S-08-10 Staff Report.pdf
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 - 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020
PLANNING DIVISION
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND DECISION
To:
File S-2008-10
From
:
Mike Clugston, AICP
Planner
Date:
April 25, 2008
File:
S-2008-10
Applicant:
Ronald Steinman
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....................................................................................................6
D.Compliance with the Flood Plain Management Provisions...............................................................6
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
Steinman Short Plat
File No. S-08-10
Page 2 of 8
I.INTRODUCTION
th
The applicant is proposing to subdivide one lot addressed as 10506 235 Place SW 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. The proposed lot layout is shown on the subdivision map (Attachment
2). The existing detached garage and shed on proposed Lot 1 will be removed while the residence will
remain.
A.Application
1.Applicant: Ronald Steinman
th
2.Site Location: 10506 235 Place SW
3.Request: To divide one lot with a total
area of approximately 25,649 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) Chapter 16.20, single
family residential development
standards.
b.Compliance with ECDC Title 18,
public works requirements.
c.Compliance with ECDC Chapter
20.75, subdivision requirements.
d.Compliance with ECDC Chapter
20.95, staff review requirements.
e.Compliance with ECDC Chapter
City of Edmonds Zoning Map, December 14, 2007
23.40, critical areas requirements.
Note: All code sections referenced in this report can be viewed via the Citys 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.No trees may be removed on the parcel without an approved tree cutting plan pursuant to
ECDC 18.45. The applicant must either apply for a separate tree cutting permit pursuant
to 18.45 or may include a tree cutting plan with the application for civil improvements.
2.Prior to recording, the applicant must complete the following requirements:
a)Civil plans must be approved. In completing the civil plans, the applicant must
address the Engineering Division conditions listed Required as a Condition of
Subdivision on Attachment 4.
b)The existing residence on proposed Lot 1 will remain. The existing detached garage
and shed shall be removed. Demolition permits from the Building Division must be
issued prior to removal of the structures.
Steinman Short Plat
File No. S-08-10
Page 3 of 8
c)The encroachment of the greenhouse onto proposed Lot 2 must be resolved by either
moving the greenhouse to conform to the setback requirements of the zone or seeking
approval for a lot line adjustment to send the appropriate amount of land from Lot 2
to the adjoining parcel to the east to allow for sufficient setbacks for the greenhouse.
d)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 No. S-
2008-10 in the City of Edmonds Planning Division.
(2)Include on the plat all required information, including owners certification,
hold harmless agreement, staffs approval block, a declaration of short plat,
and dedications and maintenance provisions, as appropriate.
(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.
e)Make sure all documents to be recorded meet the Snohomish County Auditors
requirements for recording, including all signatures in black ink.
f)Submit two copies of the documents to be recorded for the Planning Division and
Engineering Divisions approval. Once approved, the applicant must record the
documents with Snohomish County Auditors office.
g)Submit an updated copy of the title report with the documents proposed to be
recorded.
3.After recording the plat, the applicant must complete the following:
a)Provide the City Planning Division with three copies of the recorded plat, with the
recording number written on them. The City will not consider the subdivision to
have been completed until this is done.
b)Complete the Engineering Division conditions listed Required as a Condition of
Building Permit on Attachment 4.
II.FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
A. Compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance
Introduction
1.
a.Setting:
th
The subject property at 10506 235 Place SW is located in the Single-Family Residential
(RS-8) zone. It is surrounded by similarly zoned and developed lots except to the south
where the zoning is RS-8 but it is currently vacant. The vacant area is the site of the former
Woodway Elementary School which is currently being redeveloped into a city park and a
planned residential development of approximately 27 single family lots.
b.Topography and Vegetation:
The subject site is fairly flat. A small hill off the southern edge of the parcel leads down to
the Old Woodway site. Vegetation on the parcel consists of typical residential landscaping,
including grass, small trees, and shrubs. There are also a significant number of large
deciduous and evergreen trees on the parcel which contribute to a very natural forested
appearance.
c.Lot Layout:
The proposed lot layout is shown on the preliminary plat map (Attachment 2). The existing
detached garage and shed will be removed from the parcel. The existing house will remain
th
on Lot 1. Both proposed lots will be accessed via individual driveways onto 235 Place SW.
Steinman Short Plat
File No. S-08-10
Page 4 of 8
Environmental Resources
2.
a.The subdivision chapter, ECDC 20.75.085, states that a proposed 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. While some trees will need to be removed as part of the
development of the site, the extent of tree removal proposed, particularly for Lot 2, is
excessive relative to the size of the lot and the proposed development on it (Attachment 3).
Pursuant to ECDC 18.45.030.A, the proposed subdivision is not exempt from obtaining a tree
cutting permit since the lot is capable of being divided into more than one additional lot.
Based on the square footage of the existing parcel (25,649 sf) and the minimum lot size
required in the zone (8,000 sf), three parcels could possibly be created. In addition, ECDC
18.45.050.A indicates that there shall be no clearing on a site for the sake of preparing that
site for sale or future development. Trees may only be removed pursuant to a clearing permit
which has been approved by the city. As a result, no tree clearing shall be allowed without
approval of a tree clearing plan by the Planning Division.
