Loading...
Resolution 8910006.150.001(6) PAO /gjz 12/3/97 R: 12/ 10 /97gjz RESOLUTION NO. 891 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING FINDINGS DENYING A REQUESTED AMENDMENT TO THE EDMONDS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONCEPT MAP TO REDESIGNATE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 21405 73RD PLACE WEST FROM MIXED USE COMMERCIAL TO MULTI - FAMILY, HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.130 states that proposed amendments to a comprehensive plan are to be considered no more frequently than once a year, and WHEREAS, as required by ECDC 20.00.010, proposed amendments to the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan were submitted to the City of Edmonds for the 1996 comprehensive plan amendment process by November 1, 1996, and WHEREAS, the Edmonds Planning Board has reviewed the requested amendments in a series of public hearings on March 12, 1997, May 28, 1997, June 25, 1997 and July 7, 1997, and WHEREAS, as part of those hearings the Planning Commission considered a Comprehensive Plan Concept Map amendment for an area located at 21405 73rd Place West from Single Family Residential to Multi- family, Medium Density Residential, and WHEREAS, the vicinity map for the subject property is attached as Exhibit A, and 181357 -1- WHEREAS, the Edmonds Planning Department has recommended denial of the requested amendment, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended denial of the requested amendment, and WHEREAS, the City Council, on October 7, 1997, after public hearing, has denied the requested amendment, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City of Edmonds City Council denies the application for an amendment of the Comprehensive Plan Concept Map for the property described in Exhibit A from Mixed Use Commercial to Multi- family, Medium Density Residential. In support of its denial, the City Council adopts the findings and conclusions in the Edmonds Planning Department staff report, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B and incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. Based upon the attached Findings and Conclusions and concurrent review of all proposed 1996 comprehensive plan amendments in addition to a review of the cumulative impacts of those amendments, the City Council also makes the following findings as required by ECDC 20.00.050: A. The proposed amendment would not create an appropriate balance of land uses since it would create a single use district in an area characterized by mixed uses and planned for mixed use zoning. B. The proposed amendment would not be compatible with adjoining uses since it would create a single use area in the midst of mixed use development. 181357 -2- RESOLVED this 16th day of ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED : CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. m i APPROVED: December , 199 7 . 181357 -3- MAYOR, BARBARA S. FXHE—Y 12/12/97 12/16/97 12/16/97 212TH ST SW BN Comp. Plan change from Hospital /Medical to Multi- Family -High Density IF 213TH P CG2 P 215TH ST. S.W. RM -1.5 MU 000- -N Vicinity and Zoning Map Ov Item #7 Exhibit A CITY OF EDMONDS . 250 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 PLANNING DIVISION ADVISORY REPORT FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO: PLANNING BOARD FROM: Ro' ert Chave, AICP Jeffrey S. Wilson, AICP Planning Manager Current Planning Supervisor DATE: March 21, 1997 FILE: CDC- 97 -29, ITEM #7 • HEARING DATE, TIME, AND PLACE: March 26, 1997 at 7:00 P.M. Plaza Room - Edmonds Library 650 Main Street • TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Application............................................................... ............................... ............ ............................... Recommendation 2 .................................................. ............................... ..... ............................... Site Description ...... :................................................................ 2 ...................... . ............................... History ....................................................................... 2 ............................... ........... ............................... Comprehensive Plan (ECDC) ............................................................. 2 ............................... ................ Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Compliance 2 ...................................................... Appendices............................................................... 3 ............................... .:. .......... .. .... 4 Exhibit B a � I. INTRODUCTION • A. APPLICATION 1. Applicant: Ahmadnia 2. Site Location: Vicinity of 73rd PL W between 215th ST SW and 216th ST SW. 3. R_ eguest: Comprehensive PIan Map Amendment to "Multi- Family, High Density" 4. Review Process: Comprehensive Plan Amendment; Planning Board makes recommendation to the City Council for final action. B. RECOMMENDATION Based on Statements of Fact, Conclusions, and Attachments in this report, we recommend denial of the applicant's request for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, but consideration given to rezoning the property to RM -1.5. IL FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS A. SITE DESCRIPTION 1. Site Characteristics: a. Size and Shape: Approx. 5.3 acres. b. Existing Zoning: RM -2.4 (Multiple Residential) •C. Existing Land Use: Multi- family development along the east side of 73rd PL W with single family homes to the west. 2. Neighboring Characteristics: a. North: Multi- family development to the north with commercial uses to the northeast. b. South: Medical and hospital uses to the southwest. C. East: Multi - family and medical care development. d. West: Hospital to southwest with some remaining single family homes along 215th ST SW. B. HISTORY 1. The hospital property to the southwest was recently rezoned to MU (Medical Use). C. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (ECDC) 1. a. Fact: The Comprehensive Plan Map currently designates the property as "Mixed Use Commercial." The property lies within the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. The following policies are contained in the Comprehensive Plan's discussion of multi- family development: • Staff Report- Item 7 Page 2 A. Promote the development of a mixed use area served by transit and accessible to pedestrians. Provide for an aesthetically pleasing business and residential community consisting of a campus atmosphere of park -like surroundings and inter- connected development. Recognize and plan for the distinct difference in opportunities and development character provided by the Highway 99 corridor versus the local travel and access patterns on local streets. A.1. Provide a more efficient transportation system featuring increased bus service, pedestrian and bicycle routes as well as adequate streets and parking areas. A.2. Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, and service businesses, supported by nearby residents and visitors from other Parts of the region. A.3. Support a mix of uses without encroaching into single family neighborhoods. A.4. Route auto traffic to minimize impact to residential neighborhoods. A.S. Provide street trees, buffers, and landscape treatments which encourage and support a "campus "pattern of development characterized by pedestrian walkways and centralized parking. A-6 Development should be designed for both pedestrian and transit access. b. Fact: The immediate vicinity is dominated by medical and multi- family uses, • with the exception of remaining single family homes along 215th ST SW. C. Conclusion: The requested Comprehensive Plan Map change to a multi- family designation is not necessary to allow the applicant to request a rezone to a higher density multi - family zone (i.e. RM -1.5). The question is whether it is appropriate to consider a rezone of this property to RM -1.5, or whether, given the mixed use Comprehensive Plan designation, it is appropriate to draft an area -wide rezone that would allow for a mixed use development pattern throughout a wider area. D. EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) COMPLIANCE I . a. Fact: Zoning classifications are intended to be applied consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The existing RM -2.4 (Multiple Residential) zoning classification is consistent with the current Comprehensive Plan designation which allows for a mixture of different uses. • b. Fact: The RM (Multiple Residential) classification has the following purposes: The RMzone has the following speck purposes in addition to the general purposes for residential zones of ECDC 16 00.010 and 16.10.000: A. To reserve and regulate areas for a variety of housing types, and a range of greater densities than are available in the single-family residential zone, while still maintaining a residential environment; A To provide for those additional uses which complement and are compatible with multiple residential uses. Stgff'Report: Item 7 Page 3 • • C. Fact: A single mixed use zoning classification does not currently exist to apply to the area designated by the Comprehensive Plan for "Mixed Use Commercial" development within the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan is currently accomplished by applying a mix of zones. d. Conclusion: Staff would recommend proceeding to draft a new mixed use zoning classification to apply to the general "mixed use" area within the activity center. III. APPENDICES 1. Public Notice / Vicinity Map 2. Letter from Applicant Staff Re port. Item 7 Page 4 . City Of Edmonds Attn.: Robert Chave, AICP, Planning Manager Planning Manager Project: 21406 73th PL. West Application: Correction on Zoning Dear Sir: RECEIVED MAR 1 6 im 3114/96 PFRMIT COUNTER I would like to request for rezoning of my property located on 21405 73th place west. All properties surrounding my property are zoned higher density multi - family where as my property is zoned midlem density multi - family. Please advise me of the best course of action. Sin f Yours �sSein hhm la • • rAHMAD'NlA,INC:_ #22 158th St., Seattle, VITAL USA. Diasser _ V.P. Marketing'' . (206) 367 -246, 1ax''(206j 3648$4; RCW 36.70A.130 Comprehensive plans -- Amendments. (1) Each comprehensive land use plan and development regulations shall be subject to continuing evaluation and review by the county or city that adopted them. Any amendment or revision to a comprehensive land use plan shall conform to this chapter, and any change to development regulations shall be consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan. (2)(a) Each county and city shall establish and broadly disseminate to the public a public participation program identifying procedures whereby proposed amendments or revisions of the comprehensive plan are considered by the governing body of the county or city no more frequently than once every year except that amendments may be considered more frequently under the following circumstances: (i) The initial adoption of a subarea plan; and (ii) The adoption or amendment of a shoreline master program under the procedures set forth in chapter 90.58 RCW. (b) All proposals shall be considered by the governing body concurrently so the cumulative effect of the various proposals can be ascertained. However, after appropriate public participation a county or city may adopt amendments or revisions to its comprehensive plan that conform with this chapter, whenever an emergency exists or to resolve an appeal of a comprehensive plan filed with a growth management hearings board or with the court. (3) Each county that designates urban growth areas under RCW 36.70A.I 10 shall review, at least every ten years, its designated urban growth area or areas, and the densities permitted within both the incorporated and unincorporated portions of each urban growth area. In conjunction with this review by the county, each city located within an urban growth area shall review the densities permitted within its boundaries, and the extent to which the urban growth occurring within the county has located within each city and the unincorporated portions of the urban growth areas. The county comprehensive plan designating urban growth areas, and the densities permitted in the urban growth areas by the comprehensive plans of the county and each city located within the urban growth areas, shall be revised to accommodate the urban growth projected to occur in the county for the succeeding twenty -year period. [1995 c 347 § 106; 1990 1 st ex.s. c 17 § 13.] NOTES: Finding -- Severability --Part headings and table of contents not law- -1995 c 347: See notes following RCW 36.70A.470. Page [ 1 ] Adopted by Reference Resolution # ff9/ on a2 /6 % City Clerk 20.00.010 Submittal of amendments. In order to meet the requirements of the Washington State Growth Management Act, Chapter 36.70A RCW, the city shall undertake comprehensive plan amendments only once per year. All amendments requested by the city or private parties shall be reviewed concurrently to ensure that the integrity of the comprehensive plan is preserved. All comprehensive plan amendment requests are to be provided in writing, on a form provided by the director, and are to be submitted no later than November 1st of every year, or the first business day after November 1st, should that date occur on a holiday or weekend. Applications for comprehensive plan amendments to be adopted in 1996 may be submitted on or before April 1, 1996. The council may, for good cause shown, accept applications after the prescribed deadline. [Ord. 3076 § 1, 1996]. Adopted by Reference Resolution # 89 / on _/9 City Clerk____ ©1997 Code Publishing, Inc. Page 1