StaffReport_PLN20110072-DentVarianceSIGNED.pdflUSS -y„ �1
121 5'1'Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 ® Fax: 425.771.0221 . Web: Nv,wJ.`dniotjds / ,gQv
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT ® PLANNING DIVISION
PLANNING DIVISION
Project: Dent Setback Variance
File Number: PLN20110072
Date of Report: December 29, 2010
From: t
Gina Coccia, Associate Planner
Public Hearing: January 12, 2010.at 3:00 P.M.
Edmonds Public Safety Complex: Council Chambers
250 5"' Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020
The applicants, Paul and Jenelle Dent, plan to build an addition to their home on a lot in north Edmonds
at 16330 75"' Place West which is located in the RS -20 zone. Because the width of the lot is unusually
narrow (about 42 feet) and because the RS -20 zone has the largest side setbacks required in any single
family zone (35 feet total, 1.0 foot minimum side setback), the applicants have requested a variance for
both north and south side setbacks in order to design an addition to their modest mid-century home. The
side setback variance would allow their proposed addition to be located about 5 feet from the north and
south property lines as indicated on the attached site plan. Photos, floor plans, elevations, and a site plan
have been submitted for analysis.
1. Applicant: Paul & Jenelle Dent.
2. Site Location: 16330 75`x' Place West, Edmonds.
3. Zoning: Single Family Residential (RS -20).
4. Re nest: A variance to allow a residential addition to be constructed as close as 5 feet from the north
and south property lines.
5. Review Process: Variance — the Hearing Examiner conducts a public hearing and issues the final
decision in writing.
6. Major Issues:
A. Compliance with. ECDC 16.20 (Single Family Residential).
B. Compliance with ECDC 20.85 (Variances).
Dent Setback Variance
File No. PLN20110072
Page 2 of 7
III. SEPA THRESHOLD DETERMINATION
Variances granted based on special circumstances are exempt from SEPA review (WAC 197-11-
800(6)(b) and ECDC 20.15A.080). A variance alone does not require SEPA review. Therefore, the
Applicant and the City have complied with the requirements of ECDC 20.15.A.
IV. PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
A "Notice of Application and Hearing" was mailed to owners within 300 feet of the site as well
published in the Everett Herald and posted in the required locations (on site, at City Hall, in the Pubic
Safety Complex, and at the Library). Compliance with Chapter 20.03 (Public Notice) has been satisfied
with the assistance of the Planning Division (Attachment 8).
V. TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
This application was reviewed and evaluated by the City's Fire District, Engineering Division, Parks and
Recreation Department, and the Public Works Department. No issues or concerns were raised by the
above reviewing bodies.
VI. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Comprehensive Plan designation for this site is "Single Family Resource. " The following excerpts
provide guidance for development:
Residential Development
B.I. 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.2. Protect neighborhoods fi°om incompatible additions to existing buildings that do not harmonize
with existing structures in the area.
B.3. Minimize encroachment of 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 on the following principles:
B. S. a. Residential privacy is a fundamental protection to be upheld by local government.
B.S.b. Traffic not directly accessing residences in a neighborhood must be discouraged.
B.S.c. Stable property values must not be threatened by view, traffic, or land use encroachments.
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 the
slopes, soils, geology, vegetation and drainage.
(Comprehensive Plan, Pages 71-72)
Dent Setback Variance
File No. PLN20110072
Page 3 o f 7
The site is located in a residential neighborhood and the use is existing and will not change. The existing
home is situated on the western
half of the lot and the new
addition is proposed just east of
the home. Because of the
gradual slope down towards the
water, the addition will appear
to be one single storey (15') so
no views should be
compromised. They are
proposing to rehabilitate their
existing home and the addition
has been designed to fit with the
character of the home. Because of the slope, the resulting product will not feel massive as viewed from
the street. The home to the north is not near the property line, and it is situated so that it's garage and
driveway are between it and the proposed addition. The home to the south is close to the south property
line, separated by rockeries, and is logically the only property to have an impact by the proposed addition
as it is proposed to be situated in a similar location east/west on the lot, whereas now the property to the
south currently enjoys a staggered effect. However, the lot to the south is almost 70' wide and appears to
have room to expand, whereas the applicant's property does not. No new traffic will be generated,
because the site will still contain one single family. A waiver was issued from critical areas requirements
under file CRA20040069, so it is unlikely that any adverse environmental impacts will occur from this
addition. It is up to the discretion of the Development Services Department to require soils and
geotechnical reports with the building permit application.
To date, no public comments have been received.
M121211 1 NI,'< <. , t �., . .
