S-05-64 comments prior to recording2.pdf
CE
ITY OF DMONDS
PLANREVIEWCOMMENTS
PLANNINGDIVISION
425.771.0220
DATE: October 8, 2008
TO: Phillip Lehn
plehn@comcast.net
FROM: Kathleen Taylor, Associate Planner
RE: S-2005-64
CORRECTIONS TO FINAL RECORD DOCUMENT
COMMENTS #2
st
It was nice meeting with you on October 1. Since our meeting I have done further research in
response to your concerns. The following is a revised list of corrections. I have included the original
th
language from the memo dated September 30 and a response to each. Please incorporate the
following changes to the final record document as noted below.
1.Setbacks. The document as submitted states, ‘Setbacks from critical areas steep slope which
have been reduced to 10 feet were vested with the original short plat’s recording.’ Actually,
the setbacks from the original subdivision do not vest. Since ultimately another lot is being
added to the original short plat, additional impact to the slope is highly probable. Instead,
remove the statement, and add, ‘Setbacks shown are for reference only and vest no right.’
RESPONSE: According to Rob Chave, Planning Manager and Duane Bowman,
Development Services Director, the setbacks from the original subdivision do NOT vest. If
you did not agree with the geotechnical report approved with the preliminary short plat (S-
2005-64), it should have been appealed in a timely manner, i.e. within 14 days of the original
decision. At this point, we must comply with Edmonds Community Development Code
20.75.110 which requires that major changes to an approved preliminary plat be reviewed in
the same manner as the original application. This would require public notice, and fees of
approximately $945. According to both Rob Chave and Duane Bowman, to change the
setbacks would be considered a ‘major change’, and therefore subject to re-review of the
application and the associated fees.
2.Dedications. Dedication number 4 states the purpose of Tracts EX and DX. Please add to
the final sentence so that it reads, ‘Their purpose shall be to provide a landscaped open space
for the enjoyment of their owners and are not developable.’
RESPONSE: We discussed the possibility of removing Tracts EX or DX. Actual removal
would be considered a major change, and subject to the fees as noted above in item #1.
However, you could possibly reduce the size of the tracts or change the boundaries, very
slightly. This would be considered a minor change, and subject to fees of approximately
$745. Refer to the explanation in item #6 below.
3.Conditions. The document states, ‘A copy of said document is located in files 2-2006-64…’
Please change it to read, ‘A copy of said document is located in file S-2005-64…’
NO RESPONSE REQUIRED.
4.Engineering Signature Block.
Add a signature block for the Engineering Division.
NO RESPONSE REQUIRED.
5.Topography. Show the topography for the subject area, and top and toe of slope(s), as was
shown on the document for preliminary approval. Also include the line 50’ from the toe of
slope, for the toe which is shown horizontally across lot E; the 50’ line falling across lot D.
Refer to page 8 of AMEC’s 4/27/05 report.
RESPONSE: REFER TO RESPONSE TO ITEM #1.
6.Exterior lot lines. It appears that three quit claim deeds were recorded for the property on
9/9/2008, thus changing the exterior property lines. The exterior property lines cannot be
changed prior to the recording of S-2005-64. The quit claim deeds need to be retracted. The
exterior lot lines must comply with what was submitted for preliminary approval.
Furthermore, it appears that those exterior lot lines do not completely correspond to what was
recorded for the lot line adjustment, file number LL-2002-157. I did not see any obvious
explanations when researching Snohomish County record documents, but perhaps I missed
something.
RESPONSE: Pursuant to ECDC 20.75.050A, the quit claim deeds meet the definition of a
Lot Line Adjustment. However, under ECDC 20.75.110 the changes to the exterior lot lines
can be processed as minor changes. They are to be processed as a staff decision. The fee for
a minor modification of an approved subdivision is approximately $745. As a part of the
application you will need to provide a survey demonstrating that the adjacent properties still
meet the required minimum lot size, lot width, and setbacks.
As an alternative, you could retract the quit claim deeds. Record the short plat as originally
approved under the preliminary review. Then after recording you could submit for a Lot
Line Adjustment. The approximate fees for a lot line adjustment total $365.
I recognize that you did incorporate some of the changes in the draft copy that you gave to me on
October 1st; however, the format was substantially different then the original submittal. I’m not sure if
that was deliberate or not. It makes it much easier to review if the document looks similar to the
previous draft, but it certainly can be changed as long as it meets Snohomish County recording
requirements. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 425.771.0220. I will be in the office
thst
on Friday, October 10, and then on vacation until October 21.
Thanks.
cc: Duane Bowman, Development Services Director
Rob Chave, Planning Manager