-8) — no density increase is permitted.
The only criteria changing are a reduced rear setback for Lot 1 (8.5' from 15') and a
narrower Lot 2 (60.5' instead of 70') in order to retain the existing house. In each case, all
other single family zoning requirements apply and any new construction that occurs on either
lot must meet those requirements. Specifically, the reduced rear setback on Lot 1 applies
only to the existing house itself, not any new additions or alterations like that possibly
envisioned with the `proposed garage' indicated on the western portion of Lot 1 (Attachment
3). If the house on Lot 1 is ever removed, the new construction will have to meet all
applicable zoning requirements at that time — the 8.5' rear setback for Lot 1 would become
the customary rear setback for the zone.
The two modifications are the minimum necessary needed to retain the existing house while
simultaneously creating a new building lot. Lot 2 could be wider but that would further
reduce the rear setback of Lot 1. Likewise, Lot 1 could have the 15' rear setback required by
the zone but Lot 2 would then be 8.5' feet narrower than the proposed 60.5'. As mentioned
above, the reduced rear setback on Lot I applies only to the existing house itself; any new
construction must meet the underlying requirements of the RS-8 zone.
D. Compliance with the Zoning Code
1. The proposed subdivision must comply with the provisions of the Zoning Code. See Sections
II.A.3, II.A.4 and II.0 of this document.
E. Compliance with the Flood Plain Management Provisions
The proposed project is not located in a Flood Plain.
F. 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. Since approximately 800 cubic
yards of grading will be done at the site, an Environmental Checklist was required. The City
issued a Determination of Nonsignificance for the proposed grading on July 28, 2009 (Attachment
8). No appeals to this decision were received.
The Snohomish County PUD offered comment (Attachment 9) and stated that while the PUD has
adequate system capacity, the cost of any work at the site is the responsibility of the applicant.
Redwood Short Plat
File No. S-09-41
Page 8 of 9
The Edmonds School District responded (Attachment 10) and indicated that due to budget and
staffing issues, they will no longer review and comment on individual development applications.
However, safe walk provisions were analyzed separately in this report (see Section II.A.3.c).
G. Critical Areas Review
Critical Areas Review number: CRA-2009-0039 (Attachment 11).
Results of Critical Areas Review: The property does not appear to contain any critical areas as
defined by ECDC 23.40. As a result, a waiver from study requirements was issued.
H. Comments
Three public comment letters was received during the review of this proposal which is included as
Attachments 12-14.
1. Louise Crosby (7624 2001h Street SW) had concerns about the addition of a multiple family
dwelling within 7 feet of her lot and was worried about construction debris affecting her
flower beds and the existing trees on the site.
Staff Response: As was noted earlier in this report, the lot being subdivided is single-family
residential and it will stay that way; the parcel is not being rezoned to multifamily. A single
new building lot will be created where one single family house can be built. Whatever house
is built there must meet the zoning requirements for setbacks, height, lot coverage and the like
that apply to the RS-8 zone. In this case, the proposed lot is considered a flag lot and will
have 7.5' property line setbacks on all sides just as any other flag created lot in the RS-8 zone.
With respect to construction debris and other off -site impacts, there are numerous
performance standards that must be met in any type of development in Edmonds. Examples of
such restrictions include those on noise, light, dust and dirt, and open storage. Stormwater
runoff is specifically managed both during and after development through best management
practices required by ECDC Chapter 18.30 — Stormwater Management. As an example, all
new impervious surfaces created during the development process (subdivision and any new
house) must be tied to a detention system.
2. Karl and Linda Borchardt (7710 200`h Street SW) listed several concerns regarding the
proposed short plat: loss of privacy or `breathing space', reduction in lot width/setbacks,
noise, drainage, and buildability.
Staff Response: The applicant is proposing to create two smaller lots out of one larger lot. As
noted in the modification discussion earlier in this report, the subdivision could occur with or
without the modifications being proposed — without the modifications, the lots might take a
slightly different shape but likely result in the loss of the existing house. By using
modifications, the existing house on the parcel can be retained and a new building lot can be
created. With the exception of being slightly narrower than a regular RS-8 building lot,
proposed Lot 2 must meet all other applicable zoning criteria with respect to setbacks, height,
lot coverage, and the like. All flag lots in the RS-8 zone have 7.5' property line setbacks on
all sides and provide the same level of privacy or `breathing space' as the proposed short plat.
The proposed location of a house on Lot 2, as shown on the Preliminary Development Plan
(Attachment 3) is simply to indicate that the lot is buildable and does not mean a house will
actually go in that location. A building permit must be approved by the City before a structure
could be built on the new parcel. The building permit is reviewed, in part, to ensure all
applicable zoning requirements are satisfied.
3. Lisa Lundquist (7704 200`h Street SW) was concerned about how the proposed subdivision
would affect her organic vegetable garden and noted that the removal of all the trees from Lot
2 would negatively impact her garden.
Staff Response: As mentioned in Staff Response # 1 above, stormwater impacts both during
and after development are managed through the implementation of best management practices
found in ECDC 18.30. With respect to the possible loss of tree cover at the site, the City can
Redwood Short Plat
File No. S-09-41
Page 9 of 9
currently only encourage an applicant to retain trees during the subdivision process. Unless
the project, or a portion of it, is located in a critical area, there is no code requirement for tree
retention except that it may only occur during the development process per ECDC 18.45.
III. APPEAL
A party of record may submit a written appeal of a Type II decision within 14 days of the date of issuance
of the decision. The appeal will be heard at an open record public hearing before the Hearing Examiner
according to the requirements of ECDC Chapter 20.06 and Section 20.07.004.
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. ATTACHMENTS
1. Land Use Application, dated July 9, 2009
2. Preliminary Plat Map, received July 9, 2009
3. Preliminary Development Plan, received July 9, 2009
4. Applicant's Modification Request
5. Applicant's Request for Waiver of Frontage Improvements
6. Engineering Denial of Waiver of Frontage Improvements
7. Engineering Requirements
8. SEPA Determination
9. SEPA Comment letter from Snohomish County PUD, dated August 10, 2009
10. SEPA Comment letter fi•om Edmonds School District, dated August 7, 2009
11. Critical Areas Determination (CRA-2009-0039), dated May 1, 2009
12. Comment letter from Louise Crosby, dated August 6, 2009
13. Comment letter from Karl and Linda Borchardt, dated August 6, 2009
14. Comment letter from Lisa Lundquist, dated August 6, 2009
VII. PARTIES OF RECORD
Redwood, LLC
PO Box 81144
Seattle, WA 98108
LSA, Inc.
