Charles Brown PFN 04-112044

Council District: 4

Applicant: Atlas Cove LP Joshua Freed, Manager

Surveyor: Mead Gilman & Associates Edward D. Anderson, Surveyor

22 Lots

Mitigation Category Total Fees Total pert Fee

Parks & Recreation $21,428.00 $974.00 TSA "F" $39,189.26 $1,781.33 TDM $1,590.82 $72.31 WSDOT $7,234.92 $328.86 Northshore School District At bldg permit At bldg permit

SNOHOMISH COUNTY COUNCIL Snohomish County, Washington

MOTION NO. 12-066

APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAT OF CHARLES BROWN PLAT PFN 04-112044 SD

WHEREAS, Atlas Cove LP, a Washington Limited Partnership, applied to Snohomish County for final plat approval of the plat of Charles Brown Plat, PFN 04-112044 SD; and

WHEREAS, the plat consists of 22 lots on 5.86 acres of property located at 1921 Atlas Road, Bothell; and

WHEREAS, the preliminary plat was denied by the Hearing Examiner on 08 February 2006, with Council Approval (Motion 06-186) on 01 May 2006, and a Minor Revision dated 01, August, 2011; and

WHEREAS, the final plat was approved by the Snohomish County Public Works Department, Department of Planning and Development Services, Treasurer, Health District and Fire Marshal; and

WHEREAS, the Council reviewed the record on the final plat of Charles Brown Plat and considered all applicable state laws and county ordinances;

NOW, THEREFORE, ON MOTION:

Section 1. The Snohomish County Council makes the following findings of fact:

1. Preliminary approval of the plat of Charles Brown Plat was denied by the order of the Hearing Examiner dated 08 February 2006, with Council Approval (Motion 06-186) on 01 May 2006, and a Minor Revision dated 01 August 2011, in file number, PFN 04-112044 SD, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

2. The conditions of the preliminary approval found in Hearing Examiner Disposition PFN 04-112044 SD, have been satisfied.

Section 2. The Snohomish County Council makes the following conclusions:

1. Appropriate provisions have been made for the public health, safety, and general welfare.

MOTION NO. 12-066 FINAL PLAT OF CHARLES BROWN PLAT PFN 04-112044 SD

Page 1 of 2

2. Appropriate consideration has been given to open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and playgrounds.

3. Appropriate consideration has been given to sites for schools and school grounds.

4. Appropriate consideration has been given to the physical characteristics of the proposed final plat.

5. The final plat conforms to all terms of the preliminary plat approval.

6. The final plat meets the requirements of RCW 58.17 and SCC 30.41A.640 and other relevant codes.

7. The public use and interest will be served by establishment of the subdivision and dedication.

Section 3. The Snohomish County Council has determined that the final plat of Charles Brown Plat has been completed in accordance with RCW 58.17 and SCC 30.41A.640 and approves the final plat.

PASSED this day of February, 2012.

SNOHOMISH COUNTY COUNCIL Snohomish County, Washington

Council Chair

ATTEST:

Asst. Clerk of the Council

MOTION NO. 12-066 FINAL PLAT OF CHARLES BROWN PLAT PFN 04-112044 SD

Page 2 of 2

SNOHOMISH COUNTY COUNCIL SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON

OFFICIAL NOTICE OF COUNCIL DECISION

In re the case of an Appeal from theDeputy

22-lot Hearing Examiner decision in the case of

US Land Development, LLC, File No. 04-112044, requesting approval of a preliminary plat for a lot subdivision utilizing lot size averaging (Charles Brown). The subject property is located

at 1929 Atlas Road, Bothell, Washington.

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on May 1, 2006 a decision in this matter was entered by the Snohomish County Council: Upon a vote of three to one, the County Council approved a motion to grant the appeal and reverse the decision of the Deputy Hearing Exa

m iner in accordance with Council Motion No. 06-186, attached hereto. ,

FURTHER NOTICE IS GIVEN that unless oth standing erwise provided by law any person having Cou who wishes to appeal this decision must do so by filing a land use petition in Superior

rt in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 36.70C RCW and Chapter 30.72.130 SCC on or before May 26, 2006.

accompanying environmental determination must do so togethe r with appeal of the decision in re accordance with the provisions of Chapter 43.21C RCW and Section 30 . 72 .130 SCC on or

befo the deadline for appeal set out above.

FURTHER NOTICE IS GIVEN that affected propert y o Snohomish County Assessor to make a change in valuatiowners may request the n for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation.

DATED this 1 St day of May, 2006.

Mailed: Tuesday, May 2, 2006

SNOHOMISH COUNTY COUNCIL

SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON

MOTION 06-186

REVERSING THE DEPUTY HEARING EXAMINER DECISION AND GRANTING APPEAL IN PLAT OF CHARLES BROWN

FILE NO. 04 112044

WHEREAS, US Land Development LLC, applied for preliminary plat approval for 22 residential lots using lot size averaging on a 5.86 acre parcel zoned Residential - 9,600, located east of the City of Brier, and north of the City of Bothell; and

WHEREAS, the Snohomish County Deputy Hearing Examiner held an open record hearing on January 24, 2006, and issued a decision on February 8, 2006, denying the application; and

WHEREAS, on February 21, 2006, US Land Development requested reconsideration of the decision based on Snohomish County Code (SCC) §30.72.065, alleging the Deputy Hearing Examiner exceeded his jurisdiction, failure to follow applicable procedure, errors of law, the decision was not supported by substantial evidence in the record, and new evidence material to the decision; and

WHEREAS, on March 7, 2006, the Deputy Hearing Examiner denied the request for reconsideration of the decision by the Applicant except for removal of the sewer connectivity issue as a basis for denial of the plat; and

WHEREAS, on March 21, 2006, the Applicant appealed the decision of the Deputy Hearing Examiner to the County Council according to the provisions of Chapter 30.72, alleging errors of law, and that the decision was not supported by substantial evidence in the record; and

WHEREAS, the County Council considered the appeal and arguments of parties of record at a closed record public hearing on April 26, 2006; and

WHEREAS, the County Council hereby reverses the Deputy Hearing Examiner's Decision based upon the appeal issues related to consideration of other plats in the vicinity affecting access, adequacy of intersection sight distance and stopping sight distance, safe pedestrian walkway along Atlas Road, and failure of the preliminary plat to meet the general requirements of the Subdivision Code at SCC 30.41A.100 and RCW 58.17.110.

NOW, THEREFORE ON MOTION:

Section 1. The Snohomish County Council makes the following findings of fact and conclusions, pursuant to SCC 30.72.120(1):

a.The County Council considered this matter as described in the foregoing recitals, which are incorporated herein by reference.

b. Appellants raise three issues. The Council reverses the Decision based upon appeal issues and arguments related to the adequacy of 1) access and impacts of another, unrelated 113-lot development; 2) intersection sight distance and stopping sight distance; and 3) construction of a sidewalk along a portion of Atlas Road.

c.The Deputy Hearing Examiner's decision to deny the Charles Brown Plat was not based on infirmity in the plat that would preclude any possibility of approval under SCC 30.41A.100 and RCW 58.17.110. Further, to the extent the above issues are supported by substantial evidence in the record, they could have been addressed by conditions on approval.

d.The Deputy Hearing Examiner erroneously based his denial of the Charles Brown plat on speculative impacts and access needs of development unrelated to the Plat. Finding 3 erroneously considered an unidentified 113-lot plat "proposed to the south of the subject site and the record does not disclose where that plat's access will be." The 113-lot plat is located beyond any point in the vicinity that the Applicant is required to measure and therefore it is not proper for consideration in evaluating the plat. See Exhibits 19 and 55-C.

e.Conclusion of Law 2 (3) of the Decision that the plat "fails to consider conflicts with access to be needed by other plats in the vicinity and now in the planning stages..." is in error for the same reason stated in paragraph d. There was no finding of such evidence in the record to support this conclusion. In addition, no legal authority was established to deny the Charles Brown plat based on speculative impacts of another, unrelated development.

1. Conclusion of Law 2 (1) of the Decision that the plat "fails to provide the requisite safe stopping sight distance and entering sight distance in view of all of the surrounding physical circumstances of the topography..." is in error because there is substantial evidence in the record establishing that the plat has satisfied such County standard. Also, County regulations refer to Intersection Sight Distance (ISD) as opposed to "entering" sight distance.

