S-12-21 Complete But Need Additional Info.pdfJuly 11, 2012
F Y 0 1:7 : E . M 0 PINI
121 5th AVENUE NORTH ® EDMONDS, WA 98020 m (425) 771-0220 ® FAX (425) 771-0221
www.edmondswa.gov
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Mr. Carl Clap
841S-192 ° St. SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
DAVE EARLJNU
MAYOR
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR PROPOSED SHORT PLAT
FILE NO. PLN20120021
Dear Mr. Clapp:
Your land use application for a three -lot subdivision located at 8364 Olympic View Drive, File No.
PLN20120021 became complete on June 5, 2012; however, it was determined that additional
information/clarification is necessary. Please provide responses to the following items at your earliest
convenience so that staff's review of the proposal can continue:
1. Refer to the enclosed memorandum from Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager, dated June 5,
2012. The items listed in Ms. McConnell's memo will need to be addressed before review by the
Engineering Division can continue.
2. The legal description of the subject site as provided on the survey, site development plan, and within the
title report references three "parcels"; however, two of these "parcels" appear to be access easements
located on/adjacent to the eastern side of the subject site. Please explain why these easements are referred
to as "parcels", and why the legal description gives the impression that these easements are located on
property owned by Mr. Ritter in their entirety, while the survey map gives the impression that one of these
easements is located on property owned by Mr. and Mrs. Falk and the other easement is only in part
located on the subject site owned by Mr. Ritter.
A letter was received during the public comment period for the proposed short plat indicating that
permission has not been granted for the new lots to utilize the existing access easements. Access to Lot A
is proposed to be directly from Olympic View Drive; however, access to Lot B is proposed to be via the
existing access easements near the eastern side of the project site. As such, please submit sufficient
evidence that proposed Lot B will have legal rights to utilize the existing access easements or that a new
easement has been granted for the benefit of Lot B.
4. Due to the presence of slopes that are steep enough to qualify as a Landslide Hazard Area on and adjacent
to the subject site, a geotechnical report is required. Although a geotechnical report was provided as part
of the application for the preliminary approval that recently expired for the subject site (File No.
PLN20060044), one will need to be provided for the current application taking into account any changes
in the development plans that have been made between the original proposal and now. Additionally, the
geotechnical report will need to be updated to ensure that all current code requirements are addressed. As
such, please submit a geotechnical report prepared by a qualified geotechnical engineer addressing the
current proposal's compliance with all applicable requirements of the critical areas code contained within
Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapters 23.40 and 23.80. As part of addressing the
critical areas code requirements, particular attention must be paid in the geotechnical report to ECDC
it ria ri:1a;� cai.rna.i rugs ist :1 i, 1890
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
Section 23.80.070. As part of your response, please provide sufficient evidence as to how the design
standards of ECDC 23.80.070.A.3 will be met through the proposal, or if an alternative design would be
more compliant with these requirements. Design alternatives to consider include, but are not limited to, lot
layout, vehicular access (i.e. potential shared access for Lots A and B), future building location, etc.
The building envelope indicated on proposed Lot A based on applicable setback requirements is very
narrow. Although the preliminary development plans indicate the footprint of a potential home on Lot A,
this footprint is not in compliance with the 25 -foot street setback. As such, please provide evidence that a
home can reasonably be constructed on proposed Lot A while complying with the applicable setback
requirements. Additionally, in addressing this item, please include a review of how the proposed home
locations on both Lots A and B take into account the existing topography and how the design of the
subdivision and placement of the future homes meets the design standards of ECDC 23.80.070.A.3
discussed above.
6. The Special Use Permit issued by Snohomish County (AFN200607310183) states that the permit is to be
reexamined every five years. The Special Use Permit is dated July 31, 2006, so there should have been a
five year reexamination in July of 2011. Please submit the results from the County's reexamination of this
permit. In looking at the design and access to proposed Lots A and B as discussed above, did you
consider contacting Snohomish County regarding potentially purchasing the small triangle of property that
they own adjacent to the northeast corner of the site in order to have more flexibility with access and
avoiding impact to the slopes?
7. Please have your surveyor make the following corrections to the preliminary short plat map as well as to
the preliminary development plan (where applicable), and submit two large -format copies and one reduced
copy (no larger than 11" by 17") of all revised sheets:
a. The surveyor's notes state that the survey is based on the legal description from the bargain and sale
deed (AFN 200305200351) and that no other title search has been conducted. Since the survey must
accurately show all encumbrances on the property, please provide your surveyor with the current title
report and request that your surveyor update the preliminary short plat plans as necessary to reflect all
encumbrances on the property.
b. Indicate all existing and proposed easements.
c. One of the proposed legal descriptions includes several question marks in it. Verify that the legal
descriptions as indicated on the preliminary plans are correct and make any necessary corrections to
accurately reflect the existing and proposed legal descriptions.