Attn: S. Michael Smith
19217 36`h Avenue W, 9106
Lynnwood, WA 98036
Planning Division
Engineering Division
City of Lynnwood
Attn: Senior Planner
PO Box 5008
Lynnwood, WA 98046
Louise Crosby Karl and Linda Borchardt
7624 200`h Street SW 7710 2001h Street SW
Edmonds, WA 98026 Edmonds, WA 98026
Lisa Lundquist
7704 200`h Street SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
city of edmonds
land use application
JUL - 9 2009
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
COUNTER
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW ' OFFICIAL USE ONLY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 0/ �r �Oc Q n
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FILE #, 4- l �q ZONE /C S— S
HOME OCCUPATION DATE % REC'D BY AG �S7
FORMAL SUBDIVISION FEE ?_ 6 -7 0 -o (0 RECEIPT #
SHORT SUBDIVISION x
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT HEARING DATE
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT HE TA PB ADB CC
OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT
STREET VACATION
REZONE
SHORELINE PERMIT
VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION
OTHER: MOp(P(cht(OnI `I- S/917
PROPERTY ADDRESSOR LOCATION 7631 - 201st St. SW
PROJECT NAME (IF APPLICABLE) Redwood Short Plat
PROPERTY OWNER Redwood, LLC PHONE# 206-930-0123
ADDRESS P.O. Box 81144
E-MAIL ADDRESS FAX #
TAX ACCOUNT# 27041900106200 SEC. 19 TWP. 27 RNG. 4
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED USE Two -lot short plat, retaining an existing home.
A lot -width variance is proposed - though the site includes sufficient area,
the existing home does not allow code -standard 70-foot width in any configuration.
Such request is included with this package.
APPLICANT Redwood, LLC PHONE# 206-930-0123
ADDRESS P.O. Box 81144, Seattle WA 98108
E-MAIL ADDRESS FAX #
CONTACT PERSON/AGENTLSA, Inc. Attn: S. Michael SmithpHONE# 425-775-1591
ADDRESS 19217 - 36th Ave. W #106
E-MAIL ADDRESS michaels@lsaengineering.com FAX#
The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application
agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including
reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading,
inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees.
By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and that I am authorized to file this application on the behalf of the owner as listed below.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT W tyl DATE -7 — Z — 09
Property Owner's Authorization
By my signature, I certify that I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use
application, and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject
property for the purposes inspection and posting atten ant t his application.
SIGNATURE OF OWNE DATE !� _2 -U
This application form s revised on 1/27/00. To verify whether it is still current, call (425) 771-0220.
L:\LIBRARYPLANNING\Forms & Handouts\Public Handouts\Land Use Application.doc
Attachment 1
PLN-2009-0041
Iva. • uo„ eoeaawr
AibA ,u,0aasr
wr I1r19E aoser
RS-8 '
N 90WOO' E
Pt
i� i oc slm .
T]Wi9001Rq.100
vrn �uol. ,InouA9r
•
- -: ,•w. 104'
Ie:.°:_:., 0.5 REARS I
EX HOUSE
F.F.
F.F424.E
kon SF
R
� FRa ff
K. w uLUTr rArwr
I
6'114tL(]) . IYA9, it
--------s--_^
9«,Gd0I06[W
rIHERI LT16TM _ ;
--
OIr OF NYltl6
1
-
N 90'DCVW W
�_
arc a�'mua�cs
t noluoclanro'�zRol,aool0elo0
n9xFao,ae3ao
�sS$�
� � a � Vw anA
II
reins
runt�q�
BENCH MARK
CITY OF LYNNWOOD BENCH MARK NO. 79. TOP OF NORTHWEST ANCHOR
BOLT ON TRAFFIC SIGNAL BASE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
THE INTERSECnON OF 76th AVENUE W AND 196th STREET S.W.
ELEVATION :40,143
DATUM : NAVD 1929 (MEAN SEA LEVEL)
IBM : EX CASED CONCRETE MONUMENT WITH Y IN 2' BRASS DISK
ELEVATION : 428.15
UTIUTY NOTE
THE LOCATION OF UTIUTIES SHOWN HEREON IS APPRO)OMATE ONLY AND
THIS MAP DOES NOT PURPORT TO SHOW THE LOCATION OF ALL UnUTIES
PRONDING SIER`ACE TO OR IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROPERTY. THE OWNER
SHOULD CONTACT ALL UTIUTY PURVEYORS IN THE AREA TO ASCERTAIN
THE LOCATION OF ALL UTILITIES.
BASIS OF BEARINGS
200th STREET S.W.
•
tl®Nlnoai O I 2
R8 8 I T I s<o i Pr�4
��� R1p10>A0100�91
E,. 3-1/2- BRASS
_ DISK WITH -%'.
HE CORNER OF
SE1/4,i
NEt/4 SEC. 19-27-4
-_s-I 30'
1., e9i
270.00' .
400.00 _
201at STREET S.W.
; Rnlmrolaooeot
i Hettnal rer 1T i 1
9 I 2
THE CENTERUNE OF 761h AVENUE W. ASSUMED NORTH REFER TO PLAT OF
SURVEY RECORDED IN VOLUME 20 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 260. RECORDS OF
SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ALL THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF
SECTION 19. TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., RECORDS OFSNCHOMISH
COUNTY, WASHINGTON. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS
BEGINNING AT A POINT 142.1 FEET SOUTH AND 270.0 FEET WEST OF THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER
THENCE WEST 130 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH TO THE NORTH UNE OF DALE STREET(VACATED);
THENCE EAST, ALONG SAD NORTH UNE 130 FEET;
THENCE NORTH TO THE TRUE POINT POINT OF BEGINNING.
SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS OF RECORD
NOTES
3
D
T
70
n
n
30'
IBM - EX CASED
CONCRETE
MCHUMENT WIN ')C
IN Y BRASS DISK
ELEVATION 428.15'
SO' �
J
Q,
I
1
I
1
1
I,1
1 1
VICINITY MAP
NO SCALE
SANITARY SEWER
OWNER/DEVELOPER
CITY OF EDMONDS
REDWOOD LLO
W E
WATER SERVICE
P.O. BO%81144
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98108
CONTACT: PENNY WHITEHEAD
CITY OF EDMONDS
S
ENGINEER/SURVEYOR
SCALE : 1•-30'
ELECTRICITY
CCNTACn S. MICHAEL SMITH
P.U.D. NO. i OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY
LOVELL-SAUERLAND k ASSWAMr, INC.
0' 15, 30' 45' Be
19400-33RO AVENUE W. SUITE 200
LYNNWOOD, WA. 98036
_
GAS
PH.: 425-775-1591
PUGET SOUND ENERGY SERVICES
PROPERTY DATA
SCHOOLS
ZONING
EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 15
RNO CHANCE PROPOSED)
POLICE PROTECTION
783�$201ST STREET S.W.
EDMONDS. WA. 98020
CITY OF EDMONDS
AREA
17,078 S.F. OR 0.392 AC.
FIRE PROTECTION
TA%. ACCT NUMBER
CITY OF EDMONDS
27041900106200
TELEPHONE
VEtIZON NORTHWEST, INC.
