HomeMy WebLinkAboutO-2929 - Rezone (Repealed by 3003)CITY OF MARYSVILLE
Marysville,Washington
ORDINANCE NO~
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MARYSVILLE,WASHINGTON,
AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR
THE LAKEWOOD STATION BINDING SITE PLAN AND SITE SPECIFIC
REZONE,INCREASING THE ACREAGE OF MIXED USE ZONING FROM 13
TO APPROXIMATELY 16.6-ACRES,AND AMENDING THE OFFICIAL
ZONING MAP OF THE CITY.
WHEREAS,Smokey Point Commercial,LLC,submitted a Binding Site Plan (BSP)and
concurrent Rezone application proposing to subdivide 39.4-acres of property into ll-Iots
and construct between 170,000 -290,000 SF of commercial space and approXimately 350
mUlti-family units and concurrently Rezone a portion of the property in order to increase the
acreage of Mixed Use zoning from 13-acres to approximately 16.6-acres,with the remaining
acreage to retain General Commercial zoning;and
WHEREAS,folloWing notice as required by law,the Hearing Examiner held a public
hearing on the BSP and concurrent Rezone application on March 28,2013 and adopted
Finding and Conclusions approving the preliminary BSP request,subject to twelve (12)
conditions,and recommended approval of the Rezone request to Marysville City Council,as
set forth in the attached Exhibit A;and
WHEREAS,Marysville City Council held a public meeting on said rezone on June 10,
2013 and concurred with the Findings,Conclusions and Recommendation of the Hearing
Examiner;
NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARYSVILLE,WASHINGTON
DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.The Findings,Conclusions and Recommendation of the Hearing Examiner,
as set forth in the attached Exhibit A,are hereby approved and adopted by this reference,
and the City Council hereby finds as follows:
(1)The rezone is consistent with the purposes of the Marysville
Comprehensive Plan;
(2)The rezone is consistent with the purpose of Title 22 MMC;
(3)There have been significant changes in the circumstances to warrant the
rezone;and
(4)The benefit or cost to the public health,safety and welfare is sufficient
to warrant the rezone.
Section 2.The areas depicted in attached Exhibit B are hereby rezoned from
General Commercial to Mixed Use.
Section 3.The zone classification for the property depicted in attached Exhibit B
shall be perpetually conditioned upon strict compliance with the conditions of the
preliminary BSP as provided in the Findings,Conclusions and Recommendation of the
Hearing Examiner,as set forth in the attached Exhibit A.Violation of any condition of said
decision may result in reversion of the property to the previous zoning classification and/or
may resuit in enforcement action being brought by the City of MarySVille.
-
Section 4.The official zoning map of the City of Marysville is hereby amended to
refiect the reclassification of the property from the zoning designation General Commerciai
to Mixed Use as depicted in Exhibit B.
Section 5.Severability.If any section,subsection,sentence,clause,phrase or work
of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent
jurisdiction,such invalidity or unconstitutionality thereof shall not affect the validity or
constitutionality of any other section,subsection,sentence,clause,phrase or word of this
ordinance.
PASSED by the City Council and APPROVED by the Mayor this 10 fJ..day of
_.:I~lA"-!-Y}-{.,.-'--''"''--,2013.
CITY OF MARYSVILLE
Effective Date:
By:
Attest:
By:~1~!fmf/fl'7/~Y GDON,C CiiRK
Approved as to form:~
By:!d~<-.c
GRANT K.WEED,CITY ATTORNEY
Date of Publication:&vcrl:?o 13
r//:J4-/201 3
JON?RING,MAYOR
--,----
Exhibt A -Page 1
CITY OF MARYSVILLE
Hearing Examiner
Findings and Conclusions
Preliminary Binding Site Plan Decision/Rezone Recommendation
APPLICANT:
FILE NO.:
LOCATION:
APPLICATION:
Smokey Point Commercial,LlC
PA12014
North of172nd Street NE (SR 531)east and west of 25th Avenue NE
2609 172nd St NE,Marysville,WA 98270
Preliminary Binding Site Plan and concurrent Rezone in orderto subdivide
39.4 acres into 11 lots and construct between 170,000 -290,000 square
feet of commercial space and approximately 350 multifamily dwelling
units.
SUMMARY OF DECISION:
Staff Recommendation:
Hearing Examiner Decision:
PUBLIC HEARING:
Approve the Preliminary Binding Site Plan request,
with conditions
Recommend Approval of the Rezone request to the
Marysville City Council
Approve the Preliminary Binding Site Plan request,
with conditions
Recommend approval ofthe Rezone request to the
Marysville City Council
After reviewing the official file,which included the Marysville Community Development
Department Staff Recommendation;and after visiting the site,the Hearing Examiner conducted
a public hearing on the request for the Preliminary Binding Site Plan and concurrent Rezone.
These are two separate requests for which the hearing was held concurrently and for which the
Hearing Examiner will issue a decision on the Preliminary Binding Site Plan and a
recommendation to the City Council on the Rezone.The combined hearing on the Preliminary
Binding Site Plan and the Rezone was opened at 7:15 p.m.,March 28,2013,in the Council
Chambers,Marysville,Washington,and closed at 8:28 p.m.Participants at the public hearing
included representatives ofthe City of Marysville,the applicant,and neighborhood residents,
and are listed below and in the minutes ofthe hearing.E-mail correspondence from the
Washington State Department ofTransportation was submitted for the record.A verbatim
Exhibt A ~Page 2
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 2
recording of the hearing and summary minutes are available in the Community Development
Department.A list of exhibits offered and entered into the record at the hearing and a list of
parties of record are attached at the end of this report.
HEARING COMMENTS AND TESTIMONY:
The Hearing Examiner noted for the record that the issue under consideration is the combined
application for a Preliminary Binding Site Plan and a Rezone.Substantive issues related to the
Marysville Municipal Code (MMC)are as follows:
1.MMC 22G.100 sets forth the factors to be considered in review of a proposed binding site
plan,and provides for the process to include a public hearing before the hearing examiner
2.MMC 22G.010.420 sets forth the criteria applicable to a request for a zone reclassification
3.MMC 22G.010.430(2)proVides for a concurrent process for a preliminary binding site plan
and a rezone
Testimony was provided by the City Of Marysville,the applicant and neighborhood residents.A
summary ofthe testimony is as follows:
City of Marysville,Community Development Department -Chris Holland,Planning Manager
Mr.Holland reviewed the applicant's current request and the history ofthe proposed
Preliminary Binding Site Plan and Rezone as summarized here and documented in the Staff
Recommendation (Exhibit 69):
• A Rezone is requested to adjust the zoning boundaries on the subject 39.4 acre site to
increase the acreage ofthe Mixed Use (MU)zoning by 3.6 acres,resulting in approximately
16.6 acres of MU zoning,with the balance of the 22.8 acres being zoned General
Commercial (GC).
• A Preliminary Binding Site Plan is requested to define the proposed site development layout
and plan for utilities,access and circulation,subject to conditions and allowing for design
flexibility to address emerging issues and refinements prior to the administrative issuance
ofa Final Binding Site Plan.
• A Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS)was issued on February 25,2013,
with 20 conditions intended to mitigate potential adverse environmental impacts.The
MDNS appeal period ended on March 4,2013 with no comments or appeals.
•Mr.Holland entered into the record,Exhibits 70 -76 that document correspondence with
the Washington State Department ofTransportation (WSDOT),adopted land use and
transportation plan maps,and a memorandum to the Hearing Examiner regarding 172nd
Street NE and 25th Avenue NE.
•Mr.Holland noted that WSDOT had not proVided comments regarding the SEPA threshold
determination,the appeal period for which ended on March 4,2013.WSDOT is now
requesting widening of 172nd Street NE (SR 531)from 5 to 8 lanes,and disallowing a
proposed traffic signal at 25th Avenue NE due to signal spacing standards that require .5
mile spacing between signals.
Exhibt A -Page 3
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 3
•While the spacing between the existing signal at 27th Avenue NE and the proposed signal at
25th Avenue NE -which is an existing street that would be improved with redevelopment of
the site -does not meet WSDOT spacing standards,traffic impact analysis conducted for
the proposed development demonstrated adequate level of service along 172nd Street NE
would be maintained with the signal as proposed at 2Sth Avenue NE.
•Mr.Holland acknowledged that WSDOT must approve any roadway channelization and
signalization plans,and pointed out the City of Marysville's adopted plans that call for the
build-out of 25th Avenue NE as a north-south arterial.The intersection of 2Sth Avenue NE
and 172nd Street NE warrants appropriate traffic control.The specific width and
channelization of 172nd Street NE and the location ofthe intersection and the type oftraffic
control at 25th Avenue NE may be subject to negotiations with WSDOT.Mr.Holland
expressed that MDNS condition #8 provides the necessary flexibility to design 172nd Street
NE to meet WSDOT specifications.In Exhibit 76,Mr.Holland offered alternate language to
MDNS Condition NO.14 that would accommodate alternate traffic control such as a
roundabout at the 25th Avenue NE/l72nd Street NE intersection.
•Staff recommends the Hearing Examiner approve the proposed Preliminary Binding Site
Plan request,and recommend approval to the City Council ofthe proposed Rezone,subject
to conditions as provided in the staff recommendation.
Applicant -Dan Eernissee
As a representative ofthe applicant Mr.Eernissee reviewed the evolution ofthe proposed
Preliminary Binding Site Plan and Rezone,and acknowledged ongoing conversations with the
neighbors regarding specific site and building design concerns and with the Washington State
Department of Transportation regarding the location and traffic control for NE 25th Street and
172nd Avenue NE intersection.Mr.Eernissee requested the Hearing Examiner approve the
Preliminary Binding Site Plan and Rezone request,and concurs with the conditions ofapproval
recommended by staff.
Public Comment
•Peter Cowley.Concerned that the neighborhood received inadequate notice regarding the
SEPA threshold determination,notingthat signs posted on the site had fallen down and that
mailed notice arrived only 5 days prior to the end ofthe SEPA comment/appeal period.
Expressed concerns about drainage,noise impacts,increases in traffic,and the height of
proposed apartment buildings,and offered that roadway infrastructure be expanded to
address projected traffic volume.
•Julie Workman.Member ofthe lakewood Homeowners Association.Commented about
inadequate and untimely notice,traffic impacts,and the height offuture apartment
buildings adjacent to the single family neighborhood.
•Kermit (Rob)Metcalf.Adjacent property ownerto the north.Supports the proposal and
requests that utilities be designed in such as way so as to allow for extensions beyond the
site to serve potential future development.
Exhibt A -Page 4
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 4
WRIITEN COMMENTS:
No written comments'Were to the record at the public hearing,other than those introduced by
Mr.Holland.However Mr.Cowley introduced 5 photographs that are included collectively in
the record as Exhibit 77.
FINDINGS,CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION/RECOMMENDATION:
Having considered the entire record in this matter,the Hearing Examiner now makes and
enters the following:
A.FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS:
1.The information contained in the Community Development Department Staff
Recommendation (Exhibit 69)is found by the Hearing Examiner to be supported by the
evidence presented during the hearing and is by this reference adopted as portion of
the Hearing Examiner's findings and conclusions.A copy ofthe Staff Recommendation
is available in the Marysville Community Development Department.
2.The minutes ofthe hearing are an accurate summary of the testimony offered at the
hearing and are by this reference entered into the official record.