Motion on Appeal of Hearing Examiner Decision Plat of Charles Brown File No. 04 112044 Page 2 of 4

g. Finding 4 of the Decision states the "County's Land Development Analyst Norm Stone testified that the County required review of the Engineering Design and Development Standards as to this plat's access and drivers' sight distance. Mr. Stone reports that the grade's average slope was factored into the computation." The Planning and Development Services (PDS) Staff Recommendation states that "[t]he proposed direct access to lots 21 and 22 has been analyzed to show that these lots have stopping site distance to their proposed driveways, and the lot users will have entering sight distance onto Atlas Road. A plan, profile and cross section showing the site line for stopping sight distance and entering site distance has been presented for review and comment. Said plan indicates that the lots meet the minimum standards for access." Exhibit 47. See also Exhibit 15.

h. At Finding 7 of the Decision, there is discussion of the public's concerns regarding stopping sight distance and entering sight distance. However, the Decision does not identify what County standard, if any the plat failed to meet nor does it explain the basis for denial of the plat.

The Order Upon Reconsideration also is in error with the exception of paragraph 4 regarding sewer connection. Paragraph 2 regarding calculating stopping sight distance fails to consider evidence in the record which includes the PDS staff report (Exhibit 47), oral testimony of PDS staff, and the Entering and Stopping Sight Distance evaluation (Exhibit 15). In addition, the Applicant submitted a revised sight distance exhibit in its Petition for Reconsideration which also demonstrated acceptable stopping and intersection sight distances. See Exhibits 55 and 55-A. There is sufficient information in the record upon which to evaluate the adequacy of sight distances.

To the extent the Deputy Hearing Examiner had concerns related to sight distance, they could have been addressed by either 1) remanding it to County staff to review the sight distances again, or 2) a condition on approval requiring the Applicant to correct any sight distance deficiencies based on engineering and construction approvals by the Department of Public Works (DPA).

k. In Conclusion of Law 2 (2) of the Decision, the Deputy Hearing Examiner erroneously denied the Charles Brown Plat because the plat "fails to provide a safe pedestrian walkway along the plat's entire frontage on Atlas Road...".

I. As with the sight distance issue, this discrete issue could have been addressed by either 1) remanding it to County staff to review options for addressing pedestrian safety, or 2) a condition on approval requiring the

Motion on Appeal of Hearing Examiner Decision Plat of Charles Brown File No. 04 112044 Page 3 of 4

J.

ATTEST:

Applicant to construct a raised walkway along the plat's entire frontage on Atlas Road.

m. Except where inconsistent with this motion the County Council hereby adopts the findings of the Deputy Hearing Examiner as if set forth in full herein.

Section 2. The County Council, having considered the Applicant's appeal in the matter of the Plat of Charles Brown, File No. 04 112044, hereby reverses the decision of the Deputy Hearing Examiner and grants the application for preliminary plat approval, subject to the following conditions:

a. The Applicant shall re-grade Atlas Road to compensate for any inadequacy of the intersection sight distance and stopping sight distance, as identified in the Engineering Design and Development Standards (EDDS) of Snohomish County, as determined by PDS and DPW.

b. The Applicant shall extend an extruded curb, rumble bar or other measure approved by PDS and DPW to enhance pedestrian safety from the west property line of Lot 22 to the west property boundary of the Charles Brown plat.

c. All the conditions detailed in the Planning and Development Staff Recommendation dated January 17, 2006, except where inconsistent with this motion are incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein.

Dated this 1st day of May, 2006.

SNOHOMISH COUNTY COUNCIL Snohomish County, W hington

Motion on Appeal of Hearing Examiner Decision Plat of Charles Brown File No. 04 112044 Page 4 of 4

STAFF RECOMMENDATION

Project File Number: 04-112044-000-00-SD Tax Acct. Number: 003741-003-004-00

January 24, 2006 January 17, 2006

Project Name: Charles Brown Plat Nature of Request: 22 lot preliminary subdivision on 5.86 acres utilizing lot size averaging

Hearing Date: Date of Report:

Application Complete: 120-Day Status:

Owner/Applicant:

September 16, 2004 143 Days

Michael Romano U.S. Land Development Associates 22617 8th Dr SE Bothell, WA 98021

Contact:

Acreage: 5.86 du/ac Lots: 22 du/ac

U.S. Land Development Associates 22617 8th Dr SE Bothell, WA 98021

Avg. Lot Area: 5,044 square feet Gross Density: 3.75

Smallest Lot Area: 3,745 square feet Net Density: 8.46

Location: 1929 Atlas Rd, Bothell, in Section 35, Township 27, Range 04 East W.M.,

Current Zoning: R-9,600

Comprehensive Plan General Policy Plan: Urban Low Density Residential (4-6 du/acre) Subarea Plan: Alderwood Subarea Plan Designation: Suburban (2-4 du/acre)

Snohomish County, WA

School District: Fire District: Water Source: Sewer Service:

Northshore School District No 417 Snohomish County Fire District #1 Alderwood Water and Wastewater District Alderwood Water and Wastewater District

PFN: 04-112044-000-00-SD / Charles Brown Plat Author: Darryl Eastin CADocuments and Settings \Administrator\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files \OLK IC91Charles Brown Plat.doc Page 2

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

APPROVE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION WITH CONDITONS

I. NATURE OF APPLICATION

A. Request

Charles and Deanna Brown, have requested approval of a preliminary subdivision of a 5.86 acre site into 22 lots utilizing lot size averaging (SCC 30.23.210). The subject property is currently zoned R-9,600 and no rezone is proposed. Each lot is to be developed with one single family residence. Vehicular access to 17 of the proposed lots will be via a new public road cul-de-sac street that connects to Atlas Road. Two of the lots will gain access directly from Atlas Road and the remaining three lots will gain access from Barker Road. The proposed subdivision includes construction of required plat improvements and appropriate stormwater management facilities. Alderwood Water and Wastewater District is proposing to serve the subdivision with public water and sewer service.

B. Project Chronology/Background

The preliminary subdivision application was originally submitted to Planning and Development Services (PDS) on September 16, 2004. On October 29, 2004, the application was determined to be complete for regulatory purposes, but insufficient for further review. A resubmittal of the application was received on May 6, 2005, which was determined on June 6, 2005 to be insufficient for further review. A second resubmittal was received on August 3, 2005, which was determined on September 21, 2005 to be insufficient for further review. A third resubmittal of the application was received on October 26, 2005, 2005, which was determined on November 4, 2005 to be sufficient for review and no additional information needed. A SEPA Threshold Determination (TD) was issued January 8, 2005. No SEPA appeal was filed. As of the date of the hearing, 143 days of the 120-day review period will have elapsed.

C. Site Description

The subject property consists of one irregular shaped parcel. The ground surface generally slopes downward from the west to the east at a range of 0 % - 50%. Atlas Road abuts the south property line of the site and Barker Road abuts the east property line of the site. One existing single family residence and one mobile home occupy the project site. Both structures will be removed. Site soils include Alderwood—Urban Land Complex, Alderwood Gravelly-Sandy Loam and McKenna Gravelly Silt Loam. The project site is covered with evergreen conifer and deciduous (alder, willow, hemlock, fir and cedar), native and ornamental shrubs, lawn and wet soil plants. The site contains one small isolated Category 2 non-riparian wetland, one larger Category 2 riparian wetland and a Type 4 tributary to Swamp Creek.

D. Adjacent Zoning/Uses

Surrounding properties are generally developed as single family residences on a mix of small and large lots. The subject property is located approximately 300 feet east of the city limits of Brier.

The table below describes zoning of the subject property and surrounding properties at the time the applications were submitted and found to be complete by Snohomish County

PFN: 04 - 1 12044 -000 -00 -SD / Charles Brown Plat Author: Darryl Eastin CADoeuments and Settings \Administrator\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK1C9\Charles Brown Plat.doc Page 3

Location Existing Use Zoning Subject Parcel North of Subject Parcel East of Subject Parcel (across Barker Rd) West of Subject Parcel South of Subject Parcel (across Atlas Rd)

Single Family Residence Single Family Residences and vacant land Single Family Residences

Single Family Residences Single family Residences

R-9,600 R-9,600 R-9,600

R-9,600 R-9,600

II. ISSUES OF CONCERN

Five citizen comment letters and e-mails were received in response to this application. A number of general concerns were identified in the responses including proposal incompatibility with Brier and Bothell comprehensive plans and surrounding development, increased traffic volume, traffic sight distance problems, pedestrian and school children safety problems, impact on local schools, local hydrology, construction dust and debris on nearby roads, and required sewer hook-up by nearby property owners.