1. THE EOSTI NG CARPORT AND SHED WILL BE REMOVED.
2. PROPERTY ADDRESS 7631 - 201rt STREET S.W.
3. NO CRITICAL AREAS ON SITE SEE CRITICAL AREAS WAVER - FILE NO. CRA20090039
4. REFER TO PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PUN FOR GRADING QUANTITIES
S AU. TREES ON LOT 2 TO BE REMOVED
13
PRELIMINARY SHORT PLAT
�yy
FOR
REvo= LLC
IN SE1/4, NE1/4, SECTION 19, T.27 N., R.4 E., W.M.
CITY OF EDMONDS
SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON
T. T+P6
h44 d�rf
Lovell-SauerlR
Attachment 2
•19217 38th ATeau6 W...SUtte 108, Lynnwood. IT, PLR-2009-0041
DRAU �® DISS iA 9(
S.M.S. J.T.T. 5-29-09 1 -
RS-8 '
N 90D000' E 130.00'-
�tH�11��rY
e404A¢E iRFw
2 3
-y �
IX.A,A,x�;'eaxa�i
a xo«Fx.
R� a
I l5ei go
II a EX. HOUSE
a I FF. 424.4
8.032 SF
e• SFxA swWa +
I ) � _--__
elmui(I)
Asn
xETr fa U1MY FASnU.T
fi
I �
�.:,.
-
EX. C.B.-13
L.re oxa.os
Ow
_
e s F.,c
yaeD—
200th STREET S.W.
EX. 3-1/2- BRASS
_ DISX WITH -X-,
NE CORNER OF SEt/4. I 1
NEt/4 SEC. 19-27-4
i�x�utr2¢
I
xos�'s
I
x soarao• F
( .�.
L:j
RS 8 7 xa„ A,.F4
I
x"RA--lir
—1-----------�1L_.-----------j
3• I
w Oxe n E� n
-- EX. C.8. 41.1
TBM - EX. CASED
CONCRETE
MONUMENT WTH -%
ia¢6 13•Y
P" .........
201st STREET S.W.
W 2- BRASS DISK
ELEVATION 42&15'
----- ---
' f:E' xFsi in ' ' 1
0
z
196TH ST SW
Q PUGET DR
S.R. 524
JGASPERS
200TH ST SW
SITE
2 ST
201ST ST SW
;
Ty 'Pi
MAIN ST a
,
4J'
Q,e- o w
BOHD 212TH ST.
S... N
eo
220TH ST SW
;
F
o(,
ay O
Dry
j s,V't
4
4
I
$r
VICINITY MAP
NO SCALE
w N E
BASIS OF BEARINGS
5
CENTERUNE OF 76th AVENUE W. ASSUMED NORTH REFER TO PLAT OF
SCALE : 1•-30'
RVEY RECORDED IN VOLUME 20 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 260. RECORDS OF
SUE
SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
0' 15, 30' 46
60'
BENCH MARK
CITY OF LYNNWOOD BENCH MARK NO. 79. TOP OF NORTHWEST ANCHOR
BOLT ON TRAFFIC SIGNAL BASE LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
THE INTERSECTION OF 761h AVENUE W AND 19611, STREET S.W.
ELEVATION :403.43
DATUM : NANO 1929 (MEAN SEA LEVEL)
DIM : EX CASED CONCRETE MONUMENT WITH 'X IN 2- BRASS OISK
ELEVATION : 428.15
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ALL THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST GUARDER OF THE NORTHEAST O/ARTER OF
SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH
COUNTY, WASHINGTON. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
SEONNiNG AT A PO4T 142.1 FEET SOUTH AND 270.0 FEET WEST OF THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF SNO SOUTHEAST OUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER ;
THENCE WEST 130 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH TO THE NORTH LINE OF DALE STREET(VACATED):
THENCE EAST, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 130 FEET;
THENCE NORTH TO THE TRUE POINT POINT OF SEONNING.
SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS OF RECORD.
NOTES
1. THE EXISTING CARPORT AND SHED WILL BE REMOVED.
2. PROPERTY ADDRESS 7631 - 201st STREET S.W.
J. NO CRITICAL AREAS ON SITE. SEE CRITICAL AREAS WAIVER - FILE NO. CRA20090039
4. ALL TREES ON LOT 2 TO BE REMOVED
5. PROPOSED HOUSE SHOWN HEREON IS PRELIMINARY ONLY AND MAY NOT REPRESENT
THE ACTUAL HOME TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON THE NEW LOT.
S. ESTIMATED GRADING FOR PLAT DEVELOPMENT:
-NEW HOUSE LOT 2 - 500 CUBIC YARDS CUT
-DRIVEWAY AND UTILITIES (DETENTION SYSTEM) - 300 CUBIC YARDS CUT
-TOTAL EXCAVATION - BOB CUBIC YARDS CUT
GRADNG QUANTITIES TO BE CONFIRMED AT TIME OF BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION.
7. CONNECT ALL NEW IMPERNOUS SURFACES TO DETENTION SYSTEM.
y'q
v.Lts L
U11UTY NOTE
THE LOCATION OF UTIPURS SHOWN HEREON IS APPROXIMATE ONLY AND
THPURPORT
IS MAP DOES NOT PORT TO SHOW THE OF
LOCATION ALL UTILITIES
SERNCE TO OR IT THE OF THE PROPERTY. THE OWNER
1Z
"•S/U:VaL
SHOULDvDiNGC PVICINITYURVEYORS
SHOULD CONTACT ALL UTTUTY PURVEYORS IN THE AREA TO ASCERTAIN
L
THE LOCATION OF ALL UNITIES.
SANITARY SEWER
CITY OF EDMONDS
WATER SERVICE
CITY OF EDMONDS
ELECTRICITY
P.U.O. NO. I OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY
GAS
PUGET SOUND ENERGY SERVICES
PROPERTY DATA
RS-8 (NO CHANCE PROPOSED)
7631 25
7631 201ST STREET B.W.
EDMONDS. WA 98020
eeEa
17.078 S.F. OR 0.392 AC.
TAX A 'T NUMBER
2704I9ODIO62OO
SCHOOLS
EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 15
POLICE PROTECTION
CITY OF EDMONDS
FIRE PROTECTION
CITY OF EDMONDS
TELEPHONE
VERIZON NORTHWEST, INC.
OWNER/DEVELOPER
OWN R/DEVELOPER
REDWOOD, LLC
11
P.O. BOX WASHING
SEATA T.
WASM Y WHII 98f06
AD
CONTACT: PENNY WHIIEHEAO
ENGINEER/SURVEYOR
CONTACT: & MICHAEL SMITH
LOVELL-SAUERLANO & ASSOCIATES. INC
1940p-33RD AVENUE W. SUITE 200
LYNNWOOD, WA 98036
PH.: 425-775-1591
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR
REDWOOD. LL C
IN SE1/4, NE1/4, SECTION 19, T.27 N., R.4 E., W.M.
CITY OF EDMONDS
SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON
® Lovell —Sauer?