The applicant should attempt to preserve all of the trees on site to the maximum extent
practicable and consider relocating the proposed short plat improvements (utilities,
stormwater trench, etc.) to avoid tree impact. It is also noted that the Engineering Division is
th
not requiring frontage improvements along 235 Place SW so the removal of all the trees on
th
235 would not seem warranted.
b.The proposal minimizes grading because the site is relatively level. On-site improvements
are not anticipated to exceed SEPA thresholds; however, specific grading details are
reviewed with residential building permits.
c.No hazardous conditions, such as flood plains, steep slopes, or unstable soil or geologic
conditions exist at this site.
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.
e. Views in this location are local. It does not appear that they will be negatively impacted by
this proposal.
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
Lot 1 8,000 10,326 10,326
Lot 2 8,000 15,323 15,323
Lot Width:
The required lot width in the RS-8 zone is 70 feet. The proposed lots 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:
Steinman Short Plat
File No. S-08-10
Page 5 of 8
Lots 1 & 2: Street Setback (25 feet) from the north property line
Side Setback (7.5 feet) from the east and west property lines
Rear Setback (15 feet) from the south property line
Existing Structures / Encroachments: The existing detached garage and shed will be removed
from the parcel. The existing house will remain on Lot 1. There are two encroachments onto
the parcel currently: a portion of a small greenhouse encroaches onto the northeast corner of
proposed Lot 2 and a retaining wall and fence encroach slightly onto the western edge of Lot
1. Both encroachments are identified in a survey filed with the Snohomish County Auditor
(Recording # 200206125001), but there status is unresolved. The fence and retaining wall
encroachment onto Lot 1 can be maintained, but the status of the greenhouse encroachment
onto Lot 2 must be resolved and is included as a condition in this report.
b.Corner Lots: Neither lot is a corner lot.
c.Flag or Interior lot determination: Neither lot is a flag lot.
d.Lot Coverage of Existing Buildings on Proposed Lots:
When the detached garage and shed are removed, there will be approximately 8.1% lot
coverage remaining on Lot 1 and essentially zero lot coverage on Lot 2 (with the exception of
the small portion of greenhouse encroaching from the east). Any future buildings or
structures will be allowed to cover no more than 35% of each lot.
Dedications
5.
a.No dedications were required as part of this subdivision.
Improvements
6.
a.See Engineering Requirements (Attachment 4). Due to constraints of the site and
th
surrounding area relative to the width and alignment of 235 Place SW, the applicant
requested that frontage improvements not be required for this project (Attachment 5). After
consideration, the Engineering Division agreed to the request.
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.
Steinman Short Plat
File No. S-08-10
Page 6 of 8
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
removing a detached garage and shed on a fairly large lot and creating two smaller parcels. The
new parcel will be able to support the construction of a new single family home thereby increasing
the amount of available housing within the City. The natural environment presents few
constraints to the redevelopment of this parcel with the exception of the need to remove some
trees at the time of development.
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.
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 in time, 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-2007-0168.
Results of Critical Areas Reviews: The property does not appear to contain any critical areas as
defined by ECDC 23.40. As a result, a waiver from the requirement to complete a study was
issued.
G.Comments
One public comment letter was received during the review of this proposal which is included as
Attachment 6.
1. Edward P. Weigelt (23515 Robinhood Dr.) had a generally negative feeling about the proposed
subdivision feeling that it would change the character of the single family residential zone.
Staff Response: The proposed project is a subdivision, not a rezone. The underlying zoning in the
area is Single Family Residential (RS-8). The applicant has a larger lot and wishes to divide it into
two lots that are greater than the minimum of 8,000 square feet. Each lot can only be developed
with single family residential structures.
Steinman Short Plat
File No. S-08-10
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 the
staff has issued his/her decision on the reconsideration request, the time clock for filing an appeal
continues from the point it was stopped. For example, if a request is filed on day 5 of the appeal
period, an individual would have 9 more days in which to file an appeal after the staff issues their
decision on the reconsideration request.
IV.LAPSE OF APPROVAL
Section 20.075.100 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 Assessors Office.
VI.APPENDICES
Attachments:
1.Land Use Application
2.Preliminary Plat Map
3.Preliminary Development Plan
4.Engineering Requirements
5.Letter from LSA, Inc. regarding frontage improvements, dated April 3, 2008
6.Comment letter from Edward P. Weigelt, received March 4, 2008
Steinman Short Plat
File No. S-08-10
Page 8 of 8
VII.PARTIES OF RECORD
Planning Division
Ronald Steinman
20300 Whitman Avenue
Shoreline, WA 98133
Engineering Division
Jeffrey Trieber
Edward P. Weigelt
Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, Inc.
23515 Robinhood Drive
rd
19400 33 Avenue West, Suite 200
Edmonds, WA 98020
Lynnwood, WA 98036