STAFF RECOMMENDATION

Transcription

1 Snohomish County STAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning & Development Services Commercial/Land Use Division Project File Number: LU Tax Acct. Number: Hearing Date: July 18, 2007 Date of Report: July 11, 2007 Project Name: Carlson LDMR Nature of Request: Rezone from R-9600 to LDMR (Low Density Multiple Residential) and Official Site Plan approval for the development of 42 single family detached units on a 5.02 acre site. Application Complete: November 7, Day Status: 112 Owner/Applicant: Contact: The McNaughton Group PO Box 100 Edmonds, WA Cher Anderson, The McNaughton Group, LLC PO Box 100 EDMONDS, WA Acreage: 5.02 Location: The site address is th Avenue. SE, Bothell, WA Current Zoning: R-9600 Proposed Zoning: Low Density Multiple Residential (LDMR) Comprehensive Plan General Policy Plan: Urban Medium Density Residential School District: Northshore School District No. 417 Fire District: Fire District No. 7 Water Source: Alderwood Sewer & Water Sewer Service: Alderwood Sewer & Water

2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS I. NATURE OF APPLICATION A. Request The applicant is requesting a rezone from R-9600 to Low Density Multiple Residential (LDMR) and Official Site Plan approval for the development of 42 single-family detached units on a 5.02 acre site. The project will also provide 3 open space areas, an underground stormwater detention system, and one private drive aisle which takes access from 39 th Ave SE.. B. Project Chronology/Background The rezone and Official Site Plan application was originally submitted to Planning and Development Services (PDS) on November 7, 2006, and was determined on January 2, 2007 to be complete as of the date of submittal for regulatory purposes, but insufficient for further review. A resubmittal of the application was received on April 30, As of the hearing date, 112 days of the 120-day review period will have elapsed. C. Site Description The site is rolly to flat and slopes downward to the northwest. The site contains a variety of deciduous and evergreen trees, shrubs, and grasses. Currently, there is one single-family home with associated outbuildings on the property. These structures will be demolished when the property is developed, as per the Official Site Plan. D. Adjacent Zoning/Uses The adjacent zoning is primarily R-9600, and surrounding properties are either undeveloped or contain single-family homes on large lots. II. ISSUES OF CONCERN No issues of concern have been raised by neighbors, public citizens, or other public agencies. III. PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH ADOPTED CODES AND POLICIES Parks Mitigation (Chapter 30.66A SCC) The proposal is within Nakeeta Beach Park District No. 307 and is subject to Chapter 30.66A SCC, which requires payment of $1, per each new single-family residential unit, to be paid either prior to plat recording or prior to building permit issuance for each unit. Such payment or contribution of inkind mitigation is acceptable mitigation for parks and recreation impacts in accordance with county policies. Page 2 of 7

3 Traffic Mitigation and Road Design Standards (Title 13 SCC & Chapter 30.66B SCC) PDS Traffic has reviewed the proposal for compliance with Title 13 and Chapter 30.66B of Snohomish County Code, Snohomish County Engineering Design and Development Standards (EDDS), and the appropriate policies and procedures. Based on this review, the department finds that the information enclosed is adequate to make a favorable recommendation for this proposal, once the items listed at the end of this memo have been addressed. The following issues were detailed in the DPW preliminary review memo dated May 15, 2007 as needing to be addressed prior to final recommendation from Public Works, and following each item is an update for that review: 1. Access is proposed from 39 th Avenue SE, via a commercial driveway ending in a cul-de-sac. The parcel adjacent to the south is Perra PFN, which has a north/south road that stubs to the south property line of the subject development and also aligns with a north/south road in the Jewell Assemblage south of Perra. Per EDDS 3-01 (B), this development must connect to any road stub on an adjacent parcel. DPW has determined that the internal road system in this development must be public in order to provide for future road connection and circulation. Please note that creation of a public road in this type of development requires a Road Establishment. Update: DPW has determined that a public road connection is not needed from this development to Perra on the west side of the properties. The interior access proposed for this review is acceptable, which is a commercial driveway. A drop curb will be required on 39 th Avenue SE rather than curb returns, which will be addressed during the construction plan review. The required minimum access point spacing between other commercial driveways or from a road intersection off of 39 th Avenue is 45 feet between adjacent access points (same side of the road), 75 feet from an access point across the road and south, and 35 feet from and access point across the road and to the north, or the access point must be aligned directly across from another access. The property adjacent to the east (on the east side of 39 th Avenue SE) has a commercial development proposed (Cascadia, ). Cascadia was submitted after Carlson, and will have the responsibility to design the driveways so that the spacing requirements are met. 2. The traffic study does not address the impacts to the following key intersections: 529 and 508. The assignment and tabular format must be provided for those intersections. Update: An addendum to the traffic study was submitted for this review, and is no longer an issue. 3. Comments are needed from the City of Bothell, and the applicant must submit and sign an offer to pay the traffic mitigation. Update: The November 3, 2006 traffic study by Gibson Traffic Consultants calculates that the development would owe the City of Bothell $25, based on the area averages method and the following: 41 new units x 30% (sub area location) x $2, An offer for that amount was submitted for this review, and the offer was signed by an authorized official from the city as accepted, so this is issue has been addressed. Page 3 of 7

