Loading...
S-07-62 Staff Report.pdf CITY OF EDMONDS 121 - 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 PLANNING DIVISION FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND DECISION To: File S-07-62 From : Mike Clugston, Planner Date: November 15, 2007 File: S-07-62 Applicant: Steve Hershman 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.Compliance with the Zoning Code....................................................................................................5 D.Compliance with the Flood Plain Management Provisions...............................................................5 E.Environmental Assessment................................................................................................................6 F.Critical Areas Review.......................................................................................................................6 G.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. APPENDICES.....................................................................................................................7 VII. PARTIES OF RECORD......................................................................................................8 Hershman Short Plat File No. S-07-62 Page 2 of 8 I.INTRODUCTION rd The applicant is proposing to subdivide one lot addressed as 20101 83 Avenue West into two lots (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 (Attachment 2). The proposed lot layout is shown on the subdivision map (Attachment 3). The existing house will remain on proposed Lot 1. A.Application 1.Applicant: Steve Hershman rd 2.Site Location: 20101 83 Avenue West 3.Request: To divide one lot with a total area of approximately 21,011 square feet into two lots in a Single-Family Residential (RS-8) zone. 4.Review Process: Following the Comment Period, Planning Staff 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 Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Title 18, public works requirements. c.Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 20.75, subdivision requirements. d.Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 20.95, staff review 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.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” on Attachment 5. b)Implement the recommendations identified in the ‘Conclusions and Recommendations’ section of the Critical Areas Report from Associated Earth Sciences (Attachment 6). c)Verify that the existing second-story deck on Lot 1 meets the 15-foot rear property line setback requirement. If it encroaches into the setback, the applicant may choose to remove that portion of the deck that protrudes into the setback or slightly jog the boundary line between Lots 1 and 2 to provide enough room to accommodate the deck and rear setback on Lot 1. d)That portion of rockery on Lot 2 that extends from Lot 1 near the southeastern corner of the existing deck must be removed. e)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 S-07-62 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. Hershman Short Plat File No. S-07-62 Page 3 of 8 (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.” f)Make sure all documents to be recorded meet the Snohomish County Auditor’s requirements for recording, including all signatures in black ink. g)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. h)Submit an updated copy of the title report (short plat certificate) with the documents proposed to be recorded. 2.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 5. c)Implement the recommendations in the Critical Areas Report from Associated Earth Sciences (Attachment 6). II.FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS A. Compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance Introduction 1. a.Setting: rd The subject property at 20101 83 Avenue West is located in the Single-Family Residential (RS-8) zone and is surrounded by similarly zoned and developed lots. b.Topography and Vegetation: The subject site slopes downward gradually from north to south except toward the southern portion of the parcel where a potential landslide/erosion hazard area was identified. Vegetation on the parcel consists of typical urban-residential landscaping, including grass, trees, and shrubs as well as a row of larger trees along the north property line as well as numerous singles on proposed Lot 2 which is currently undeveloped. c.Lot Layout: The proposed lot layout is shown on the preliminary plat map (Attachment 3). Proposed Lot 2 will be a flag lot. Environmental Resources 2. a.Section 20.75.085 of the Edmonds Community Development Code states that a subdivision should be designed to minimize significant adverse impacts where environmental resources exist (such as trees, streams, ravines, or wildlife habitats). The existing trees on the site are considered to be environmental resources. Most of the trees on the parcel are located in areas that would be impacted by future development and will likely need to be removed. b.The proposal minimizes grading by locating improvements on more level portions of the parcel. The access to Lot 2 will be graded and improved, as would a home site, but such work is not expected to exceed SEPA thresholds. c.A landslide and erosion hazard area exists on the parcel. Lot 1 contains the landslide hazard area but Lot 1 is already developed. Lot 2 is the newly proposed lot and it contains an identified erosion hazard area which is essentially overlapped by a portion of the landslide hazard buffer extending from Lot 1. d.A drainage plan must be submitted to the Engineering Division prior to recording the short plat and/or when a building permit is applied for on this site. All proposed development on Hershman Short Plat File No. S-07-62 Page 4 of 8 the site must be designed to meet current code in order to minimize off-site drainage impacts. All new impervious surfaces must be connected to the proposed detention system. 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 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 Proposed Proposed Lot Area Gross sq. ft Net sq. ft 8,000 10,005 10,005 Lot 1 8,000 11,005 11,005 Lot 2 Lot Width: The required lot width in the RS-8 zone is 70 feet. The proposed lots appear to meet this requirement. Setbacks and Lot Coverage 4. 