3.Specific Findings and Conclusions with respect to the Preliminary Binding 5ite Plan and
Rezone are as follows:
a.FINDINGS:
•Reconfiguration of the zoning (Rezone)for the Mixed Use (MU)component of
the site plan provides for multi-family housing opportunities at a suitable
location and prOVides for a transition from commercial uses to adjacent
residential development.
•Per MMC 22G.100.110,approval ofthe Preliminary Binding Site Plan constitutes
authorization for the applicant to take the necessary steps to meet the
conditions imposed by the City before commencing the final binding site plan
review process.
• A mitigated determination of non-significance (MDNS)was issued by the City of
Marysville on February 15,2013,with 20 conditions or mitigation measures.The
MDNS was subject to a 15-day comment/appeal period that expired on March 4,
2013.Public Notice for the SEPA threshold determination and the open record
public hearing for the proposed Preliminary Binding Site Plan and concurrent
Rezone was provided in accordance with MMC 22E.030.120 and MMC
22G.Ol0.110.
•The City received no timely comments or appeals ofthe MDNS.
•Per MMC 22E.030.090(5)(c).Mitigation measures identified in an MDNS are
considered conditions of permit approval.
•MDNS Condition No.8 provides for the necessary right-of-way for 172nd Street
NE (SR 531)to be approved by WSDOT and the City.Engineer prior to civil
construction plan approval.
Exhibt A -Page 5
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 5
•MONS Condition No.14,as proposed to be amended per Exhibit 76 provides
reasonable flexibility for the parties (City of Marysville,applicant,WSOOT)to
determine to their mutual satisfaction the location and traffic control measures
for the proposed roadway intersection of172ndStreet NE at 25th Avenue NE.
•Exhibit 73 -City of Marysville Comprehensive Plan land Use Map identifies
General Commercial,Mixed Use and Multi-Family as the predominant planned
land uses in the Lakewood neighborhood.Exhibit 75 -City of Marysville
Transportation Element plan for Connector Roads identifies a southward
extension of 25th Avenue NE across 172nd Street NE.Together,these two exhibits
provide a clear indication ofthe City of Marysville intent for an integrated land
use and transportation plan that includes an intersection on 172nd Street NE that
would be located at the approximate existing southern terminus of25th Avenue
NE.Plans do not specify what,if any traffic control mechanism would be
appropriate for that intersection.
•Exhibit 72 expresses the WSOOT disapproval of a proposed signalized
intersection at 172nd Street NE (SR 531)and 25th Avenue NE due to the close
spacing (680 feet)from the existing signalized intersection at 27th Avenue NE.
WSOOT standards provide for .5 mile spacing on highways of the classification of
172nd Street NE,with a possible reduction to .25 mile spacing under certain
conditions.WSOOT proposes that a signalized intersection could be permitted on
the western edge ofthe property,or,a roundabout could be allowed at 25th
Avenue NE iffeasible.
•An alternate location for a signalized intersection at the western edge ofthe
property would not be supported by the City of Marysville,as articulated in a
City of Marysville memorandum to the Hearing Examiner -Exhibit 76.
•Exhibit 76 provides alternate language for MONS Condition No.14 regarding the
25th Avenue NE/l72nd Street NE intersection that the City believes would be
satisfactory to WSOOT.
•As ofthe close ofthe public hearing on March 28,the Hearing Examiner was not
aware ofa response from WSOOT ofthe City's proposed alternate language to
MONS Condition No.14.
•Site-specific design and development approval will occur in the Final Binding Site
Plan.Conversations and negotiations with adjacent property owners regarding
issues ofconcern identified at the public hearing,such as utility location,building
height,fence height and materials,traffic and noise mitigation and others that
may emerge will be addressed as administrative decisions,in accordance with
MMC 22G.100.
•Per MMC 22G.010.170(3)(a-e)the Hearing Examiner finds the proposal,as
conditioned,is consistent with adopted development codes,plans and
regulations.
Exhibt A -Page 6
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 6
•.Per MMC 22G.010.420 the Hearing Examiner finds the proposal complies with
the criteria for approval ofa Rezone,and incorporates the request for a street
vacation of25th Avenue NE in the recommendation to the City Council.
b.CONCLUSIONS:
•Staff recommended MDNS conditions adequately mitigate identified potential
adverse environmental impacts ofthe proposal.
•MDNS Condition No.14 is hereby amended per Exhibit 76 and incorporated in
Section B below.
•Staff recommended conditions for the Preliminary Binding Site Plan adequately
address site specific development conditions.
•The applicant has satisfactorily demonstrated that the proposal is consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan and has addressed the criteria for approval of a
zone reclassification (Rezone)MMC 22G.01O.420.
B.DECISION ON PRELIMINARY BINDING SITE PLAN/RECOMMENDATION FOR REZONE:
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions,the Hearing Examiner APPROVES the
Preliminary Binding Site Plan request,and RECOMMENDS APPROVAL ofthe Rezone request
wit!l conditions per the staff recommendation forthe Preliminary Binding Site Plan/Concurrent
Rezone and the SEPA MDNS mitigation as follows:
PRELIMINARY BINDING SITE PLAN!CONCURENT REZONE
1.The preliminary Binding Site Plan (BSP)received bythe Community Development
Department on March 1,2013 (Exhibit66)shall be the approved preliminary BSP
layout.
2.The Rezone proposal identifying the revised boundary between MU zoning and GC
zoning received by the Community Development on March 1,2013 (Exhibit 67)shall
be the zoning configuration recommended to the City Council for approval.This
recommendation for Rezone approval includes the request for street vacation of 25th
Avenue NE.
3.Project design shall comply with the condition ofthe Comprehensive Plan Map
Amendment and concurrent rezone Ordinance No.2755,requiring two (2)east-west
road connections,one located at approximately the 17300 Block and the other located
at approximately the 17500 Block.
4.All power lines,telephone wires,television cables,fire alarm systems and other
communication wires,cables or lines shall be placed underground either by direct
burial or by means of conduit or ducts providing service to each building.
S.A six (6)to eight (8)foot CMU wall shall be installed along the east perimeter ofthe
development from 173'd Street NE to the northeast property corner,separating the
multi-family and commercial uses from the Lakewood Commons single-family
condominium development.This detail shall be provided on the on the civil
construction,and/or architectural plans.
Exhibt A -Page 7
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 7
6.The following design elements shall be incorporated into the commercial portion of
the BSP:
a.Public entrances for the buildings located along 25th Avenue NE,27th Avenue
NE,172nd Street NE (SR 531)and 173'd Street NE shall be visible and accessible
from public streets and sidewalks.Preferably these access ways should be
separated from the parking and drive aisles.If access traverses the parking lot,
then it should be raised and clearly marked.
b.Pedestrian-oriented space shall be required at intersections and street corners
leading directly to a building entry or entries,such as:
i.Pedestrian access to the abutting structures from the street;
ii.Paved walking surfaces of either concrete or approved unit paving;
iii.Pedestrian scaled lighting (no more than 15'in height)at a level
averaging at least 2 foot candles throughout the space;
iv.Landscaping components that add seasonal interest to the space;
v.Pedestrian amenities,such as a water feature,drinking fountain,tables,
and/or distinctive paving or artwork.
vi.Apedestrian-oriented building fa~ade.
vii.If providing pedestrian oriented space is not feasible or desirable per
the director,considerthe following:
A.Install substantial landscaping (at least 30 x 30'or 900 SF of ground
surface area with trees,shrubs,and or groundcover).The space
may include a special architectural element,such as a trellis,to add
identity or demarcation ofthe area.Such an architectural element
may have a sign incorporated into it (as long as such sign does not
identify an individual business or businesses).
B.Other treatments will be considered by the Director,prOVided they
meet the intent of the standards and guidelines outlined above.
c.Blank walls shall not be allowed on elevations facing a public or private road.A
blank wall is a ground floor wall,or portion of a ground floor wall,over 4'in
height having a horizontal length greaterthan 15'that does not include a
transparent window or door,or,any portion ofa ground floor wall having a
surface area of 400 SF orgreater that does not include a transparent window.
Design Treatments to eliminate blank walls shall include,but shall not be
limited to:
i.Transparent windows or doors;
ii.Display windows;
iii.Landscape planting bed at least 5 feet wide or a raised planter bed at
least 2 feet high and 3 feet wide in front of the wall.Such planting
Exhibt A -Page 8
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 8
areas shall include planting materials that are sufficient to obscure or
screen at least 60%ofthe wall's surface within 3 years;
iv.Installing vertical trellis in front ofthe wall with climbing vines or plant
materials sufficient to obscure.or screen at least 60%ofthe wall's
surface within 3 years.For large areas,trellises should be used in
conjunction with other blank wall treatments.
v.Other methods such as murals or special building material treatments
that meetthe intent of the standards outlined above may be approved
by the director.
d.Street furniture,including the following elements,shall be provided and
strategically located throughout:
i.Trash Receptacles:Ironsites Series 5-20 as manufactured by Victor
Stanley;Powdercoating Victor Stanley,or comparable.
ii.Ash Urn:lronsites Series 5-20 as manufactured by Victor Stanley;
Powdercoating Victor Stanley,or comparable.
iii.Benches:Victor Stanley RB-28 steel sides bench or Timber Form
Renaissance Model 2806-5,5'-1"length with arm rest;Powdercoat
over galvanized zinc,or comparable.
e.Plazas and gathering places for relaxing,eating,socializing and recreating shall
be provided and designed,as follows:
iv.Sized between 5,000 to 10,000 SF.
v.Able to serve as a centerfor daily activities.
vi.Paving should be unit pavers or concrete with special texture,pattern,
and/or decorative features.
vii.Pedestrian amenities should be provided,including features such as
seating,plants,drinking fountains,artwork,and such focal points as
sculptures or water features.
7.Detailed recreational site amenities and boundaries of proposed recreational facilities
shall be proVided on the civil construction,architectural,or landscape plans for the
multi-family portion ofthe site in accordance with MMC 22C.020.270 &MMC
22C.020.280.Recreational amenities shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks
Director.
8.Adetail ofthe bicycle parking spaces shall be provided on the civil construction or
architectural plans,and designed in accordance with MMC 22C.130.060.
9.A lighting plan and details for parking lot illumination locations,materials and fixture
design shall be provided on the civil construction or architectural plans.·lighting shall
comply with the following design standards:,
a.25'maximum height.
Exhibt A -Page 9
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 9
b.Fixtures shall be full cut-off,dark sky rated,with lower fixtures preferable so as
to maintain a human scale.
c.Parking lot lighting shall be designed to provide security lighting to all parking
spaces.
d.lighting shall be shielded in a manner that does not disturb residential uses or
pose a hazard to passing traffic.lighting should not be permitted to trespass
onto adjacent private parcels nor shall light source (luminaire)be visible at the
property line.
e.Fixture design shall incorporate unique design features that coincide with the
architectural design ofthe development.
f.Pedestrian scale lighting (light fixtures no taller than is')is required in areas of
pedestrian activity.lighting shall enable pedestrians to identify a face 45'
away in order to promote safety.
g.Exterior lighting shall be part ofthe architectural concept.lighting shall
enhance the bUilding design and adjoining landscaping.It should provide
adequate lighting to ensure safety and security,and enhance and encourage
evening activities.In addition,the following shall be addressed:
i.The site plan shall identify lighting equipment and standards.