® ® ® Engineers/Surveyor;
•19217 36th Avenue W., Suite TDB, Lynnwood. Attachment 3
A" CH7 TUn - F.B. PLN-2009-0041
U Lovell-Sauerland and Associates, Inc. Phone: 425-775-1591
Y Y c a , , o q , _ , O H d Z 19217 — 36th Avenue West, Suite 106 info@lsaengineering.com
Lynnwood, Washington 98036 LSAengineering.com
Surveyors / Engineers / Planners / Development Consultants
Assigned Staff July 6, 2009
Edmonds Community Development LSA No. 5175
121 — 5th Avenue North RECENVED
Edmonds, WA 98020
JUL a 9 2009
Re: Redwood Short Plat DEVELOPMENT SEWICE8
Modification Request — Lot Width 0OUNTE
Introduction:
This letter seeks consideration of a combined lot -width and rear -setback modification, and
outlines the proposal's compliance with adopted criteria for approval. In the two -lot short
subdivision request, Lot 1 is proposed to carve out a section of its standard, 15-foot rear
setback to 8.5 feet to accommodate and existing home while Lot 2 is proposed for lot -width
reduction from 70 feet to 60.5 feet.
Both criteria of the combined request are elements of ECDC 16.20.030 - Table of site
development standards, however, Chapter 20.85 recognizes not every situation allows absolute
conformance:
20.75.075 Modifications.
A. Request. Request for a modification to a requirement of this chapter shall be made on the
regular subdivision application form. The applicant shall state reasons to support the approval of
the requested modification.
B. Notice. The notice of the public hearing at which the applicant's proposed subdivision will be
considered shall contain a description of the proposed modification.
C. Consideration. The proposed modification shall be considered in the same manner as the
proposed subdivision. The modification may be approved, or recommended for approval, only if
all of the required findings set forth in Chapter 20.85 ECDC (Variances) can be made. [Ord.
3211 § 6, 1998].
This request is noted on the application form. There should be no public hearing for the
request, rather administrative review per short subdivision procedures. Variance criteria are
noted below:
20.85.000 Scope.
A variance to any requirement of the zoning ordinance (ECDC Titles 16 and 17) except use and
procedural requirements may be approved when the findings required by this chapter can be
made.
This variance request relates specifically to ECDC 16.20.030, and qualifies for variance
consideration. Edmonds code also provides guidance toward review and approval of any
individual application:
20.85.010 Findings.
No variance may be approved unless all of the findings in this section can be marrP
Attachment 4
P LN-2009-0041
A. Special Circumstances. That, because of special circumstances relating to the property, the
strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges
permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning.
1. Special circumstances include the size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the
property, public necessity as of public structures and uses as set forth in ECDC 17.00.030
and environmental factors such as vegetation, streams, ponds and wildlife habitats.
2. Special circumstances should not be predicated upon any factor personal to the owner
such as age or disability, extra expense which may be necessary to comply with the zoning
ordinance, the ability to secure a scenic view, the ability to make more profitable use of the
property, nor any factor resulting from the action of the owner or any past owner of the same
property;
While the site includes sufficient area contained within its existing boundary, placement of a
1953 home does not allow the City's standard, 70-foot width for Lot 2 (see plans). Combining
elements from ECDC 16.20.030, we propose reducing two elements from the bulk table — an
8.5' rear -yard setback for Lot 1 will allow a greater Lot 2 width of 60.5 feet.
The special circumstance is placement of the home on the lot from 1953. When this home was
built, zoning standards did not exist. When the home was built, the site probably looked perfect
for a yard and possible future division. Indeed, there is ample room for a new structure behind
the existing.
The need for flexibility comes from later implementation of zoning standards mandating lot
geometry. It would be unreasonable to argue that actions predating adoption of any rule,
standard, or requirement be found responsible for their later noncompliance. This is at the core
of general acceptance for nonconforming situations. While the subject request is for a new use
as opposed to one that is pre-existing, the logic for assessing this criterion follows clearly.
B. Special Privilege. That the approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege
to the property in comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the
same zoning;
The existing lot is significantly bigger than its neighbors. Granting the modification request will
allow the subject property density equivalent to that of its surroundings. A photo -exhibit
showing the surrounding lots with improvements is submitted with this package showing the
immediate neighbors.
C. Comprehensive Plan. That the approval of the variance will be consistent with the
comprehensive plan;
Generally, Edmonds takes an expansive stance on critical -area protection. The Comprehensive
Plan, in pages 50-53, explains the City approach as cautious and oriented toward protection.
The following paragraphs, found on page 52, summarize City policy succinctly:
"As the Best Available Science Report and updated critical areas regulations indicate, the City's
intent is to take a conservative approach to protecting critical areas. Relatively large buffers are
proposed (consistent with the science), but these are balanced by the ability of existing
developed areas to continue infill activity in exchange for enhancing critical areas buffers. The
goal is to obtain enhanced protection of resources within the city, while recognizing infill
development must continue to occur. However, a conservative approach toresource protection
implies that the City be cautious in making wholesale changes in zoning that could result in
more development impacts to critical areas.
This is particularly true since the buffers proposed in the new regulations are substantial
increases over previous regulations; without larger lot sizes in areas that are substantially
impacted by critical areas, there would be little or no opportunity to mitigate critical areas
impacts — especially when surrounding areas have already been developed.
Caution is also needed considering that the mapped inventory is based on general sources from
other agencies and is likely to underestimate the amount of steep slopes, for example."
The corollary of `protecting critical areas to the maximum extent possible' proposes supporting
development away from sensitive features. The Redwood property has received a "Critical
Areas Determination" from Edmonds that the property is exempt from any review. According to
Edmonds' overt policy of critical area protection, this modification proposal should be approved
to facilitate City growth policy.
"Infill Development. The City's principal policy direction is aimed at encouraging infill
development consistent with its neighborhoods and community character. This overall
plan direction has been termed "designed infill" and can be seen in the City's emphasis
and continued work on streamlining permitting, revising codes to provide more flexible
standards, and improving its design guidelines." (Page 102, Comprehensive Plan)
The existing home could be removed to eliminate the need for this modification, but such action
would both be financially unviable and contrary to the City's explicit directive toward
'neighborhood -consistent infill'. Allowing the home to remain directly promotes this idea.
Specific Housing Policies include:
H. Goal: Provide a variety of housing for all segments of the city that is consistent and
compatible with the established character of the community.
H.1. Expand and promote a variety of housing opportunities by establishing land use
patterns that provide a mixture of housing types and densities.
H.1.a. Provide for mixed use, multi family and single family housing that is
targeted and located according to the land use patterns established in
the land use element.
Enabling this site to retain a moderate, existing home while providing for one new home
provides consistency and diversity. Edmonds' Comprehensive Plan and Zoning/Development
codes anticipate higher density for this site.
H.2. Encourage infill development consistent with the character of the surrounding
neighborhood.
H.2.a. Within single family neighborhoods, encourage infill development by considering
innovative single family development patterns such as Planned Residential Developments
(PRDs).
