PLN2024-0052 Hearing Examiner Decision1
2
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
IE:l
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
10
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 51h Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY
OF EDMONDS
Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner
RE: Firdale Village Daycare
Conditional Use Permit
PLN2024-0052
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS
OF LAW AND FINAL DECISION
INTRODUCTION
Jesse Binford of BC Investigative Engineers has requested approval of a conditional use to
expand the space of the existing daycare center at Firdale Village located at 9617 Firdale
Ave. The application is approved subject to conditions.
ORAL TESTIMONY
A computer -generated transcript of the hearing has been prepared to provide an overview
of the hearing testimony. The transcript is provided for informational purposes only as
Appendix A..
EXHIBITS
The October 16, 2024 staff report along with its five attachments were admitted during
the October 24, 2024 public hearing.
Conditional Use
P. 1 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural:
1. Applicant. Jesse Binford of BC Investigative Engineers, BC Investigative Engineers
3605 C St. NE Auburn, WA 98002.
2. Hearing. A virtual and in -person hearing on the subject applications was held on
October 24, 2024 at 3:00 pm in the City Hall of the City of Edmonds, 3rd Floor Brackett
Room. The hearing was left open through October 25, 2024 for additional public comment
since an applicant representative appeared to have difficulty joining into the hearing. No
additional comments were provided.
Substantive:
3. Site and Proposal Description. Jesse Binford of BC Investigative Engineers has
requested approval of a conditional use to expand the space of the existing daycare center
at Firdale Village located at 9617 Firdale Ave. The existing daycare center is a
nonconforming use and its expansion is authorized by approval of a conditional use permit.
The proposed daycare operation will occur within an existing shopping center. The
proposed tenant space will be the new location of an existing day care facility at the subject
property. No change to traffic flow through the site is proposed and parking requirements
will be met through review and approval of the above noted permit applications. The staff
report provides very little information on the details of the proposal. Staff confirmed at
hearing that the existing daycare center is located on the northwest corner of the project. A
proposed expansion to a separate building located on the southeast corner of the shopping
center will be used to expand the daycare operations. As far as can be ascertained from the
record, the expansion is a restoration of a building that was fire damaged and will result in
very roughly a doubling of building space for the child care operation. It's unknown whether
the restoration includes an enlargement of the building. Building permits have already been
issued for the restoration. Hearing testimony is unclear, but it appears that the expansion
will increase the child capacity of the operation by 38 or 39 children. The current capacity
is 38 children.
4. Characteristics of the Area. Multifamily Residential (RM-1.5) development is located
to the east, with all other sides zoned Single -Family Residential (RS-8). The only exception
is to the immediate south, across the county line in Shoreline, which is likewise developed
as single-family homes.
5. Adverse Impacts of Proposed Use. The proposal will not create any significant
adverse land use impacts.
A. Aesthetics. Impacts to aesthetics are more likely than not insignificant. As previously
noted, the expansion area involves the restoration of a building that sustained fire
damage. The record is unclear if this restoration involved any expansion of the building
or what types of exterior alterations, if any, resulted from the restoration over the
Conditional Use
p. 2 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
development of the site prior to the fire. However, even if the daycare portion were
entirely an enlargement over the former (pre -fire) building footprint, the added area is
relatively modest comparted to the bulk and scale of surrounding buildings. Further,
the FVMU zone has detailed designed standards that assure aesthetic compatibility and
would have been enforced during building permit review for the expansion. For these
reasons, the proposal is not found to create any significant adverse impacts.
B. Noise. A public comment letter raised a concern about noise and noted that the existing
noise generated by the use is already a problem. The Applicant's proposed expansion
will double the number of children served by the facility, thereby likely increasing
existing noise impacts. Staff noted that unamplified voices are exempt from the City's
noise ordinance during daytime hours. While the City's noise ordinance sets acceptable
levels of noise impacts, this doesn't preclude using the conditional use process to add
reasonable mitigation measures to reduce adverse impacts. The location, orientation
and buffering of the play area could be mitigated to reduce noise impacts. As best as
can be ascertained from the record, the current outdoor play area is locked in place and
cannot be relocated or redesigned to mitigate impacts on adjoining uses. It also appears
to be heavily treed along its perimeter, thus providing for reasonable noise buffering.