Uplighting on trees and provisions for seasonal lighting are encouraged.
ii.Accent lighting on architectural and landscape features is encouraged
to add interest and focal points.
10.Prior to civil construction plan approval,a detailed landscaping plan depicting all of
the applicable elements outlined in MMC 22C.120.030 will be required to be
submitted for review and approval.The landscape plan shall incorporate the following
design elements,as outlined in Chapter 22C.120 MMC:
a.All landscaped areas shall be provided with an irrigation system or a readily
available water supply with at least 1 outlet located within 50'of all plant
material.
b.Water conservation measures shall be applied as outlined in MMC
22C.120.050.
c.The proposed and existing residential structures shall be buffered from
commercial structures and adjoining parking lots by use of vegetation,
landscaping,fencing,walls,berms or othersimilar methods which are deemed
under the circumstances to create effective and aesthetically pleasing screens
or buffers between such diverse land uses.
d.Site development shall be sensitive to the preservation of native trees,where
applicable.
e.A20'111andscape buffer,plus a quality 6'minimum height,sight-obscuring
fence or wall,is required to be installed to create a buffer between the
Exhibt A -Page 10
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 10
commercial portion ofthe site and the existing single-family residential
properties.
f.A 10'L11andscape buffer,plus a quality 6'minimum height,sight-obscuring
fence or wall,is required to be installed to create a buffer between the multi-
family portion ofthe site and the existing single-family residential properties.
g.A10'L21andscape buffer,plus a quality 6'minimum height,sight-obscuring
fence or wall,is required to be installed to create a buffer between the
commercial portion ofthe site and the proposed multi-family residential
properties.
h.A 15'L3 landscape buffer is required between off-street parking and drive-
aisles and 172nd Street NE (SR S31).
i.A 10'L3 landscape buffer is required between off-street parking and drive-
aisles and 27'h Avenue NE,25th Avenue NE,173rd Street NE and 174th Street NE.
j.The development shall create a well-de.fined streetscape to allow for the safe
movement of pedestrians.Whenever possible,building setbacks shall be
minimized and parking and drive-through passageways shall be relegated to
the side and rear of buildings.
k.Attractive landscape transition to adjoining properties shall be provided.
I.Where buildings are not located along the street frontages,enhanced
landscaping shall be required in order to create an attractive street edge.
m.Ten (10%)percent ofthe required parking areas shall be landscaped with L4
landscaping,provided that:
i.No parking stall shall be located more than 45'from a landscaped area;
ii.All landscaping must be located between parking stalls,at the end of
parking columns,or between stalls and the property line;
iii.All individual planting areas within parking lots shall be planted with at
least one tree,be a minimum of 5'in width and 120 SF in size,and in
addition to the required trees,shall be planted with a living
groundcover;
iv.All landscaped areas shall be protected from vehicle damage by a 6"
protective curbing.Wheel stops may be substituted when required to
allow storm water to pass.
v.Aminimum 2'setback shall be provided for all trees and shrubs where
vehicles overhang into planted areas.
n.Pursuant to MMC 22C.130.050(6),screening in the form of a solid masonry
wall,architectural fence or dense coniferous hedge shall be effected or planted
and maintained to a height of not less than 5'where a parking lot has a
common boundary line with any residentially developed property.
o.Street trees are required to be planted along all public streets and access
roads/easements and comply with the following:
Exhibt A -Page 11
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 11
i.Street trees shall be planted between the curb and the walking path of
the sidewalk.Either 5'x5'pits with tree grates or a continuous
planting strip with groundcover that is at least 5'wide may be used.
Where planting strips are not incorporated into the design,street trees
shall be located behind the sidewalk.
ii.Street trees shall meet the most recent ANSI standards for a 1 W'
caliper tree at the time of planting,and shall be spaced to provide a
continuous canopy coverage within 10-years.
p.Utility meters,electrical conduit,and other service utility apparatus shall be
located and/or designed to minimize their visibility to the public.If such
elements are mounted in a location visible from the street,pedestrian
pathway,common open space,or shared auto courtyards,they shall be
screened with vegetation or by architectural features.
q.Additional landscaping design standards related to site and building design are
outlined in MMC 22C.020.250.
11.The following calculations and design elements for storage space and collection points
for recyclables shall be provided on the civil construction or architectural plans and
approved by the Sanitation Division:
a.Residential:
i.1 Y,SF per dwelling unit.
ii.The storage area shall be dispersed in collection points throughout the
site.
iii.Minimum of 1 collection point for every 30 dwelling units.
iv.Collection points may be located within residential buildings,in
separate buildings/structures without dwelling units,or outdoors.
v.Collection points located in separate buildings/structures or outdoors
shall be no more than 200'from a common entrance of a residential
building.
vi.Collection points shall be located in a manner so that hauling trucks do
not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic on-site,or project into any
public right-of-way.
b.Commercial:
i.5 SF per every 1,000 SF ofcommercial GFA.
ii.Storage space may be allocated to a centralized collection point.
iii.Outdoor collection points shall not be located in any reqUired setback
areas.
iv.Collection points shall be located in a manner so that hauling trucks do
not obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic on-site,or project into any
public right-of-way.
Exhibt A -Page 12
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 12
v.Access to collection points may be limited,except during regular
business hours and/or specified collection hours.
c.Generally:
i.Dimensions ofthe collection points shall be ofsufficient width and
depth to enclose containers for recyclables.
ii.Architectural design of any structure enclosing an outdoor collection
point,or any building primarily used to contain a collection point,shall
be consistent with the design of the primary structure(s)on the site.
iii.Collection points shall be identified by signs not exceeding 2 SF.
iv.A 6'wall orfence shall enclose any outdoor collection point.
v.Enclosures for outdoor collection points and buildings used primarily to
contain a collection point shall have gate openings at least 12'wide for
haulers.In addition,the gate opening for any building or other roofed
structure used primarily as a collection point shall have avertical
clearance ofat least 12'.
vi.Weather protection of recyclables shall be ensured by using weather-
proof containers or by providing a roofover the storage area.
12.The following solid waste details will be required to be provided on the civil
construction,architectural,or landscape plans:
a.Service elements shall be located to minimize the negative Visual,noise,odor,
and physical impacts to the street environment,adjacent (on and off-site)
residents or other uses,and pedestrian areas.
b.The designated spot for service elements shall be paved with concrete.
c.Appropriate enclosure ofthe common trash and recycling elements shall be
reqUired,as determined by the Director.Requirements and considerations:
i.A 6-foot fence constructed of concrete block or brick enclosing trash
and recycling receptacles is required.Coordination with the current
franchise hauler is required.The sides and rear ofthe enclosure must
be screened with Type ll,l2, l3,or l4 landscaping at least 5'deep in
visible locations,as determined by the director,to soften the views of
the screening element and add visual interest.
ii.Preferably,service enclosures are integrated into the building itself.
SEPA MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE
A Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS)was issued on February 15,2013.The
following mitigation measures are imposed to minimize the probable significant adverse
environmental impacts ofthe proposed Preliminary Binding Site Plan and concurrent Rezone
for lakewood Station (Note Amended Condition No.14):
Exhibt A -Page 13
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 13
1.The applicant/contractor shall adhere to the recommendation outlined in
Geotechnical Engineering Study,prepared by Earth Solutions NW,llC,dated May 21,
2012,or as amended.
2.Prior to civil construction plan approval,the applicant shall submit a more detailed
noise analysis in order to determine the extent of required mitigation,as
recommended in the preliminary noise analysis,prepared by The Greensbusch Group,
Inc.,dated December 5,2012.This noise analysis shall include,but not be limited to,a
review of any external mechanical equipment,delivery and loading areas,parking lot
traffic,street sweeping lot parking lots,as well as recommendations to mitigate any
noise impacts the proposed commercial development will have on the adjacent single-
family (existing)and multi-family (proposed)properties.
3.The applicant shall be required to replace the off-site stormwater culvert under 172nd
Street NE,which is located at 2131172nd Street NE.Additionally,the applicant shall
be required to analyze the peak flows for this system to ensure that the new culvert
and existing ditch can convey developed peak flows.
4.The applicant shall obtain all necessary state and federal authorizations for wetland
impacts prior to beginning any ground disturbing activities within the wetland areas or
associated buffers.
5.The eXisting on-site sewage system(s)shall be abandoned by having the septic tank(s)
pumped by a certified pumper,then having the top ofthe tank removed or destroyed
and filling the void (WAC 246-272A-0300).Documentation demonstrating completion
ofthis work shall be submitted prior tofinal BSP approval.
6.The existing on-site well(s)shall be decommissioned in accordance with WAC 173-160-
381.Acopy ofthe well contractor's decommissioning report(s)shall be submitted
prior to final BSP approval.
7.Astreet vacation for 25th Avenue NE shall be required to be approved by Marysville
City Council in accordance with Chapter 12.32 MMC.The street vacation shall be
reviewed by Marysville City Council concurrently with the Hearing Examiner's
Recommendation on the proposed rezone.
8.Public right-of-way (ROW)shall be dedicated along 172nd Street NE (SR 531)in order
to accommodate the 90'principal arterialS-lane public ROW section (EDDS SP3-201-
002),in accordance with MMC 12.02A.ll0(1)(c),unless additional ROW is required to
be dedicated by Washington State Department ofTransportation (WSDOT).The City
Engineer and WSDOT shall review and approve the required ROW dedication,prior to
civil construction plan approval.
9.Thirty-feet (30')of public ROW shall be dedicated along 174th Street NE,west of 25th
Avenue NE,in order to accommodate the half-street 60'neighborhood collector
public ROW section (EDDS SP3-202-001)in accordance with MMC 12.02A.ll0(1)(c).
Exhibt A -Page 14
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 14
10.Public ROW shall be dedicated along 25th Avenue NE and 27th Avenue NE,in order to
accommodate the 60'collector arterial/commercial access street public ROW section
(EDDS SP3-201-003)in accordance with MMC 12.02A.110(1)(c).
11.173'd Street NE is approved as a private road.173'd Street NE shall be designed and
constructed to the pubic road standard,including two 11'traveUanes,twoS'bicycle.
lanes,curbs &getter per EDDS Section 3-514,two 5'planter strips and two 5'
sidewalks.A public utility and access easement for the private road shallbe reviewed
and approved by the City Engineer and recorded concurrently with the BSP.
12.The applicant shall be required to construct frontage improvements along 172nd Street
NE (SR 531),173'd Street NE (private),174th Street NE,25th Avenue NE and 27th
Avenue NE,in accordance with MMC 12.02A.090,prior to recording the BSP.Frontage
improvements shall include street lighting and signal communications conduit.
Roadway improvements,channelization and site access planswill be required to be
reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and WSDOT (SR 531 and traffic signals)
prior to construction plan approval.
13.Frontage improvements along 172nd Street NE (SR 531)shall be credited against the
traffic impact fees in accordance with Section 22D.030.070(5)MMC.The amount of
credit for improvements to 172nd Street NE (SR 531)shall be approved by the City·
Engineer.
14.The applicant shall construct a traffic signal atthe intersection of 25th Avenue NE and
172nd Street NE(SR 531)prior to recording the BSP.Traffic signal design shall consider
both the short-term (one eastbound through lane)and long-term (two eastbound
through lanes)at this location.Signal design shall include protected phasing for the
eastbound left-turn.Signal construction plans shall be reviewed and approved by the
City Engineer and WSDOT prior to civil construction plan approval.Credit towards
traffic impacts fees shall not be given for any work related to design and construction
ofthe signal.