H.2.b. Provide for accessory housing in single family neighborhoods that addresses the needs
of extended families and encourages housing affordability.
H.2.c. Provide flexible development standards for infill development, such as non -conforming
lots, when development in these situations will be consistent with the character of the
neighborhood and with the goal to provide affordable single family housing.
There is no doubt the surrounding area supports a division into similarly -sized and proportioned
lots. A PRD is not planned but minor relaxation of zoning standards allows innovative infill
development. The planned infill will create nonconformity, but fully within neighborhood
character.
D. Zoning Ordinance. That the approval of the variance will be consistent with the purposes of
the zoning ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located;
Edmonds' applicable Purpose sections relating to zone districts generally and residential
properties specifically are copied below:
16.00.010 Purposes.
In addition to the purposes stated in the city's comprehensive plan, the zoning ordinance shall
have the following purposes:
A. To assist in the implementation of the adopted comprehensive plan for the physical
development of the city by regulating and providing for existing uses and planning for the future
as specified in the comprehensive plan; and
B. To protect the character and the social and economic stability of residential, commercial,
industrial and other uses within the city, and to ensure the orderly and beneficial development of
those uses by:
1. Preserving and retaining appropriate areas for each type of use;
2. Preventing encroachment into these areas by incompatible uses; and
3. By regulating the use of individual parcels of land to prevent unreasonable detrimental effects
of nearby uses. (Ord. 3240 § 1, 19991.
16.20.000 Purposes.
The IRS zone has the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for
residential zones of ECDC 16.00.010 and 16.10.000:
A. To reserve and regulate areas primarily for family living in single-family dwellings;
B. To provide for additional nonresidential uses which complement and are compatible with
single-family dwelling use. [Ord. 3547 § 1, 2005].
Neither section includes any provision offended by the proposed modification. Generally,
zoning codes are designed to promote reasonable and consistent standards between
properties. The minor request at issue would likely not even be noticeable to most observers.
E. Not Detrimental. That the variance as approved or conditionally approved will not be
significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity and same zone;
No change of use is proposed: Both lots will enjoy only uses available to all other RS-8
properties in the City. All engineering requirements will be met as with every other division in
the City. The minor width/setback reduction request does not permit any activity not otherwise
allowed within the zone district. Once built, the two lots and homes will be fully consistent with
the surrounding neighborhood and health/safety/welfare expectations for this area.
F. Minimum Variance. That the approved variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner
the rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning.
Originally, the concept was to retain the entire rear -yard setback for Lot 1 and reduce Lot 2's
width further. City staff advised compromising the setback somewhat for a greater lot width
could minimize the overall request. The design was revised, resulting in the concept submitted
herewith.
Each element of the request has absolutely been minimized within the space available. This
modification does not represent the owners' wants, rather their needs. There simply is not
enough space to meet all normal parameters, and the flexibility requested cannot be reduced
further.
Closing:
Thanks for your time in review.
((0010041
'R',
Land Use Planner
U Lovell-Sauerland and Associates, Inc. Phone: 425-775-1591
b a Z 19217 - 36th Avenue West, Suite 106 info@lsaengineering.com
Lynnwood, Washington 98036 LSAengineering.com
Surveyors / Engineers / Planners / Development Consultants
Assigned Staff
Edmonds Community Development
121 — 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
Re: Redwood Short Plat
Waiver Request — Frontage Improvements
To Whom it Concerns:
July 9, 2009
RECENVED LSA No. 5175
JUL - 9 2009
This letter represents a waiver request from standard frontage improvements. While
understanding the general benefits of providing sidewalks in new development, it is also
important to consider specific circumstance when looking at any individual case.
201st Street, west of 76th Avenue W, is consistent throughout its modest length. It includes two
driving lanes and wide, flat shoulders used for parking and walking. The roadway crown is
shifted about six feet to the south.
The street is a dead end. Beyond the subject property there is no right-of-way and 201 st dead -
ends at homes lying directly within any potential extension route. Functionally, it is a private
road with little -to -no development potential. Very few of the lots along 201 st are capable of
further division and there is little chance of any contiguous sidewalk system along the street.
Even if some future walkway system were cobbled together, it could not connect 76th and 80th to
provide any neighborhood connection.
Since the driving improvement is offset six feet south within the right-of-way and proposed
division on the north, any sidewalk improvement for this one lot will appear completely out -of -
place within the otherwise wide, consistent right-of-way. Westbound drivers would feel the need
to dodge concrete seemingly in the middle of the road. The "improvement' would actually take
away existing parking and also would disturb the existing, uniform improvement scheme.
Of course, cost is a significant concern in any small project and standard improvements would
be expensive. In most cases, these costs are considered "part of doing business" for each
development to pay its share in upgrading the overall public system. However, a standard
sidewalk in this case would not be a benefit and in fact could be viewed as detrimental. As
such, forcing a small project to allocate significant expense is unwarranted.
Sound analysis dictates a sidewalk should not be required for the Redwood Short Plat.
Thanks very much for your time and consideration.
Attachment 5
P LN-2009-0041
Date:
To:
From:
Subject:
August 12, 2009
Mike Clugston, Planner
Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager
PLN20090041, 2 lot Short Plat
7631 201" St SW
The following comments are provided from the Engineering Division in review of the
preliminary short plat application for the Redwood development at 7631 201St St SW.
The applicants submitted a request for waiver from the requirement to construct sidewalks
along the frontage of the subject development. Chapter 18.90 Edmonds Community
Development Code states the requirements of the chapter may be waived, if it can be
demonstrated by the applicant that there are special cirucumstances related to topography or
other factors which make the construction of the sidewalk economically unfeasible or
practically impossible.
The request for waiver does not demonstrate the above criteria applies to the subject
development and therefore, the request for waiver has been denied.
Please ask the applicant to revise and resubmit the preliminary development plan showing
construction of sidewalks along the frontage of the subject development. Alternatively, the
applicant may volunteer to construct sidewalks on the opposite side of the street as a
continuation of the existing sidewalk near the intersection of 201St Ave W and 76th Ave W.
Thank you.
Attachment 6
PLN-2009-0041
City of Edmonds
MEMORANDUM
Date: April 8, 2010
To: Mike Clugston, Planner
From: Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager
Subject: PLN20090041, Redwood, LLC — 2-lot Short Plat
7631-201" St SW
Engineering has reviewed and approved the preliminary short plat application for the
Redwood, LLC. short plat at 7631-201St St SW. Preliminary approval shall not be interpreted
to mean approval of the improvements as shown on the preliminary plans.
Please find attached the Engineering Requirements for the subject development. The
applicant will be required to satisfy these requirements as a condition of short plat approval.
Once the Planning Division has approved the preliminary short plat, the applicant will be
required to submit civil engineering plans addressing all short plat conditions. Plans are to be
submitted to the Engineering Division. A civil plan review fee of $1000 is to be paid at the
time of submittal.
Thank you.