d. The preliminary plans include a summary of proposed lot areas; however, the areas listed within the
summary conflict with those stated in each lot. Revise all inconsistencies in the lot areas listed on the
plans.
e. The gross areas of the proposed lots are indicated on the preliminary plans; however, net area is also
required in order to determine if the proposed lots comply with the minimum lot size requirements
applicable to the RS -12 zone. Provide net areas for each of the proposed lots. Net area is equivalent
to the gross area excluding the area of any vehicular access easements.
f. Label all existing structures, including the existing garage and the objects located on the northern and
eastern sides of the residence. Additionally, show the existing shed located near the western side of
proposed Lot C on the survey and any other existing structures that are not already indicated on the
preliminary plans. It must be shown that all existing structures and improvements comply with the
minimum required setbacks from the proposed property lines.
g. Correct the location of the street setbacks indicated on Lots B and C to be 25 feet from the western
boundary of the vehicular access easement.
Page 2 of 3
h. The Special Use Permit does not authorize the placement of any utilities within the easement, which is
intended for ingress and egress purposes only. As such, no utilities will be permitted within this
easement. Correct the label on the preliminary plans to indicate that this easement is for
ingress/egress purposes only.
i. The existing easement (AFN 1614380) makes reference to a Parcel A. It appears this may be an
original parcel that has since been subdivided. Please confirm location of this easement by indicating
the boundaries of the referenced Parcel A. This information could be provided on a separate sheet or
in a separate detail in order to avoid confusion with the preliminary short plat map.
ECDC 23.90.040.0 requires retention and/or establishment of 30 percent of native vegetation on
subdividable properties located within the RS -12 and RS -20 zones, which includes the requirement for
submittal of a vegetation management plan. Please submit a plan to satisfy this requirement, including an
indication of which portions of the site will be retained/established as native vegetation to account for the
30 percent area requirement and plans for how this area will be established and maintained in accordance
with the requirements of ECDC 23.90.040.C. This area is not required to be set aside as a Native Growth
Protection Area (NGPA), so please change the label on your preliminary development plan if you do not
intend for this area to be set aside as an NGPA. Additionally, measures must be taken to try to retain as
many existing trees as possible located both within and outside of the proposed native vegetation area.
Please indicate those trees that would be impacted by the installation of the subdivision improvements and
indicate how the trees to be retained will be protected during development in accordance with ECDC
18.45.050. It should be noted that any trees located within future building footprint areas that would not
be impacted by the installation of the subdivision improvements would not be able to be removed until the
time of building permit application review and approval for future structures on the site, unless the trees
are found to be hazardous or if removal is found to be consistent with the requirements of ECDC
18.45.050.
Please submit the above information as soon as possible, so that staff may continue processing your
application. Please keep in mind that a complete response to this information request must be received
within 90 days or the application will lapse for lack of information (ECDC 20.02.003.D). Thus, your
application will expire if the requested information is not received by October 9, 2012.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me at (425) 771-0220, extension 1224. I look forward to
working with you on this project.
Sincerely,
Development Services Department - Planning Division
r
' Jen Machuga
Associate Planner
Enclosure: Memorandum from Jeanie McConnell dated June 5, 2012
Cc: File No. PLN20120021
Mr. William Ritter
8364 Olympic View Drive
Edmonds, WA 98026
Page 3 of 3
Date: June 5, 2012
To: Jen Machuga, Planner
From: Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager
Subject: PLN20120021, 3 lot Short Plat
8364 Olympic View Drive
The comments provided below are based upon review of the preliminary plans & documents
for the subject short plat. Additional information is requested from the applicant at this time
in order to continue review of the application and provide preliminary approval of the short
plat. Please ask the applicant to revise and resubmit plans addressing each of the comments
below.
Please also note, after receiving preliminary short plat approval from the Planning Division,
the applicant will be required to submit a complete set of civil engineering plans to the City
Engineering Division for review and approval prior to recording.
1. A preliminary drainage proposal has been provided showing individual on-site detention
systems with connection to the City storm system. Please provide invert elevations to the
extent necessary to confirm discharge to the City storm system is possible.
2. If the city storm main is to be extended within the city right-of-way and parallel to
Olympic View Drive it shall be placed in the flow line and shall be 12" diameter pipe.
Please revise plans to show this layout revise to show this portion of the system on private
property.
3. Please revise plans to show the city watermain within Olympic View Drive and
connection of the water services to this main.
4. Please confirm how many lots (currently and proposed) will be taking access off the
private drive. Private drive shall be widened along county property (within easement area)
and adjacent to the subject development as follows:
® Where 5 or more homes take access the access road will need to be paved to 20 -
feet in width.
® At the point where only 3-4 homes are accessing the drive then the pavement can
be reduced to 16 -feet in width.
® A minimum 12 -feet of pavement width is required for anything less than that.
Please revise plans as needed and clearly show number of homes taking access.
Thank you.
City of Edmonds