Recent nearby development within the County (including this proposal) complies with the designated residential development density specified for this part of the South County UGA in the Comprehensive Plan.

The Department of Public Works (DPW) reviewed the issue of traffic volume and determined that the proposal will not impact any inadequate road conditions in the vicinity with 3 or more p.m. peak hour trips. DPWrA1gITIEVI0411'1116,1S-Sue of sight distance at driveway access semi-G4

-1ortC21 am, " minim

. rt.4

The applicant Will be required to pay a fee to mitigate project traffic impacts on the . .

County road system. In addition, DPW is requiring that concrete curbs and gutters, 5-foot planter strips and 5-foot sidewalks be constructed along the property frontage adjacent to Atlas Rd and Barker Rd. However, a 7-foot paved shoulder striped for a walkway along the west portion of Atlas Rd. has been approved by the County Engineer to reduce the impact of required road improvements to the adjacent critical area. The Northshore School District commented that school age children will be bused from the Atlas/Barker Rd intersection. Required frontage improvements for both roads will provide safe walking conditions for the school children from this subdivision.

Stormwater runoff generated by the development will be collected and conveyed to a detention pond located on the southeast corner of the site. The volume of the detention pond and developed release rate are designed for 50% of existing 2-year, 10-year and 100-year storm events. The pond outlet flow will be piped to an existing I2-inch culvert under Barker Rd. The capacity of

lejulvert isoappro / o Vi"

xialeyt four cubic per second before topping road. aclot. irt ,,mrs

Applicant will be required to pay fees to mitigate increased impact by the proposal on the Northshore School District. 3711(F(

PFN: 04-1 12044-000-00-SD / Charles Brown Plat Author: Darryl Eastin C:\Documents and Settings \Administrator\ Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files \OLK I C9Tharles Brown Plat.doc Page 4

The Snohomish County Unified Development Code requires roads in the vicinity of theproject site to be kept clear of dirt and debris during construction of required subdivision improvements.

Decisions regarding hook-ups by nearby property owners to any new sewer line required for the proposal are under the purview of the Alderwood Water and Wastewater District and the Snohomish He21th District.

Refer to discussion in Section III of staff report for a more detailed response to these concerns

III. PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH ADOPTED CODES AND POLICLES

Parks Mitigation (Chapter 30.66A SCC)

The proposal is within Nakeeta Beach Park Service Area (No. 307 ) and is subject to Chapter 30.66A SCC (amended per ordinance 04-0)6 adopted February 23, 2005), which requires payment of $974.00 per each new single-family residential lot, to be paid either prior to plat recording or prior to building permit issuance for each unit. Park impact fees shall be paid within five years after the application is deemed complete. After five years, park impact fees shall be based on the rate in effect at the time of building permit issuance. Such payment isacceptable mitigation for parks and recreation impacts in accordance with county policies.

Traffic Mitigation and Road Design Standards (Title 13 SCC & Chapter 30.66B SCC)

The Department of Public Works (DPW) 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. DPW is recommending approval of the application subject to conditions as indicated in this report under Section V-Staff recommendation. DPW's comments on the subject proposal are provided as follows and also listed in their memorandum of August 10, 2005 (Exhibit 45).

1. Road System Capacity [SCC 30.66B.310]

The impact fee for this proposal is based on the new average daily trips (ADT) generated by 21 new lots at 9.57 adt/lot. This rate comes from the 7 th Edition of the ITE Trip Generation Report (Land Use Code 210). The development will generate 200.97 new ADT and has a road system capacity impact fee of $39,189.15, based on $195/ADT. The impact fee per new issued building permit will be $39,189.15\22 lots or $1,781.33 per lot. This impact fee must be proportionally paid prior to the issuance of the building permits.

Trips Calculations

ADT (22 New SFR - 1 Exist.)x (9.57 ADT/SFR) = 200.97

AM PHT (22 New SFR - 1 Exist.) x (0.75 AM PHT/SFR) = 15.75

PM PHT (22 New SFR - 1 Exist.) x (1.01 PM PHT/SFR) = 21.21

PFN: 04-112044-000-00-SD / Charles Brown Plat Author: Darryl Eastin C:\Documents and Senings\Administrator\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK I C91Charles Brown Plat.doc Page 5

2. Concurrency [SCC 30.66B.1201

The subject development has been evaluated for concurrency under the provisions of SCC 30.66B.120. The Department of Public Works has made a preliminary determination that the development is concurrent as of October 28, 2004.

The development has been deemed concurrent on the following basis: Medium-Sized Development in TSA with no arterial unit in arrears. SCC 30.66B.130(4). The subject development is located in TSA F, which, as of the date of submittal of the application, had no arterial units in arrears. The subject development generates 15.75 a.m. peak-hour trips and 21.21 p.m. peak-hour trips which is not more than the threshold of 50 peak-hour trips in which case the development would also have to be evaluated under SCC 30.66B.035.

3. Inadequate Road Condition (IRC) [SCC 30.66B.210]

The subject proposal will not impact any IRC locations identified at this time within TSA F with three or more of its p.m. peak hour trips, nor will it create any. Therefore, it is anticipated that mitigation will not be required with respect to inadequate road conditions and no restrictions to building permit issuance or certificate of occupancy/final inspection will be imposed under this section of Chapter 30.66B.

4. Frontage Improvements [SCC 30.66]3.410]

The subject property frontage is located along Atlas Road and Barker Road. Urban standard frontage improvements are required consisting of 18 feet of pavement from centerline of right-of-way, a 5 foot planter strip, and a 5 foot sidewalk. Construction of frontage improvements is required prior to the recording of the plat unless bonding of improvements is allowed by PDS, in which case construction is required prior to any occupancy of the development.

The County Engineer reviewed a frontage improvements standard deviation request on November 3, 2004, and approved the use of an asphalt paved walkway from the west edge of lot 22 to the west boundary of the plat. This department recognizes the need to reduce the impact to the environmentally sensitive area adjacent to Atlas Road and still provide pedestrian facilities. The improvement will consist of an 11 foot driving lane and x7 foot paved shoulder striped fora walkway.

5. Access and Circulation [SCC 30.66B.420]

The proposed direct access to lots 21 and 22 has been analyzed to show that these lots have stopping site distance to their proposed driveways, and the lot users will have entering sight distance onto Atlas Road. A plan, profile and cross section showing the site line for stopping sight distance and entering sight distance has been presented for review and comment. Said plan indicates that the lots meet the minimum standards for access.

6. Dedication of Right-of-Way [SCC 30.66B.510 and 30.66B.5201

PFN: 04-112044-000-00-SD / Charles Brown Plat Author: Darryl Eastin CADocuments and Settings1Administrator\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK IC91Charles Brown Plat.doc Page 6

Barker Road is designated as a collector non-arterial on the County's Arterial Circulation Map. This requires a right-of-way width of 30 feet on each side of the right— of-way cen terline. 20 feet of right-of-way presently exists on the development's side of the right-of-way. Therefore, 10 feet of additional right-of-way is required. Atlas Road is designated as a collector non-arterial on the County's Arterial Circulation Map. This requires a right-of-way width of 30 feet on each side of the right-of-way centerline. 20 feet of right-of-way presently exists on the development's side of the right-of-way. Therefore, 10 feet of additional right-of-way is required.

7. State Highway Impacts [;CC 30'660'71R)

This development is subject to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT)/County Interlocal Agreement (ILA) which became effective on applications determined complete on or after December 21, 1997.

The impact mitigation measures under the ILA, Section IV(4.1)(b), may be accomplished through a) voluntary negotiated construction of improvements, b) voluntary negotiated payment in lieu of

tr consuction, c) transfer of land from the developer to the State, or d) a voluntary payment in the amount of $36.00 per ADT. Should the applicant choose the voluntary payment option to mitigate their impact to the state highway system, the payment is calculated at

200.97 ADT x $36.00/ADT = $7,234.92

A voluntary offer for the above amount has been submitted to the WSDOT and had been accepted by the WSDOT in theirepte Smber 27, 2004tter. le

8. Other Streets and Roads [SCC 30.66B.720J

Public Works will recommend mitigation measures of the development's direct traffic impact on the city, town or other county roads to the approving authority and the approving authority will impose such measures as a condition of approval of the development in conformance with the terms of the interlocal agreement referred to in SCC 30.61.230 between the county and the other agency.

This application will not impact any city with which the county has an interlocal agreement for traffic impact mitigation.

9. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) [SCC 30.66B.630]

Al] new developments in the urban area shall provide transportation demand management measures. Sufficient transportation demand management measures shall be provided to indicate the potential for removing a minimum of five (5) percent of a development's P.M. peak hour trips from the road system. This requirement shall be met by the provisions of site design requirements under SCC 30.66B.640, as applicable, except where the development proposes construction or purchase of specific offsite TDM measures or voluntary payment in lieu of site design, in accordance with SCC 30.66B.620 and 30.66B.625.

It has been determined that the cost of removing one peak hour trip from the road system is approximately $1,500. This is based on the average cost of one stall in a park and ride lot and the average cost of one "seat" in a 15-passenger van. For a development required to provide TDM,

PFN: 04-112044-000-00-SD / Charles Brown Plat Author: Darryl Eastin CADocuments and Settings\Administrator\Local Settingsaemporary Internet Files\OLKIC9\Charles Brown Plat.doc Page 7

the development's TDM obligation will equal $1,500 times the required trip reduction percentage times the development's peak hour trip generation. [SCC 30.66B.615]

The trip reduction percentage for this development is five percent. The TDM obligation for this development is therefore equivalent to 5% of the 21.21 new PM peak hour trips x $1,500.00 which equals $1,590.75. A written offer for payment of this TDM obligation has been submitted by the applicant and is accepted.

10. Pedestrian Facilities [RCW 58.17.110]

Comments have been received from the Northshore School District in which the district states that school children of all ages will be bused from the Atlas Road\Barker Road intersection. The Frontage improvements for this development will provide safe walking conditions for the school children from this development.

11. Department of Public Works' Recommendation:

Public Works has recommended approval of the development subject to conditions, which have been included in this report.

School Mitigation (Chapter 30.66C SCC)

The proposal is subject to chapter 30.66C SCC which requires payment of mitigation fees or comparable mitigation for each new dwelling unit to the appropriate school district. Pursuant to SCC 30.66C.100, school impact mitigation fees will be determined according to the Base Fee Schedule in effect for the Northshore School District 1/417 at the time of building permit application and collected at the time of building permit issuance for the proposed dwelling units. PDS has included a recommended condition of approval for inclusion within the project decision to comply with this code requirement. Proposed lot (1) will receive mitigation fee credit for the one existing parcel of the subject property.

Drainage and Grading (Chapters 30.63A and 30.63B SC[)

The site is divided by two drainage basins; one on the easterly part of the site and one other on the west. The west part of the site slopes downward to a Type 4 stream that flows from north to south. The large Category 2 wetland and stream on the westerly part of the site flow from the northwest to the southwest to a drainage structure adjacent to Atlas Road. The water then flows under Atlas Road and outfalls to an existing swale that continues in a southerly direction. Stormwater runoff from the project be collected in catch basins and conveyed to a stormwater detention pond located at the southeast corner of the site. Water quality treatment will be provided through additional storage volume at the bottom of the pond. Water from the pond will be discharged to an existing 12-inch culvert under Barker Rd.

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. Grading quantities are anticipated to be

PFN: 04-112044-000-00-SD / Charles Brown Plat Author: Darryl Eastin CADocuments and Seltings\AdministratorTocal Settings \Temporary Internet Files\OLKIC9\Charles Brown Plat.doc Page 8

approximately 20,000 cubic yards of total grading for the project, 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 30.62 SCC)

The site contains one isolated Category 2 non-riparian wetland measuring 4,475 SF and one Category 2 riparian wetland measuring 41,824 SF that extends off-site to the northwest. The site also contains a Type 4 stream. The stream, a tributary to Swamp Creek, transects the larger wetland to the west. The wetland and stream will be protected within a Native Growth Protection Area (NGPA) that covers approximately the western one-half of the site. (See Exhibit 4 — Wetlands Function Replacement Report and Exhibit 7 — Plat Map). Urban Category 2 riparian wetlands in Snohomish County typically receive 50-foot protective buffers. Proposed development will eliminate the small isolated Category 2 wetland to allow construction of the stormwater detention facility and create developable areas for lots 2 and 3.

PDS has reviewed the Critical Areas Study and Wetland Mitigation and Stream Relocation Plan and determined that the project complies with the critical areas regulations.

GMA Comprehensive Plan (General Policy Plan, GPP)

Four elements of the Snohomish County (]MA Comprehensive Plan (GMACP) were adopted pursuant to Ordinance 94-125, which became effective on July 10, 1995. These elements are: the General Policy Plan (GPP); the Transportation Element; the 1995-2000 Capital Facilities Plan; and the Comprehensive Parks & Recreation Plan. On November 27, 1996, effective December 12, 1996, the Council adopted Amended Ordinances 96-074, and 96-071 which amended the map and text of the Snohomish County GMA Comprehensive Plan, and adopted an area-wide rezone within the Urban Growth Areas of the county respectively. This application was complete on February 22, 2005 after the effective date of Amended Ordinances 96-074 and 96-071. This application has been evaluated for consistency with the version of the GMA Comprehensive Plan, which became effective on December 12, 1996, as revised through the completeness date of the application.

The subject property is designated Urban Low Density Residential (ULDR: 4-6 DU/Ac) on the GPP Future Land Use map, and is located within an Urban Growth Area (UGA). It is not located within a mapped Growth Phasing Overlay. According to the GPP, the Urban Low Density Residential designation "covers various sub-area plan designations, which allow mostly detached housing developments on larger lot sizes. Land in this category may be developed at a density of four to six dwelling units per acre. Implementing zones include the R-7200, PRD-7200, R-8400, PRD-8400, R-9600, PRD-9600 and WFB zones."

The property is designated Suburban (2-4 DU/Ac) on the pre-GMA Alderwood Subarea Plan. In resolving the GPP text discussion regarding the structural relationship of the subarea plans to the

PFN: 04-112044-000-00-SD / Charles Brown Plat Author: Darryl Eastin CADocuments and Settings\Administrator\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK IC9\Charles Brown Plat.doc Page 9

GPP, previous hearing examiner decisions have held that the definitive statement in the GMACP adoption ordinance that "the existing subarea comprehensive plans are not part of the county's GMA comprehensive plan..." must be accorded primacy. Therefore, the comprehensive plan to be utilized in the consistency determination procedure required by RCW 36.70B.030(2) and SCC 32.50.100 is the GMACP, and not the pre-GMA subarea plan.

SCC 32.50.100 requires evaluation under the GPP when adopted development regulations do not exist. The GPP and pre-GMA subarea plan policies which might reasonably be applied to the review of a proposal, such as those which relate to density, design, utilities, critical areas protection and transportation, have been superseded by adopted GMA development regulations. Applicability of specific comprehensive plan policies to a development application is also limited by the Citizens v. Mt. Vernon (133 Wn. 2d 861) decision.

The 22 lots proposed are consistent with the density provisions of Snohomish County's GMA-based zoning regulations under Subtitle 30.2.

Zoning (Chapter 30.2 SCC)

This project meets zoning code requirements for lot size, including lot size averagingprovisions, bulk regulations and other zoning code requirements.

The proposal has been evaluated for compliance with the lot size averaging (LSA ) provisions of SCC 30.23.210 effective on September 24, 2004, id which provide that the minimum lot area of the applicable zone is deemed to have been met if the area in lots plus critical areas and their buffers and areas designated as open space or recreational uses, if any, divided b y the number of lots proposed, is not less than the

minimumyrnpoond, lot area requirement. In no case shall the density

achieved be greater than the gross site area divided by the underlying zoning. In determining the appropriate calculation, lots may not be less than 3,000 square feet in area, and any lot having an area less than the minimum zoning requirement must provide a minimum lot width of not less than 40 feet, and right-of-way (ROW) setbacks of 15 feet, except that garages must be setback 18 feet from the ROW (except alleys) and corner lots may reduce one ROW setback to no less than 10 feet. Lot coverage for this proposed subdivision is a maximum of 55%.

The LSA calculation is as follows:

Area in Lots (110,974 square feet) + Critical Areas and Buffers (98,311 square fee t) + Open Space (1,990 square feet) = (211,275 square feet) + 22 (# of lots proposed) -- (9,603) square feet

The minimum zoning requirement is 9,600 square feet. No lot is less than 3,000 square feet, and all lots comply with minimum lot width and setback requirements. Roadways and su

te rface

detention/retention facilities are not counted toward the LSA calculations. PDS concludes that the proposal is consistent with the lot size averaging provisions of SCC 30.23.210.

Environmental Policy (Chapter 30.61 SCC)

PDS issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for the subject application on January 8, 2005 (Exhibit 25). The DNS was not appealed.