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: rd Lot 1: Street Setback (25 feet) from the west property line adjacent to 83 Avenue West Side Setback (7.5 feet) on north and south property lines Rear Setback (15 feet) along east property line Lot 2: All side setbacks (7.5 feet) Existing Structures / Encroachments: The existing residence and second story deck on Lot 1 will remain. As proposed, it appears that the deck (and possibly a very small corner of the house) will encroach slightly into the 15-foot rear property line setback on Lot 1. Structures over three feet in height may not encroach the setback. That portion of the deck (and house) encroaching the rear setback must be removed or the property line separating Lots 1 and 2 near the deck could be slightly redrawn to accommodate and eliminate the encroachment. For reference, no rockery may exceed three feet in setback area height within a setback. The term “setback area height” is defined as the height measured vertically from the original grade of the soil to the highest point of the upper most rock. It is the property owner’s responsibility to verify original grade and compliance with setback area height by submitting a professional land surveyor letter and section view when an enforcement action is initiated due to a violation. In this case, that portion of the rockery on Lot 2 extending across the proposed boundary line from Lot 1 must be removed. Corner Lots: Neither of the proposed lots are considered corner lots. b.Flag or Interior lot determination: Lots 2 is flag lot. c.Lot Coverage of Existing Buildings on Proposed Lots: The house and deck on Lot 1 will remain and will cover approximately 14% of the lot. There are currently no structures on proposed Lot 2 and therefore it has zero lot coverage. Any future buildings or structures will be allowed to cover no more than 35% of either lot. Hershman Short Plat File No. S-07-62 Page 5 of 8 Dedications 5. a.No dedications were required for the proposed subdivision. Improvements 6. a.See Engineering Requirements (Attachment 5). 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: 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.5. Protect residential areas from incompatible land uses through the careful control of other types of development and expansion based upon the following principles: B.5.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, thereby increasing the amount of available housing within the City. The development of the parcel must take into consideration the presence of the landslide/erosion hazard areas on the parcel. 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 of this document. D.Compliance with the Flood Plain Management Provisions 1.The proposed project is not located in a Flood Plain. Hershman Short Plat File No. S-07-62 Page 6 of 8 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? No. If more than 500 cubic yards of grading will be required, an Environmental Checklist is required. At this point, the total amount of grading for the subdivision improvements is not anticipated to exceed 500 cubic yards. If through review of the civil plans, it is determined that more than 500 cubic yards of grading will be necessary, the City will require an Environmental Checklist to be submitted and will issue an Environmental Determination. F.Critical Areas Review 1.Critical Areas Review number: CA-2007-0044. Results of Critical Areas Review: A critical areas study was required due to the presence of a possible landslide and/or erosion hazard area on the southern portion of the existing parcel as defined by ECDC 23.40. The applicant submitted a report prepared by Associated Earth Sciences (Attachment 6) that describes the areas in question and proposes buffer reduction and accompanying mitigation. The report indicates that the landslide hazard is situated on Lot 1 and that the hazard is stable. Because it is stable and because Lot 1 is already developed, buffer reduction from 50’ to 15’ was proposed. A portion of the reduced landslide buffer does encroach on Lot 2. This buffer nearly overlaps the erosion hazard area on Lot 2. The erosion hazard was also determined to be stable. Three mitigation recommendations were also presented. The City will use the recommendations to condition subdivision approval to ensure that the landslide buffer/erosion hazard area on Lot 2 will not be disturbed and the existing vegetation be maintained unless an appropriate landscaping plan is submitted and approved. G.Comments One public comment letter was received during the review of this proposal which is included as Attachment 7. rd 1. Michael Berman (20111 83 Ave. W) had concerns about run-off and erosion caused by the proposed action as well as development in relation to the identified erosion hazard on the subject property. Also, there was a question about using the existing and future homes as rental units. Staff Response: The applicant submitted a preliminary grading, drainage and utilities plan with the application (Attachment 4). The applicant must comply with specific Engineering Requirements at various stages of development. For example, the applicant must implement stormwater best management practices as described in Chapter 18.30 of the Edmonds Community Development Code and in the 1992 Department of Ecology Stormwater Manual. Civil plans must be submitted and approved by the Engineering Division prior recording the short plat and obtaining a building permit. Engineering also conducts a series of inspections during the development process to ensure that the approved civil plans are followed. Regarding development near the erosion hazard area, the applicant submitted a report describing site conditions and recommendations for mitigation techniques for development (see Section II.F.). These mitigations will allow development near the erosion hazard area without impacting adjacent properties. Finally, it is up to the owner of the parcel(s) whether the existing house on Lot 1 and any future house on Lot 2 are owner-occupied or renter-occupied. The lots are zoned for single family dwellings so only one single-family home can be on each lot. How the houses are used is a private decision. Hershman Short Plat File No. S-07-62 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 City staff to reconsider their 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 20.105.040 and 20.105.020 describes how appeals of a staff 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 staff has issued a 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 staff issues a decision on the reconsideration request. IV.LAPSE OF APPROVAL Section 20.075.100 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.APPENDICES Attachments: 1.Application 2.Vicinity / Zoning Map 3.Preliminary Plat Map, received July 30, 2007 4. Preliminary Grading, Drainage & Utilities Map, received September 18, 2007 5. Engineering Requirements 6. Critical Areas Report from Associated Earth Sciences, dated June 2, 2007 7. Email comment from Michael Berman, dated October 18, 2007 Hershman Short Plat File No. S-07-62 Page 8 of 8 VII.PARTIES OF RECORD Planning Division Steve Hershman Engineering Division rd 20101 83 Avenue West Parks and Recreation Edmonds, WA 98026 Public Works Fire Department Jackie H. Siebert Michael Berman Tri-County Land Surveying Company rd 20111 83 Avenue West th 4610 200 Street SW, Suite A Edmonds, WA 98026 Lynnwood, WA 98036