4 4. Comments are needed from the City of Mill Creek. Update: The traffic study by Gibson Traffic Consultants indicates that the development would owe the City of Mill Creek $2, for traffic mitigation based on the number of trips that the traffic distribution shows would go through City collection projects. Comments dated May 15, 2007 have been received from the city that agrees with that amount. The following item was the last remaining issue to be addressed prior to final comments from the previous review (May 15, 2007): The design of the future public road, 39 th Avenue SE does not meet EDDS 3-01 for road circulation. Section 4 (B) states that a road serving more than 25 lots or 250 ADT shall be connected in at least two locations with another road or roads that meet the applicable standards for the resulting traffic volume. Either 39 th Avenue must be connected to another road or a deviation request with sufficient justification for approval is needed. Update: The applicant submitted a deviation request asking that the requirement for a second constructed road connection to 39 th Avenue SE be eliminated. The request was reviewed by the County Engineer and the County Traffic Engineer on July 10, 2007 and was denied. DPW management has determined 39 th Avenue SE needs to be connected to an open constructed public road in a second location because of the number of trips being generated by three different developments proposed on properties that will use 39 th Avenue SE for access, and due to existing traffic problems in the area. There is an Inadequate Road Condition at the York Road/Jewell Road intersection; and an arterial unit in arrears (unit 420; 35 th Avenue SE from SR 524 to Grannis Road). A second road connection would provide alternate routes for the residents of the development and for emergency vehicles, and would help distribute the traffic to other roads. Additional circulation is needed in that location to help relieve existing traffic problems, and to prevent exacerbating those problems with additional trips. Please note that deviation requests submitted by the applicants of the other two developments located on 39 th Avenue SE asking to eliminate the requirement for a second road connection have also been denied by DPW. Therefore, DPW would be able to approve the proposed development with the condition that the provision of a second constructed public road connection between 39 th Avenue SE and the existing public road system is resolved to DPW satisfaction prior to issuance of permits. School Mitigation (Chapter 30.66C SCC) The Snohomish County Council amended Chapter 30.66C SCC by Amended Ordinance , adopted November 17, 1997, which became effective January 1, 1999, in accordance with Amended Ordinance , to provide for collection of school impact mitigation fees at the time of building permit issuance based upon certified amounts in effect at that time. The subject application was determined to be complete after the effective date of amended Chapter 30.66C SCC. Pursuant to Chapter 30.66C SCC, school impact mitigation fees will be determined according to the Base Fee Schedule in effect for the Northshore School District No. 417, at the time of building permit submittal and collected at the time of building permit issuance for the proposed units. PDS has included a recommended condition of approval for inclusion within the project decision to comply with the requirements of Chapter 30.66C SCC. Page 4 of 7