PFN: 04-112044-000-00-SD / Charles Brown Plat Author: Darryl Eastin CADocuments and SettingskAdministrator\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKIC9\Charles Brown Plat.doc Page 10

Subdivision Code (Chapter 30.41A SCC)

The proposed plat also meets Chapter 30.41A SCC requirements. A complete application for the proposed plat was received by PDS on September 16, 2004. The proposed plat as conditioned also meets the general requirements under Section 30.4 1A.100 with respect to health, safety and general welfare of the community as noted in Section III (RCW 58.17) of this report. As proposed, the subject lots will not be subject to flood, inundation or swamp conditions. The lots as proposed are outside of all regulated flood hazard areas. As conditioned, the plat will meet all SCC 30.41A.210 design standards for roads.

Plats — Subdivisions - Dedications (Chapter 58.17 RCW)

The plat has been reviewed for conformance with criteria established by RCW 58.17.100, .110, .120, and .195. Such criteria require that the plat conform with applicable zoning ordinances and comprehensive plans, and make appropriate provisions for the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and other planning features including safe walking conditions for students.

The proposed plat conforms with applicable zoning codes and the comprehensive plan. There is open space provided within the plat in the form of wetland, and buffer areas, the single-family homes on small lots will be in character with the existing neighborhood. Provisions for adequate drainage have been made in the conceptual plat design which indicates that the final design can conform to Chapter 30.63A SCC and State DOE drainage standards. The plat, as conditioned, will conform to Chapters 30.66A, B and C SCC, satisfying county requirements with respect to parks and recreation, traffic, roads and walkway design standards, and school mitigation. Water and sewer are to be provided by the Alderwood Water and Wastewater District. A sewer main extension of approximately 1,500 linear feet along Locust Rd and Barker Rd will be required to provide sewer service to the project site.

The Snohomish Health District has reviewed the proposed preliminary subdivision. The Health District in a letter dated May 26, 2005 recommended for the subdivision with the understanding that the existing onsite sewage system(s) will be abandon by having the septic tank(s) pumped b y

a licensed pumper, then having the top of the tank removed or destroyed and filling the void.

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.

PFN: 04-112044-000-00-SD / Charles Brown Plat Author: Darryl Eastin C:\Documents and Settings\AdministratorTocal Sertings\Ternporary Internet Files\OLKIC9\Charles Brown Plat.doc Page I

V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON BEHALF OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH

Planning and Development Services recommends APPROVAL of the proposed PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION subject to the following CONDITIONS:

CONDITIONS

A. The preliminary plat received by PDS on May 6, 2005 (Exhibit 30) shall be the approved plat configuration. Changes to the approved plat are governed by SCC 30.41A.330.

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 plattor shall mark with temporary markers in the field the boundary of all Native Growth Protection Areas (NGPA) required by Chapter 30.62 SCC, or the limits of the proposed site disturbance outside of the NGPA, using methods and materials acceptable to the county.

A final mitigation plan based on the Wetlands Function Replacement Re port dated September 3, 2004 prepared by }{6t8 Consulting (Exhibit 4) shall be submitted for review and approval during the construction review phase of this project.

C. The following additional restrictions and/or items shall be indicated on the face of the final plat:

"The lots within this subdivision will be subject to school impact mitigation fees for the Northshore School District No. 417 to be determined by the certified amount within the Base Fee Schedule in effect at the time of building permit application, and to be collected prior to building permit issuance, in accordance with the provisions of SCC 30.66C.010. Credit shall be given for one (1) existing parcel. Proposed Lot 1 shall receive credit."

ii 30.66B SCC requires the new lot mitigation payments in the amounts shown below for each single-family residential building permit:

$1,781.33 per lot for mitigation of impacts on county roads paid to the county,

$328.86 per lot (tota) of $7,234.92) paid to the County for the WSDOT as fee mitigation of project impacts on state highways.

$72.31 per lot shall have paid to the County for Transportation Demand Management within Transportation Service Area "F".

iii Additional right-of-way, parallel and adjacent to the right-of-way centerlines of Atlas Road and Barker Road shall have been dedicated to the County along the development's entire frontage such that a minimum of 30 feet of right-of-way exists from the centerline of Atlas Road and Barker Road.

PFN: 04-112044-000-00-SD / Charles Brown Plat Author: Darryl Eastin CADocuments and Settings\Administrator\Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files\OLK1C9\Charles Brown Plat.doc Page 12

iv. All Critical Areas and their buffers shall be designated Native Growth Protection Areas (NGPA) (unless other agreements have been made) with the following language on the face of the plat;

"All NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION AREAS shall be left permanentl y undisturbed in a substantially natural state. No clearing, grading, filling, building

construction or placement, or road construction of any kind shall occur, except removal of hazardous trees. The activities as set forth in SCC 32.10.110(29)(a), ( c), and (d) are allowed when approved by the County."

v. The NGPA shall be located in a separate Tract.

D. Prior to recording of the final plat:

The developer shall pay the County $974.00 per new dwelling unit as mitigation for parks and recreation impacts in accordance with Chapter 30,66A SCC; provided, however, the developer may elect to postpone payment of the mitigation requirement until issuance of a building permit for that lot. The election to postpone payment shall be noted by a covenant placed on the face of the recorded plat and included in the deed for each affected lot within the subdivision.

Construction of urban standard frontage improvements on Atlas Road and Barker Road shall have been completed except as modifi5I by the deviation to the design standards that has been granted. &no

iii Native Growth Protection Area boundaries (NGPA) shall have been permanently marked on the site prior to final inspection by the county, with both NGPA signs and adjacent markers which can be magnetically located (e.g.: rebar, pipe, 2) penny nails, etc.). The plattor may use other permanent methods and materials provided they are first approved by the county. Where an NGPA boundary crosses another boundary (e.g.: lot, tract, plat, road, etc.), a rebar marker with surveyors' cap and license number must be placed at the line crossing.

NGPA signs shall have been placed no greater than 100 feet apart around the perimeter of the NGPA. Minimum placement shall include one Type 1 sign per wetland, and at least one Type 1 sign shall be placed in any lot that borders the NGPA, unless otherwise approved by the county biologist. The design and proposed locations for the NGPA signs shall be submitted to the Land Use Division for review and approval prior to installation.

iv. The final wetland mitigation plan shall be completely implemented.

E. In conformity with applicable standards and timing requirements:

The Detention Pond Landscape Plan (Exhibit 8) shall be implemented. All required detention facility landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved landscape plan. r rArn otc.

F. All development activity shall conform to the requirements of Chapter 30.63A SCC.

PFN: 04 - 112044 -000-00 -SD / Charles Brown Plat Author: Darryl Eastin CADocuments and SettingsV■ dministrator\Local Sertingffernporary Internet Files\OLKIC9\Charles Brown Plat.doc Page 13

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.

Preliminary plats which are approved by the county are valid for five (5) years from the date of approval and must be recorded within that time period unless an extension has been properly requested and granted pursuant to SCC 30.41A.300.

PFN: 04-112044-000-00-SD / Charles Brown Plat Author: Darryl Eastin CADocuments and Settings \Administrator\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Hes \OLKIC91Charles Brown Plat.doc Page 14

Aaron Reardon County Executive

S oho ish County Planning a d eveloprne t Services

N25)388'3411 FAX (425) 388-3944

MS #604 3000 Rockefeller Avenue

Everett, WA 98201

August 1, 2011

Atlas Cove LP 18404 102 nd Ave NE Bothell WA 98011

Mead Gilman and Associates Edward Anderson, PLS P.O. Box 289 VVoodinville WA 98072

Project File Number: 11-104034-000-00-SD Project Name: Charles Brown Plat Subdivision Number: 04-112044 SD

Dear Sirs,

An application for a Minor Revision to the approved preliminary plat map was received on June 7, 2011. The proposed revision is to adjust lot lines for Lots 3 through 8 to accommodate the proposed house footprints.

Project History: The original Preliminary Approval (04-1 12044-SD) for the plat was issued dated March 7, 2006. The approval was for a 22-lot subdivision utilizing lot size averaging. The Preliminary Plat Approval has an expiration date of March 7, 2013.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

1. An application for a Minor Revision approved preliminary plat (04-112044-SD) was received on June 7, 2011. The proposed revision is to adjust lot lines for Lots 3 through 8 to accommodate the proposed house footprints.

2. The subject property is located on the north side Atlas Road at the intersection of 19m

Place West.