1. Site Description:
A. Zonin : The zoning of the subject property is Single Family Residential (RS -20).
B. Lot Information: The house was constructed in 1957 and then later annexed into the City of
Edmonds on August 1, 1963. It is described as tax parcel number 00513106000900 and is 0.22
acres (about 9583 square feet). The minimum lot size for new lots in the RS -20 zone, so this lot
is about half the size of a standard lot. The minimum lot width in the RS -20 zone is 100 feet, so
this lot is less than half as wide as a standard RS -20 lot.
C. Development: The site is currently developed with a small 3 -bedroom single family home (928
square foot first floor and 672 square foot lower level, according to the County Assessor's
records) while the floor plans submitted propose a four bedroom home with a 2 -car garage.
D. Terrain & Vegetation: The site slopes west down towards the railroad tracks. The City's
LiDAR data indicates a 38 -foot difference in elevation across the entire site (237 feet) between
the street and the railroad tracks.
E. Critical Areas: A critical areas "checklist" was submitted under file number CRA20040069 and
it was determined that there are no critical areas on or adjacent to the property. Therefore, a
Dent Setback Variance
File No. PLN20110072
Page 4 of 7
"waiver" from Title 23 ECDC (the City's critical areas ordinance) was issued. During the site
visit, staff noted no critical areas. The rolling slope will be re-evaluated during building permit
review for compliance with Title 23 ECDC.
F. Soils: According to the USDA soils map, this site consists of both `Alderwood Gravelly Sandy
Loams " and "Alderwood-Everett Gravelly Sandy Loam. "
G. Wildlife: None noted upon site visit.
H. Access: The site is accessed via 75`I' Place West, which is considered a "Collector Street. "
2. Neighboring Development & Zoning: The site is located in north Edmonds furthest west adjacent
to the BNSF railroad tracks and Puget Sound. The neighborhood is a mix of RS -20 and RS -12
single-family zoned properties.
3. Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Compliance:
A. Bulk & Use Zoning Standards (ECDC 16.20):
The fundamental site development standards pertaining to residential development in the RS -20
zone are set forth in Chapter 16.20.030. The table below illustrates the required and proposed
setbacks to construct the new addition.
Required
Existing
Proposed
East "Street" West "Rear" North "Side" South "Side"
25'
25'
35'/10''
35'/10'
> 100'
25'
5'
3'
> 70'
25'
.51
5'
The existing home does not meet the required side setbacks. The proposed addition will not be
set further towards the side property lines than the existing home. The 42' wide lot would
normally require 35' of side setbacks, leaving room for a 7' wide building addition. The height
of the addition is one storey, and height calculations will be required with the building permit,
but it appears as though the project was designed to remain under the 25' height limit. The
maximum lot coverage in all single family zones is 35%, and for a 9583 square foot lot this
would mean the lot coverage would need to remain under 3354 square feet. The site plan
indicates the lot coverage is 3119 square feet. This will be evaluated with the building permit
application, but it appears as though the applicant is attempting to meet all other development
standards except for the side setbacks, which they are requesting relief from.
B. Variance (ECDC 20.85):
ECDC 20.85 states that an applicant may request a variance from the standards of this chapter
pursuant to the procedures set forth in ECDC 20.85. This chapter also sets forth the mechanism
whereby a provision of the code may be varied on a case-by-case basis if the application of the
provision would result in an unusual and unreasonable hardship. ECDC 20.85.010 contains the
findings that must be made in order for a Variance application to be approved. According to the
aforementioned code section, "No variance may be approved unless all of the findings in this
section can be made. " The findings are as follows:
1 35110 means 35 feet combined with a minimum distance of 10 feet on either side.
Dent Setback Variance
File No. PLN20110072
Page S of 7
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;
Special circumstances include the size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the
property, public necessity as of public structures and uses set forth in ECDC 17.00.030 and
environmental factors such as vegetation, streams, ponds and wildlife habitats;
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 abiliiy 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;
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;
Comprehensive Plan. That the approval of the variance will be consistent with the
comprehensive plan;
Zoning Ordinance. That the approval of the variance will be consistent with the zoning
ordinance and the zone district in which the property is located;
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;
Minimum Variance. That the approved variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner
rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning.
1. The applicant submitted arguments for how they feel they meet the variance criteria.
2. Staff agrees with the applicant's review of criteria and their proposal.
IX. CONCLUSIONS
1. Special Circumstances — Special circumstances exist on the site related to the size of the property
and the width of the property. The existing lot and home were legally established under the County's
jurisdiction, which justify approval of the variance. The lot is well under half the required lot width
for the zone, and well under half the minimum lot area for the zone.
2. Special Privilege — The City would treat another sub -standard lot in the same way. Below is a list of
approved setback variances in north Edmonds over the last ten years.