Attachment 7
City of Edmonds PLN-2009-0041
CITY OF EDMONDS
ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS FOR SHORT PLATS
Name: Redwood - 2-lot short plat File No.: PLN20090041
Reviewed by: Jeanie McConnell April 8, 2010 Address: 7631 201st St SW
Engineering Division Date
Required as a
Required as a
Condition of
Requirement
Condition of
SFR Building
Already
Subdivision
Permit
Satisfied
1. Right -of Way` Dedication for' PubII& Streets. = �
a) N/A
2. Public Street Improvements
(Asphalt, curb, gutter and sidewalks):
a) Construct 18" curb & gutter along property frontage - 201st St SW
X
b) Construct five-foot wide concrete sidewalk to City standards along
X
property frontage - 201 st St SW
c) 201st St SW to be widened along property frontage as required to
provide for a minimum 12' lane from centerline of paved roadway to the
X
face of the curb.
d) Cross slope of public road shall not exceed 2%
X
X
e) Lots 1 & 2 shall take access off 201st St SW.
i. Driveway entrances to be provided to City standards
fi. Individual driveway access points shall meet sight distance
requirements set forth by the American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
a) Provide asphalt or concrete driveway approach to each lot. X
b) Slope of driveways shall not exceed 14% and shall be noted as such
on the civils. X
4. ' Street Turnaround:
a) Provide on -site turnaround for Lot 2 to City Standards. X
a) Provide all easements as required. I X I I I
pIn20090041-Redwood-2 lot-Engr Reqmnts 1 of 3
Required as a
Condition of
Subdivision
Required as a
Condition of
SFR Building Permit
Requirement
Already
Satisfied
b) Public hydrant spacing shall meet requirements of ECDC 19.25.
X
c) Provide water service stub to each Lot
X
d) Connect to public water system.
X
X
9. Sanitary'Sewer.System Improvements:' ,
a) Provide 6" service lateral from City's Sanitary Sewer main to
development with 6" cleanout at the edge of right-of-way.
X
b) Provide new 4" side sewer to lot 2. Where sewer is shared by more
than one lot, it shall be 6".
X
X
e Connect to public sewer system.
X
10 Storm Sewer S stem im' rovements:
a) Provide a Stormwater Management report and plan. Compliance with
ECDC 18.30 and 1992 Department of Ecology Stormwater Manual is
required.
X
b) Construct privately owned and maintained storm detention system
sized to provide adequate capacity for proposed future single family
dwellings, associated impervious areas and street improvements in
accordance with ECDC 18.30. Storm detention system to be located
on private property.
X
X
c) Connect all new impervious surfaces to detention system.
X
X
d) Provide storm sewer stub to all proposed lots.
X
e) Connect to public storm system.
x
X
f) Storm catch basins shall be installed in gutter flow line in 201 st St SW,
as required, with construction of curb, gutter & sidewalk.
X
Underground Wirin er Ord. 1387 : .
a) Required for all new services.
X
X
12 1Excavation and,Gradin` a"r IBC
a) Submit a grading plan as part of engineered site plan.
X
X
b) Submit grading plan for foundations with building permit.
X
13 Si na a er City Engineer). -
a) Provide fire and aid address signage.
X
14, , Survey Monumentation
er Ord. Sect.12.10.120
a) N/A
15 As -built Dravirin s` (Per'Clty Engineer):
a) Provide an as -built drawings of all street and utility improvements both
in .dwg electronic format as well as hard copy.
X
X
16. Other Requirements:
a) Plat showing lots, easements, legals, survey information
X
X
b) Legal documents for each lot
X
c) Field stake lot corners (by professional surveyor)
X
d) Field stake utility stubs at property lines
X
pin20090041-Redwood-2 lot-Engr Reqmnts 2 of 3
Required as a
Condition of
Subdivision
Required as a
Condition of
SFR Building
Permit
Requirement
Already
Satisfied
e)
Clustered mailbox location per Postmaster
X
f)
Maintenance agreements
X
g)
Traffic Impact Analysis
X
17.
'Engineering Fees:
a)
Storm development charge (access tract)
N/A
b)
Storm system development charge
$428.00
X
c)
Sewer connection fee
$730.00
X
d)
Water connection fee
$g08.00
X
e)
Water meter fee - 3/4" meter
$550.00
X
f)
Traffic mitigation fee per SFR
$840.72
X
g)
Short Plat review fee
$1,000.00
X
h)
Inspection fee (2.2% of improvement costs)
TBDJ
x
9ea"Aw-" sznPa Alpa8, 2010
Engineering Program Manager, CITY OF EDMONDS Date
pIn20090041-Redwood-2 lot-Engr Reqmnts 3 of 3
OF EDM
Y o+6
CITY` OW EDMONDS
ESr tseo 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220
RCW 197-11-970 Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS)
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
Description of proposal: (File No. S-09-41) Short plat application to subdivide an existing 17,078 square
foot parcel into two lots in the RS-8 zone. Proposed grading at the site will include approximately 1000
cubic yards of cut and 300 cubic yards of fill.
Proponent: Redwood, LLC
Location of proposal, including street address if any: Parcel addressed as 7631 201" Street SW
(Tax ID# 27041900106200). The site is approximately 300' west of 76"' Avenue West.
Lead agency: CITY OF EDMONDS
The City of Edmonds, acting as lead agency for this proposal, has determined that it does not have a
probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not
required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed
environmental checklist and other information on file with the City. This information is available to the
public on request.
This is not an approval of the proposed action, only a determination of the potential environmental impacts
of the proposal. The City of Edmonds has determined that the environmental impacts are adequately
addressed through the implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Edmonds Community
Development Code governing land -use standards, construction, clearing, grading and stormwater control,
and critical areas. This determination is issued on the basis of compliance of the proposal with all
applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations and standards.
There is no comment period for this DNS.
XX This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal
for 21 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by August 12, 2009.
Project Planner: Mike Clugston, Planner
Responsible Official: Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Contact Information: City of Edmonds 1 121 5th Avenue North, Edponds WA 98020 1 425-771-0220
Date: July 29, 2009 Signature: `" poe eo6 ChaA-e
XX You may appeal this determination to Robert Chave, Planning Manager, at 121 5th Avenue
North, Edmonds, WA 98020, by filing a written appeal citing the specific reasons for the
appeal with the required appeal fee, adjacent property owners list and notarized affidavit form
no later than August 19, 2009.
You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Rob Chave to read or ask about the
procedures for SEPA appeals.
XX Posted on July 29, 2009, at the Edmonds Public Library, Edmonds Community Services
Building, and the Edmonds Post Office.
XX Distribute to "Checked" Agencies on the reverse side of this form, along with a copy of the
Checklist.
Attachment 8
SEPA DNS 5-09-41.DOC Page I of 2 P LN-2009-0041
7/27/09.SEPA
• Mailed SEPA Determination to properties within 300 feet of the site.