If a signal permit at the intersection of 25th Avenue NE and 172nd Street NE (SR 531)
cannot be obtained from WSDOT,and the applicant can provide an alternative traffic
control method,such as a roundabout,and meet the adopted level-of-service
standards in the Transportation Element ofthe Marysville Comprehensive Plan.and
said alternative is approved by WSDOT,the signal at the intersection of 25th Avenue
NE and 172nd Street NE (SR 531)shall not be required.
15.The applicant shall conduct a detailed analysis in order to understand street system
operations and queuing along 27th Avenue NE between the site access and 172nd
Street NE prior to civil construction plan approval.The evaluation shall consider
impacts to the neighborhood north and east ofthe site.Analysis shall determine if
dual southbound left-turn lanes and/or access management is necessary to proVide
adequate operations and minimize neighborhood impacts.After review ofthe
Exhibt A -Page 15
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 15
analysis,the City Engineer shall determine whether or not signal improvements or
access management on 27th Avenue NE will be required.
16.The applicant shall install Lemec Renaissance Series color BRTX street luminaire
fixtures along 172nd Street NE (SR 531),173'd Street NE (private),174th Street NE,25th
Avenue NE and 27'h Avenue NE.Street illumination shall be designed in accordance
with Section 3-506 of the Marysville Engineering Design and Development Standards
(EDDS).
17.The applicant shall install a 6'wide by 16'long concrete pad on the back side ofthe
sidewalk at the existing Community Transit bus stop on the northwest corner of172nd
Street NE (SR 531)and 27'h Avenue NE for tjle future installation of a bus shelter.
18.The applicant shall install a 6'wide by 16'long concrete pad on the back side ofthe
sidewalk for a future Community Transit bus stop on the northwest corner of 172nd
Street NE (SR 531)and 25th Avenue NE for the future installation.of a bus shelter.
19.In order to mitigate impacts upon the future capacity ofthe road system,the
applicant shall be required to submit payment to the City of Marysville,on a
proportionate share cost ofthe future capacity improvements as set forth in MMC
220.030.070(3),for the development.Traffic impact fees shall be vested at a rate of
$3,290.00 per multi-family unit and $1,870.00 per commercial PM Peak HourTrip
(PMPHT).
20.Pursuant to the ILA with Snohomish County,the applicant is obligated to pay traffic
mitigation based on 20%ofthe average daily trips generated from the proposed
project multiplied by the County mitigation fee of $46.00 per new average dilily trip
(ADT)for the multi-family phase and $39.00 per new ADT for the commercial phases.
The applicant submitted a signed traffic mitigationoffer to Snohomish County,in the
amount of$69,404.20,calculated as follows:
USE ADT RATE (20%)IMPACT FEE
Multi-Family 1493 $9.20 $13,735.60(348-units)
Commercial 7137 $7.80 $55,668.60
TOTAL $69,404.20
Snohomish County reserves the right to adjust the impact fee ifthere is a change of
use or building size within the development.
Dated this 8nd day of April 2013.
(~fPi\c[Jm.&
Kevin D.McDonald,AICP
Hearing Examiner Pro Tem
Exhibt A -Page 16
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 16
RECONSIDERATION (MMC 226.010.190):
A party to a public hearing may seek reconsideration only of afinal decision by filing a written
request for reconsideration with the director within fourteen (14)days ofthe final written
decision.The request shall comply with MMC 22.010.530(3).The hearing examiner shall
consider the request within seven (7)days of filing the saine.The request may be decided
without public comment or argument by the party filing the request.Ifthe request is denied,
the previous action shall become final.Ifthe request is granted,the hearing examiner may
immediately revise and reissue its decision.Reconsideration should be granted only when a
legal error has occurred or a material factual issue has been overlooked that would change the
previous decision.
JUDICIAL APPEAL (MMC 226.010.540):
(1)Appeals from the final decision ofthe hearing examiner,or other city board or body
involving MMC Title 22 and for which all other appeals specifically authorized have been
timely exhausted,shall be made to Snohomish County superior court pursuant to the Land
Use Petition Act,Chapter 36.70C RCW,within 21 days ofthe date the decision or action
became final,unless another applicable appeal process or time period is established by
state law or local ordinance.
(2)Notice ofthe appeal and.any other pleadings required to be filed with the court shall be
served as required by law within the applicable time period.This requirement is
jurisdictional.
(3)The cost oftranscribing and preparing all records ordered certified by the court or desired
by the appellant for such appeal shall be borne by the appellant.The record of the
proceedings shall be prepared by the City or such qualified person as it selects.The
appellant shall post with the city clerk priorto the preparation of any records an advance
fee deposit in the amount specified by the city clerk.Any overage will be promptly returned
to the appellant.
EXHIBITS:
The following exhibits were offered and entered into the record:
1.Receipt
2.Land Use Application.
3.BSP and Rezone Submittal Checklist
4.legal Description
5.Rezone Criteria Response letter,Dan Eernissee,05.29.12
6.Smokey Point Commercial Rezone Staff Rec (PA 08001-2)
7.Smokey Point Commercial Rezone Ordinance 2755
8.First American-Title Report
Exhibt A -Page 17
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 17
9.Environmental Checklist (also see Exhibit 59)
10.8 Y,x 11 Vicinity Map
11.Wakefield-BSP/Rezone Cover letter,05.31.12
12.Critical Areas Report (CAR),Talasaea Consultants,Inc.,03.27.12
13.CAR &Mitigation Plan,Talasaea Consultants,Inc.03.21.12 SUPERSEDED
14.Earth Solutions NW-Geotechnical Engineering Study,05.21.12
15.TraffEx-Traffic Impact Analysis,05.18.12
16.24x 36 Critical Areas Enhancement Plan,06.12.12 SUPERSEDED
17.24x 36 ARCH Site Plan and Conceptual Elevation Plan,06.12.12 SUPERSEDED
18.11x 17 Preliminary BSP,06.12.12 SUPERSEDED
19.24 x 36 Preliminary BSP,06.12.12 SUPERSEDED
20.11 x 17 Conceptual Landscape Plan,06.12.12
21.24 x 36 Conceptual Landscape Plan,06.12.12
22.11 x 17 Phasing Plan,06.12.12 SUPERSEDED
23.24 x 36 Phasing Plan,06.12.12 SUPERSEDED
24.11 x 17 Preliminary Civil Plan,06.12.12 SUPERSEDED
25.24 x 36 Preliminary Civil Plan,06.12.12 SUPERSEDED
26.24 x 36 Architectural Site Plan,06.12.12 SUPERSEDED
27.Color Vicinity map
28.Preliminary Drainage report,June 2012 SUPERSEDED
29.11 x 17 Subdivision Plan,06.19.12 SUPERSEDED
30.24 x 36 Subdivision Plan,06.19.12 SUPERSEDED
31.Letter of Complete application,06.20.12
32.Scott &Debbie Hackworth Email String,07.10.12
33.RFR Checklist
34.Affidavit of Posting-NOA
35.1"Technical Review (TR)Comments,08.02.12
36.Omega Engineering _1"TR response letter,10.15.12
37.TraffEx-Response Letter,09.20.12
38.TraffEx-Revised Impact Fees Letter,10.04.12
39.ADAPT-Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment,02.15.12
40.11 x 17 Site Plan,10.22.12 SUPERSEDED
41.Earth Solutions-Phase 1 ESA,11.09.07
42.Preliminary Drainage Report,Joseph M.Smeby,June 2012,Revised Oct.'12
43.24 x 36 Site Plan,10.22.12 SUPERSEDED
44.RFR Checklist
45.2nd Technical Review Comments,11.09.12
46.TraffEx-Response to add'i comments on the TIA,11.27.12
47.The Greenbusch Group-Preliminary Noise Study,12.05.12
48.24 x 36 Site Plan,12.05.12 SUPERSEDED
49.Transpo Group-TIA review,01.25.13
50.Amendment to SEPA Checklist,01.29.13 (also see Exhibit 59)
51.11 x 17 Site Plan,01.29.13 SUPERSEDED
Exhibt A -Page 18
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 18
52.24 x 36 Architectural Site Plan,01.29.13 SUPERSEDED
53.24 x 36 Site Plan,01.29.13 SUPERSEDED
54.TraffEx-Response to Transpo and Revised Trip Generation,01.31.13
55.Critical Areas report and Detailed Mitigation Plan,02.03.13
56.Traffic Concurrency Recommendation,Kevin Nielsen,02.11.13
57.3'd Technical Review,02.13.13
58.Traffic Concurrency Acceptance Letter,Steve Malsam,02.13.13
59.MDNS,02.15.13,w/EC (Exhibit 9)&Amendment to EC (Exhibit 50)
60.Affidavit ofposting-MDNS
61.Affidavit ofposting -NOH
62.Technical Review 3 response letter-Dan Fernissee,02.21.13
63.11 x 17 Architectural Site Plan(sheets Al,AI01,A102)DDG,03.01.13
64.24 x 36 Architectural Site Plan,(sheets Al,AI01,AI02)DDG 03.01.13
65.11 x 17 Site Plan (sheets 1-10)Omega,03.01.13
66.24 x 36 Site Plan (sheets 1-10)Omega,03.01.13
67.8 Y,x 11 Rezone Boundary map
68.Snohomish County RODO for Mitigation ofImpacts to County Roads
69.Staff Recommendation
70.E-mail correspondence thread:WSDOT -Marysville
71.E-mail correspondence thread:WSDOT -Marysville
72.E-mail correspondence thread:WSDOT -Marysville
73.Marysville Land Use Plan Map
74.Marysville Lakewood Neighborhood Land Use Designations Map
75.Marysville Planned Connector Roads Map
76.Memo to Hearing Examiner from Chris Holland,Planning Manager
77.Photographs submitted by Mr.Cowley
PARTIES of RECORD:
City of Marysville
Community Development Department
80 Columbia Avenue
Marysville,WA 98270
Peter Cowley
P.O.Box 191
Marysville,WA 98270
Kermit R.Metcalf
18904-86th Place West
Edmonds,WA 98026
Dan Eernissee
5509 17th Ave NE
Seattle,WA 98105
Julie Workman
17516 27th Ave NE
Marysville,WA 98271
Ramin Pazooki
WSDOT
P.O.Box 330310
Seattle,WA 98133-9710
Exhibt A -Page 19
Hearing Examiner Decision
File No.:PA 12014
Page 19
Steve Benenati
WSDOT
P.O.Box 330310
Seattle,WA 98133-9710
Exhibit B -Page 1 of 1
,r:-:-,r:-:-
!
.--
,
\47:l.14'
L MU TO GC =8.048 SF
MIXED USE
EXISTING AREA:281,054 SF /6.45 AC
PROPOSED AREA:274,02-4 SF /5.29 AC
GENERAL COMMERCIAL!