3. PDS concludes that environmental review pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) was completed in conjunction with the plat under 04-112044-SD. The

Sincerely,

/

(((

S cey enior Planner

proposed changes to the site plan do not require either a revised or a new threshold

determination.

4. The proposed project site is currently zoned R-9600, and designated Urban Low Density Residential (4-6 du/acres) in the Snohomish County Gi'vlA General Policy Plan (GPP). The site is located within an Urban Growth Area (UGA).

5. No changes to the road layout are proposed.

6. No critical areas exist on the site. Consequently, the project remains in compliance with

SCC 30.62.

7. Upon review of the revised preliminary plat plan, PDS concludes that the proposal continues to be consistent with the development provisions of county code.

10. The Department of Planning and Development Services (PDS) concludes that this revision to the plat of Charles Brown makes appropriate provisions for the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with the SCC Title 30. PDS has considered all relevant facts, and determined that the public interest will be served by this revision.

DECISION The Department of Planning and Development Services has determined this preliminary plat revision to be consistent with applicable county development regulations adopted under

Chapter 36.70A RCW, and hereby APPROVES with CONDIONS the minor revision to the plat

of Charles Brown. Nothing in this 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.

This preliminary plat revision approval will expire March 7, 2013, the expiration date of the

preliminary plat.

CONDITIONS:

1. The Plat Map received by PD S on April 22, 2011 shall constitute the approved

preliminary subdivion lot boundaries for the above mentioned lots. All site development work shall comply with the requirements of the plans and permits approved pursuant to this condition. This condition modifies Condition A contained in the Decision of Snohomish County Planning and Development Services approval of 04-112044-SD.

2. The approved revised preliminary plat is subject to all applicable restrictions and

conditions imposed by the Staff Recommendation dated January 17, 2006.

Thank you for developing in Snohomish County. If you have any additional questions or

concerns, please contact me at 425-388-3311, ext. 2637.

BEFORE THE

SNOHOMISH COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER

DECISION of the DEPUTY HEARING EXAMINER

In the Matter of the Application of

US LAND DEVELOPMENT ASSOC.

)

) FILE NO. 04 112044 )

) Preliminary plat for a 22-lot subdivision utilizing lot ) size averaging )

DATE OF DECISION: February 8, 2006

PLAT/PROJECT NAME: Charles Brown Plat

DECISION (SUMMARY): The subdivision application is DENIED.

BASIC INFORMATION

GENERAL LOCATION: This project is located at 1929 Atlas Road, Bothell, Washington.

ACREAGE: 5.86 acres

NUMBER OF LOTS: 22

AVERAGE LOT SIZE: 5,044 square feet

MINIMUM LOT SIZE: 3,745 square feet

DENSITY: 3.75 du/ac (gross) 8.46 du/ac (net)

ZONING: R-9,600

6101435015.DOC 1

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: General Policy Plan Designation: Urban Low Density Residential (4-6 du/ac) Subarea Plan: Alderwood Subarea Plan Designation: Suburban (2-4 du/ac)

HTILITIPS: Water/Sewer: Alderwood Water and Wastewater District

SCHOOL DISTRICT: Northshore No. 417

FIRE DISTRICT: No. 1

SELECTED AGENCY RECOMMENDATIONS: Department of: Planning and Development Services (PDS):

Approval subject to conditions

Public Works (DPW):

Approval subject to conditions

INTRODUCTION

The applicant filed the Master Application on September 14, 2004. (Exhibit 1)

The Department of Planning and Development Services (PDS) gave proper public notice of the open record hearing as required by the county code. (Exhibits 26, 27 and 28)

A SEPA determination was made on December 23, 2005. (Exhibit 25) No appeal was filed.

The Examiner held an open record hearing on January 24, 2006, the 143 rd day of the 120-day decision making period. Witnesses were sworn, testimony was presented, and exhibits were entered at the hearing.

PUBLIC HEARING

The public hearing commenced on January 24, 2006 at 9:06 a.m.

1. The Examiner announced that he had read the PDS staff report, reviewed the file and viewed the area and therefore was generally apprised of the particular request involved.

2. The applicant, U.S. land Development Associates, was represented by Michael Romano of Centurion Development Services. Snohomish County was represented by Darryl Eastin of the Department of Planning and Development Services and by Norm Stone of the Department of Public Works.

3. Pre-hearing letters of opposition or concern were submitted: (A) by Richard Wennberg on his own behalf and on behalf of the Swamp Creek/Locust Way Neighborhood Association, with Leonard Goodisman (Exhibits 31 and 48), (B) by Brad Wilkins, (C) by Dale Oddson and (D) by Jim Bride III. (Exhibits 31, 32, 33 and 35), (E) Edward M. Denning, (Exhibit 49), (F) Of those writers, Messrs. Bride and Wilkins testified at the public hearing. Letters (Exhibits 34 and 52) and testimony at the hearing was supplied also by Paul Sweum, Development Director for the City of Brier. A letter is also in the record from Jorge Garcia, City of Briar Engineer and from Gerald and Nancy Jang. Issues raised by the above-mentioned parties include traffic, vehicular access, street infrastructure and

6101435015 .DOC

2

design, storm drainage, pedestrian facilities, on-site recreation, impact on schools and sewer connectivity for homes in Brier about 300 yards west of the subject plat.

6101435015.DOC 3

The hearing concluded at 10:04 a.m.

NOTE: For a complete record, an electronic recording of this hearing is available in the Office of the Hearing Examiner.

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION

FINDINGS OF FACT

Based on all the evidence of record, the following findings of fact are entered.

1. The master list of exhibits and witnesses which is a part of this file and which exhibits were considered by the Examiner, is hereby made a part of this file as if set forth in full herein.

2. Except as stated otherwise herein, the Hearing Examiner finds as fact that the PDS staff report has correctly analyzed the nature of the application, the issues of concern, the application's consistency with adopted codes and policies and land use regulations, and the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Except where inconsistent with this decision, that staff report is hereby adopted by the Examiner as if set forth in full herein.

3. The request is to construct a 22-lot subdivision using lot size averaging. Average weekday vehicle trips are 210, with 16 being a.m. peak hour trips and 21 being p.m. peak hour trips. Vehicular access for 17 lots will be via the internal plat cul-de-sac onto Atlas Road approximately midway between that road's intersection with Barker Road to the east and the center of a curve uphill to the west. Three lots will have access via Barker Road. Proposed Lot 21 and 22 will each have its own separate driveway about 55 feet from one another about 175 feet west of that cul-de-sac access for 17 lots onto Atlas Road. (Because of the small size of the subject lots, drivers may have to back in or back out Also, the plat (Exhibit 30) shows an unbuilt plat ("Bon Meadows") of unspecified number of lots on the south side of Atlas Road to the west. When built, that plat may need access to Atlas Road. That access might be via Sage Road, shown south of Atlas Road and centered on proposed Lots 21 and 22. Further, a plat of approximately 111- 113 lots is proposed to the south of the subject site and the record does not disclose where that plat's access will be.

4. The subject plat was submitted in September 2004 and required a year and a half to reach the Hearing Examiner partly because of immediate concerns in 2004 about site distance for Lots 21 and 22. The County's Land Development Analyst Norm Stone testified that the County required review of the Engineering Design and Development Standards as to this plat's access and drivers' sight distance. Mr. Stone reports that the grade's average slope was factored into the computation. The applicant's representative, Michael Romano, testified that the applicant would prefer that Lots 21 and 22 have access via the same cul-de-sac proposed to serve 17 other lots. That would require a shared use driveway for Lots 21 and 22 but, according to Mr. Romano, the County will not allow that

6101435015.DOC 4

shared use driveway but, instead, requires a separate 20-foot driveway for Lot 21 and 22, resulting in a loss of one lot from the proposed 22 total. Mr. Romano testifies that Atlas Road is a collector but it is a residential collector and so the County allows lots to take direct access to it. Atlas Road is heavily used for a neighborhood collector because Atlas Road and Barker Road and Locust Way form a twisted link joining 228 th Street's western segment to Interstate 5 and Alderwood Mall to its eastern segment to Route 9.