• Mailed SEPA Determination and the Environmental Checklist to the following:
XX Environmental Review Section
Department of Ecology
P.O. Box 47703
Olympia, WA 98504-7703
XX COMCAST
Outside Plant Engineer, North Region
410 Valley Ave NW #12
Puyallup, WA 98371-3317
XX City of Lynnwood
Attn: Senior Planner
PO Box 5008
Lynnwood, WA 98046
XX Puget Sound Energy
Attn: Elaine Babby
PO Box 90868, M/S XRD-1 W
Bellevue, WA 98009
pc: File No. S-09-41
SEPA Notebook
XX Edmonds School District #15
Attn: Stephanie Hall
Planning and Property Management Specialist
20420 68°i Avenue West
Lynnwood, WA 98036
XX Dean Saksena, Senior Manager
Snohomish Co. PUD
PO Box 1107
Everett, WA 98206-1107
XX Redwood, LLC
PO Box 81144
Seattle, WA 98108
XX LSA, Inc.
Attn: S. M[chael Smith
19217 36' Ave. W #106
Lynnwood, WA 98036
Ly
RM`3
2
QQTH ST S W
- _
- -
77
Site
r
2C
-
>.
Q
(.0
RS-8
City of Edmonds Zoning Map, November 18, 2008
Page 2 of 2
SEPA DNS S-0941.DOC
7/27/09.SEPA
SIVOHQMISH COUNTY
PUBLIC UTILITiY' DISTRICT. NO. 1
Mike Clugston
City of Edmonds
121 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
Dear Mr. Clugston:
Providing quality water, power and service at a competitive price that our customers value
August 10, 2009
Reference Number: S 09 41 Short subdivision for Redwood, LLC
District DR Number: 09-104
The District presently has sufficient electric system capacity to serve the proposed
development. However, the existing District facilities in the local area may require upgrading.
Cost of any work, new or upgrade, to existing facilities that is required to connect this
proposed development to the District electric system shall be in accordance with the applicable
District policy. The developer will be required to supply the District with suitable
locations/easements upon its property for any underground electrical facilities that must be installed
to serve the proposed development. Contact with the District is recommended prior to design of the
proposed project.
For information about specific electric service requirements, please call the District's
South County office at 425-670-3200 to contact a Customer Engineer.
Sincerely,
Dean Saksena
Senior Manager
Distribution Engineering Services
Attachment 9
PLN-2009-0041
1802 — 75`h Street S.W. • Everett, WA ® 98203 / Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1107 ® Everett, WA • 98206-1107
425-783-4300 • Toll -free in Western Washington at 1-877-783-1000, ext. 4300 • www.snopud.com
EDMONDS E D M O N D S SCHOOL DISTRICT Brian Harding
Director
Is FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS
20420 68th Ave. W., Lynnwood, WA 98036-7400
425-431-7334 FAX 425-431-7089
SCH®L http://www.edmonds.wednet.edu�
Includes Brier, Edmonds, Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, and Woodway !/
August 7, 2009 h
Like most municipal organizations in the State, Edmonds School District is facing
unprecedented financial restrictions. To meet this challenge, the Facilities Operations
Department has evaluated our work load and determined that we will need to discontinue
our review and comment on individual development applications. We have long
appreciated the opportunity to participate in this process, but financial and personnel
constraints will require the District to discontinue these reviews.
The District's interest in these reviews has been primarily focused on student safety while
to and from school. This concern is now heightened with the District's reduction in bus
service within a mile of schools. Edmonds School District does not have the authority or
expertise to suggest specific requirements for developers, but encourages jurisdictions to
require safe walk routes between home and school or bus stop. Ideally, this would
include curb, gutter and sidewalks.
The other function of development reviews deals with determining which schools
students will attend and locating the nearest bus stop. This information is available on-
line at www.edmonds.wednet.edu. By following the menu to "Our Departments and
Programs" to "Transportation", viewers can then click on "Neighborhood School Finder -
Locate Your Child's Bus Route" for specific information. When entering address
information, it will often be necessary to enter an address within immediate proximity of
the proposed development. Until the development's address has been entered into the
system, it will not be available in the data base. If you have questions regarding a
specific bus stop location, please contact Craig Christensen, Transportation Director at
425-431-7233.
We regret any inconvenience this may cause to your planning department, but feel that
our blanket position regarding safe walk routes and the on-line availability of school and
transportation information should provide adequate resources to meet your needs. If you
have any questions, please call me at 425 431 7334.
Sincerely,
Brian Hardin
Director, Facilities, Operations
Attachment 10
.OUR MISSION. PLN-2009-0041
To ADVOCATE for all students by PROVIDING a learning environment which EMPOWERS students, staff and the comr
personal, creative and academic potential in order to BECOME lifelong learners and responsible world
#P20
L OF EDVO
�a City of Edmonds
Development Services Department
Planning Division
Phone: 425.771.0220
Fax: 425.771.0221
The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is to
be filled out by any person preparing a Development
Permit Application for the City of Edmonds prior to
his/her submittal of the application to the City.
The purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to
determine whether any potential Critical Areas are, or
may be, present on the subject property. The information
needed to complete the Checklist should be easily
available from observations of the site or data available at
City Hall (Critical areas inventories, maps, or soil
surveys).
Date Received:
City Receipt #:
Critical Areas File #: i y -�`�t�)�a�
Critical Areas Checklist Fee: $155.00
Date Mailed to Applicant:
A property owner, or his/her authorized representative,
must fill out the checklist, sign and date it, and submit it
to the City. The City will review the checklist, make a
precursory site visit, and make a determination of the
subsequent steps necessary to complete a development
permit application.
Please submit a vicinity map, along with the signed copy
of this form to assist City staff in finding and locating the
specific piece of property described on this form. In
addition, the applicant shall include other pertinent
information (e.g. site plan, topography map, etc.) or
studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assistant staff
in completing their preliminary assessment of the site.
The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees
to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable
attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or
incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees.
By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and that I am authorized to filleDthis
1 application on the behalf of the owner as listed below. p,
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT DATE 15 - v� r0 /
Property Owner's Authorization
By my signature, I certify that I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application,
and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the
purposes of inspection and posting attendant to this ap lication.
SIGNATURE OF OWNE ' DATE
a NO
Owner/Applicant: Applicant Representative:
Redwood, LLC LSA, Inc. - Attn: S. Michael Smith
Name Name
P.O. Box 81144 19217 - 36th Ave. W, Suite 106
Street Address
Seattle WA
City State
Telephone: 206-930-0123
Email address (optional): _
Street Address
98108 Lynnwood WA 98036
Zip City State Zip
Telephone: 425-775-1591
Email Address (optional):
michaels@lsae
Attachment 11
P L N-2009-0041
Critical Areas Checklist CA File No:C���- �Q, -��
Site Information (soils/topography/hydrology/vegetation)
1. Site Address/Location: 7631 - 201st St. sw
2. Property Tax Account Number: 27041900106200
3. Approximate Site Size (acres or square feet): • 54 acres
4. Is this site currently developed? " yes; no.
If yes; how is site developed? one existing single-family home
5. Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply.