From the evidence presented there is nothing more that can be reasonably required of
the applicant to reduce noise impacts. Since anticipated noise will likely conform to the
City's noise ordinance, the proposal is not found to create significant noise impacts.
C. Parking. The staff report doesn't address the parking impacts of the proposal. However,
the Engineering Compliance Memo, Att. 5, identified that conformance to City parking
standards would be addressed during building permit review. This is found sufficient
to provide for adequate parking.
D. On -site Pedestrian Circulation. The public comment letter expressing concern about
noise also questioned whether it would be safe for children to be walked between the
two buildings used for the proposed daycare operation. The Applicant testified that
speed bumps are located on the project site to provide for safe circulation. A condition
of approval also requires that Public Works evaluate the project site for safe pedestrian
circulation between the two buildings of the proposed child care facility. This would be
similar to the assessment required for safe walking conditions to and from school for
preliminary plat review. As conditioned, the proposal is found to provide for safe on -
site pedestrian circulation.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Procedural:
1. Authority of Hearing Examiner. ECDC 20.01.003 classifies conditional use
permit applications as a Type III-B review process where the hearing examiner makes a
final decision on the application after holding a public hearing.
Substantive:
Conditional Use
p. 3 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
A.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2. ZoninDesignations. The project site is zoned Firdale Village Mixed Use
(FMVU) zone.
3. Permit Review Criteria. Conditional use permit criteria are governed by
ECDC 20.05.010 and joint use parking permit applications by ECDC 20.30.030. All
applicable criteria are quoted in italics below and applied through corresponding
conclusions of law.
ECDC 20.05.010: No conditional use permit maybe approved unless all of the findings
in this section can be made.
That the proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
4. The criterion is met for the reasons identified in Section VI of the staff report.
ECDC 20.05.010(B): Zoning Ordinance. That the proposed use, and its location, is
consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the purposes of the zone district
in which the use is to be located, and that the proposed use will meet all applicable
requirements of the zoning ordinance.
5. The criterion is met. The proposal meets or will meet all applicable
development standards. The existing use is nonconforming and may be expanded via a
conditional use as authorized by ECDC 17.40.O1O1). Further verification of applicable
zoning and all other development standards will be made during building permit review.
The proposal also meets the purpose of the zoning code. ECDC 16.100.000 provides that
the purpose of the FMVU zone is to create a vibrant neighborhood village form of
development that contributes to the vitality of the neighborhood. Provision of a needed
community service that brings together residents such as the proposed daycare service meets
this objective.
ECDC 20.05.010(C): Not Detrimental. That the use, as approved or conditionally
approved, will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, and
to nearby private property or improvements unless the use is a public necessity.
6. The criterion is met. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the proposal will not
create any significant adverse impacts, which includes impacts to adjoining property
owners.
ECDC 20.05.010(D): Transferability. The hearing examiner shall determine whether the
conditional use permit shall run with the land or shall be personal. If it runs with the land
and the hearing examiner finds it in the public interest, the hearing examiner may require
that it be recorded in the form of a covenant with the Snohomish County auditor. The
hearing examiner may also determine whether the conditional use permit may or may not
Conditional Use
p. 4 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
be used by a subsequent user of the same property.
7. The Applicant has not requested that the requested conditional use permit run
with the land so it will qualify as personal.
DECISION
The conditional use permit is approved subject to the condition that Public Works review
the project site for safe walking conditions for children walking between the two
buildings that comprise the proposed daycare use. Public Works may require reasonable
modifications to the parking area such as pathway striping to the extent reasonably
necessary to provide safe walking conditions for the children. It is recognized that Public
Works likely will not find any such modifications necessary or reasonable. The intent is
that this issue just be reviewed in case some reasonable mitigation is an option.
Dated this 7th day of November 2024.
iiV A. Olbrechts
City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner
Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
This land use decision is final and subject to closed record appeal to the City Council as
authorized by ECDC 20.01.003. Appeals must be filed within 14 days of the issuance
of this decision as required by ECDC 20.06.030(B). Reconsideration may be requested
within 10 calendar days of issuance of this decision as required by ECDC 20.06.140.
Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes
notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
Conditional Use p. 5 Findings, Conclusions and Decision