6101435015.DOC 5

5. The applicant proposes to build on Barker Road full standard width of pavement, curb, gutter and sidewalk and the same along Atlas Road but only along the "developed portion" of the subject plat; i.e., only northwesterly along Atlas Road to the farthest lot line of proposed Lot 22. Beyond Lot 22 to the plat's northwest corner, Atlas Road borders the 10,000 square foot wetland habitat replacement area mitigating the loss of a wetland used as the proposed plat's stormwater detention tract. Asserting, "That's never going to be developed through there.", the applicant argues that a seven foot wide paved pedestrian shoulder will be sufficient alongside that habitat replacement area instead of conventional curb, gutter and sidewalk design. In testimony, the applicant indicated that it might merit installation of rumble bars to help separate vehicles from pedestrians. The result is a sidewalk to nowhere, which may be worse than no sidewalk at all because pedestrians or bicyclists traveling the quarter mile to either Brier City Park or the new Creek Side County Park along Locust Way need safe passage along this entire plat, not only along the developed portion of this plat.

6. The importance of the full curb, gutter and sidewalk is seen in the testimony of vicinity resident Brad Wilkins, who testifies that an eastbound (downhill) car's headlights do not show walkers until the vehicle has dropped to Lots 21 and 22. There, vehicles may also be backing out of or entering either Lot 21 or 22 or other above-described access points in the immediate vicinity. Witness Wilkins opines that cars backing out of either Lot 21 or 22 will be "t-boned". Witness Jim Bride points out the need to protect pedestrians by preventing downhill drivers from cutting to the inside of the curve. Vicinity resident Ryan Larsen writes (Exhibit 33) that it is now:

"...extremely dangerous to attempt a walk along side the road in either direction. This contributes to an even more dangerous situation for our kids waiting at the bus stop."

Based on that evidence, the Hearing Examiner finds as fact that a curb is needed. It also appears that the need for such a curb outweighs the need to preserve every square foot of the proposed 10,000 square foot habitat replacement area.

7. Above-mentioned local residents Wennberg and Goodisman at Exhibit 48 and Denning at Exhibit 49 note that the Engineering Design and Development Standards (EDDS) allow the County Engineer to determine and use the 85 th

percentile speed rather than the posted speed when circumstances create a safety concern. They note the evidence of record that few cars travel at the posted 25 miles per hour at the site in question and that the grade limits visibility. They calculated stopping sight distance based on 6 percent grade using visual alignment or laser beam at a height of 3.5 feet with targets per EDDS 3.06 and found that, even at only 25 miles per hour, the available stopping sight at the plat's cul-de-sac entrance is required by the EDDS to be nearly 300 feet (280 feet) but is only 171 feet here.

8. The City of Briar's Community Development Director at Exhibits 52 and 53 urges that sewer connectivity to Brier be required of this plat in order to provide gravity

6101435015.DOC 6

sewer service to Briar's Golden View, Old Poplar Way and portions of the Vine Road sewer basins, which communities are now either without sewer service or must pump to a gravity system. Paul Sweum of Briar testified that 50 to 100 homes need this plat's connectivity in order to decommission septic systems. The City of Briar specifies two specific extensions of this plat's sewer that would accomplish that objective. The applicant's representative's testimony is that the two governments should work that out between themselves.

9. The project would comply with park mitigation requirements under Chapter 30.66A SCC (Title 26A SCC) by the payment of $974.00 for each new single-family home.

6101435015.DOC 7

10. School mitigation requirements under Chapter 30.66C SCC (Title 26C SCC) have been reviewed and set forth in the conditions.

11. The site contains one isolated Category 2 non-riparian wetland measuring 4,475 square feet and one Category 2 riparian wetland measuring 41,824 square feet that extends off-site to the northwest. The site also contains a Type 4 stream. The stream, a tributary to Swamp Creek, transects the larger wetland to the west. The wetland and stream will be protected within a Native Growth Protection Area (NGPA) that covers approximately the western one-half of the site. (See Exhibit 4 — Wetlands Function Replacement Report and Exhibit 7 — Plat Map). Urban Category 2 riparian wetlands in Snohomish County typically receive 50-foot protective buffers. Proposed development will eliminate the small isolated Category 2 wetland to allow construction of the stormwater detention facility and create developable areas for lots 2 and 3.

12. The PDS Engineering Division has reviewed the concept of the proposed grading and drainage and recommends approval of the project subject to conditions, which would be imposed during full detailed drainage plan review pursuant to Chapter 30.63A SCC (Title 24 SCC).

13. The Snohomish County Health District has no objection to this proposal provided that public water and sewer are furnished. Public water and sewer service and electrical power will be available for this development.

14. The property is designated Urban Low Density Residential (ULDR 4-6 du/ac) on the General Policy Plan (GPP) Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and is located within an Urban Growth Area (UGA). Land in this category may be developed at a density of 4-6 du/ac and one of the implementing zones is the R-9,600 zone which is the case here.

15. The proposed use (single-family detached development) is essentially compatible with existing single-family detached developments on larger lots. Because the property is within a UGA, policies were adopted to promote urban densities of development. A comparison with the present lower density character of much of the area is inappropriate since the present density of development in much of the surrounding area is inconsistent with both the adopted comprehensive plans and the present zoning.

16 The request complies with the Snohomish County Subdivision Code, Chapter 30.41A SCC (Title 19 SCC) as well as the State Subdivision Code, RCW 58.17. The proposed plat complies with the established criteria therein and makes the appropriate provisions for public, health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools and school grounds, and other planning features including safe walking conditions for students.

17. The proposal has been evaluated by PDS for compliance with the lot size averaging provisions of SCC 30.41A.240 and SCC 30.23.210. This proposal is consistent with these provisions.

6101435015.DOC 8

18. The request is consistent with Section 30.70.100 SCC (Section 32.50.100 SCC), which requires, pursuant to RCW 36.70B.040, that all project permit applications be consistent with the GMACP, and GMA-based county codes.

19. Any finding of fact in this decision which should be deemed a conclusion is hereby adopted as such.

6101435015.DOC 9

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Based on the findings of fact entered above, the following conclusions of law are entered.

1. The proposed plat does not meet the requirements of Snohomish County's Subdivision Code at SCC 30.412A.100 concerning the public health, safety and general welfare as required at RCW 58.17.

2. Specifically, the plat (1) fails to provide the requisite safe stopping sight distance and entering sight distance in view of all of the surrounding physical circumstances of the topography, (2) fails to provide a safe pedestrian walkway along the plat's entire frontage on Atlas Road, (3) fails to consider conflicts with access to be needed by other plats in the vicinity and now in the planning stages and (4) fails to provide sewer connectivity to nearby communities document by the record to need such connection.

3. Thus, for failing to satisfy the basic requirements of any plat as listed above, the proposed subdivision should be denied.

4. Any conclusion in this decision which should be deemed a finding of fact is hereby adopted as such.

DECISION

Based on the findings of fact and conclusions of law entered above, the decision of the Hearing Examiner on the application is as follows:

The requests for a preliminary plat for a 22-lot subdivision utilizing lot size averaging provisions is hereby DENIED.

Decision issued this 8 th day of February 2006.

Ed Good, Deputy Hearing Examiner

EXPLANATION OF RECONSIDERATION AND APPEAL PROCEDURES

The decision of the Hearing Examiner is final and conclusive with right of appeal to the County Council. However, reconsideration by the Examiner may also be sought by one or more parties of record. The following paragraphs summarize the reconsideration and appeal processes. For more information about reconsideration and appeal procedures, please see Chapter 30.72 SCC and the respective Examiner and Council Rules of Procedure.

Reconsideration

6101435015.DOC

IO

Any party of record may request reconsideration by the Examiner. A petition for reconsideration must be filed in writing with the Office of the Hearing Examiner, 2 nd

Floor, County Administration-East Building, 3000 Rockefeller Avenue, Everett, Washington, (Mailing Address: M/S #405, 3000 Rockefeller Avenue, Everett WA 98201) on or before FEBRUARY 21, 2006. There is no fee for filing a petition for reconsideration. "The petitioner for reconsideration shall mail or otherwise provide a copy of the petition for reconsideration to all parties of record on the date of filing." [SCC 30.72.065]

6101435015.DOC

11

A petition for reconsideration does not have to be in a special form but must: contain the name, mailing address and daytime telephone number of the petitioner, together with the signature of the petitioner or of the petitioner's attorney, if any; identify the specific findings, conclusions, actions and/or conditions for which reconsideration is requested; state the relief requested; and, where applicable, identify the specific nature of any newly discovered evidence and/or changes proposed by the applicant.

The grounds for seeking reconsideration are limited to the following:

(a) The Hearing Examiner exceeded the Hearing Examiner's jurisdiction;

(b) The Hearing Examiner failed to follow the applicable procedure in reaching the Hearing Examiner's decision;

(c) The Hearing Examiner committed an error of law;

(d) The Hearing Examiner's findings, conclusions and/or conditions are not supported by the record;

(e) New evidence which could not reasonably have been produced and which is material to the decision is discovered; or

(f) The applicant proposed changes to the application in response to deficiencies identified in the decision.