£XIS11NG AREA:539,088 SF /12.38 AC IPROPOSEDAREA:546.117 SF /12.54 I.e
'\,...".".,'<7.87 '/1~~II~I
I
I
I
I~
-~
172ND ST NE
149.27'
PROPOSED
l-ZONING
UN'
,noNllQ'I'\'3
GENERAL COMMERCIAL
EXISTING AREA:533,131 SF /12.24 Ae
PROPOSED AREA:384,925 SF /&38 AC
••_..o~.m~
~IIIMIXEDUSE
EXISTING AREA:281.OM SF /8.45 AC
PROPOSED AREA:449,256 SF /10.31 AC
I
EXISTING I~1-ZOOINGLINE I !>.•:;l--.~~I.~-----:~.1''''§N89'2'12~W .~
97.44'\\~.fl
~I~~•~~!GC TO MU -169,219 SF ~~I(EXCLUDES EX.R.O.W.)ONW
I I
HEARING
CALL TO ORDER
1Ma'''~EXAMINER
ryWAsHINGTOVr~
Hearing Examiner Meeting
March 28,2013
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m.by Hearing Examiner Pro Tem Kevin
McDonald at Marysville City Hall.
Also Present:
PUBLIC HEARING
Planning Manager Chris Holland,Associate Planner Angela
Gemmer,and Recording Secretary Laurie Hugdahl.
PA13006 -Ottaway Variance-a variance from MMC Section 22C.010.070(11)(a)in
order to allow a manufactured home that is more than five years old to be
installed on an existing residential lot.
Applicant:
Location:
Cynthia and Vern Ottaway
4505 79th Ave NE
Hearing Examiner McDonald explained that Cynthia and Vern Ottaway were requesting
a variance from Marysville code that requires a manufactured home to be less than five
years old on a residential lot.He stated that he has received and read the materials
provided by staff and also visited the site.He entered Exhibits 1-12,with Exhibit 12
being the staff report,into the record.This issue relates to a variance from the code to
allow for the installation of a manufactured code that was constructed in 1999,and
therefore is approximately 14 years old.The code requires that a manufactured home
be five years old or less,but it provides for a variance from the strict application of the
code provided that each of nine provisions is met.
Staff Testimony:
Angela Gemmer,Associate Planner,stated the property is presently developed with a
1969 mobile home which has deteriorated in condition.The property owners would like
to have a newer,good quality manufactured home placed on the site as a replacement
for the older one.They have requested relief from the restriction of manufactured
homes to be five years old or less because it makes the home cost prohibitive.Ms.
Gemmer explained that the intent of the five-year restriction was to balance the state
requirement of not discriminating against manufactured homes with preserving the
integrity of subdivisions so that property values don't deteriorate.
3/28/13 City of Marysville Hearing Examiner Meeting Minutes
Page 1 of 10
Staff feels a variance is merited in this case because it is an improvement from the
current condition.It will be a much nicer,contemporary home.The east side of 79th
Avenue is heavily encumbered with critical areas so staff does not anticipate that this
home will be placed in a subdivision.There is also a PUD corridor on the east side that
precludes development to the east side.Additionally,the subject property is a
panhandle lot and set back a fair distance from the road.Due to critical areas buffers,
there is buffering afforded by the existing trees and shrubs around the two streams that
border the property.Additionally,there are already a number of manufactured homes in
the neighborhood so it would be compatible with the neighborhood.In summary,the
request merits approval based on the acceptable response to all of the variance
conditions.No comments have been received on this item.
Hearing Examiner McDonald noted that the recommendation from staff,in addition to
approval,is for the new manufactured home to be installed approximately in the same
location as the existing manufacture home.He asked if that situation was acceptable to
the applicant.
Applicant Testimony:
Ms.Ottaway stated it is her intent to put the replacement home in the same location as
the existing home except it will be larger.
Public Testimony:None
Seeing applicant's concurrence with the conditions of approval,the hearing on the
Ottaway variance was closed at 7:12 p.m.
PA12014 -lakewood Station-Preliminary Binding Site Plan and concurrent
Rezone in order to subdivide 39.4-acres into 11-lots and construct between
170,000-290,000 SF of commercial space and approximately 350 mUlti-family
units.
Applicant:
location:
Smokey Point Commercial,lLC
2609 172nd St NE
Hearing Examiner McDonald stated that there are two issues at hand with the
Lakewood Station application.It is an application for Preliminary Binding Site Plan and
concurrent rezone in order to subdivide 39.4 acres into 11 lots and construct between
170,000 and 290,000 square feet of commercial space and approximately 350 multi-
family residential units.He has received the staff report and Exhibits 1-69 which have
been entered into the record.Additionally,Exhibits 70-76 have been received in his
desk packet tonight and were added to the record.
3/28/13 City of Marysville Hearing Examiner Meeting Minutes
Page 2 of 10
Staff Testimony:
Planning Manager Chris Holland reviewed the request as contained in the packet.He
explained that in 2008 the applicant proposed a Comprehensive Plan amendment and
concurrent rezone which designated the northem portion of the development site to
Mixed Use.That Mixed Use zoning designation encompasses about 13 acres and was
adopted by City Council by Ordinance 2755.For the subject rezone,after review of site
conditions and the proposed development,the applicant has proposed shifting the lines
a little bit to accommodate the proposed layout.The increase in commercial area would
go from about 13 to approximately 16.6 acres.Staff has reviewed all of the pertinent
information submitted by the applicant and has determined that it complies with the
provisions of the rezone criteria and with the applicable provisions of the design criteria
in the Marysville Municipal Code.Staff is recommending,as conditioned in Section 2.0
of the staff recommendation, that the Hearing Examiner approve the Binding Site Plan
and recommend approval of the rezone to Marysville City Council for their consideration
and adoption by formal ordinance.
Mr.Holland stated he had several new exhibits he wanted to read into the record and
provide some clarification on.He read Exhibit 70,which was an email string from Steve
Benenati with WSOOT received on Monday,March 25.The City had requested that
WSOOT review and provide comments throughout the review process on this
application,including the Notice of Application process.Comments were not received
until Monday,March 25.A SEPA threshold determination was issued on February 15
with 20 conditions,and the appeal period expired on March 4.There were no comments
from WSOOT or any other agencies or private citizens.In Exhibit 70,WSOOT
requested that the City amend the MONS Conditions 8 and 14.Specifically they are
requesting additional right-of-way for construction of 172nd from a five-lane to an eight-
lane arterial.They are also requesting that the City amend Condition 14 disallowing a
signal at 25th Avenue NE.Mr.Holland pointed out that in the January 12 email from
Steve Benenati,under item 4,WSOOT specifically stated that:
"It is imperative that the location of any public access point be planned carefully to
ensure adequate signal progression.Where feasible,major intersecting roadways
that might ultimately require signalization are planned with a minimum of half-mile
spacing.The addition of all new public or private access points that may require
signalization will require an engineering analysis that is signed and sealed by a
qualified professional engineer ..."
25th Avenue is an existing roadway that provides access to Carroll's Creek Landing so
it is not a new intersection.He noted that the applicant provided a traffic impact analysis
as well as several supplemental signal warrants demonstrating that a signal at 25th can
meet the Level of Service (LOS)standards even though it would not meet the half-mile
spacing from 27th Avenue NE.
Exhibit 71 is an email string from Chris Holland to the WSOOT that was sent on
Monday,March 25 stating that the City had not received any comments during the
public review process or during the public comment period and appeal period for the
3/28/13 City ot Marysville Hearing Examiner Meeting Minutes
Page 30t 10
issuance of the determination of non-significance on this project.The City also
disagreed that Condition 8 of the MDNS needs to be amended.This condition
specifically states that if the five-lane roadway isn't acceptable to WSDOT,they can
require additional right-of-way.Sr.Holland pointed out that WSDOT owns the road,and
they will have to approve any channelization and signal plans for this development
along SR 531.Condition 14 of the MDNS specifically states that signal construction
plans shall be reviewed and approved by the city engineer and WSDOT prior to civil
construction plan approval.Again,approval by WSDOT is already required for the
development to move forward.
Exhibit 71 is an email from WSDOT received this afternoon,March 28,further stating
that WSDOT will not allow a signal at 25th because it doesn't meet the half-mile spacing
requirement;however,they would consider a reduction to a quarter-mile spacing based
on certain analysis.They would also entertain a signal at the western edge of the
proposed development site.They would also entertain a roundabout at 25th or at the
western edge of the proposed development site.WSDOT went on to state that in the
City's Transportation Element and Comprehensive Plan it doesn't specifically state that
there are signals planned for 25th or any other intersections along 172nd.Planning
Manager Holland agreed,but stated that planned road connections are clearly identified
in the Comprehensive Plan.Also,in the Transportation Element signals are installed as
warranted.
Exhibits 73-75 are land use maps clearly showing the future road extensions of 25th to
the south of the subject property and connecting to 169th.They also show the future
road extension west of this site which would provide access all the way down to 156th
Street which would be a principal access point to the existing and newly constructed
156th Street overpass and potential future interchange at 156th.
Exhibit 76 is a memo from Chris Holland to the Hearing Examiner outlining what staff
has reviewed from WSDOT and their thoughts on WSDOT's comments this week.He
reiterated that staff does not believe there any change is warranted to the MDNS
Condition number 8.On MDNS Condition 14 staff is respectfully requesting the Hearing
Examiner amend to add the following or similar language or add to the conditions of the
Binding Site Plan:
"If a signal permit at the intersection of 25th Avenue NE and 172nd Street NE
cannot be obtained from WSDOT and the applicant can provide an alternative
traffic control method such as a roundabout and meet the adopted Level of Service
standards in the Transportation Element of the Marysville Comprehensive Plan and
said alternative is approved by WSDOT,the signal at the intersection of 25th
Avenue NE and 172nd Street shall not be required."
This allows for an alternative that can meet concurrence and LOS standards.Lastly,Mr.
Holland stated that Marysville would not be in support of a signalized intersection on the
western side of the proposed development as it would not support the half-mile or even
a variance for a quarter-mile separation for the City's future signalization further west of
3/28/13 City ofMarysville Hearing Examiner Meeting Minutes
Page 4 of 10
this development which would provide the primary access south down to the 156th/I-5
overpass.
Hearing Examiner McDonald referred to the right-of-way width that would be required by
WSDOT along 172nd,and asked if the state is looking for right-of-way enough to
provide for an eight-lane section.Senior Planner Holland affirmed this,but stated he
believes what they are actually asking for is a deceleration lane,not for the entire
section from 25th to 27th to be an eight-lane section.WSDOT recently installed brand
new signal poles,curbs,gutters,sidewalks,and planter strips on the north side of
172nd all the way to 25th.With the way the curb lines exist and where the signal poles
are they would not be able to widen at the intersection of 27th and 172nd.Hearing
Examiner McDonald asked if the transit pullout would cease to exist and become part of
the right turn lane into 25th.Chris Holland didn't think the curb line would change where
the bus pullout is.He thinks it would change halfway in the block between 25th and 27th
for a right deceleration lane.Hearing Examiner McDonald commented that the point of a
deceleration lane would be irrelevant if a signal at that intersection was allowed or if
some alternative intersection control would be installed.Mr.Holland concurred and
stated he does not believe that WSDOT has reviewed all of the traffic impact analysis or
the subsequent information submitted by the professional engineer for the project
manager.
Hearing Examiner McDonald asked what the requirement for additional right-of-way
would do to the configuration of the Lakewood Station site development.Mr.Holland
thought that if additional right-of-way ultimately is required,the applicant would come
back to the City for a minor amendment to change the location of some of the buildings
and the parking layout.He doesn't think it would warrant any additional mitigation
measures or additional conditions as proposed in the Staff Recommendation.
Hearing Examiner McDonald asked if approval of the Preliminary Binding Site Plan
would preclude such rearrangement of building pads,driving,or parking circulation.