5 Drainage and Grading (Chapters 30.63A and 30.63B SCC) Planning and Development Services (Engineering) has reviewed the concept offered and is recommending approval of the project, subject to conditions which would be imposed during full drainage plan review pursuant to Chapter 30.63A SCC. Stormwater will be collected and directed to the underground storm retention system located in the northwest corner of the property. Grading quantities are anticipated to balance approximately 9,000 cubic yards of cut and 9,000 cubic yards of fill, primarily for road, drainage facility, and home site construction. Water quality would be controlled during construction by use of silt fences and straw bales in accordance with a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) required by Chapter 30.63A SCC. Critical Areas Regulations (Chapter SCC) There are no critical areas on or within 100 feet of the project site. GMA Comprehensive Plan (General Policy Plan, GPP) On December 21, 2005, effective February 1, 2006, the Council adopted Amended Ordinances through , through , which amended the map and text of the Snohomish County GMA Comprehensive Plan, added rural lands to Urban Growth Areas and adopted area-wide rezones within the Urban Growth Areas of the county respectively. The subject property is designated Urban Medium Density Residential (ULDR: 6-12 DU/Ac) on the GPP Future Land Use map, and is located within an Urban Growth Area (UGA). According to the GPP, the Urban Medium Density Residential designation "covers various sub-area plan designations which allow a combination of detached homes on small lots, townhouses, and apartments in low density, multifamily residential developments. Land in this category may be developed up to a maximum density of twelve dwelling units per acre. Implementing zones include the LDMR, PRD-LDMR, Townhouse, R-7200, PRD-7200 and WFB zones. PDS finds the requested rezone to be consistent with the General Policy Plan s Urban Medium Density Residential designation of the property. Zoning (Chapter 30.2 SCC) The 42 single family detached units proposed for this site are consistent with the density provisions of Snohomish County s GMA-based zoning regulations under SCC 30.2, and the proposed rezone meets the rezone criteria set forth in SCC 30.42A.100 (1)(2). Furthermore, the Snohomish County Council determined, in Finding #20 of its May 24, 2006 decision denying the appeal of the Deputy Hearing Examiner s decision approving a rezone from Urban Residential 8,400 to Low Density Multiple Residential (LDMR), the following: The Growth Management Act, Chapter 36.70A RCW, specifically recognizes that the intent of the Act is to provide for the public health, safety, and welfare. Snohomish County s GMA Comprehensive Plan Page 5 of 7

6 (GMACP) provides specific policies concerning land use, housing and urban residential density. The proposed rezone implements the County s GMACP. Environmental Policy (Chapter SCC) PDS issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for the subject application on June 18, 2007 (Exhibit 14). The DNS was not appealed. IV. CONCLUSIONS A. The proposal is consistent with the GMACP; GMA-based county codes, the type and character of land use permitted on the project site, the permitted density and applicable design and development standards. B. Adequate public services exist to serve the proposal. C. If approved with the recommended conditions, the proposal would make adequate provisions for the public health, safety and general welfare. Page 6 of 7

7 V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH APPROVAL of the proposed rezone and Official Site Plan is recommended subject to the following PRECONDITIONS and CONDITIONS: PRECONDITIONS A. The applicant shall satisfy DPW requirements for an additional road connection for 39 th Avenue SE. CONDITIONS A. The official site plan received by PDS on November 7, 2006 (Exhibit 6A-6C) shall be the official site plan. B. Prior to initiation of any further site work; and/or prior to issuance of any development/construction permits by the county: i. All site development work shall comply with the requirements of the plans and permits approved pursuant to Condition A, above. ii. The applicant shall provide PDS with a site plan and water plan for the location of the required fire hydrants. C. In conformity with applicable standards and timing requirements: i. The preliminary landscape plan (Exhibit 5) shall be implemented. All required detention facility landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved landscape plan. D. All development activity shall conform to the requirements of Chapter 30.63A SCC. Nothing in this permit/approval excuses the applicant, owner, lessee, agent, successor or assigns from compliance with any other federal, state or local statutes, ordinances or regulations applicable to this project. Page 7 of 7