Flat: less than 5-feet elevation change over entire site.
x Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal
distance of 66-feet).
Hilly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and less than 30% (a vertical rise of 10-feet
over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet).
Steep: grades of greater than 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal
distance of less than 33-feet).
Other (please describe):
6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: No ;Approx. Depth: N/A
7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: No ; Approx. Depth: N/A
What season(s) of the year? N/A
8. Site is in the floodway No floodplain No of a water course.
9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year-round?
No Flows are seasonal? No (What time of year? N/A )
10. Site is primarily: forested ; meadow ;shrubs ; mixed ;
urban landscaped (lawn, shrubs etc) x - maintained as .yard
11. Obvious wetland is present on site: No
For City Staff Use Only ------- ------------------------ -----------
1. Plan Check Number, iiff applicable?
2. Site is Zoned? h� — 9
3. SCS mapped soil type(s)? _Wuw v c) i 9 ti 6 y',- ' ( � „� �,� — �L �, o e -,2- S
4. Critical Areas inventory or C.A. map indicates Critical Area on site? l X ex,,
5. Site within designated earth subsidence landslide hazard area? h 0
SITE DETERMINATION
STUDY RVOUIRED WAIVER
Reviewed by: Date:
Critical Areas Checklist.doc/2.5.2009
August 6, 2009
Mr. and Mrs. Lee Crosby
762+2001h St. SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing to express my concerns about the new house being built at 7631 201St
Street in Edmonds. This unit is planned to be only 7 feet from my back fence, and
one of my concerns is that the construction debris and runoff may affect my flower
beds and trees along the fence line.
I moved here in 1968 because I wanted to live in a quiet, peaceful neighborhood
filled with single dwelling homes. Our neighborhood has remained this way for over
3 decades; it is only just recently that multiple -family dwellings have sprouted up
replacing original homes.
The additional noise and traffic of cars coming and going, as well as the transient
nature of renters in general, are reasons I do not like to see our neighborhood plots
developed in this way. With the addition of the new house on my back fenceline, I
will be surrounded on 3 of 4 sides by the increased noise and traffic of multiple
family lots. This is definitely a concern forme.
I'm also concerned about the loss of privacy if the new home, only 7 feet from my
back fence according to blueprints, is a 2-story unit. Although I have erected a fence
and have some large trees growing along that fenceline, I currently enjoy a quiet,
private backyard setting and would like to keep it that way.
I know that originally there was supposed to be an alley constructed along our back
fenceline, serving properties housed on 200th and 2015t . With this new construction
so close to my own fence, it appears this will no longer be a possibility.
I was hoping our neighborhood could remain as close to its original design as
possible; given the economic times and changing demographic of the tenants around
me, I now can only hope our new neighbor is respectful of our peace and quiet and
maintains the good neighbor standards we currently have with the existing family
that lives at this location.
Sincerely,
Louise Crosby
Attachment 12
P LN-2009-0041
6 August 2009
City of Edmonds
Development Services Department
121— 5t' Ave. North
Edmonds, WA 98020
Re: File # S-09-41
Project Location: 7631 — 20151 St. SW, Edmonds
Dear Sir:
In response to the notice concerning the above File No. that was mailed to us on July
23, 2009, my wife and I would like to share our reasons for asking that the proposed
development be either reconsidered or cancelled.
• First, the location of the proposed dwelling changes the existing neighborhood
balance by placing the home next to the fences of the two homes which border the
property on the north. We have already experienced the change that occurs when
buildings, such as the apartment complex which was built on the North-East corner
of the proposed subdivision, are built so close to the property line, changing the
balance of the original neighborhood design. Rather than having connecting
backyards which allow "breathing space" between the homes which back up to each
other, the "apartment complex" appearance and feeling spreads further into the
neighborhood.
• Second, with the reduction of the seventy foot minimum of lot width to that of sixty
and one-half feet, the original sense and feeling of privacy is lost due to the
crowding of the buildings closer together. With only seven and one-half foot
separation between the proposed home and the bordering fence, the new occupants
will be overlooking the yard beyond and viewing directly into the homes to the
North. No amount of shrubbery or trees will be able to regain the privacy that will
be lost.
• Third, with the project reducing the "breathing space" between the homes opposite
each other, the noise will not only be brought closer to the other homes, but will be
multiplied due to the reduced distance from each other. This has been brought
home to those of us who presently live within a short distance from the apartment
complex on the North-East corner as stated above, but also the four homes that were
built on one lot directly across the street from the apartment complex. It is no secret
that the noise level has been increased to at least double the level before their
introduction; and coupled with the fact that this area sits in a natural bowel, any
noise tends to be amplified rather than reduced.
• Fourth, there is the continual concern about drainage of heavy rains. The flow of
the water at the present time is of little concern due to the natural contour of the
land allows it to run off without any problem. With the proposed change in the
natural contours: specifically, the removal of 800 cu. yards of earth, that natural
flow will change. Even though the proposed project would probably not be
Attachment 13
PLN-2009-0041
affected, the adjoining properties would feel the effect of any changes. Standing in
any of the back yards of the adjoining properties would clearly show how any
change could result in problems for those properties.
The above concerns are shared by those of us who share the border with the proposed
development. The concerns are heighten when Note #5 is taken into consideration,
which could change the present design on file: "Proposed house shown hereon is
preliminary only and may not represent the actual home to be constructed on the new
lot." Any change in the preliminary design could only add additional concerns and
reasons for a reconsideration or cancellation of the project.
Thank you for the opportunity to share these concerns. We would appreciate an
update about these concerns and the project's status as new developments occur.
Siznc/erely ours,
Karl and Linda Borchardt
7710 — 200`h St. SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
425-774-6810
August 6, 2009
Lisa Lundquist
7704 2001h St. SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
To Redwood, LLC
Dear Sirs:
I am writing as a neighbor who will be, affected by the new construction proposed
on 201st street to occupy the lot directly behind my own. This will be my first
experience with new construction in the neighborhood since I have lived here, 7
years now.
I just ask that you be cognizant of my organic vegetable garden when you set up
your construction area, and be sure that no chemicals or contaminated waters flow
downhill into my property.
Additionally, I read on the blueprints for the design that all trees are to be removed
from Parcel 2 (new construction). There are 2 trees on our shared fenceline (one of
which has roots on your side of the fence) and both have become heavily entwined
in the fence, covering both sides. One is a berry tree of some sort and the other is
my cotoneaster, the one that is 20 feet high. It is my wish that you do not remove
these as they provide a nice bit of shade for my garden and some privacy for both
properties. According to the blueprint I believe this area would be part of your yard,
so I hope you appreciate a wild fenceline in your yard!
I appreciate your willingness to consider the impact your new home will have on
our neighborhood. We are a collection of quiet, friendly folk along your back row
(facing 200th) and we certainly hope the neighborhood remains so!
Sincerely,
Lisa Lundquist
Attachment 14
PLN-2009-0041