Senior Planner Holland stated that it would not.
Hearing Examiner McDonald asked if there would be pedestrian crossings at 25th if
there is any sort of traffic control.Mr.Holland replied that there would be pedestrian
connections to the south on both the east and the west legs.
Applicant Testimony:
Dan Eernissee,5509 1yth Ave NE,Seattle;98105,spoke in support of the request.He
noted that Larry Hobbs,the traffic engineer;Joseph Smede,the engineer;and Steve
Molson,an owner,were present to answer any questions that might arise.He stated
that the rezone of the site from Commercial Business to Mixed Use is now five years
old.He reviewed some of the background of this project and the justification for the
rezone.He stated that the applicant had always intended to come back at some point
once they had a site layout that worked well with the commercial and the residential
site.Most recently,the SEPA appeal/public opinion process went through without
comments or appeals.They have tried their best to get together with anyone who had
any issues with the proposed site plan.He met with the Lakewood Commons
3/28/13 City of Marysvifle Hearing Examiner Meeting Minutes
Page 5 of 10
Homeowners Association prior to the MDNS being issued to talk about their concerns
and hasn't heard from them since.One of the biggest concerns raised was the type of
fencing used.The developer agreed to put in a 6 or 8-foot CMU wall instead of a wood
fence based on the residents'preference.Mr.Eernissee stated that if the Hearing
Examiner would elect to keep the record open,the developer would be open to
responding to any issues that might come up,especially to the neighbors at Lakewood
Cornmons.Regarding the roundabout/signal at 25th ,the applicant will continue to work
with staff,but they agree that the Binding Site Plan decision shouldn't be constrained or
held up based on that issue.The applicant fully understands that they need to work this
out with WSDOT.
Public Testimony:
Peter Cowley,PO Box 191,Marvsville.WA 98270,expressed concern about the
rnailings regarding the SEPA threshold determination.He stated that he received his
postcard on February 28.The deadline to file an appeal was March 4 so he received
five days notification of this.Three of the four signs posted at the site were blown down
or fell down.He feels the neighborhood should have had an opportunity to review all of
the determination.He thanked Lakewood Station developers for meeting with the
homeowners and the board recently.It is helpful that they are addressing concerns with
a cement wall rather than a wooden fence.He expressed concern about the raising of
the grade of the soil by two to three feet to prornote adequate drainage because this will
create a height discrepancy between the parcels.He had additional concerns about
drainage issues this rnight create.Also,he expressed concern about access of traffic
frorn the mixed use sections through the development and exiting on 172nd.He wants
them to exit on 25th because of the traffic issues that are already a problern.Backups
already occur now that the Everett Clinic and the White-Leasure developrnent are there.
He is also concerned about the noise.He stated that the noise studies are done in an
office setting and not actually on site.He lives on the corner of 2th and one of the
proposed entrances.He spoke against access going into the development frorn 2th.He
stated that the Lakewood area is growing at a trernendous rate.The fact that WSDOT is
recornrnending eight lanes is very astute on their part.He feels that this is necessary for
the long-terrn benefit of the comrnunity.He would also like to see a planter strip
separating traffic westbound and eastbound on 172nd•He feels this would beautify the
neighborhood.Finally,Mr.Cowley reiterated that the residents are not happy with the
failure of someone to get the notices out in a tirnely manner.Five photos frorn Mr.
Cowley were entered as part of the record.
Hearing Examiner McDonald cornrnented that it is not in his purview to rnake any design
recommendations for 172nd.
Julie Workman,17516 2th Ave NE,Marvsville,WA 98271,stated she is part of the
board of the Lakewood Home Owners Association concurred with Mr.Cowley's
comments.She also was upset they did not have notice in a timel~manner to respond.
She expressed concern about the traffic.If they do durnp onto 2t ,she expressed
concern about emergency access.Also,she thinks a decision should be postponed until
WSDOT can properly review the proposal.She stated that the neighbors are concerned
3/28/13 City ot Marysville Hearing Examiner Meeting Minutes
Page Bot 10
with the height of the apartment proposed (three stories)because of the proximity and
privacy issues.
Kermit (Rob)Metcalf,Ryan Northwest II,LLC,18904 -86th Place West,Edmonds,WA
98026,spoke in support of the project.As an adjacent property owner,he shares a
common northern boundary within the UGA.He requested that the final design for
utilities serving the project would contain the ability to serve the maximum UGA possible
to the north.His conversations with city officials have indicated that there are means to
accomplish this and to maximize the servicing of the UGA area.He wants to make sure
the slopes and sizing of pipes within the design are adequate to extend the sewer and
make it available to other properties north of this project.
Chris Holland explained that the sewer main on 172nd street is not very deep.There is
another main on 27th Avenue NE that is a little deeper.As you head north,and install a
main within 25th Avenue NE it will shallow up and ultimately get to the surface where it
may not necessarily serve all of the properties further north of this development.The
applicant has proposed to extend the sewer from the deeper main within 27th Avenue
NE behind the proposed commercial buildings and stub it out at the north line.Staff
does not know yet how much further north it can be extended,but it will be extended as
far north as possible.Also,regarding the public notice requirements,he clarified that
there are two different public notice requirements for this project.One is the Mitigated
SEPA Threshold Determination Notice.The other is the public hearing notice.Staff did
a combined notice to the area.The Mitigated SEPA determination notice is required to
be posted on site,published in the paper,published on the City's website,published at
City Hall,and with the US Postal Service.As shown in Exhibit 60,those items were
accomplished.The MONS notice typically is not,nor is it required to be mailed to the
surrounding property owners;however,Notice of Application and Notice of Public
Hearing notices are required to be sent to the 300-foot surrounding property owners as
well as all parties of record.To clarify,the City did a combined notice which meant the
Notice of the SEPA Threshold Determination with comments and appeal periods had an
expiration date.It also had a date for when the public hearing would be held.He feels
there is confusion over process and what was required to go out.He believes the
residents did receive their notification as surrounding property owners in accordance
with the public hearing notices.Mr.Holland pointed out that Mr.Cowley,as a party of
record,was also emailed the MONS and the Notice of Public Hearing either on the 15th
or on the 18th of February.This was done as a courtesy and was not required.
Peter Cowley further discussed height concerns related to the new apartments which
would be adjacent to approximately 14 existing homes.He requested that the
apartments be only two stories where they are adjacent to those homes and then step
up in height further back from the property line.He added that due to the county
development years ago,some of the existing two-story residences are only five feet
from the property line.
Hearing Examiner McDonald commented that a major concern he has hear~f'r9m the
community seems to be the use of 2ih.He asked staff or the project's traffic engineer to
describe the outcome for the level of service analysis for that intersection.Planning
3/28/13 City ofMarysville Hearing Examiner Meeting Minutes
Page 7 of 10
Manager Holland explained that,as conditioned in the MONS Condition 15,additional
analysis of that intersection is required to ensure that it will function at an acceptable
level of service.Staff has requested additional information to see whether or not a dual
left out would be necessary.There may be some signal design that needs to be done
there.There may also be some restrictions about left turns if there is stacking.Staff has
requested additional information and would not approve a construction plan for the
project until there is further analysis.Hearing Examiner McDonald asked if staff feels
that it would be appropriate to keep the hearing open until additional traffic analysis is
done.Mr.Holland replied that in his opinion,as it's laid out,it meets the level of service
as they've analyzed with future projection and with the existing commercial shopping
center.However,staff has concerns that the first southerly access which is proposed on
27th might cause some queuing issues.This could require a minor site plan
modification that wouldn't affect the overall level of service of the intersection function
that is acceptable in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan.Hearing
Examiner McDonald stated that typically it is better to have more access points to
improve LOS issues and traffic flow.He asked for confirmation that the configuration of
the intersection can be done at a subsequent point in the process without requiring a
modification to the Preliminary Binding Site Plan.Planning Manager affirmed this and
added that those would all be reviewed in concurrence with the civil construction plans.
No development permit would be issued until those issues are identified and approved.
Hearing Examiner McDonald referred to 25th and noted that the planning maps show
approximate future roadway layouts.He asked if 25th on the Lakewood Station site
were to be shifted or if the traffic control of that intersection were to be non-signalized,
would that affect the long-term infrastructure planning for this portion of Marysville.Mr.
Holland said it would not,but if the road were to shift west the City would like to ensure,
through the review and approval process that the civil plans for the channelization
improvements along 172nd,that they have the opportunity to have an intersection
further west.Staff will continue to review this along with DOT,but it would not have any
effect or bearing on the overall Binding Site Plan or the effectiveness of that roadway
corridor.
Hearing Examiner McDonald asked the approximate distance between 25th and 2yth.
Mr.Holland stated that it is approximately 690 feet.Hearing Examiner McDonald noted
that this is less than a quarter mile and below the DOT threshold of a half mile.Planning
Manager Holland concurred.He added that it is not uncommon with state highways of
this classification to have multiple signalizations within a closer proximity than a half
mile or a quarter mile.Hearing Examiner McDonald commented that in an urban setting,
the character,movement,and speed of traffic tends to be different than a more rural
character where there is less friction and more unimpeded flow.The character of the
area around Lakewood Station will change and the character of the roadway that serves
those neighborhoods would probably need to be changed as well to reflect more of an
urban character.There may be an argument there for looking at closer signal spacing
than is typically part of the WSDOT state highway system standards.
Hearing Examiner McDonald asked if any of the access points via 27th would be
proposed to be signalized.Mr.Holland said 27th would maintain a through-road
3/28/13 City ofMarysville Hearing Examiner Meeting Minutes
Page 8 of 10
character,and traffic approaching from the west to access 27th would be stop-
controlled.
Hearing Examiner McDonald noted that,based on the photographs and the testimony,it
appears that at some points in the day queuing on the north leg of the 2th Ave
intersection progresses quite a distance to the north.He asked if the traffic analysis
indicates that traffic loading from Lakewood Station would significantly increase that
queuing and result in driveway blockage along 27th.Mr.Holland stated that this is why
staff is requiring additional information to make sure that does not occur.However,as
reflected in Condition 15,staff believes that the dual left out at that location would clear
this queue much more rapidly.
Hearing Examiner McDonald referred to the eastbound transit pullout on the far side of
the intersection of 27th.He asked if there is any proposal to include an additional transit
stop along the frontage of Lakewood Station.Mr.Holland said there have been two
requested pad locations from Community Transit.The first one would be close to the
intersection of 27th (near Building E)and 172nd (near Building K).The second one
would be close to the intersection of 25th and 172nd.Both of those are shown on the
site plan as cement pads for future installation of bus shelters.This is conditioned in the
MDNS.Hearing Examiner McDonald if there would be a complementary bus stop on the
south side of the street for eastbound pickup and drop off.Planning Manager Holland
stated that they anticipate there will eventually be one closer to 25th on the south side,
but that would occur as improvements to the south side of 172nd would occur.
Hearing Examiner McDonald asked the applicant if there is concurrence with the
conditions proposed by staff with respect to the Preliminary Binding Site Plan and
Rezone.Mr.Eernissee stated that that the applicant is in concurrence with each of the
conditions.
Hearing Examiner McDonald stated that he was not inclined to leave the record open.
