R-2009-19_PB-StaffReport+Attachments.pdf
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 - 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020
PLANNING DIVISION ADVISORY REPORT
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
To:
EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD
From
:
Gina Coccia
Associate Planner
Date:
Planning Board Meeting of October 14, 2009
File:R-2009-19
th
Rezone application initiated by the City Council for the properties along 215 Street SW
thth
lying east of 76 Avenue West and addressed between 7321 and 7528 215 Street SW,
inclusive. Proposed zoning change from “Multiple Residential” (RM-2.4) to “Single-Family
Residential” (RS-8). These properties were subject to a Comprehensive Plan amendment that
was approved in 2008 (AMD-2007-14) and the proposed rezone would make the zoning
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan map.
Hearing Date, Time, and Place: October 14, 2009 at 7:00 PM
Edmonds City Council Chambers
Public Safety Complex
th
250 - 5 Avenue North
I. INTRODUCTION
A. APPLICATION
1. Applicant:
City of Edmonds – the City Council initiated the proposal.
thth
2. Site Location:
Properties along 215 Street SW lying east of 76 Avenue West and
th
addressed between 7321 and 7528 – 215 Street SW, inclusive (refer to Attachment 1).
3. Request:
Application for a rezone from “Multiple Residential” (RM-2.4) to “Single-
Family Residential” (RS-8) (Attachment 1).
4. Review Process:
Rezone - Planning Board conducts a public hearing and forwards a
recommendation to the City Council for final decision.
5. Major Issues:
a.
Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter
20.40 (REZONES).
b.
Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter
20.100 (HEARING EXAMINER, PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD AND
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW).
City of Edmonds Planning Board
B. RECOMMENDATION
Based on Statements of Fact, Analysis, Conclusions, and Attachments in this report, staff
recommends that the Planning Board make a recommendation to the City Council to
APPROVE
the requested rezone from “Multiple Residential” (RM-2.4) to “Single-Family
Residential” (RS-8).
II. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
A. SITE DESCRIPTION
1. Site Development and Zoning
a. Facts:
:
(1) Size and Shape The area under review is comprised of 19 lots along
thth
215 Street SW lying east of 76 Avenue West and addressed between
th
7321 and 7528 – 215 Street SW, inclusive. Each parcel is roughly 0.25
acres and the area as a whole is approximately 4.5 acres (Attachment 2)
:
(2) Land Use
Each lot is developed with one single family home constructed in the
1950s-1960s.
(3) Zoning:
Current zoning of the subject properties is “Multiple Residential” (RM-2.4)
as shown on the vicinity map (Attachment 1). This area has been zoned for
multiple-residential use as far back as 1963 – for almost fifty years.
2. Neighboring Development and Zoning
a. Facts:
:
(1)North Multi-family developments, some under RM-2.4 zoning and a
portion zoned “General Commercial” (CG2).
(2)East:
Multi-family developments, some under RM-2.4 zoning and slightly
further east begins an area of RM-1.5 zoning.
(3)South:
Stevens Hospital, which is zoned “Medical Use” (MU).
th
(4)West:
Edmonds Woodway High School is across 76 Avenue West to the
west and is zoned “Public” (P) – refer to Attachment 1.
Courtesy of Bing.com Courtesy of Bing.com
R-2009-19_PB-StaffReport.doc Page 2 of 6
B. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA)
1. Fact:
A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on September 10, 2009, for the
change in zoning. No appeals were received.
2. Conclusion:
SEPA requirements have been satisfied for the proposed change in
zoning.
C. EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) COMPLIANCE
1.ECDC Section 20.40 (Rezones)
:
a.Facts
(i)
The RS-8 zoning classification is included in Attachment 5 for reference.
(ii)
Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 20.40.010 provides
that, at a minimum, the following factors shall be considered in reviewing an
application for a rezone:
(1)Comprehensive Plan.
Whether the proposal is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan; and,
(2)Zoning Ordinance.
Whether the proposal is consistent with the
purposes of the Zoning Ordinance, and whether the proposal is consistent
with the purposes of the proposed zone district; and,
(3)Surrounding Area.
The relationship of the proposed zoning change to
the existing land uses and zoning of surrounding or nearby property; and,
(4)Changes.
Whether there has been sufficient change in the character of
the immediate or surrounding area or in city policy to justify the rezone:
and,
(5)Suitability.
Whether the property is economically and physically
suitable for the uses allowed under the existing zoning, and under the
proposed zoning. One factor could be the length of time the property has
remained undeveloped compared to the surrounding area, and parcels
elsewhere with the same zoning; and
(6)Value.
The relative gain to the public health, safety and welfare
compared to the potential increase or decrease in value to the property
owners.
b.Analysis:
(i)
Comprehensive Plan.The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject
property as part of the “Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center.” The
Comprehensive Plan map designation was amended in 2008 by the City
Council from “Mixed Use Commercial” to “Single-Family Urban 1”
(Attachment 3). The proposed new zone (RS-8) is consistent with the new
Comprehensive Plan designation. The intent of the initiation of this rezone
request is to make the zoning consistent with the Comprehensive Plan map.
(ii)
Zoning Ordinance. The RS-8 zone is the corresponding zone for the Single
Family Urban 1 Comprehensive Plan designation. The purposes of the
proposed RS-8 zone are given in ECDC 16.20.000 (Attachment 5) and are
listed below.
R-2009-19_PB-StaffReport.doc Page 3 of 6
A.To reserve and regulate areas primarily for family living in single-family
dwellings.
B.
To provide for additional nonresidential uses which compliment and are
compatible with single-family dwelling use.
The lots within the “Luschen’s Tracts – Division 2” Plat (Attachment 2) are all
roughly 80’ x 128’ or 10,240 square feet. Through the current multi-family
zoning designation there is a potential for several dwelling units per lot (1 unit
per 2,400 square feet of lot area means a potential for up to 4 dwelling units per
lot). At the proposed zoning designation (RS-8) there can only be one dwelling
unit per 8,000 square feet of lot area. The change to RS-8 would mean the
potential for multi-family development would be eliminated. This is consistent
with the original intent of the subdivision, as described during the Council
consideration of the Comprehensive Plan amendment in 2008.
StreetSideRearLot
ZoneHeightParking
SetbackSetbackSetbackCoverage
RM-2.415’ 10’ 15’ 25’ 45% 2
RS-825’ 7.5’ 15’ 25’ 35% 2
(iii)
Surrounding Area. Uses in the subject area are single family. The surrounding
area contains a mix of uses, including multi-family, medical and commercial
office uses.
(iv)
Changes.TheComprehensive Plan designation for this neighborhood was
changed in 2008 in order to encourage the retention of single-family
development, and the zoning change is consistent with the amendment.
(v)
Suitability.The neighborhood comprising the subject application has always
been developed with single-family homes. The neighborhood appears to be
both economically and physically suitable for the proposed zoning.
(vi)
Value. The affect on value is uncertain. Assuming the value has been set
according to the long-standing single family development of the lots, the
change in zoning should have no net effect on value. However, properties on
th
the margins of the neighborhood (e.g. the two lots fronting on 76 Ave W)
could have their potential value reduced if they were hoping to increase their
development intensity.
c.Conclusions:
(i)
The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use
designation for the subject property.
(ii)
The proposed rezone is consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance.
Based on the facts and analysis contained above, planning staff concludes that the proposal
satisfies the criteria for a change in zoning.
R-2009-19_PB-StaffReport.doc Page 4 of 6
2.ECDC Section 20.100.020 (Planning Advisory Board Review & City Council Action)
a.Facts & Analysis:
(i)
The Planning Board reviews rezone requests and makes a recommendation to the
City Council per ECDC 20.100.020.A.1. The request at hand is a rezone, so the
Planning Board will make a recommendation to the Council after public
comments are taken into consideration.
(ii)
The City Council shall consider the recommendation by the Planning Board.
Staff will schedule the proposal to go before the Council after the Planning Board
has made their recommendation.
b.Conclusion:
The proposed rezone is and will be compliant with the Edmonds Community
Development Code.
D. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
a.Facts:
This site was recently designated “Single Family – Urban 1.” No development proposals
have been received for this neighborhood. Relevant goals and policies include:
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 upon the following
principles:
B.5.a. Residential privacy is a fundamental protection to be upheld by local
government.
B.5.b. Traffic not directly accessing residences in a neighborhood must be
discouraged.
B.5.c. Stable property values must not be threatened by view, traffic or land use
encroachments.
B.5.d. Private property must be protected from adverse environmental impacts
of development including noise, drainage, traffic, slides, etc.
b.Analysis:
The Comprehensive Plan Policies noted above encourage the retention of older housing
within Edmonds.
c.Conclusion:
The proposal appears to be consistent with the policy direction in the Comprehensive
Plan.
E. TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
No comments were received from City departments reviewing the proposal.
R-2009-19_PB-StaffReport.doc Page 5 of 6
F. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Two public comment letters were received to date – one in favor for the proposed rezone and
one against, outlined below.
1.Jim Underhill
submitted a letter received 10/05/09 (Attachment 6) that outlines last
year’s Comprehensive Plan amendment. He argues that this is an affordable
neighborhood and supports the rezone of the neighborhood.
2.Alden PeppelSusana MartinezRosa Macias
,, and submitted a letter received 10/07/09
(Attachment 7) that argues that there will be a severe economic impact to property
th
owners specifically adjacent to 76 Avenue West and they feel that this is both
unnecessary and unacceptable. It is important to note that Mr. Peppel and Ms. Martinez
th
own the two western-most properties along 76 Avenue West. They express that the
density should not be decreased through the proposed zoning change to their properties
and believe that their street is not a typical single-family street. These owners oppose the
rezone request.
III. ATTACHMENTS
1.
Zoning and aerial vicinity maps.
2.
Plat map.
3.
July 22, 2008 City Council Approved Minutes.
4.
Public notices.
5.
ECDC zoning regulations for RS-8 zone.
6.
Letter from Jim Underhill.
7.
Letter from Alden Peppel, Susana Martinez, and Rosa Macias.
V. PARTIES OF RECORD
Jim Underhill
Alden R. Peppel
th
7410 215 Street SW 2017 Narrows View Circle NW – A203
Edmonds WA 98026 Gig Harbor WA 98335
Susana Martinez Rosa Alivia Macias
thth
7527 215 Street SW 7519 215 Street SW
Edmonds WA 98026 Edmonds WA 98026
R-2009-19_PB-StaffReport.doc Page 6 of 6