Petitions for reconsideration will be processed and considered by the Hearing Examiner pursuant to the provisions of SCC 30.72.065. Please include the County file number in any correspondence regarding this case.

Appeal

An appeal to the County Council may be filed by any aggrieved party of record. Where the reconsideration process of SCC 30.72.065 has been invoked, no appeal may be filed until the reconsideration petition has been disposed of by the hearing examiner. An aggrieved party need not file a petition for reconsideration but may file an appeal directly to the County Council. If a petition for reconsideration is filed, issues subsequently raised by that party on appeal to the County Council shall be limited to those issues raised in the petition for reconsideration. Appeals shall be addressed to the Snohomish County Council but shall be filed in writing with the Department of Planning and Development Services, 2 nd Floor, County Administration-East Building, 3000 Rockefeller Avenue, Everett, Washington (Mailing address: M/S #604, 3000 Rockefeller Avenue, Everett, WA 98201) on or before FEBRUARY 22, 2006 and shall be accompanied by a filing fee in the amount of five hundred dollars ($500.00); PROVIDED, that the filing fee shall not be charged to a department of the County or to other than the first appellant; and PROVIDED FURTHER, that the filing fee shall be refunded in any case where an appeal is dismissed without hearing because of untimely filing, lack of standing, lack of jurisdiction or other procedural defect. [SCC 30.72.070]

6101435015 DOC

12

An appeal must contain the following items in order to be complete: a detailed statement of the grounds for appeal; a detailed statement of the facts upon which the appeal is based, including citations to specific Hearing Examiner findings, conclusions, exhibits or oral testimony; written arguments in support of the appeal; the name, mailing address and daytime telephone number of each appellant, together with the signature of at least one of the appellants or of the attorney for the appellant(s), if any; the name, mailing address, daytime telephone number and signature of the appellant's agent or representative, if any; and the required filing fee.

6101435015.DOC

13

The grounds for filing an appeal shall be limited to the following:

(a) The decision exceeded the Hearing Examiner's jurisdiction;

(b) The Hearing Examiner failed to follow the applicable procedure in reaching his decision;

(c) The Hearing Examiner committed an error of law; or

(d) The Hearing Examiner's findings, conclusions and/or conditions are not supported by substantial evidence in the record. [SCC 30.72.080]

Appeals will be processed and considered by the County Council pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 30.72 SCC. Please include the County file number in any correspondence regarding the case.

Staff Distribution:

Department of Planning and Development Services: Darryl Eastin Department of Public Works: Norm Stone

The following statement is provided pursuant to ROW 36.70B.130: "Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation." A copy of this Decision is being provided to the Snohomish County Assessor as required by RCW 36.70B.130.

6101435015.DOC

14

Executive Office Sig

CEO Staff Review Received at Council Office

LOG NUMBERS

BGT. )N-/ V/11- CEO rqh(172-5-.

EXECUTIVE/COUNCIL APPROVAL FORM

MANAGEMENT ROUTING:

TO: COUNCIL CHAIRPERSON:

EXECUTIVE

EXEC. DIR. DIRECTOR/ELECTED DEPARTMENT DIV. MGR. DIVISION ORIGINATOR DATE 06 February 2012 EXT. 2844

Aaron G. Reardon Brian Parry Clay White "r--e CLL.\

Planning & Dev Serv. Thomas Rowe Division Manager Susan Richardson

DOCUMENT TYPE:

BUDGET ACTION: Emergency Appropriation Supplemental Appropriation

Budget Transfer CONTRACT: New

Amendment

DOCUMENT / AGENDA TITLE: Motion to approve the final plat of Charles Brown Plat File Number: 04-112044 SD

SNOHOMISH COUNTY COUNCIL

E ECUTIVE RECOMMENDATION:

Approve No Recommendation Further ProcessinE Requested By

GRANT APPLICATION ORDINANCE Amendment to Ord. # PLAN

X OTHER Motion to Approve

APPROVAL AUTHORITY: EXECUTIVE CITE BASIS SCC 30.41A.640

COUNCIL X

HANDLING: NORMAL X EXPEDITE

URGENT DEADLINE DATE

PURPOSE: Final Plat Approval

BACKGROUND: Plat Name: Charles Brown Plat Location: 1921 Atlas Road, Bothell General Policy Plan: Urban Low Density Residential (4-6 du/ac) Subarea Plan: Alderwood Subarea Plan Designation: Suburban (2-4 du/ac) Zoning: R9,600/UGA Acreage: 5.86 Number of Lots: 22 Average Lot Size: 4,959.6 sf Hearing Examiner Approval: Denied 08 February 2006, with Council Approval (Motion 06-186) 01 May 2006, and a Minor Revision dated 01 August 2011

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

EXPEND: FUND. AGY. ORG . ACTY, OW, AU I CURRENT YR 2ND YR 1ST 6 YRS

TOTAL 0

REVENUE: FUND, AGY, ORG, REV, SOURCE CURRENT YR 2ND YR 1ST 6 YRS

TOTAL 0

DEPARTMENT FISCAL IMPACT NOTES:

BUDGET REVIEW: Analyst Administrator

Recommend Approval

CONTRACT INFORMATION:

ORIGINAL CONTRACT #

AMOUNT AMOUNT

AMENDMENT CONTRACT #

CONTRACT PERIOD: ORIGINAL Start End AMENDMENT Start End

CONTRACT / PROJECT TITLE:

CONTRACTOR NAME & ADDRESS (City/State only):

APPROVED:

RISK MANAGEMENT Yes No ,>----

COMMENTS

PROSECUTING Arry As r0 FORM: Yes No

OTHER DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW / COMMENTS:

ELECTRpNIC ATTACHMENTS : (List & include path & filename for each e.g. G:\ECArdeptname\docnameMotion )

G:\Ecaf\dept\057:pdsl,Chrles--Brown-ECAF:- Gi\EcaLdept\05 : pds\Charles-Brown-Motion; G: Ecaf dept,05----pdstrartecffrownieftecklist: G:\Ecaf dept\O-5pds- harles BrownjlE Decision Gs Ecaldept05-__Charles -Brown-±ouncil Approval; 0:' , Ecardepf05:pdsl ,Charles Brown : -Minor--Revision

NON-ELECTRONIC ATTACHMENTS: Final Plat Mytrn., Vietnify Tvrak -

4,A

2

FINAL PLAT CHECKLIST

PLAT NAME: Charles Brown Plat File Number: 04-112044 SD

Date Completed

1. Current Plat Name Reservation Letter 05 May 2011

2. Health District Approval Memo 17 May 2011

3. Sewer Purveyor Approval Letter 03 May 2011

4. Water Purveyor Approval Letter 03 May 2011

5. PUD Approval Letter 07 September 2011

6. Surveyor's Seal (on bluelines/mylar) 29 November 2011

7. Treasurer's Signature (on mylar) 07 December 2011

8. DPW Signature (on mylar) 03 February 2012

9. Fire Marshall Approval Memo 01 December 2011

10.Site Visit (planner) 14 November 2011

11.Concurrency Expires: 28 October 2010

12.$1,781.33 per lot shall be paid to County for road impacts. Deferred

13.$328.86 per lot (total of $7,234.92) shall be paid to County for WSDOT impacts.

Deferred

14.$72.31 per lot shall be paid to County for TDM within TSA "F." Deferred

15.All critical areas shall be designated as NGPA and permanently marked in the field

no greater than 100' apart. 01 February 2012

16.$974.00 per new dwelling unit shall be paid to County for parks impacts. Deferred

17. Frontage improvements shall have been completed. 01 February 2012

18. Final wetland mitigation plan shall be completely implemented, including detention

facility landscaping. 01 February 2012

19.AII development shall conform to Chapter 30.63A SOC. 01 February 2012

20.Applicant shall regrade Atlas Road to compensate any inadequacy of intersection

sight and stopping distances. 01 February 2012

21.Applicant shall extend extruded curb, rumble bar or other measure to enhance

pedestrian safety. 01 February 2012

COUNTY SIGNATURES

I certify that all c nditions rof approval have been met; those not met are bonded:

NAME(:"\\) < L\c DATE: 06 February 2012s

Charles Brown Plat PFN: 04 112044 SD Page 2

-TA (Ril■ r(=T,r11

m9„..,7Ari g,vv

i.,_-.4. ±\11i1A HI

AP

P L.

NA

ME

: