Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem VIII-B-2 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Aqenda Subject Resolution No. 3768 - Application No. PL T04-0004 Department: Planning Attachments: Resolution No. 3768, H.E. Decision, Staff Report, Vicinity Map, D.N.S., Application; Tom Pike's reconsideration request, Hearing Examiner order granting reconsideration Date: October 18, 2004 Budget Impact: Administrative Recommendation: City Council adopt Resolution No. 3768. Backqround Summary: The Hearing Examiner on August 17, 2004, conducted a public hearing on the request of David Malik and Thomas Pike for preliminary plat approval for 14 lots. The project is located at 11533 SE 318th Place and 3181211ih Avenue SE. On September 23, 2004, the Examiner recommended to the City Council approval of the preliminary plat, with conditions, and also issued final decisions on two variances related to the proposal. On September 29, 2004 Mr. Thomas Pike, one of the proposal's applicants, filed for a reconsideration of the Hearing Examiner's decision seeking clarification of one of the conditions of approval recommended by the Hearing Examiner. On October 18, 2004, the Hearing Examiner issued his ruling granting Mr. Pike's reconsideration request. The attached resolution incorporates the reconsideration request granted by the Hearing Examiner. The City Council may now either affirm the Examiner's decision, remand to the Examiner or schedule a closed record hearing. The Council can only modify or disaffirm the Examiner's decision after conducting their own closed record hearing. HE\PL T04-4 L1101-1 PLAT 03.5 PL T04-0004 Reviewed by Council & Committees: ~Arts Commission COUNCIL COMMITTE S: Airport ~ Finance Hearing Examiner Municipal Servo Human Services Planning & CD Park Board Public Works Planning Comm. Other ~Re~~~f~g by Departm~en~toDiViSions: Cemetery Mayor Finance Parks Fire Planning Legal Police Public Works Human Resources Action: Committee Approval: BYes BNO Council Approval: Yes No Call for Public Hearing _/_/- Referred to Until / / Tabled Until / / Councilmember: Singer I Staff: Krauss Meeting Date: November 1, 2004 I Item Number: VIII.B.2 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF AUBURN In the Matter of the Application of ) ) ) ) ) ) AMENDED RECOMMENDA TlON NO. PL T03-0003 David Malik and Thomas Pike For Approval of a Preliminary Plat. On September 17.2004 the recommendation for the above captioned matter was issued. The recommendation included the following conditions: 4. The east division shall not receive approval for any construction permits. including clearing and grading, utility extension. or any other construction that could result in increased storm water runoff: until the storm water conveyance and detention facilities in the west division are completed and the conveyance facilities across the Hurley parcel between the two divisions are completed. The provisions of Condition No.4 also apply. On September 29,2004 a representative of the Applicant requested reconsideration of condition 4. In the request (which is part of the offIcial record of this proceeding) it is stated that the condition would result in construction delays on the east parcel of up to a full year and require a phased construction of the plat. The reasoning of the Applicant's request is reasonable. Condition 4 as set forth in the recommendation would be costly and serve to be disruptive of the neighborhood and the general area. Accordingly Condition #4 as stated in the Recommendation is withdrawn and the following shall be the new condition: 4. The east division may receive approval for all construction permits, including clearing and grading and utility extension provided that all construction on the east parcel that could result in increased storm water runoff be timed to occur after the completion of the storm water conveyance and detention facilities in the west division and across the Hurley property. Done and dated this 22nd day of October, 2004. Malik & Pike Amended Recommendation Page 1 on nT' City of Auburn Hearing Examiner 25 - West Main Street Auburn, WA 98001 September 29th, 2004 Subject: Pike - Malik Subdivision Dear Mr. Examiner, I have received your recommendations on the Pike - Malik land use variance request. There appears to one minor point that if possible I request you reconsider in time for the October 4th City Counsel Meeting. On page 12 of 14, paragraph 4 you are denying the issuance of any construction permits for the Pike parcel until the storm water facilities on the Malik and Hurley parcel's are complete. The wording of this paragraph essentially requires the creation ofthree separate construction contracts and projects. I) Malik's, 2) Hurley's and 3) Pike's. This condition will result in construction delays on the east parcel of up to a full year. One of our goals in combining both parcels into one proposal was to minimize the construction costs by combining the actual construction work into one project. I request this condition be removed and replaced with the following substitute. "The east division may receive approval for all construction permits, including clearing and grading and utility extension provided that all construction on the east parcel that could result in increased storm water runoff be timed to occur after the completion of the storm water conveyance and detention facilities in the west division and across the Hurley property. This revision will still accomplish your intent of managing storm water run off during construction and at the same time insure a timely issuance of construction permits for the east parcel. I realize your case load is extensive but request a reply by tomorrow, October 1st so that the necessary documents can be readied for the October 4th, City Counsel Meeting. Thank you for considering this request. Please advise if additional information is required. Sincerely, Thomas Pike 11533 - SE 318th PI Auburn, Wa 98092 206-948-0077 - -·'·r~· *Ø"'''' * ~../ ',~.ø.,,;!Jt; """~¥I':r'11",. * W"'- ". -/ (j',3, '0> , Peter B. lewis, MayOl 25 Welt MaIn SINe! * Aubwn WA 91001-4998 *Www;cI.clllbum.wa.UI * 253-931-3OOC September 22, 2004 r- S r:p 2 !, A,.¡.", - j U..i:'Y,# TOM PIKE 11533 SE 318TH PLACE AUBURN, WA 98092 DAVID MAUK _ 1208 NORTH CENTRAL KENT, WA 98032 ALEANNA KONDEUS PLANNER! PROJECT MANAGER CRAMER NW, INC. 945 N CENTRAL #104 KENT WA 98031 RE: APPUCATlON NO. PLTO~'I:ooo,;' c Dear Applicants: Attached is the Hearing Examiner's official recommendation regarding your request that wa!¡ considered by the Hearing Examiner on August 17, 2004. The City Council will consider your request on October 4 in the City Council Chambers at 7:30 p.m. You or a representative are requested to be at that meeting to answer any questions the City Councilmembers might have regarding your proposal. The land use posting board sign must be returned to the City after the October 4 City Counc:il meeting. If you have any questions regarding the attached, please give us a call. PK:pz Attachment cc: Building Department Public Works Department City Clerk HEIDECIPL T03-3 .AuBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED _1_"·_ ;....,.. BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF AUBURN In the Matter of the Application of ) ) David Malik and Thomas Pikel ) ) For Approval of a Preliminary Plat. ) ) NO. PLT03-0003 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDA nON á ORIGINAL INTRODUCTION The folIowing findings and conclusions are the basis for the Hearing Examiner's recommendation to the City Council on both divisions pf the preliminary plat. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION The Hearing Examiner recommends that the Auburn City Council AI'PROVE the request for a preliminary plat to subdivide 3.05 acres of land into 13 single-family residential lots and one storm water tract. SUMMARY OF RECORD Reauest David Malik and Thomas Pike (Applicants) requested approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide two noncontiguous parcels consisting of3.04 acres ofland into 13 single-family residential lots and one storm water tract. 2 The two parcels would be connected by a storm water and utility easement that extends across the property situated between the Malik property and the Pike property. The subject property is located in the Lee Hill area at 11533 SE 318th Place and 3][812 _ I 12th Avenue SE in Auburn, Washington. I According to the Findings of Fact in the MDNS issued by the Responsible Official, the City Council will issue separate resolutions for preliminary plat approval for each of the divisions of this plat application. These resolutions will be issued separately notwithstanding the City's decision to process the two parcels as one preliminary plat. 2 The staffrepon to the Hearing Examiner and preliminary plat application describe the proposed plat as consisting of 14 lots for residential development. However, at the hearing City staff confirmed thallhe proposed plat would consist of 13 residentiallolS and one stomwater detention tract. --T'· Hearim!. Date The Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn held an open record hearing on the request on August 17,2004. Testimony The following individuals presented testimony under oath at the opt:n record hearing: Dave Osaki, City of Auburn Planne~ Ãleanna Kondelis, Surveyor, representing the Applicant Joe Welsh, City of Auburn Public Works Engineer David Malik Thomas Pike Pasqual Perry Jim Sundqvist Jarret Clark Daniel Annatas Andrew Elom Andrew Lane, Attorney, represented Applicant David Malik Exhibits The following exhibits were admitted into the record: Exhibit I Staff Report dated August 9, 2004 Exhibit 2 Vicinity map Exhibit 3 Preliminary Plat Application Exhibit 4 Environmental Checklist Exhibit 5 Site plan Exhibit 6 Revised Notice of Application Exhibit 7 Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance, issued July 26, 2004, final on August 16,2004 Exhibit 8 HurleylPike Utility Easement Agreement, dated November 10, 2003 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Exhibit II Exhibit 12 Exhibit 12a Exhibit 13 Well Agreement and Easement GeoEngineers Wetlands evaluation and report, dated May 27, 2004 EDA W, Inc. Biological Site Assessment dated July 21,2004 Comment Letter from Perrys, dated received June 25, 2004 City's response to Perrys, dated July 26,2004 Comment Letter ftom Sundqvists, dated received Apri.l 22, 2004 , Mr. Osaki was not the reviewing planner but made the City' presentation because IIhe reviewing planner took ill. Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City '!f Auburn Ma/iI<IPike PreliminalY Nat, No. PLT03-0003 Page 2 of /4 Exhibit I3a City's response to Sundqvists, dated July 26, 2004 Exhibit 14 Comment Letter !Tom Mooneys, dated June 25, 2004 Exhibit 14a City's response to Mooneys, dated July 26, 2004 Exhibit 15 Comment Email from Clark, dated April] 9,2004 Exhibit 15a City's response to Clark, dated July 26, 2004 Exhibit 16 Comment Letter from Armatas, dated received April 9, 2004 Exhibit 16a City's response to Armatas, dated July 26,2004 Exhibit 17 Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit 184 August 24, 2004 Memorandum to Hearing Examiner from Sean ~artin, Planner Upon consideration of the testimony and exhibits admitted in the record, the Hearing Examiner enters the following Findings and Conclusions: FINDINGS I. The Applicants requested approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide, two noncontiguous parcels consisting of3.04 acres ofland (tax parcels 333940-0090 and 333940-0018) into 13 single-fami1y residential lots and one stonn water tract. The subject parcels, located in the Lea Hill area, are connected by a utility easement that crosses the parcel between them owned by third partie:;.5 The west division of the proposed plat, owned by Mr. Malik, is located at 318] 2 _ II zth Avenue SE and the east division, owned by Mr. Pike, is located at] ]533 SE 3]8th Place in Auburn, Washington.6 Exhibit 1. page 1: Exhibits 2,3, and 5. 2. The subject property is zoned Single-Family Residential (LHR-2).7 Exhibit J. page 1. Development standards in the R-2 zone require a minimum lot area of 6,000 square feet, a minimum lot width of 60 feet, a minimum lot depth of 80 feet, and !Tont yard setbacks of20-feet. ACC 18.14.040. All I3 of the proposed lots would meet or exceed square footage and minimum lot depth standards. Exhibit 5. 4 Because the planner who presented the case for the City was not the planner who prepared the case for hearing, the Hearing Examiner requested clarifications from the City at the close ofthe hearing. The City submitted the requested clarification which is admined as Exhibit J 8. 5 for the purposes of this decision, the tenns "west division" and "Malik parcel" refer to the portion of the proposed plat owned by Mr. Malik. The tenns "east division" and "Pike parcel" refer to the portion of the proposed plat owned by Mr. Pike. The tenn "subject prorerty" refers to both divisions as the whole proposed development. . The legal description ofthe Malik parcel is the south half of Lot 18, Block I, C.D. Hillman's addition to the City of Sean Ie according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 13 of plats, at page 62 Records of King County, Washington. The legal description of the Pike PwrceJ is Lot 4 of King County Short Plat No 677081, recorded under Recording No. 7801190881, Records of King County, Washington. Exhibit 3. , Lea Hill is a neighborhood with its own zoning designation which is subject to the same development standards as the general R-2 zoning district. Testimony oj Mr. Osaki. Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City "f Auburn Malik/Pike Preliminary Plat. No. PLT03-0003 Page 3 of /4 3. Surrounding land uses are all single-family residential uses and hav¡: zoning designations ofLHR-2. Exhibit I, page 2. The subject property is generally rolling with slopes of 5 to 15%, with the greater slopes being in the west division. The undeveloped portions of the subject property contain alder, maple, fir, and cedar trees, shrubs, and grass. Songbirds and squirrels have been observed, but no endangered or threatened species are known to exist on-site. Exhibit 4, Environmental Checklist. Studies commissioned and submitted by the Applicants indicate that the subject property contains no wetlands, significant.a< uatic habitat, or significant bald eagle habitat. Exhibits 10 and 11. -,,-,.. 4.' The purposes of the Auburn subdivision code are to prevent the overcrowding of land; lessen congestion and promote safe and convenient travel; promote the effective use ofland; provide for adequate light and air; facilitate ad€:quate provision of public infrastructure and services; provide for proper ingress and egress; provide for the expeditious review and approval of land divisions; adequately provide for the housing and commercial needs of citizens; require uniform monumenting ofIand divisions; implement the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; and prevent or abate public nuisiIIlces. ACC 17.02.030. 5. The City's subdivision code requires that corner lots intended for residential development be at least five-feet wider than the minimum width required by the zoning ordinance. ACC 17. 12.25(D). In the west division, the proposed lots satisfy the comer lot requirement. In the east division, the east-most ilot complies with the comer lot requirement, but the west-most lot is the subject of a variance request for reduced width. Exhibit 5. 6. The proposed plat is consistent with the policies of the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Land Use Policy 14 (LU-14) requires that single-family residential developments have densities no greater than six units per acre. Transportation Policy TR-13 requires that where possible, existing streets should be linked and planning should be implemented to allow for future connectivity with existing and other future streets. Exhibit I, pages 3-4. Through Environmental Policies EN-20 and EN-24, the City encourages retentiion of existing vegetation during new development, including significant trec:s. The City requires connections to the existing public street system as a matter of policy, requiring the costs of such connections to be bourne by developers. Such connections should include the elimination oflengthy dead ends streets and are intended to support a sense of inter connectedness and community, as well as to provide improved emergency vehicle access. Transportation Policy 23; Land Use Policies 56 and 58: Exhibit 7, MDNS, Conclusions. City statftestified that the proposed plat, as conditioned, would be consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Exhibit 1, pages 3-4: Testimony of Mr. Osaki. Finding/i, Conclusions & Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Malik/Pike Preliminary Plat, No PLT03-0003 Page 4 of 14 ..,...... 7. Each of the two divisions of the plat contains an existing residence which each Applicant intends to retain. The placement of each existing residenc:e has prompted each Applicant to seek a variance for their respective division of the proposed preliminary plat. 8 In the west division, the placement of the existing house has prompted Mr. Malik to request a variance ITOm the ITont yard setback required under Auburn City Code (ACC) 18.14.040.F.1. In the east division, placement of the existing residence caused Mr. Pike to request a variance ITOm the minimum lot width required under ACe 18.14.040.C. The varilll!ce requests impact the number of lots allowed in each division, but the preliminary plat application could be approved whether or not the variances were grallted Exhibit J; Exhibit J, page 2; Testimony of Mr. Osaki. City staff testified that, with the exception of the variance issues, the proposed plat as conditioned complies generally with the development standards of the subdivision ordinan'~e. Testimony of Mr. Osaki; Exhibit J. page 4. 8. The combined preliminary plat application was submitted February 18,2004.9 Exhibits 3 & 4. A joint engineering plan for the two parcels was submitted by Aleanna Kondelis of Cramer Northwest, Inc, for the Applicants at the request of City staff. Exhibit 3, Letter to Sean Martin, City of Auburn Planning Services. 9. The two divisions of the proposed plat are separated by a parcel that ilS owned by Dan and Jackie Hurley. The Applicants propose to convey storm water runoff ITom the Pike division through a utility easement over the Hurley property into a stormwater detention and treatment facility on the far west end of the Malik division. Applicant Pike entered into a private agreement with the Hurleys to obtain a IS-foot utility easement along the north boundary of the Hur.ley property. The terms of the agreement stipulate that the easement may be used to convey water, sewer, stormdrain, natural gas, and communications utilities facilities across the Hurley property for the benefit of the Pike property. In return for the easement, Mr. Pike agreed to pay the Hurleys $1,000.00 and to replant the easement area with vegetation or to grade and gravel it, at the Hurleys' option, upon completion of improvements. Exhibit 8. It is noted that at the hearing the City stated that the easement would be required to be a minimum of25 feet wide to provide adequate separation of sewer and water lines. Testimony of Mr. Welch; Exhibit 18, page 4. ) 10. Both divisions of the plat will rely on a storm water detention facility located in the west division. Because the two divisions are being constructed by different , The variance applications are decided under separate cover. · The Applicants initially filed separate applications for subdivision of their two par!:els. The City staff originally believed that because the two parcels, the Malik division and the Pik,: division, were served by a combined stoan water management system, they were contiguous. As a result the City required that the applications for development of the two parcels be consolidated. When the misunderstanding was clarified, the City continued with the combined application. Exhibit 1, page 2. Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City ~r Auburn Malik/Pike Preliminary Plat, No. PL T03-0003 Page 5 of 14 land owners, each on his own schedule, a condition of approval wOll~d be necessary to ensure that the storm water detention facility in the west is completed before improvements to the east division that could create stormwatl:r runoff would be constructed. Testimony of Mr. Osaki: Exhibit 3, Letter to Sean Martin, City of Auburn Planning Services. 11. The west division fronts Ilzth Avenue SE, a minor arterial. which requires 67-feet of right-of-way width. The existing right-of-way is substandard. As a condition ofSEPA approval, the City required the Applicants to dedicate 3.5 ~~et by statutory warranty deed to the City and to complete half-street improvements Bringing I 12th Avenue SE to "minor arterial" standards. The deed and street improvement plan must be submitted and approved by the City prior to building permit issuance. Exhibit l, page 2: Exhibit 5: Exhibit 7, page 5. ]2. The east division fronts both] 16th Avenue SE, a public road, and SE 3]8th Place, a private access easement. Exhibit 5. The Applicants would be required to construct half-street improvements on I] 6th Avenue SE to the standard defined by the City's Design and Construction Standards manual. Exhibit l, page 2; Exhibit 7, page 2. 13. Access to the west division would be provided through construction of a new public street (SE 31Sth Street) connected to 112'h Avenue SE. Placement of the new public street has been a difficult issue for this project due to the shape and size of the parcel, the location of the existing residence on proposed Lot I within 25 feet of the northern property line, and an existing utility easement encumbering the southern property boundary in the proposed stormwater tract, which prevents placement of the new road along the south boundary. Testimony of Mr. Osaki; Exhibit 5. The proposed public road would require dedication of35-j~et of right- of-way along the northern property line across all lots in the west division and the storm drainage tract to create a stub end road for eventual connection with SE 3] Sth Place. Exhibit 5. The public road dedication could necessitate reconfiguration of Lots 7 and S in order to maintain compliance with minimum lot area requirements. A temporary cul-de-sac easement, 65-feet in diameter, would be required at the stub end of the public street to allow for emergency vehicle turn around until the through road connection is created, at which time the easement could be lifted. Testimony of Mr. Welch; Exhibit l8, page 4. 14. The east division would access I ] 6th Avenue SE by expanding the existing private access easement known as SE 3] 8th Place, Exhibit I, page 2. The Applicants would be required to develop the private street to public half-street standards in anticipation of the through road connection in the future, although they could maintain it as a private road until that time. As a condition in the MDNS, the City required the private acccess easement to be dedicated! to the City when the through connection is constructed. Future owners of east division lots would be notified by a note on the final plat that each lot in the east division Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Malik/Pike Preliminary Plat, No. PLT03-0003 Page 6 of 14 would be required to dedicate the area needed for the public road. 10 Testimony of Mr. Welch; Exhibit 18, page 3. ] 5. According to information provided by the Applicants, approximately 56 vehicle trips per day would be generated by the plat with peak volumes occurring between 7:00-9:00 a.m. and 4:00-6:00 p.m. daily. Exhibit 4. page 18. Less than 30 of the new trips are anticipated to occur in the p.m. peak hour. Exhibit 7, MDNS. A condition of approval would be required to ensure that ¡he Applicants pay the required transportation impact fees in effect at the time of building pennit application prior to building permit issuance, pursuant to ACC 19.04.040. Exhibit 1. page 3; Testimony of Mr. Osaki. 16. The City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan designation ofthe subject ¡property is Single Family Residential. Exhibit 1, page 1. The Single Family R<:sidential designation designates and protects areas for single-family dwelling. The proposed plat would support the Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Policy LU-14, which encourages the majority of Single-Family Residential designated areas to be developed to a density of between four and six dwelling units per acre. In addition, the proposed plat would support Transportation Policy TR-13, which calls for construction of roads to facilitate street connectivity in futw'e development to promote ease of vehicle and pedestrian circulation. Exhibit 1, pages 3-4. 17. Electricity, natural gas, garbage service, telephone, and public water and sanitary sewer service serve the existing residences on the subject property. The Applicants propose to extend potable water and sanitary sewer service to the proposed lots. Exhibit 4. page 19. Fire and police protection would be provided by the City of Auburn, Exhibit 1. page 3. 18. The subject property is located within the Auburn School District. A condition of approval would be required to ensure that the Applicants pay the required school impact fees pursuant to ACC 19.02.070 prior to building permit issuance. I I Exhibit 1, page 3; Testimony of Mr. Osaki. 19. It is the policy of the City to require parkland dedication where a proposed subdivision would result in a substantial increase in demand for parkland or is needed to prevent or abate public nuisances. Generally, dedication of parkland is required in residential developments of 50 or more lots. However, where it is 10 The record does not contain sufficient evidence to verifY whether each lot in the ',ast division would retain enough area and depth to meet zoning development standards. The question will be determined in the related decision on the east division's application for variance. II Although the record lacks necessary information from the school district relating to capacity and the basis for imposition of any school impact fees, the Applicants had the opportunity to review the City's staff report and recommended conditions of approval and did not object to imposition of school impact fees of an unspecified amount. Findings. Conclusions & Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn MalildPike Preliminary Plat, ."10. PL TOJ-0003 Page 7 of 14 detennined that the proposed subdivision, together with any reasonalbly anticipated future development on adjacent or nearby land, will act in a cumulative manner to substantially increase demand for park land, d,edication may be required of smaller subdivisions. A CC 17.12.260. The City has not required any dedication of parkland in the present application. Existing recreational opportunities in the vicinity include Green River Community College hiking trails, City of Auburn Dale Park, and Hazelwood Elementary, Lea Hill Elementary, and Rainier Junior High School playfields, Exhibit 4,.page 17. 20. A transit stop is located approximately one block south of the project. Exhibit 4. page 18. 21. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEP A), the City of Auburn acted as lead agency fçr review of environmental impacts caused by the proposal. The City issued a Final Mitigated Determination of Non significance (MDNS) on July 26, 2004. The MDNS contains six conditions addressing the following: significant tree retention and replacement; the storm water easement across the Hurley property; dedication of right-of-way and frontage improvements for I 12th Avenue SE; internal street improvement requirements; emergency vehicle access at the stub ends of the internal access roads; and a final biological assessment of wildlife and habitat on-site. Exhibit 7. The MDNS was not appealed. 12 Testimony of Mr. Osaki. 22. A shared well located in the proposed drainage tract in the west divisiion serves the existing residence on that parcel and an adjoining property to the north owned by Pat and Brenda Perry. Mr. Malik (owner of the west division) seeks to abandon the well and to connect to public water. Exhibit 5; Exhibit 7. The City received a comment letter ITom the Perrys in which they object to the Applicant's plan to abandon the well. Exhibit 12. The City may require the Applicant to decommission the well in compliance with regulations. Exhibit 7, page 3. Any issue between the Applicant and the neighboring property owner serv,ed by the well would be a private dispute and not subject to the jurisdiction oftJ~e Hearing Examiner. ~ 23. The proposed plat was reviewed by the Building, Fire, Public Works, M&O, Parks, Planning, and Police Departments of the City of Auburn. Exhibit 1. page 1. Review comments from those agencies were incorporated into the staff analysis and have formed the basis of the recommended conditions of approval. Testimony of Mr. Osaki. The City recommended approval of the plat application.13 Testimony of Mr. Osaki; Exhibit 1. page 1. The Applicants " Even though no appeals were taken, the conditions of the MDNS are being incorporated as conditions of approval for each division of the plat. 13 The Staff Repon contains conflicting ¡nfonnation regarding the staff recommendation. On page I, Stalfrecommends "approval of the preliminary plat application based on Findings of Fac!, Conclusions, and conditions as outlined'" in the repon. Exhibit I. page I. Staff again Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Malik/Pike Preliminary Plat. No. Pi T03-0003 Page 8 of 14 concurred with the City's analysis as presented at hearing. Testimony of Ms. Kondelis. 24. The City received public comments from several surrounding property owners. These concerns pertained to the following: a shared well with off-sit.: property; retention of significant trees, specifically along property lines; priva(:y protection through fencing and tree retention; possible bald eagle habitat and wl~tlands on or near the proposed site; storm water runoff from the proposed development; and compatibility of the proposed development with surrounding livestü<:k and private property. Exhibits 12,13,14,15,16; Testimony of Mr. Perry; Testimony of Mr. Sundqvist; Testimony of Mr. Armatas; Testimony of Mr. Clark; Testimony of Mr. Elom. In response to citizen comments, the City required additional site studies for critical areas and sensitive species. Exhibits 10 and 11. The City responded to each public comment letter received. Exhibits 12a, 13a, 14a, 15a, and 16a, .:..-,.. 25. After review of all citizen comments and the proposal in light of applicable code provisions, the City recommended approval of the proposed plat. Testimony of Mr. Osaki; Exhibi/1, page 3. 26. The City provided reasonable notice of the public hearing to the public and known interested parties. Testimony of Mr. Osaki; Exhibi/17. CONCLUSIONS The Hearings Examiner is granted jurisdiction to hear and make a recommendation to the City Council pursuant to RCW 36.70.970 and ACC 17.06.050 and 18.66.030, Criteria for Review Auburn City Code 17.06.070 provides criteria for review for preliminllry plat applications. Such applications shall only be approved if the Applicant satisfies the following: A. Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks, playgrounds and sites for schools and school grounds; B. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of the comprehensive plan; recommended approval based on the application's consistency with plat criteria. Exh;bitl, page 3. However, on page 5 of the staff report, Staff Recommends the Hearing Examiner approve the west division of the plat and deny the east division of the plat. Exhibit J. page 5. Upon review, the hearing Examiner has determined that approval subject to conditions is the appropriate outcome. Findings. Conclusions & Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Malik/Pike Preliminary Plat, Nu. PLT03-0003a I'age 9 of 14 - C. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of any other applicable policies or plans which have been adopted by the city council; D. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of this title, as enumerated in ACC 17.02.030; E. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the Auburn zoning ordinance and any other applicable planning or engineering standards and specifications as adopted by the city, or as modified and approved as part of a PUD pursuant to ACC Chapter 18.69; . F. The potential environme ntaJ impacts of the proposed subdivision are mitigated such that the preliminary plat will not have an unacceptable adverse .effect upon the quality of the environment; and G. Adequate provisions are made so the preliminary plat will prevent or abate public nuisances. The above criteria are similar to the criteria provided in RCW 57.17.110, which the Applicant must also satisfY for approval of a preliminary plat application. RCW 58.17.110 requires that: Appropriate provisions must be made for the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or rt'>ads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds and all other relevant facts including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; and the public interest must be served by the subdivision. RCW 58./7./10. Conclusions Based on Findinl!s I, Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and ge,neral welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other ImbUc ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks, playgrounds and sites for ¡¡chools and school grounds, The preliminary plat will connect to public utilities, improve existing roads to City standards, and construct new roads to City standards. Conditions of approval will ensure that transportation and school impact fees are paid in accordance with local ordinance. A condition of approval will ensure that storm drainage will be adequately controlled by requiring construction in phases, with the storm drainage tract in the west division being completed befìJre improvements to the east division are permitted. As conditioned, adequate provisions for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare have been or will be provided. Findings Nos. 6, 7. 9. /0. /1. /2, 13. 14, 15, /7, /8. 20, 23. 24, and 25.. 2. The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of the comprehensive plan. The single-family residential development will be Findings. Conc/usiom & Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Malik/Pike Preliminary Plat, No. PL T03-0003 Page 10 of 14 ------ - -----.----......--- . ._--~..._.._.._._._-_._-~_._~-------.-....- consistent with the Single Family Residential Comprehensive Plan designation and will support Auburn's Environmental, Transportation, and Land Use poJicies and goals. Findings Nos. 16.23. and 25. 3. The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of other applicable policies and plans. The proposed plat is generally consJistent with applicable policies or plans of the City of Auburn, except for the issues subject to the two pending variance applications, decided in separate decisions. Findings Nos. 5. 6. and 7. :..,.. '4. The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes oCtile subdivision code. The proposal is generally consistent with the policy of the Auburn Land Division Ordinance. The proposed subdivision will promote the public health, safety and general welfare and satisfy the purposes set forth in AMC 17.02.030(A)-(K). The payment of impact fees will contributt: towards road and school improvements; dedication of right-of-way and construction of /Tontage improvements on 11th Avenue SE and 116'h Avenue SE wiill promote safe travel; and the construction of SE 31Slh Street and expansion of SE 318th Place will provide for proper ingress and egress. Findings Nos. 4. 5, 7, and 15. 5. The proposed subdivision conforms to the Auburn zoning ordinalnce and other applicable planning or engineering standards. Evidence was provided that the plat can comply with the applicable standards. Each of the lots in the west division will satisfy R-2 dimensional standards. Lots in the eas1t division will either conform with dimensional standards or will be approved by variance in a separate decision. Lots containing existing structures will either granted variance /Tom applicable setback requirements or will be required to be brought into compliance with those standards. Payment of impact fees will be required at the time of building permit issuance. No park mitigation is required. Compliance with the engineering standards will be determined at the time of civil plan review. Findings Nos. 6, 7. 18. 15. and 19. 6. Any potential significant adverse environmental impacts of the pJ'oposed subdivision were mitigated through the SEPA process. Finding No. 21. 7. Adequate provisions are made so that the preliminary plat will pJ'event or abate public nuisances. Compliance with development regulations tmsures that the City's authority to regulate public nuisances is maximally implemented. Citizen concerns about the incompatibility of the proposed developmtmt with their existing private property uses are private matters not subject to Hearing Examiner jurisdiction. Findings Nos. 6. 7. 24 and 25. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the preceding Findings and Conclusions, the request for approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide 3.04 acres ofland into 13 single-family residential Findings, Conclusions & Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City (if Auburn Mum.lPike Preliminary Plat, No. PLT03-00li3 Page II of 14 .. _~_._____.___.____ _.0 ..~.__._..___. ... ......____._ lots and one storm water tract connected by easement should be GRANTED subject to the following conditions: I. The Applicants shall submit a road construction plan for review and approval by the City that includes dedication of a 35-foot right of way along the north property line for the entire length of the west division. The dedication will create a stub end road to provide for an east west through connection between 11 th Avenue SE and 1 16th Avenue SE at a future date. This may require reconfiguration of Lots 7 and 8 to maintain compliance with the minimum lot area requirements of the zoning district. 2. A temporary cul-de-sac easement shall be created over Lot 8, and Lot 7 if necessary, to allow for emergency vehicle turn around during the time before the east west through connection is constructed. The cul-de-sac shall have a minimum diameter of 65-feet. At such a time as the through road connection is constructed, the easement shall be lifted fi'om the affected lots. The I:ul-de-sac easement shall be reviewed and approved by the City Public Works department at the time of engineering review and recorded prior to final plat approval. 3. The utility easement across the property between the two divisions of the plat shall be a minimum of25-feet wide to allow for minimum required separation of sewer and water lines. If such an arran¡¡ement cannot be reached between the ADDlicants and the owners of what is now the Hurlev Darcel. the east division (owned bv Pike) of the Dlat shall be denied. 4. The east division shall not receive approval for any construction pem1its, including clearing and grading, utility extension, or any other constmction that could result in increased storm water runoff, until the storm water conveyance and detention facilities in the west division are completed and the conveyance facilities across the Hurley parcel between the two divisions are completed. The provisions of Condition No.4 also apply. 5. The Applicants shall each pay City of Auburn transportation impact fees in effect at the time of building permit application for the number of lots in thdr own division prior to building permit issuance. 6, The Applicants shall each pay City of Auburn school impact fees in effect for the Auburn School District at the time of building permit application for the number of lots in their own division prior to building permit issuance. Conditions ofMDNS Approval: 7. Sienificant trees: Prior to authorization to begin clearing and grading for each division, the Applicants shall each submit for review and approval by the Planning Director a significant tree survey and retention plan for their own Fjnding~. Conclusions & Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the Cìly of Auburn Malik-Pike Preliminary Plat, No. PLTOJ-OOOJ Page /2 of /4 division. These plans shall outline measures to protect significant on- and off-site trees, including the following: a. The location of all on-site trees meeting the City's definition of "significant tree;" b. The approximate location of all off-site trees with driplines extending into the subject property; c. Identification of all trees on-site proposed for retention; d. The identification of protective measures to be employed for the on-site trees to be retained and off-site trees with driplines that extend into the subject property; e. In the event that more than 50-inches of cumulative diameter of significant trees are proposed for removal from either division of the plat. replacement trees are required to be installed as follows. One 2-inch caliper deciduous tre,~ or one 6- foot tall evergreen tree shall be planted in the front yard setback or mar yard setback for every ten inches of cumulative diameter of significant trees removed during site construction. The Planning Director shall approve the replacement tree species. 'l 8. The Applicants shall submit an easement for review and approval by the City Engineer outlining the plat's shared storm facilities' maintenance and access rights, which shall be recorded by the Applicants before final plat approval. The Applicants shall submit a second easement for review and approval by the City Engineer that depicts the easement for the portion of the system's infrastructure to be located on the Hurley parcel between the two divisions of the plat, which shall be recorded prior to final plat approval. The second easement shall be a minimum of25 feet in width along the entire length of what is now the Hurley property's northern boundary to allow the required minimum spacing between s,~wer and water lines. ;+ 9. The Applicant owner of the west division shall dedicate 3.5-feet of the right-of- way for I 12th Avenue SE to the City of Auburn by statutory warranty deed and complete the half-street improvements for the right-of-way to the City's current standard for a "Minor Arteria!." The deed and street improvement pllm shall be reviewed and approved prior to the issuance of construction permits and must be complete prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, 10. The Applicants shall construct both streets internal to the plat to the standards required of "Local Residential" public half-streets. The half-street improvements to be constructed in the east division may be maintained as a private street held in reserve for future dedication until such a time as the northern half of the street is constructed to public half-street standards or until the through connection of SE 318th Street is constructed. The reservation shall be shown on all construction plans and on the face of the final plat map. I I. The Applicants shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Engin<:er at the time of construction plan review for each division that proper turning radii will be Findings. Conclusions & Recommendation Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn Malik/Pike Preliminary Plat. No. PL TtJ3-0003 Page 13 of 14 provided and maintained at each stub end of the new streets until sUI~h a time as the through completion of SF 318'h Strcet is completed. 12. The Applicants shall submit a Final Biological Assessment report or letter conlirnling that the conclusions and rccommcndations contained in the dratì Biological Assessment report. dated July 21. 2004. arc lina!. Decided this LL day of September 2004. James M. Driscoll City of Auburn Hearing Examincr'· 'I This plat ",as very çomplicated and dit1icult to revit~\\. II i~ strong.l~ suggested that in the future the City S~p3rate and revic\\- different propo~cd plals \\ ilh a nlOr~' traditional proces:), Finding.,. (·ondll....·;ons & Rt'commt.'/ldalim1 Hearing l-.'.ral11;lll'rfor the (/'.1' (/f fufturl1 AlaiiA r¡/.,c !lrdil"ill(II:1'/'!JII, .\0_ IlL ]ìJ3-0IloJ Pug/! !..¡(~rI4 REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Any party of record who feels the decision of the Examiner is based ón error of procedure, fact or judgment, or the discovery of new evidence may file a written request for reconsideration with the Hearing Examiner no later than September 30, 2004, from the date of mailing of the decision. Reconsideration requests should be addressed to: Hearing Examiner, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA 98001-4998. CllY COUNCIL ACTION This decision of the Hearing Examiner is a recommendation to the City Council and will be considered by the Council at their October 4, meeting. At the October 4, meeting the Councit may eithelr affirm the Examiner's recommendation, remand the decision back to the Examiner, or schedule a closed record public hearing. RESOLUTION NO.3 7 6 8 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE 3.05 ACRES OF LAND INTO 13 SINGI_E- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND ONE STORM WATER TRACT WHEREAS, Application No. PL T04-0004, dated February 18, 21004, has been submitted to the City of Auburn, Washington, by David Malik and Thomas Pike, requesting approval of a Preliminary Plat to subdivide 3.05 acres of land into 13 single-family residential lots and one storm water tract, within th,e City of Auburn; and WHEREAS, said request above referred to was referred to the Hearing ( Examiner for study and public hearing thereon; and WHEREAS, pursuant to staff review, the Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing to consider said petition in the Council Chambers of the Auburn City Hall on August 17, 2004, of which the Hearing Examiner recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat on September 17, 2004; and WHEREAS, on September 29, 2004, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration of condition 4 of the Hearing Examiner recommendation; and WHEREAS, on October 22, 2004, the Hearing Examiner issued an amended recommendation to withdraw condition 4 and replace it with a new condition 4; -----...-----....----------- Resolution No. 3768 October 27,2004 Page 1 WHEREAS, the City Council, on November 1 2004, considered said request and affirmed the Hearing Examiner's recommendation for prE!liminary plat based upon the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions, to-wit: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Applicants requested approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide two noncontiguous parcels consisting of 3,04 acres of land (tax parcels 333940- 0090 and 333940-0018) into 13 single-family residential lots and one storm water tract. The subject parcels, located in the Lea Hill area, are connected by a utility easement that crosses the parcel between them owned by third parties. The west division of the proposed plat, owned by Mr. Malik, is located at 31812-112th Avenue SE and the east division, owned by Mr. Pike, is located at 11533 SE 318th Place in Auburn, Washington. Exhibit a, page 1; Exhibits 2, 3 and 5. 2. The subject property is zoned Single-Family Residential (LHR-2). Exhibit 1, page 1. Development standards in the R-2 zone require a minimum lot area of 6,000 square feet, a minimum lot width of 60 fee, a minimum lot depth of 80 feet, and front yard setbacks of20-feet. ACC 18.14.040. All 13 of the proposed lots would meet or exceed square footage and minimum lot depth standards. Exhibit 5. 3. Surrounding land uses are all single-family residential uses and have zoning designations of LHR-2. Exhibit 1, page 2. The subject pmperty is generally rolling with slopes of 5 to 15%, with the greater slopes being in the west division. The underdeveloped portions of the subject property contain alder, maple, fir and cedar trees, shrubs, and grass. Songbirds and squirrels have been observed, but no endangered or thrElatened species are known to exist on-site. Exhibit 4, Environmental Checklist. Studies commissioned and submitted by the Applicants indicate that the subject property contains no wetlands, significant aquatic habitat, or significant bald eagle habitat. Exhibits 10 and 11. 4. The purposes of the Auburn subdivision code are to prevEmt the overcrowding of land; lessen congestion and promote safe and convenient travel; promote the effective use of land; promote for adequate Ii! ht and air; facilitate adequate provision of public infrastructure and sl~rvices; provide for the expeditious review and approval of land divisions; adequately provide for the housing and commercial needs of citizens; -------.......--------------- Resolution No. 3768 October 27,2004 Page 2 require uniform monumenting of land divisions; implement the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; and prevent or abate public nuisances. ACC 17.02.030. 5. The City's subdivision code requires that corner lots intended for residential development be at least five-feet wider than the minimum width required by the zoning ordinance. ACC 17.12.25(0). In the west division, the proposed lots satisfy the corner lot requirement. In the east division, the east-most lot complies with the corner lot requirement, but the west- most lot is the subject of a variance request for reduced width. Exhibit 5. 6. The proposed plat is consistent with the policies of the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Land Use Policy 14 (LU-14) requires thaI: single- family residential developments have densities no greater than six units per acre. Transportation Policy TR-13 requires that where possible, existing streets should be linked and planning should be implemEmted to allow for future connectivity with existing and other streets. Exhibit 1, pages 3-4. Through Environmental Policies EN-20 and EN-24, Ithe City encourages retention of existing vegetation during new development, including significant trees. The City requires connections to the existing public street system as a matter of policy, requiring the costs of such connections to be bourne by developers. Such connections should include the elimination of lengthy dead ends streets and are intended to support a sense of interconnectedness and community, as well as to provide improved emergency vehicle access. Transportation Policy 23; Ls'nd Use Policies 56 and 58; Exhibit 7, MONS, Conclusions. City staff testified that the proposed plat, as conditioned, would be consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Exhibit 1, pages 3-4; Testimony of Mr. Osaki. 7. Each of the two divisions of the plat contains an existing residence which each Applicant intends to retain. The placement of each 13xisting residence has prompted each Applicant to seek a variance for their respective decision of the proposed preliminary plat. In the west division, the placement of the existing house has prompted Mr. Malik to request a variance from the front yard setback required under Auburn City Code (ACC) 18.14.040.F.1. In the east division, placement of the existing residence caused Mr. Pike to request a variance from the minimum lot width required under ACC 18.14.040.C. The variance requests impact the number of lots allowed in each division, but the preliminary plat application could be approved whether or not the variances were granted. Exhibit 3; Exhibit 1, page 2; Testimony of Mr. Osaki. City staff testified that, with the exception of the variance issues, the proposed plat as conditioned --....----------....-------- Resolution No. 3768 October 27, 2004 Page 3 __.....,'_._,..__.,_.~_____ __ ._____._ __"~'.._._n.._ complies generally with the development standards of the subdivision ordinance. Testimony of Mr. Osaki; Exhibit 1, page 4. 8. The combined preliminary plat application was submitted February 18, 2004. Exhibits 3 and 4. A joint engineering plan for the two parcels was submitted by Aleanna Kondelis of Cramer Northwest, Inc, for the Applicants at the request of City staff. Exhibit 3, Letter to Sean Martin, City of Aubum Planning Services. 9. The two divisions of the proposed plat are separated by a parcE,1 that is owned by Dan and Jackie Hurley. The Applicants propose to convey storm water runoff from the Pike division through a utility easeml3nt over the Hurley property into a stormwater detention and treatment facility on the far west end of the Malik division. Applicant Pike entered into a private agreement with the Hurleys to obtain a 15-foot utility easement along the north boundary of the Hurley property. The terms of the agreement stipulate that the easement may be used to convey water, sewer, stormdrain, natural gas, and communications utilities facilities across the Hurley property for the benefit of the Pike property. In return for the easement, Mr. Pike agreed to pay the Hurleys $1,000.00 and to replant the easement area with vegetation or to grade and gravel it, at the Hurleys option, upon completion of improvements. Exhibit 8. It is noted that at the hearing the City stated that the easement would be required to be a minimum of 25 feet wide to provide adequate separation of sewer and water lines. Testimony of Mr. Welch; Exhibit 18, page 4. 10. Both divisions of the plat will rely on a storm water detention facility located in the west division. Because the two divisions are being constructed by different land owners, each on his own schedule, a condition of approval would be necessary to ensure that the storm water detention facility in the west is completed before improvements to the east division that could create stormwater runoff would be constructed. Testimony of Mr. Osaki; Exhibit 3, Letter Sean Martin, City of Auburn Planning Services. 11. The west division fronts 11 ih Avenue SE, a minor arterial, which r1equires 57-feet of right-of-way width. The existing right-of-way is substandard. As a condition of SEPA approval, the City required the Applicants to d,edicate 3.5 feet by statutory warranty deed to the City and to complete half-street improvements bringing 112th Avenue SE to "Minor Arterial" standards. The deed and street improvement plan must be submitted and approved by the City prior to building permit issuance. Exhibit 1, page 2; Exhibit 5; Exhibit 7, page 5. ---------------------------- Resolution No, 3768 October 27,2004 Page 4 12. The east division fronts both 1161h Avenue SE, a public road, and SE 3181h Place, a private access easement. Exhibit 5. The Applicants would be required to construct half-street improvements on 1161h Avenue SE to the standard defined by the City's Design and Construction Standards manual. Exhibit 1, page 2; Exhibit 7, page 2. 13. Access to the west division would be provided through construction of a new public street (SE 318th Street) connected to 11ih Avenue SE. Placement of the new public street has been a difficult issue for this; project due to the shape and size of the parcel, the location of the existing residence on proposed Lot 1 within 25 feet of the northern property line, and an existing utility easement encumbering the southern property boundary in the proposed stormwater tract, which prevents placement of the new road along the south boundary. Testimony of Mr. Osaki; E)(hibit 5. The proposed public road would require dedication of 35-feet of right-of- way along the northern property line across all lots in the west division and the storm drainage tract to create a stub end road for eventual connection with SE 318th Place. Exhibit 5. The proposed public road would require dedication of 35-feet of right-of-way along the northern property line across all lots in the west division and the storm drainage tract to create a stub end road for eventual connection with SE 318th Place. Exhibit 6. The public road dedication could necessitate reconfiguration of Lots 7 sind 8 in order to maintain compliance with minimum lot area requirements. A temporary cul-de-sac easement, 65-feet in diameter, would be required at the stub end of the public street to allow for emergency vehicle turn around until the through road connection is created, at which time the ea:sement could be lifted. Testimony of Mr. Welch; Exhibit 18, page 4. 14. The east division would access 116th Avenue SE by expanding the E!xisting private access easement known as SE 318th Place. Exhibit 1, page 2. The Applicants would be required to develop the private street to public half-street standards in anticipation of the through road connection in the future, although they could maintain it as a private road until that tinne. As a condition in the MONS, the City required the private access easement to be dedicated to the City when the through connection is constructed. Future owners of west division lots would be notified by a note on the final plat that each lot in the east division would be required to dedicate the area needed for the public road. Testimony of Mr. Welch; Exhibit W, page 3. 15. According to information provided by the Applicants, approximately 56 vehicle trips per day would be generated by the plat with peak volumes occurring between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. ---------------------------- Resolution No. 3768 October 27,2004 Page 5 daily. Exhibit 4, page 18. Less than 30 of the new trips are anticipated to occur in the p,m. peak hour. Exhibit 7, MONS. A condition of approval would be required to ensure that the Applicants pay the required transportation impact fees in effect at the time of building permit application prior to building permit issuance, pursuant to ACC 19.14.040. Exhibit 1, page 3; Testimony of MR. Osaki. 16. The City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan designation of the subject property is Single Family Residential. Exhibit 1, page 1. ThE! Single Family Residential designation designates and protects areas for single- family dwelling. The proposed plat would support the Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Policy LU-14, which encourages the majority of Single- Family Residential designated areas to be developed to a density of between four and six dwelling units per acre. In addition, the proposed plat would support Transportation Policy TR-13, which calls for construction of roads to facilitate street connectivity in future development to promote ease of vehicle and pedestrian circulation. Exhibit 1, pages 3- 4. 17. Electricity, natural gas, garbage service, telephone, and public water and sanitary sewer serve the existing residences on the subject property. The Applicants propose to extend potable water and sanitary sewer service to the proposed lots. Exhibits 4, page 19. Fire and police protection would be provided by the City of Auburn. 18. The subject property is located within the Auburn School District. A condition of approval would be required to ensure that the Applicants pay the required school impact fees pursuant to ACC 19.02.070 prior to bUilding permit issuance. Exhibit 1, page 3; Testimony of Mr. Osaki. 19. It is the policy of the City to require parkland dedication where a proposed subdivision would result in a substantial increase in parkland or is needed to prevent or abate public nuisances. Generally, dedication of par~:land is required in residential developments of 50 or more lots. However, where it is determined that the proposed subdivision, together with any reasonably anticipated future development on adjacent or nearby land, will act in a cumulative manner to substantially increase demand for park land, dedication may be required of smaller subdivisions. ACC 17.12.260. The City has not required any dedication of parkland in the present application. Existing recreational opportunities in the vicinity include Green River Community College hiking trails, City of Auburn Dale Park, and Hazl~lwood Elementary, Lea Hill Elementary, and Rainier Junior High Schol)1 play fields. Exhibit 4, page 17. ---------------------------- Resolution No. 3768 October 27,2004 Page 6 20. A transit stop is located approximately one bock south of the project. Exhibit 4, page 18. 21. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), the City of Auburn acted as lead agency for review of environmental impacts caused by the proposal. The City issued a Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) on July 26, 2004. The MONS contains six conditions addressing the following: Significant tree retention and replacement; the storm water easement across the Hurley property; dedication of right-of-way and frontage improvements for 112th Avenue SE; internal street impmvement requirements; emergency vehicle access at the stub ends of internal access roads; and a final biological assessment of wildlife and habitat on- site. Exhibit 7. The MONS was not appealed. Testimony of Mr. O,~aki. 22. A shared well located in the proposed drainage tract in the west division serves the existing residence on the parcel and an adjoining property to the north owned by Pat and Brenda Perry, Mr. Malik (owner of the west division) seeks to abandon the well and to connect to public water. Exhibit 5; Exhibit 7. The City received a comment letter from the Perrys in which they object to the applicant's plan to abandon the well. Exhibit 12. The City may require the Applicant to decommission the well in compliance with regulations. Exhibit 7, page 3. Any issue between the Applicant and the neighboring property owner served by the well would be a private dispute and not subject to the jurisdiction of the Hearing Examiner. 23. The proposed plat was reviewed by the Building, Fire, Public Works, M&O, Parks, Planning, and Police Departments of the City of Auburn. Exhibit 1, page 1. Review comments from those agencies were incorporated into the staff analysis and have formed the basis of the recommended conditions of approval. Testimony of Mr. Osaki. The City recommended approval of the plat application. Testimony of Mr. Osaki; Exhibit 1, page 1. The Applicants concurred with the City's analysis as presented at hearing. Testimony of Ms. Kondelis. 24. The City received comments from several surrounding property ()wners. These concerns pertained to the following: a shared well with off-site property; retention of significant trees, specifically along property lines; privacy protection through fencing and tree retention; possible bald eagle habitat and wetlands on or near the proposed site; storm water run()ff from the proposed development; and compatibility of the proposed development with surrounding livestock and private property. Exhibits 12, 13, 14, 16; ---------------------------- Resolution No. 3768 October 27,2004 Page 7 Testimony of Mr. Perry; Testimony of Mr. Sundqvist; TestimonJl of Mr. Armatas; Testimony of Mr. Clark; Testimony of Mr. Elom. In response to citizen comments, the City required additional site studies for critical arrears and sensitive species. Exhibits 10 and 11. The City responded to each public comment letter received. Exhibits 12a, 13a, 14a, 15a, and 16a. 25. After review of all citizen comments and the proposal in light of applicable code provisions, the City recommended approval of the proposed plat. Testimony of Mr. Osaki; Exhibit 1, page 3. 26. The City provided reasonable notice of the public hearing to the public and known interested parties. Testimony of Mr. Osaki; Exhibit 17. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Jurisdiction The Hearing Examiner is granted jurisdiction to hear and make a recommendation to the City Council pursuant to RCW 36.70,970 and ACC 17.06.050 and 18.66.030. Criteria for Review Auburn City Code 17.06.070 provides criteria for review for preliminary plat applications. Such applications shall only be approved in the Applicant s¡atisfies the following: A. Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and !~eneral welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks, playgrounds and sites for schools and school grounds. B. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes¡ of the comprehensive plan; C. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of any other applicable policies or plans, which have been adopted by the City council; -...-------......-------.......-- Resolution No. 3768 October 27,2004 Page 8 D. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of this title, as enumerated in ACC 17.02.030; E. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the Auburn zoning ordinance and any other applicable planning or engineering standards and specifications as adopted by the City, or as modified and approved as part of a PUD pursuant to ACC Chapter 18.69; F. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed subdivision are mitigated such that the preliminary plat will not have an unacceptable adverse effect upon the quality ofthe environment; and G. Adequate provisions are made so the preliminary plat will prevent or abate public nuisances. The above criteria are similar to the criteria provided in RCW 57.-17.100, which the Applicant must also satisfy for approval of a preliminëlry plat application. RCW 58.17.100 requires that: Appropriate provisions must be made for the public health, safe,ty and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks, playgrounds, schools and school grounds and all other rt31evant facts including sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who only walk to and from school; ëlnd the public interest must be served by the subdivision. RCW 58.17.100. Conclusions Based on Findinas 1. Adequate provIsions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, ¡¡lIeys, other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, Iparks, playgrounds and sites for schools and school grounds. The preliminary plat will connect to public utilities, improve existing roads to City standards, and construct new roads to City standards. Conditions of approval will ensure that transportation and school impact fees are paid in accordance with local ordinance. A condition of approval will ensul'e that storm drainage will be adequately controlled by requiring construction in phases, with the storm drainage tract in the west division being completed before improvements to the east division are permitted. As conditioned, ---..-----......-..--------.... Resolution No. 3768 October 27, 2004 Page 9 - ._-------~.__._.__.._._._-~_._--_._------_.-"._-.'"-_.---------'---' adequate provisions for the protection of the public health, safl3ty, and general welfare have been or will be provided. Finding Nos. 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18,20,23,24, and 25. 2. The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposell of the comprehensive plan. The single-family residential development will be consistent with the Single Family Residential Comprehensive Plan designation and will support Auburn's Environmental, Transportation and Land Use policies and goals. Finding Nos. 16,23, and 25. 3. The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes ()f other applicable policies and plans. The proposed plat is generally consistent with the applicable policies or plans of the City of Auburn, except for the issues subject to the two pending variance applications, dec:ided in separate decisions, Findings Nos. 5, 6, and 7. 4. The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes. of the subdivision code. The proposal is generally consistent with the policy of Auburn Land Division Ordinance. The proposed subdivision will promote the public health, safety and general welfare and satisfy the purposes set forth in AMC 17.02.030(A)-(K). The payment of impact fees will contribute towards road and school improvements; dedication of right-of-way and construction of frontage improvements on 11ih Avenue SE and 116th Avenue SE will promote safe travel; and the construction of SE 31S'lh Place will provide for proper ingress and egress. Finding Nos. 4, 5, 7, ana' 15. 5. The proposed subdivision conforms to the Auburn Zoning Ordinance and other applicable planning or engineering standards. Evidence was provided that the plat can comply with the applicable standards. Each of the lots in the west division will satisfy R-2 dimensional standards. Lots in the east division will either conform with dimensional standards or will be approved by variance in a separate decision. Lots containing E¡xisting structures will either granted variance from applicable setback requirements or will be required to be brought into compliance with those standards. Payment of impact fees will be required at the time of building permit issuance. No park mitigation is required. Compliance with the engineering standards will be determined at the time of civil plan ¡review. Findings nos. 6, 7, 18, 15, and 19. 6. Any potential significant adverse environmental impacts 4)f the proposed subdivision were mitigated through the SEPA pr1ocess. Finding No. 21. ....----......--------.......... Resolution No. 3768 October 27, 2004 Page 10 7. Adequate provIsions are made so that the preliminary plat will prevent or abate public nuisances. Compliance with devE1lopment regulations ensures that the City's authority to regulate public nuisances is maximally implemented. Citizen concerns about the incompatibility of the proposed development with their existing private property uses arls private matter not subject to Hearing Examiner jurisdiction. Finding Nos. 6, 7, 24, and 25. Recommendations 1. The Applicants shall submit a road construction plan for review and approval by the City that includes dedication of a 35-foot right-of-way along the north property line for the entire length of the west division. The dedication will create a stub end road to provide for an east west through connection between 112th Avenue SE and 116th Avenue SE at a future date. This may require reconfiguration of Lots 7 and 8 to maintain compliance with the minimum lot area requirements of the zoning district. 2. A temporary cul-de-sac easement shall be created over Lot 8, and Lot 7 if necessary, to allow for emergency vehicle turn around during the time before the east west through connection is constructed. The cul-de-sac shall have a minimum diameter of 65-feet. At such a time as the through road connection is constructed, the easement shall be lifted from the affected lots. The cul-de-sac easement shall be reviewed and approved by the City Public Works department at the time of engineering review and recorded prior to the final plat approval. 3. The utility easement across the property between the two divisions of the plat shall be a minimum of 25-feet wide to allow for minimum flsquired separation of sewer and water lines. If such an arranaement cannot be reached between the Applicants and the owners of what is now the Hurlev parcel. the east division (Owner bv Pike) of the plat shall be denied. 4. The east division may receive approval \for all construction permits, including clearing and grading and utility extension provided that all construction on the east parcel that could result in increased stoml water runoff be timed to occur after the completion of the storm water conveyance and detention facilities in the west division and acmss the Hurley property. 5. The Applicants shall each pay City of Aubum transportation impact fees in effect at the time of building permit application for the number of lots in their own division prior to building permit issuance. ---------------------------- Resolution No. 3768 October 27,2004 Page 11 _._.._~,. 6. The Applicants shall each pay City of Auburn school impact fees in effect for the Auburn School District at the time of building permit application for the number of lots in their own division prior to building permit issuance. Conditions of MONS Approval: 7. Sianificant Trees: Prior to authorization to begin clearing and grading for each division, the Applicants shall each submit for review and approval by the Planning Director a significant tree survey and retention plan for their own division. These plans shall outline measures to protect signifk:ant on- and-off-site trees, including the following: a. The location of all on-site trees meeting the City's definition of "significant tree;" b. The approximate location of all off-site trees with clriplines extending into the subject property; c. Identification of all trees on-site proposed for retention; d. The identification of protective measures to be employed for the on-site trees to be retained and off-site trees with driplines that extend into the subject property; and e. In the event that more than 50-inches of cumulative diameter of significant trees are proposed for removal from either division of the plat, replacement trees are required to be installed as follows: One 2-inch caliper deciduous tree or one 6-foot tall eVE!rgreen trees shall be planted in the front yard setback or reélr yard setback for ever ten inches of cumulative diameter of significant trees removed during site construction. The Planning Director shall approve the replacement trees species. 8. The Applicants shall submit an easement for review and approval by the City Engineer outlining the plat's shared storm facilities' maintenanl=e and access rights, which shall be recorded by the Applicants before final plat approval. The Applicants shall submit a second easement for reviE!w and approval by the City Engineer that depicts the easement for the po/1ion of the system's infrastructure to be located on the Hurley parcel between the two divisions of the plat, which shall be recorded prior to the final plat approval. The second easement shall be a minimum of 25-feet in width along the entire length of what is now the Hurley property's northern --..----....----------..-----... Resolution No. 3768 October 27, 2004 Page 12 boundary to allow the required minimum spacing between sewer and water lines. 9. The Applicant owner of the west division shall dedicate 3.5-feE~t of the right-of-way for 11ih Avenue SE to the city of Auburn by statutory warranty deed and complete the half-street improvements for the right-of- way to the City's current standard for a "Minor Arterial." The deed and street improvement plan shall be reviewed and approved prior to the issuance of construction permits and must be complete prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 10. The Applicants shall construct both streets internal to the plat to the standards required of "Local Residential" public half-streets. The half- street improvements to be constructed in the east division may be maintained as a private street held in reserve for future dedication until such a time as the northern half of the street is constructed to ~ublic half- street standards or until the through connection of SE 318t Street is constructed. The reservation shall be shown on all construction plans and on the face of the final plat map. 11. The Applicants shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Eng'ineer at the time of construction plan review for each division that proper turning radii will be provided and maintained at each stub end of the new streets until such a time as the through completion of SE 318th Street is completed. 12. The Applicants shall submit a Final Biological Assessment report I)r letter confirming that the conclusions and recommendations contained in the draft Biological Assessment report dated July 21, 2004, are final. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES as follows: Section 1. The above-cited Hearing Examiner's Conclusions and Decision are herewith approved and incorporated in this Resolution. Section 2. The Preliminary Plat for a 13 single-family subdivision, within the City of Auburn, legally described in Exhibit "A" attached herelio and incorporated herein by this reference, is hereby approved. ---..---.......-----..------- Resolution No, 3768 October 27, 2004 Page 13 Section 3. The Mayor is authorized to implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directives of this legislation. Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect and be in full force upon passage and signatures hereon. DATED and SIGNED this _ day of ,2004. CITY OF AUBURN PETER B. LEWIS MAYOR . ATTEST: Danielle E. Daskam, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ....----.....-------..-------- Resolution No. 3768 October 27, 2004 Page 14 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description THE SOUTH HALF OF LOT 18, BLOCK I, C.D. HILLMAN'S AUBURNDALE ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SEATTLE, DIVISION 1, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 13 OF PLATS, AT PAGE 62, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. LOT 4 OF KING COUNTY SHORT PLAT NO. 677081, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 7801190881, RECORDS OF KU"¡G COUNTY, WASHINGTON. (K.C.S.P. # 875054 -7512160330) TL # 3339400090 -..------------------------ Resolution No. 3768 October 27, 2004 Page 15