File Number Address Request
PLN.2001.119
6907 174`h Street SW
Street and side setback
variances
PLN.2002.185
18025 69`h Place W
Rear setback variance
PLN.2005.51
17126 69th Place W
Front setback variance
PLN.2005.53
17118 691h Place W
Front setback variance
PLN.2005.72
7400 158th Street SW
Street setback variance
Dent Setback Variance
File No. PLN20110072
Page 6 of 7
The proposed site plan and elevations reflect a moderately sized house for the neighborhood. The
existing home would get a face-lift and the proposed addition would include a 2 -car garage. There
have been approved setback variances in this neighborhood due to similar circumstances (relatively
small lots in a zone that requires the largest setbacks), therefore, the approval of a variance would not
be a grant of special privilege.
3. Comprehensive Plan — See Section VI of this report for a discussion on consistency with the
Comprehensive Plan for the City of Edmonds. The project is compliant with the goals and policies
of the Comprehensive Plan related to "Residential Development."
4. Zoning Ordinance — See Section VIII.3 of this report for a discussion on consistency with the
criteria given the zoning code of the City of Edmonds. If approved, the project would comply with
the Zoning Code. The project requires a variance to the side setback requirements to be approved
before it will comply with the requirements of the RS -20 zoning standards.
5. Not Detrimental —The proposal will not be detrimental or injurious to adjacent property owners nor
to the public's health, safety, or welfare. No views will be obstructed by the addition, because it will
be stair -stepped down the slope. No public comments have been received to date.
6. Minimum Variance — The requested variance is the minimum necessary to construct any addition on
the property. The addition is as wide as the existing home, which is only around 35 feet wide.
Anything more narrow would result in an addition that feels like a hotel room where you have to pass
through one room to get to the next. The proposal is just wide enough to gain additional living area
but not nearly as large as the other homes in the neighborhood.
7. Because the proposal meets all of the criteria for a variance, the side setback variance should be
approved as described on the application (Attachment 3) and as shown on the preliminary plans
(Attachment 5).
X. RECOMMENDATION
Based on statements of Fact, Conclusions, and Attachments in this report, staff finds that all six variance
criteria are met and therefore recommends that the Hearing Examiner APPROVE the north and south
side setback variance.
PM PARTIES O.
1. Paul & Jenelle Dent— 16330 75th Place West, Edmonds WA 98020.
Street and side setback
variances (reduce 10' side
PLN.2005.162
15625 751h Place W
setback to 6.6' and 25' street
setback to 5.5' from the
lanned ROW line)
PLN.2007.47
7115 174th Street SW
Street setback variance
PLN.2007.84
15515 75th Place W
Two street setback variances
PLN.2008.12
7815 175th Street SW
Side setback variance (5')
The proposed site plan and elevations reflect a moderately sized house for the neighborhood. The
existing home would get a face-lift and the proposed addition would include a 2 -car garage. There
have been approved setback variances in this neighborhood due to similar circumstances (relatively
small lots in a zone that requires the largest setbacks), therefore, the approval of a variance would not
be a grant of special privilege.
3. Comprehensive Plan — See Section VI of this report for a discussion on consistency with the
Comprehensive Plan for the City of Edmonds. The project is compliant with the goals and policies
of the Comprehensive Plan related to "Residential Development."
4. Zoning Ordinance — See Section VIII.3 of this report for a discussion on consistency with the
criteria given the zoning code of the City of Edmonds. If approved, the project would comply with
the Zoning Code. The project requires a variance to the side setback requirements to be approved
before it will comply with the requirements of the RS -20 zoning standards.
5. Not Detrimental —The proposal will not be detrimental or injurious to adjacent property owners nor
to the public's health, safety, or welfare. No views will be obstructed by the addition, because it will
be stair -stepped down the slope. No public comments have been received to date.
6. Minimum Variance — The requested variance is the minimum necessary to construct any addition on
the property. The addition is as wide as the existing home, which is only around 35 feet wide.
Anything more narrow would result in an addition that feels like a hotel room where you have to pass
through one room to get to the next. The proposal is just wide enough to gain additional living area
but not nearly as large as the other homes in the neighborhood.
7. Because the proposal meets all of the criteria for a variance, the side setback variance should be
approved as described on the application (Attachment 3) and as shown on the preliminary plans
(Attachment 5).
X. RECOMMENDATION
Based on statements of Fact, Conclusions, and Attachments in this report, staff finds that all six variance
criteria are met and therefore recommends that the Hearing Examiner APPROVE the north and south
side setback variance.
PM PARTIES O.
1. Paul & Jenelle Dent— 16330 75th Place West, Edmonds WA 98020.
XII. ATTACHMENTS
1.
Zoning & Vicinity Map
2.
Land Use Application
3.
Criteria Statement
4.
Photographs existing home
5.
Site Plans (not to scale)
6.
Floor Plans
7.
Elevations
8.
Public Notice
Dent Setback Variance
File No. PLN20110072
Page 7 of 7