With respect to the design of the fence that would separate Lakewood Station from the
existing single-family neighborhood,he believes this is a design issue that can be dealt
with in the course of finalizing the plan.With respect to the design capacity and
intersection configuration of 25th,he believes that the City,the applicant,and WSDOT
can work out the issues of access and signal control to the mutual satisfaction of all the
parties.He summarized that some access from 172nd will be required;the precise
location of that will remain to be determined in the final negotiations with the Binding
Site Plan.Planning Manager Holland agreed with this.
Additional Public Comments:
Peter Cowley stressed that a signal light is needed at 25th•There are a lot of young
families that live in the navy housing in the back.He said he will be talking to WSDOT
about this item and encouraging them to consider this.He stated that this is not a
primary highway by his definition even though it is labeled as a state route.He also
feels that now is the time to increase the road width as it will be much more expensive
3/28/13 City ofMarysville Hearing Examiner Meeting Minutes
Page 9 of 10
later.The costs can be shared with future development in that area.He is not convinced
that two left turn lanes will address all the traffic issues there.
Seeing no further comments,the hearing was closed at 8:28 p.m.Hearing Examiner
McDonald stated that he would report his recommendations to the City within 15
calendar days.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:28 p.m.
C .0 jI 1.A.0
Laurie Hugdahl,Recording S~
3/28/13 City ofMarysville Hearing Examiner Meeting Minutes
Page 10 of 10
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Community Development Department •80 Columbia Avenue·Marysville,WA 98270
(360)363-8100 •(360)651-5099 FAX •Office Hours:Mon -Fri 7:30 AM -4:00 PM
Project Title
File Number
Lakewood Station
PA 12014
.-
Date of Report
Attachments
March 19,2013
Rezone boundary map (Exhibit 67)
Staff
Recommendation
Approve the preliminary Binding Site Plan and forward a recommendation of approval of the
Rezone to Marysville City Council,for Lakewood Station,subject to the conditions contained in
Section 2,0 of this Staff Recommendation.~':,,/;,~>f,"~Tic.:''.,''/~.,.J':<J;~"II!.•~.ml:!m,nI-~'('~'~::H~
Applicant
Request
SEPA Status
Smokey Point Commercial,LLC
Preliminary Binding Site Plan approval and concurrent Rezone in order to subdivide 39.4-acres into
ii-lots and construct between 170,000 -290,000 SF of commercial space and approximately 350
multi-family units.The applicant is also seeking approval of a Street Vacation of 25th Avenue NE
that will be considered under a separate application reviewed bv Marvsville City Council.
A SEPA Threshold Determination of Non-Significance (DNS)was issued on February 15,2013.The
appeal period for the DNS expired on March 4,2013.No appeals were filed.
31052000302400,31052000304600,
APN(s)31052000303600, 31052000302600,
31052000302800, 31052000302900,
31052000302500 31052000302700
General Location
Acreage (SF)
North of 172"'Street NE (SR 531)
on either side of 25th Avenue NE
39.4 (1,716,264 SF)Section 20 Township 31N I Range I 05E
Comprehensive Plan MU &GC
Current
Zoning MU &GC Shoreline Environment
Proposed Current
N/A
ProPosed
Water Supply Marysville Marysville Sewer Supply Private (septic)I Marysville
Present Use of The majority of the site is vacant undeveloped land.There is a single-family home and associated
outbuildings located on the east side of 25th Avenue NE and a single-family residence and mobile~p:ir0[1pe~rtlY;::::==;SjhOtmjejOtnjth~e]w]e~stisi~dgeColf~25th
Avenue NE.,mm~;:;:i~:z.i~ITZ:::~~i~=2:::=~1h"'J-':~:f",,"i.".'",;eLi;',>;::l'-iil ".',~,->;',:."',,":r,;"~':1:,:<..:,1",'::....c,..,"
Marysville Local Agencies 8t State 8t Federal County OtherDistricts
~Building ~Arlington (city)o US Army Corps of ~Health District ~Tulalip Tribes
[gJ Fire District o Arlington Airport Engineers o Planning ~Stillaguamish
IZ:J Land ~Community Transit D BNSF ~Public Works -Tribe
Development o Everett (city)IZ:J DOE Land Development D
D Parks o Lake Stevens (city)DWDFW o Public Works D
[8J Planning [8J Lakewood SD 306 IZ:J WSDOT D DoPolice[8J PUD No.1 (electric)DWUTC D DIZ:J Public Works D D D
,!J'•
o Administrative o City Council [gl Quasi-Judicial D Planning Commission
Date of Hearing March 28,2013 D Approved D Denied o Continued
'""'""1fl •
Name Chris Holland Title Planning Manager Phone 360.363.8207 E-mail cholland@marysvillewa.gov
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 1
·..
Comprehensive Plan Zoning land Use
Site Mixed Use;General
Commercial MU;GC
Majority of site is vacant,
with two single-Family
residences
North Single-family,High Density-
small lot R-B Vacant land and large lot
single-family residences
East Multi-family,Low Density;
General Commercial R-12;GC
Lakewood Commons single-
family Condo's;Lakewood
Pointe Sho in Center
South General Commercial GC
Vacant;Lakewood Crossing
Shopping Center is located to
the southeast
\
Large lot single-family
residences;Farming~~
MUMixedUse
o
West
..General Commercial 88 -Mixed Use ...R12 Multi-Family Low R4.5 Single Family Medium
Downtown Commercial General Industrial ~R6-18 Multi-Family low ..Public-Institutional
Community Business light Industrial ..R8 Single Family High Small Lot Recreation
~Neighborhood Business R28 Multi-Family High R6.5 Single Family High ..Open
..Mixed Use ..R18 Multi-Family Medium ~R4-8 Single Family High
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 2
1.0 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
1.Smokey Point Commercial,LLC (applicant),has requested preliminary Binding Site Plan
(BSP)approval and a concurrent Rezone in order to subdivide 39.4-acres into 11-lots and
construct between 170,000 -290,000 SF of commercial space and approximately 350
multi-family units.
2.The application was determined to be complete on June 19,2012 (Exhibit 31).
3.Marysville City Council adopted Ordinance No.2755 (Exhibit 7)on November 24,2008,
amending the Marysville Comprehensive Plan map and concurrently zoning approximately
13 of the 39.4-acre acre site to Mixed Use (MU).The remaining 26.4-acres retained.the
Generai Commercial (GC)zoning designation.
4.A condition of the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and concurrent rezone,Ordinance
No.2755,was that future project actions will be required to incorporate into project
design,two (2)east-west road connection,one located at approximately the 17300 Block
and the other located at approximately the 17500 Block.These two connections are shown
on the preliminary BSP (Exhibit 65 &66),satisfying the condition of Ordinance No.2755.
5.The applicant is proposing a concurrent rezone in order to increase the acreage of MU
zoning from 13 to approximately 16.6-acres,with the rest of the 22.8-acres to remain GC
(see Exhibit 67).
6.The proposed layout of the preliminary BSP will require a street vacation of 25th Avenue
NE.Street vacations are processed pursuant to Chapter 12.32 MMC,Vacation of Streets
and Alleys,and will be reviewed by Marysville City Councii under a separate application.
7.The proposed site consists of eight (8)parcels totaling approximately 39.4-acres.The
majority of the site is vacant undeveloped land.There is a single-family home and
associated outbuildings located on the east side of 25th Avenue NE and a single-family
residence and mobile home on the west side of 25th Avenue NE.The overall site
topography is relatively flat.On-site vegetation is generally moderate to heavy,with
mature species of deciduous and evergreen trees,combined with some open areas
consisting of field grass.
8.Primary access to the site is proposed via commercial driveways located off of 25th Avenue
NE.Secondary access is proposed from 27th Avenue NE.Direct access to the site is
prohibited from 1720 'Street NE (SR 531).
9.According to the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)prepared by TraffEx,dated May 18,2012
(Exhibit 15),and supplemental information submitted by TraffEx dated September 20,
2012 (EXhibit 37),October 4,2012 (Exhibit 38)and November 27,2012 (Exhibit 46),the
development,as currently proposed,would generate 8,630 average daily trips (ADT)and
895 PM peak hour trips (PMPHT).
10.The Public Works Director reviewed the TIA and supplemental information submitted by
TraffEx and issued a written concurrency recommendation,dated February 11,2013
(Exhibit 56),informing the developer of the project impacts and mitigation obligation
pursuant to Chapter 22D.030 MMC,Traffic Impact Fees and Mitigation.Pursuant to MMC
22D.030.070(l)(d),an applicant is required to make a written proposal for mitigation of
the Impacts to the Public Works Director,based on the concurrency recommendation.The
applicant submitted a written mitigation offer to the Public Works Director dated February
13,2013 (Exhibit 58).
The Public Works Director reviewed the written mitigation offer and made a final
concurrency determination,the conditions of which are reflected in mitigation measures 7 -
20 of the Mitigated SEPA Threshold Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS).The
mitigation measures are referenced in Section 3.0 of this Staff Recommendation.
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 3
11.Pursuant to MMC 22D.030.070,the traffic concurrency determination and the project's
impacts and mitigation obligations shall expire on February 15,2019 (6-years from the
date the MDNS was issued).If concurrency expires prior to building permit issuance,the
Public Works Director shall,at the request of the developer,consider evidence from the
applicant that conditions have not significantly changed and make a new concurrency
determination.
12.Pursuant to Chapter 14.15 MMC,a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP)and
subsequent installation of an approved stormwater management system on the site is
required.Potentiai significant adverse environmental impacts associated with increased
stormwater runoff from the proposed development are adequately mitigated by compliance
with this regulation.
13.A Critical Areas Report (CAR)for the properties located west of 25th Avenue NE was
prepared by Talasaea Consultants,Inc.,dated March 27,2012 (Exhibit 12),and a CAR and
Detailed Conceptual Mitigation Plan for the properties located east of 25th Avenue NE was
prepared by Talasaea Consultants,Inc.,dated March 21,2012 (Exhibit 13)and revised on
February 4,2013 (Exhibit 55).
According to the CAR (Exhibit 12),one 31,929 SF artificially created pond and one drainage
ditch were identified on the properties located west of 25th Avenue NE.The pond and ditch
are artificially created wetlands and are,therefore,exempt from the provisions of Chapter
22E.Ol0 MMC Critical Areas Management.The artificially created pond is proposed to be
retained and maintained as open space for the development,and the vegetative
community around the pond is proposed to be enhanced per the CAR.
According to the revised CAR and Detailed Conceptual Mitigation Plan (Exhibit 55),one
31,923 SF Category III wetland was identified on the properties located east of 25th Avenue
NE.In July 2011,an enforcement letter from the Washington State Department of Ecology
(DOE)was issued to Smokey Point Commercial,LLC (applicant)regarding clearing and
grading activity that has occurred within the wetland without DOE permit approval.The
CAR and Detailed Conceptual Mitigation Plan has been prepared in order to obtain an
"after-the-fact"approval for wetland impacts and to address mitigation for impacts to the
wetland.Proposed mitigation includes on-site wetland and buffer restoration and
purchasing an appropriate amount of credits at a certified mitigation bank for the indirect
(paper-fill)wetland impacts.Prior to beginning any ground disturbing activities within the
wetland areas or associated buffers,the appiicant shall obtain all necessary state and
federal authorizations for wetland impacts.
