Preliminary Plat -- High PointI
r.0C. 189�
611
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Density, traffic, trees, wetlands, walking conditions
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 51h Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF EDMONDS
Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner
RE: 18500 High Street Plat
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS
Preliminary Formal Plat OF LAW AND FINAL DECISION
PLN2024-0040
INTRODUCTION
The applicant proposes subdividing a 3.3-acre property located at 18500 High Street
into seven (7) via conservation subdivision design (ECDC 20.75.048). The
application is approved subject to conditions.
Several neighbors expressed concerns over the project. Their biggest concerns
centered upon traffic impacts and poor water pressure. Commenters also indicated
concern about unauthorized use of the private road east of High Street. Utility -related
comments focused on available water, stormwater management, and fire hydrant
access. Other concerns expressed included environmental impacts, such as the
retention of the western redcedar at the north end of the property and the presence of
wildlife onsite. These issues are addressed in detail in the Findings of Fact below,
pages 3-8.
As noted by the Examiner during the public hearing, the City's development
standards have been designed to address most of the concerns raised by the neighbors.
Often these standards are not found acceptable to those affected. The reason for that
is state mandates require the City to accommodate high levels of additional
population while constitutional limitations prevent the City from requiring developers
to mitigate existing conditions or anything else beyond the impacts they create. For
the most part City staff have taken mitigation as far as City standards allow.
How development standards have been applied is detailed in the findings below. The
transcript of the proceeding, Appendix A, also provides a good overview of how City
Subdivision P. 1 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
staff have responded to public concerns. Of particular significance is that City
engineering staff have been focused upon not reducing water pressure to neighboring
properties. The City Engineer also identified the addition of traffic calming devices
(speed bumps) to Olympic Drive to reduce speeding and the associated impact to
sight distance at the intersection of Olympic and High Point.
The Examiner was able to add a couple conditions beyond those recommended by
staff. One condition requires the posting of signs along the adjoining private drive to
prohibit parking of construction vehicles. This condition was volunteered by the
applicant during the hearing. The other condition requires the applicant to provide
staff with an assessment of walking conditions to any off -site school bus stop and
requires staff to require off -site improvements as necessary to assure safe walking
conditions to and from the bus stop(s), if any.
Another point of concern was the loss of wildlife and habitat at the project site.
Those issues have already been addressed in the City's conservation subdivision
standards. Conservation subdivisions promote the retention of significant trees and
protection of natural resources in exchange for flexibility in site development
standards. The proposed conservation area protects the steep slope, trees, understory,
and stream from development beyond the minimum requirements of the critical areas
ordinance (Chapter 23.40 ECDC). To address concern over nesting bald eagles in
Hutt Park, per ECDC 23.90.040(A)(3), the Federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection
Act protects bald eagle habitat. Washington's bald eagle protection rules (WAC 232-
12-292) apply only if the State lists them as an endangered or threatened species. The
bald eagle is currently not listed as endangered or threatened and thus is not subject to
City or state protection.
ORAL TESTIMONY
A computer -generated transcript of the hearing has been prepared to provide an
overview of the hearing testimony. The transcript is not intended to provide a
precisely accurate rendition of testimony but generally identifies the subjects
addressed during the hearing. The transcript is provided for informational purposes
only as Appendix A.
EXHIBITS
Exhibits 1-10 listed on pages 2 of the staff report dated February 7, 2025, were
admitted into the record at the February 13, 2025, public hearing. Ex_ 11, the
preliminary drainage report for the project, was admitted as Exhibit 11 during the
hearing. Attachments will be referred to as exhibits in this Decision.
Subdivision p. 2 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1
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/Owner. Chris Lyon, High Street LLC, 320 Dayton St, Suite 10,
Edmonds, WA 98020.
2. Hearing. A Hybrid public hearing on the application was held at Edmonds
City Hall, 121 5th Ave N in the 3rd Floor Brackett Room and on Zoom or by phone on
February 13, 2025 at 3:00 pm, Meeting ID No. 842 7405 7639.
Substantive:
3. Site/Proposal Description. The Applicant is proposing to subdivide a 3.3-
acre site located 18500 High Street into 7 single family lots, with one of the lots
retaining the existing single-family residence. The Applicant proposes to use the
provisions of Conservation Subdivision Design, ECDC 20.75.048, which allow for lot
and site layout flexibility to retain significant trees on the property. Furthermore, the
applicant proposes a conservation subdivision pursuant to Section 20.75.048,
retaining all trees in the stream buffer and geological hazard areas. While the
applicant provided no inventory of the trees within the critical areas per ECDC
23.10.060(B)(2)(a), because of the nature of conservation subdivisions, the
prohibition of tree removal from critical areas, and phased review of tree retention
and protection plans.
4. Characteristics of the Area. The project site is in a quiet, heavily wooded,
single-family neighborhood west of Hutt Park (Ex. 3, Packet Pg. 38). It is located
between Olympic View Drive on the west and 92°d Ave West on the east, north of
187th St SW, on High Street which dead -ends into the project site.
5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts created by the
proposal. The City issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for the
proposed project on January 17, 2025. Impacts are more specifically addressed as
follows:
A. Critical Areas. The proposal will not adversely affect any critical areas. The
site slopes downward to the south and west, which the critical areas
determination (CRA2024-0068) identified as potential severe erosion and
landslide hazard areas. The submitted critical areas report also mapped a Type
F stream coursing through the southern extent of the lot and its southern
neighbors, , each addressed separately below. See pages 2 & 3 of Exhibit 1.
City staff have found that the proposal conforms to the City's critical area
requirements. Project opponents have not identified any potential
noncompliance and none is evident from the record. The proposal is found to
Subdivision
p. 3 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
conform to the City's critical area regulation and therefore no more protection
can be required of the applicant to protect the environmental resources of the
project site, including wetlands, streams, geologically hazardous areas and
wildlife.
1. Steep Slopes / Erosion and Landslide Hazard Area. The critical areas
determination (CRA2024-0068) identified potential severe erosion and
landslide hazard areas on the site. See Exhibit 7, packet pages 199 - 274.
2. Stream. The site contains a Type F stream which is addressed in Exhibit
7, pages 170 — 198. Streams are considered critical areas pursuant to
ECDC Chapter 23.90 and may require development buffer zones of 40ft -
150ft (ECDC 23.90.040(D)). Waterways that are confirmed to contain fish
habitat by the Washington Department of Natural Resources are
considered fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas within the City of
Edmonds (ECDC 23.90.010(A)(1)(b)).
B. Tree Retention. The proposal provides for adequate protection of trees
because it complies with the City's tree retention standards.
The tree regulations of Chapter 23.10 ECDC apply to this subdivision. The
applicant submitted a tree retention and protection plan (Attachment 6) as
required by ECDC 23.10.060. Per the phased tree review process (ECDC
23.10.060(B)(3)), the City reviews the proposal at each step of development
for updated tree plans, including civil improvement plan review and
associated building permits.
Retention
ECDC 23.10.060(C)(1) requires subdivisions retain at least 30% of all
significant trees in the developable area onsite. ECDC 23.10.005 defines
significant trees as those with a trunk diameter of at least six inches at 4.5 feet
from existing grade (diameter at breast height - DBH). The developable site
includes the gross site area of the lot minus any critical areas and buffers
(ECDC 23.10.020(D)). In the context of single-family lots, erosion hazard
areas sloped more than 25% count as critical areas rather than the standard
15% or greater classification (ECDC 23.10.040(A)(1)). Other critical areas or
their buffers remain unchanged by the tree code.
The site contains eleven significant trees in the developable area. The
applicant proposes to retain eight of these, which exceeds the 30% threshold
and meets the 50% significant tree retention standard in ECDC 23.10.060(G).
If a development retains at least 50% of the significant trees on a site, the fees -
in -lieu of replanting do not apply per ECDC 23.10.080(E). Fees -in -lieu
Subdivision p. 4 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
payments may be required in subsequent phases if the overall retention falls
below 50% of the significant trees existing pre -development.
Furthermore, the applicant proposes a conservation subdivision pursuant to
Section 20.75.048, retaining all trees in the stream buffer and geological
hazard areas. While the applicant provided no inventory of the trees within the
critical areas per ECDC 23.10.060(B)(2)(a), because of the nature of
conservation subdivisions, the prohibition of tree removal from critical areas,
and phased review of tree retention and protection plans (ECDC
23.10.060(B)(3)(a)), staff waives this requirement at this time. The City may
request an inventory of these trees during a later development application
phase.
Replacement
Apart from dead, dying, or diseased trees, ECDC 23.10.080 requires
replacement of each significant tree removed in association with development.
Based on the sizes of the proposed significant tree to be removed, ECDC
23.10.080(A) requires fourteen replacements. The applicant proposes planting
these replacements along the eastern perimeter of Lots 1-4. ECDC
23.10.080(D)(3) requires replacements shall primarily be native species,
though the submitted tree retention and protection plan lists no specific
choices.
As noted above, code requires an updated replacement plan with each future
phase of project review to verify consistency with the replacement
specifications in Chapter 23.10. The number of removals and thus the number
and location of proposed replacements may change at a future development
phase.
Public comments expressed over the retention of the western redcedar at the
north end of the property and the presence of wildlife onsite. Conservation
subdivisions promote the retention of significant trees and protection of
natural resources in exchange for flexibility in site development standards.
The proposed conservation area protects the steep slope, trees, understory, and
stream from development beyond the minimum requirements of the critical
areas ordinance (Chapter 23.40 ECDC). Staff have determined that the
proposed tree removal complies with the City's tree retention standards. The
record reflects this compliance and project opponents did not identify any
noncompliance. The applicant cannot be made to retain more trees than
required by City ordinances. As such, the proposed tree removal is found to
not create any significant impacts as contemplated in city regulations and no
further retention can be required of the applicant.
Subdivision
p. 5 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
6. Adequacy of Infrastructure and Public Services. As conditioned by this decision,
adequate infrastructure will serve development as follows:
A. Drainage: The City's drainage standards impose detailed requirements that
mandate that the proposal maintain pre -development off -site stormwater flow
volumes and velocities. Consequently, no adverse stormwater impacts to adjoining
properties or the environment are anticipated. The City's stormwater manual is based
upon the Washington State Department of Ecology stormwater manual, which by is
required to incorporate all known, available and reasonable methods of stormwater
prevention, control and treatment (AKART) as required by RCW 90.52.040 and
RCW 90.48.010. These standards include requiring that off -site flows created by the
proposal don't exceed pre -developed forested conditions of the project site. Water
quality treatment must also conform to AKART, The Applicant has prepared a
preliminary stormwater design (Ex. 3), and staff has found the design as integrated
into the preliminary plat design to adequately meet stormwater standards for purposes
of preliminary plat review.
Public comments, Ex. 8, identified that flooding had occurred in the area in the
1990's. As noted above, the City's stormwater regulations require the stormwater
system for the project site to not increase any off -site stormwater flows. The
Applicant's preliminary stormwater report, Ex. 3, contains detailed calculations
demonstrating compliance with this requirement that public works staff have found to
be sufficient. Given the absence of any evidence to the contrary, it must be
concluded that the project will not add to the drainage problems currently faced by
the surrounding neighborhood.
B. Transportation: The proposal provides for adequate and appropriate
transportation facilities.
The project site is located at the southern end of High St. Each of the proposed lots
will take access from High St, which connects Olympic View Dr to the northwest.
Staff received seven comments on this application. Commenters primarily expressed
concern about the High Street right-of-way and water utility issues. Specifically,
commenters fear the impact increased traffic may have on the vicinity. The
Engineering Division's Memorandum of Compliance (Attachment 9) addresses traffic
and right-of-way issues relevant to this preliminary phase in greater detail.
Commenters also indicated concern about unauthorized use of the private road east of
High Street at the northern boundary of the subject lot. Utility -related comments
focused on available water, stormwater management, and fire hydrant access.
The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed plat development and found no site
distance problems as regulated by City code. She noted that the transportation
engineer did not see this specific development contributing traffic at a level that
would warrant additional implementation of any improvements on the High Street
Subdivision p. 6 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and Olympic View drive intersection. The City's sight distance standards set
acceptable sight distance levels for the City's intersections. No evidence or claims
were presented that sight distance fails to conform to the City's public works
standards addressing street design. Absent any suggestion that the intersection fails
to conform to street standards, the Engineer's finding of compliance is determinative
and no mitigation can be required of the applicant.
Public concerns were also raised about speeding on High Street, which exacerbated
sight distance problems. Staff responded at the hearing that speed bumps will be
installed on the southern end of Olympic View drive to address part of this concern
and that further assessment will happen in 2025 for traffic calming on the north of
High Steet.
C. Parks and Open Space: According to ECDC 20.75.090, before or concurrent with
the approval of the final plat of any subdivision, the subdivider shall dedicate land,
pay a fee in -lieu of dedication, or do a combination of both, for park and recreational
purposes. With the adoption of Ordinance 3934 in 2013, park impacts are now
addressed through the assessment of park impact fees in accordance with Edmonds
City Code (ECC) Chapter 3.36.
However, as stated above, staff recommends conditioning approval on coordination
with the Parks Department about creating access to Hutt Park via the proposed open
space tract. Whether this takes shape as a dedication would be determined by the
applicant together with Parks during the civil improvements phase.
D. Water and Sewer: The Olympic View Water and Sewer District (OVWSD) is the
water and sewer supplier for the project site. OVWSD will be involved in the civil
subdivision plan review process and must approve the water and sewer
improvements.
Residents expressed concern about existing low water pressure. As a matter of
constitutional law, applicants cannot be made to fix existing problems, including low
water pressure. However, they certainly can be made to mitigate against impacts that
make existing conditions worse, if such impacts are not within legislative standards
that find the impacts acceptable. The City's Engineer testified that the utilities
engineer has verified that the system can handle the added connection without a drop
of existing water pressure. She noted that water pressure impacts will be further
assessed during civil plan review.
South County Fire has reviewed the application, which would include ensuring that
International Fire Code fire hydrant standards are met.
E. Schools and Walking Conditions to Schools: Citywide efforts to provide safe
transportation include enforcement of traffic regulations, provision of crosswalk and
sidewalks for pedestrians, and provision of well -designed streets for safe driving.
Subdivision p. 7 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Safety also involves ongoing coordination with emergency service providers to
ensure access for their emergency equipment. Recommendations to address safety
issues are based on assessment of historical collision data, focused sub -area or
corridor safety studies, or on citizen feedback.
The City of Edmonds applies a Walkway Prioritization Process provided in the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan in assessing where sidewalks
should be required or upgraded. Criteria have been developed to evaluate and
prioritize walkway improvement projects. These criteria (which include distance from
schools) are used to prioritize improvements to walkway sections that are identified
based on input from public meetings, Walkway Committee meetings, and deficiencies
determined from a review of the existing city walkway inventory. The criteria are
weighted according to their importance. A system of points is used to evaluate each
proposed project against each criterion. The result is a weighted average score that
helps to compare and prioritize proposed projects. The City's policy is to consider
these criteria in conjunction with City code and the Sidewalk Comprehensive Plan
Map in determining sidewalk requirements for subdivisions.
High Street is a local street in the RS-12 zone. The Comprehensive Sidewalk Plan
map does not show a requirement for sidewalks on High Street and ECDC 18.90.030
indicates that sidewalks are not required in the RS-12 zone. Therefore, sidewalks are
not required adjacent to the subject property along High Street.
The steep slope down to the stream presents a poor opportunity to provide
recreational pedestrian trail access, even if the critical areas ordinance permits such
uses (ECDC 23.40.220(C)(7)). Providing access to adjacent Hutt Park requires the
Parks Department's review. A condition of approval requires the applicant to work
with the City's Parks, Recreation and Human Services Department to provide access
to Hutt Park through the proposed open space tract.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Procedural:
1. Authority of Hearing Examiner. ECDC 20.01.003 provides the Hearing
Examiner with the authority to hold a hearing and issue a final decision on
preliminary plat applications, classifying them as Type III -A applications.
Substantive:
2. Zoning Designation. The subject property is zoned Single -Family
Residential (RS-12).
Subdivision
P. 8 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
3. Review Criteria and Application. Chapter 20.75 ECDC governs the
review criteria for subdivisions. Relevant criteria are quoted below and applied
through corresponding conclusions of law.
ECDC 20.75.080(A): General findings. A proposed subdivision may be approved
only if all of the following general findings can be made for the proposal, as approved
or as conditionally approved.•
Subdivision Ordinance. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of this chapter
(as listed in ECDC 20.75.020) and meets all requirements of this chapter.
4. Criterion Met. The criterion is met. The proposed subdivision is consistent with
ECDC 20.75.020 and all the requirements of ECDC 20.75. The proposed subdivision
will not create any significant adverse impacts and will provide for appropriate
infrastructure as determined in Findings of Fact No. 5 and 6. For these reasons, as
intended by ECDC 20.75.020, the proposal will not negatively impact public health,
safety or general welfare, will not negatively impact congestion on streets and
highways, and will have adequate access to water, utilities, sewerage, storm drainage
and will provide proper ingress and egress.
ECDC 20.75.080(B): Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is consistent with the
provisions of the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan, or other adopted City policy, and is
in the public interest.
5. Criterion Met. The criterion is met. The proposal is consistent with the
comprehensive plan for the reasons identified at pages 6 — 8 of the staff report.
ECDC 20.75.080(C): Zoning Ordinance. The proposal meets all requirements of the
zoning ordinance, or a modification has been approved as provided for in this
chapter.
6. Criterion Met. The criterion is met. The proposal is consistent with the City's
zoning ordinance for the reasons identified at pages 8-10 of the staff report.
ECDC 20.75.080(D): Floodplain Management. The proposal meets all requirements
of the Edmonds Community Development Code relating toFoodplain management.
7. Criterion Met. The criterion is met. The proposed project is not located within a
designated flood plain management area.
ECDC 20.75.085(A): Environmental.
1. Where environmental resources exist, such as trees, streams, ravines or wildlife
habitats, the proposal shall be designed to minimize significant adverse impacts to
the resources. Permanent restrictions may be imposed on the proposal to avoid
impact.
Subdivision P. 9 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
2. The proposal shall be designed to minimize grading by using shared driveways
and by relating street, house site and lot placement to the existing topography.
3. Where conditions exist which could be hazardous to the future residents of the
land to be divided, or to nearby residents or property, such as flood plains, steep
slopes or unstable soil or geologic conditions, a subdivision of the hazardous land
shall be denied unless the condition can be permanently corrected, consistent with
paragraphs A(1) and (2) of this section.
4. The proposal shall be designed to minimize off -site impacts on drainage, views
and so forth.
8. Criterion Met. The criterion is met. As determined in Finding of Fact No 5A, the
proposal does not encroach into any critical areas or their buffers. Impacts to trees are
adequately addressed via conformance to the City's tree retention standards as
outlined in Finding of Fact No. 5B.
ECDC 20.75.085(B): Lot and Street Layout.
1. Lots shall be designed to contain a usable building area. If the building
area would be difficult to develop, the lot shall be redesigned or eliminated,
unless special conditions can be imposed on the approval which will ensure
that the lot is developed properly.
2. Lots shall not front on highways, arterials or collector streets unless there
is no other feasible access. Special access provisions, such as shared
driveways, turnarounds or frontage streets may be required to minimize traffic
hazards.
3. Each lot shall meet the applicable dimensional requirements of the zoning
ordinance.
4. Pedestrian walks or bicycle paths shall be provided to serve schools, parks,
public facilities, shorelines and streams where street access is not adequate.
9. Criterion Met. The criterion is met. As determined in the staff report, all proposed
lots meet the dimensional requirements of the RS-12 zoning district. Each lot contains
a buildable area as is readily evident from the plat map, Ex. 3, and the fact that the
proposed lots are not encumbered by any critical areas. The proposed lots do not front
on any highways, arterials or collector streets. As noted in Finding of Fact No. 6,
sidewalks appear to provide safe walking conditions to and from school.
ECDC 20.75.085(C): Dedications.
1. The City council may require dedication of land in the proposed subdivision
for public use.
2. Only the City council may approve a dedication of park land to satisfy the
requirements of ECDC 20.75.090. The council may request a review and written
recommendation from the planning advisory board.
3. Any approval of a subdivision shall be conditioned on appropriate dedication
of land for streets, including those on the official street map and the preliminary
plat.
Subdivision P. 10 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
10. Criterion Met. The criterion is met. According to the Engineering Division
requirements (Ex. 9), no dedications is required, however, improvements will be
required to High St to meet city street standards.
ECDC 20.75.085(D): Improvements.
1. Improvements which may be required, but are not limited to, streets, curbs,
pedestrian walks and bicycle paths, sidewalks, street landscaping, water lines,
sewage systems, drainage systems and underground utilities.
2. The person or body approving a subdivision shall determine the
improvements necessary to meet the purposes and requirements of this chapter,
and the requirements of
a. ECDC Title 18 Public Works Requirements;
b. Chapter 19.25, Fire Code, as to fire hydrants, water supply and access.
This determination shall be based on the recommendations of the community
development director, the public works director, and the fire chief.
11. Criterion Met. The criterion is met. The project has undergone extensive review
by the community development director, the public works director (specifically
engineering) and Fire District No. 1. A number of improvements have been
recommended as a result of this review and they have been incorporated into the
conditions of approval and have been found to provide for adequate public
infrastructure as determined in Finding of Fact No. 6. Further, since RCW 58.17.110
(applicable to short plats via RCW 58.17.060) mandates that preliminary short plats
may not be approved absent a finding of appropriate infrastructure, the criterion
above is broadly construed to require the findings required by RCW 58.17.110 and
those findings are made as detailed in FOF No. 6. Notably, RCW 58.17.110 requires
that appropriate provision be made for schools and school grounds. This requirement
is not expressly incorporated into the City's subdivision standards but is construed as
part of the "but are not limited to" language above.
ECDC 20.75.085(E): Flood Plain Management. All subdivision proposals shall
comply with the criteria set forth in the Edmonds Community Development Code for
flood plain management.
12. Criterion Met.
Management area.
Subdivision
The criterion is met. This project is not in a Flood Plain
DECISION
P. 11 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
As conditioned below, the proposed conservation preliminary plat conforms to all
required criteria for approval for the reasons detailed in the Conclusions of Law
above. The conditions necessary to assure compliance and required by this Decision
are as follows:
1. Prior to recording, the applicant must complete the following requirements:
a. Civil plans must be approved prior to recording. In completing the civil
plans, the following must be addressed:
i. Complete the Engineering Division conditions listed in "Required as a
Condition of Subdivision" in Attachment 9.
ii. Protect all trees to be retained and those located on adjacent properties
during development according to the standards of ECDC 23.10.070
and consistent with the approved tree retention and protection plan
(Attachment 6).
iii. The City encourages the applicant to notify adjacent property owners
whose trees may be impacted by the proposal.
b. Record a protected tree notice on title as required by ECDC 23.10.085.
c. Make the following revisions to the subdivision:
i. Ensure that all existing easements are indicated.
ii. Indicate the locations of all new easements and provide easement
descriptions and maintenance provisions for all new easements.
iii. Include the addresses for each of the lots on the final subdivision (new
addresses will be assigned following preliminary approval and
provided prior to submitting for final review).
iv. Add to the face of the subdivision: "Conditions of approval must be
met and can be found in the approval for the short subdivision located
in File No. PLN2024-0040 in the City of Edmonds Planning
Division."
v. Include on the subdivision all required information, including owner's
certification, hold harmless agreement, and Planning and Development
and Public Works director's approval blocks.
vi. Make sure all documents to be recorded meet the Snohomish County
Auditor's requirements for recording.
d. Contact the Parks, Recreation and Human Services Department and
Planning Division to coordinate whether and how to provide public access
to Hutt Park via the proposed open space Tract 998.
Subdivision p. 12 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
e. Submit an updated copy of the title report (formal subdivision certificate)
with the documents proposed to be recorded. The title report must be
prepared within 30 days of submittal for final review.
f. Submit 2 copies of the documents to be recorded for the Planning Division
and Engineering Division's approval. Once approved, the documents will
be recorded by the City Clerk at the Snohomish County Auditor's office.
2. After recording the subdivision and in conjunction with future building permit
applications, the applicant must complete the following:
a. Complete the Engineering Division conditions listed "Required as a
Condition of Building Permit" in Attachment 9.
b. Submit an updated tree retention and protection plan with the building
permit application for each lot.
c. A notice to title for tree retention must be recorded for each lot prior to
certificate of occupancy, as necessary.
Hearing Examiner Added Conditions:
1. With the permission of the private road easement grantees, the Applicant shall
post the private road located east of Hight Street at the northern boundary of the
project site with signs prohibiting parking of construction vehicles. The
Applicant shall also advise the contractors working at the project site of this
requirement.
2. The Applicant shall consult with the Edmonds School District No. 15 to ascertain
whether any school bus stops are located off -site and shall advise permitting staff
of its finding prior to final plat approval. If school bus stops will be located off -
site, the Applicant shall provide a walking conditions assessment to planning staff
prior to final plat approval that identifies the off -site walking conditions to the
off -site school bus stop(s). Permitting staff may then require off -site
improvements to the extent necessary to assure safe walking conditions to the
extent proportional and related to project impacts as legally required. Such off -
site improvements, when required, typically involve adding pedestrian pathways
to shoulders when reasonably feasible and striping cross -walks.
Dated this 28th day of February 2025.
�� D�6�zcdit�
Phil Olbrechts,
City of Edmonds Hearing Examiner
Subdivision p. 13 Findings, Conclusions and Decision
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
This is a final land use decision issued by the City of Edmonds, which may be appealed t,
Snohomish County Superior Court within 21 days of issuance as governed by th
Washington State Land Use Petition Act, Chapter 36.70C RCW.
Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purpose
notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
Subdivision p. 14 Findings, Conclusions and Decision