14.A preliminary noise study was prepared by The Greenbusch Group,Inc.,dated December
5,2012 (Exhibit 47).The preliminary analysis provides a rough estimation of predicted
sound levels associated with mechanical equipment,parking lot activity,deiiver trucks,and
sweepers.Prior to civil construction plan approval,the applicant shall submit a more
detailed noise analysis in order to determine the extent of required mitigation,as
recommended in the preliminary noise analysis.This noise analysis shall include,but not
be limited to,a review of any external mechanicai equipment,delivery and loading areas,
parking lot traffic,street sweeping lot parking lots,as well as recommendations to mitigate
any noise impacts the proposed commerciai development will have on the adjacent single-
family (eXisting)and multi-family (proposed)properties.
15.Public notice of the deveiopment application was provided in accordance with MMC
22G.Ol0.090 (Exhibit 34).
16.During the public review and comment period,the City received a letter from Marie A.Ryan
(Exhibit 35),who is the managing partner of 5-acres iocated directly north of the proposed
BSP (APN 31052000300100);an e-mail from Scott &Debbie Hackworth (Exhibit 32);and a
phone call from Peter Cowley,owner of the adjacent single-family residence located at
17408 27th Avenue NE (see exhibit 45 for phone call synopsis).Concerns and questions
raised during the public review and comment period include the following:
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 4
a.Request that the new sewer line,required to be installed within 25th Avenue NE,be
deep enough to serve additional properties along 25th Avenue NE.
Staff Comment:Due to the limited depth of the existing sewer main within 172"'
Street NE (SR 531),the applicant is proposing to extend the sewer main within 27th
Avenue NE,west to 25th Avenue NE,in order to provide properties north of the
proposed development,along 25th Avenue NE,adequate sanitary sewer service in the
future.
b.General questions about the types of stores proposed,critical areas,height
allowances,whether or not the proposed multi-family units are apartments (rentals)or
condos (owned),will water and sewer service be extended along the entire length of
25th Avenue NE,and when will the project begin construction and approximate
completion date.
Staff Comment:All of these general questions were responded to via e-mail,with
an acknowledgement of receipt from Scott &Debbie Hackworth (see Exhibit 32).
c.Added motor vehicle traffic to the area.
Staff Comment:The applicant submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA),prepared
by TraffEx,dated May 18,2012 (Exhibit 15),and supplemental information submitted
by TraffEx dated September 20,2012 (Exhibit 37),October 4,2012 (Exhibit 38)and
November 27,2012 (Exhibit 46).The City of Marysville contracted with TranspoGroup
to conduct an independent analysis of the TIA and supplemental information submitted
by TraffEx (Exhibit 49).
The Public Works Director reviewed the TIA and supplemental information prepared by
TraffEx and the independent analysis conducted by TranspoGroup,and made a final
traffic concurrency determination,the conditions of which are reflected in mitigation
measures 7 -20 of the Mitigated SEPA Threshold Determination of Non-Significance
(MDNS)referenced in Section 3.0 of this Staff Recommendation.
Although traffic in the area will increase due to the proposed development,it has been
determined by the Public Work Director,as conditioned,that all affected intersections
and roadway corridors in the area will comply with the adopted level-of-service (LOS)
standards established in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
d.Thirty (30)to forty (40)foot building heights.
Staff Comment:Pursuant to MMC 22C.020.080(2),the base height allowed in the
Mixed Use (MU)zone is 45'and the base height allowed in the General Commercial
(GC)zone is 35'.In both zones,heights may be increased when portions of the
structure or building which exceed the base height limit provide one additional foot of
street and interior setback beyond the required setback for each foot above the base
height limit.
MMC 22C.120.120 requires new development to provide a minimum 20'11 landscape
buffer,plus a 6',sight-obscuring fence or wall between the commercial portion of the
site and existing single-family residential properties.Additionally,a minimum 10'11
landscape buffer,plus a 6'sight-obscuring fence or wall is required between the multi-
family portion of the site and existing single-family residential properties.An 11
landscape buffer is required to be opaque from the ground to a height of at least 6'
with intermittent visual obstructions from the opaque portion to a height of at least
20'.The 11 screen is intended to exclude all visual contact between uses and to
create a strong impression of spatial separation.
The landscape buffers and sight-obscuring fencing required in the MMC should provide
adequate spatial separation between the existing single-family residences and
proposed multi-family and commercial uses.
e.City code should require an 8'cement wall separating the commercial and multi-family
from the existing single-family homes.
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 5
Staff Comment:The applicant has offered to install a split-face CMU wall between
the proposed project and the Lakewood Commons single-family condominium
development to the west.The applicant has requested that the Lakewood Commons
Homeowners Association determine if they would prefer a 6'or 8'CMU wall (6'
minimum required).
f.City should not allow a left hand turn into the development off of 27th Avenue NE.The
concern is that this would add to much traffic,light and noise to the existing single-
family homes.
Staff Comment:Primary access to the site is proposed via commercial driveways
located off of 25th Avenue NE.Secondary access is proposed from 27th Avenue NE via
two commercial access driveways.Fifteen (15%)percent,or 134 trips,are proposed
to utilize 27th Avenue NE during the critical PM peak hour (4:00 -6:00 PM).
Condition No.15 of the MDNS,referenced in Section 3.0 of this Staff
Recommendation,requires the applicant to conduct a detailed analysis in order to
understand street system operations and queuing along 27th Avenue NE between the
site access and 172nd Street NE prior to civil construction plan approval.The
evaluation shall consider impacts to the neighborhoods north and east of the site.
Analysis shall determine if dual southbound left-turn lanes and/or access management
is necessary to provide adequate operations and minimize neighborhood impacts.
After review of the analysis,the City Engineer shall determine whether or not signal
improvements or access management on 27th Avenue NE will be required.
17.A Request for Review of the proposed development was sent to the following Local,County,
State &Federal Agencies and Districts:
a.City ofAriington:No comments received.
b.Community Transit:Community Transit (CT)requested a 6'x 16'concrete pad be
constructed on the back side of the sidewalk at the northwest corner of 172nd Street
NE (SR 531)and 27th Avenue NE,and on the northwest corner of 1720d Street NE (SR
531)and 25th Avenue NE for future bus shelter installation (Exhibit 35).
Staff Comment:A detail of the requested bus shelters has been provided on the
preliminary SSP.Additionally,the application has been conditioned to provide the
concrete pad for future installation of bus shelters,as reflected in MDNS Condition(s)
17 &18,referenced in Section 3.0 of this Staff Recommendation.
c.Lakewood School District 306:Lakewood School District No.306 provided generai
comments regarding bus service and an assumption that the project would be required
to provide sidewalks for students utilizing bus service (Exhibit 35).
Staff Comment:Sidewalks are required to be constructed along 25th Avenue NE,27th
Avenue NE and 172nd Street NE (SR 531)in accordance with MMC 12.02A.090.
d.Pubiic Utiiities District (PUD)No.1 of Snohomish County:No comments received.
e.Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE)
Staff Comment:Staff forwarded the initial application,including the Critical Areas
Reports and amendments to DOE.No written comments have been received from
DOE.However,based on phone conversations Staff had with Paul S.Anderson,PWS,
DOE Wetland Specialist,the project was conditioned to obtain all necessary state and
federal authorizations for wetland impacts prior to beginning any ground disturbing
activities within the wetland areas or associated buffers,as refiected in MDNS
Condition No.4,as referenced in Section 3.0 of this Staff Recommendation.
f.Washington State Department ofTransportation (WSDOT):No comments received.
g.Snohomish Health District:Snohomish Health District recommended the existing
onsite sewage system(s)be abandoned in accordance with WAC 246-272A-0300 and
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 6
the existing well(s)be decommissioned in accordance with WAC 173-160-381 (Exhibit
35).
Staff Comment:The onsite sewage systems and wells were conditioned to be
abandoned/decommissioned,as reflected in MDNS Condition(s)5 &6,referenced in
Section 3.0 of this Staff Recommendation.
h.Snohomish County Department of Pubiic Works:5nohomish County Department of
Public Works requested the applicant provide a traffic mitigation offer in accordance
with the ILA between the City of Marysville and Snohomish County based on 20%of
the average daily trips generated from the proposed project multiplied by the County
mitigation fee of $46.00 per new average daily trip (ADT)for the multi-family phase,
and $39.00 per new ADT for the commercial phases (Exhibit 35).
Staff Comment:The applicant submitted a signed traffic mitigation offer to
Snohomish County in the amount of $69,404.20.The traffic mitigation offer was
approved by Snohomish County through a Record of Developer Obligations for
Mitigation of Impacts to the County Road (Exhibit 68).
i.Stiiiaguamish Tribe:No comments received.
j.Tuiaiip Tribes:No comments received.
18.MMC 22G.l00.100(3)requires the City to determine whether or not the BSP complies with
the following criteria:
a.Whether the proposed BSP and development of the parcel(s)relate to all elements of
the Marysville Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Comment:The Comprehensive Plan designation for the subject property is
Mixed Use and General Commercial.The proposed development and subsequent use
of the property will be consistent with the pertinent development policies outlined in
the Marysville Comprehensive Plan,as conditioned herein.
The follOWing development policies outlined in the Comprehensive Plan that are
specifically pertinent to this request,and were used to establish appropriate
conditions,are as follows:
LAND USE ELEMENT
General Development Land Use Policies
Poiicies:LU-3, LU-4, LU-5, LU-6, LU-7,LU-8, LU-9,LU-ll
Commercial Land Use Policies
Poiicies:LU-58, LU-59, LU-60,LU-64,LU-67,LU-68,LU-69,LU-72, LU-76,LU-81
General Commercial
Poiicies:LU-98
Mixed Use
Poiicies:LU-154, LU-156, LU-157, LU-158,LU-163
HOUSING ELEMENT
Housing Policies
Poiicies:HO-21,HO-26
ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT
Environmentally Sensitive Lands Policies
Poiicies:EN-9,EN-12, EN-13,EN-15
Earth Goals and Policies
Poiicies:EN-19,EN-21
Water:Quality,Wetland and Watershed Protection,Storm Water Runoff,
Drainage,Shoreline Goals and Policies
Poiicies:EN-27, EN-29,EN-32,EN-38
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 7
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
Transportation System Efficiency and Safety
Policies;T-7, T-8, T-9,T-ll
Public Involvement and Agency Coordination
Policies;T-13
Mobility Options
Policies;T-24,T-25, T-26, T-27,T-28,T-30
Sustainable Transportation Systems and the Environment
Policies;T-34,T-38
Level of Service Standards and Concurrency
Policies;T-40,T-41
Financing and Implementation
Policies;T-44, T-45,T-46
UTILITIES ELEMENT
Policies;UT-1, UT-3, UT-8,UT-9
PUBLIC FACILITIES &SERVICES ELEMENT
Police,Fire,Library
Policies;PS-1, PS-3,PS-9,PS-10,PS-ll
Schools
Policies;SC-8
Water,Sewer,Storm Drainage,Solid Waste
Policies;PF-1, PF-2, PF-7,PF-18, PF-19,PF-20,PF-26
b.Whether the proposed BSP meets the zoning regulations.
Staff Comment;Approximately 13 of the 39.4-acres is currently zoned Mixed Use
(MU).The remaining 26.4-acres Is zoned General Commercial (GC).The applicant is
proposing a rezone in order to increase the acreage of MU zoning from 13 to 16.6-
acres,with the remaining 22.8-acres to retain GC zoning.
The purpose of the MU zone is to proVide for pedestrian-and transit-oriented hlgh-
density employment uses,together with limited complementary retail and higher
density residential development,in locations within activity centers where the full
range of commercial activities is not desirable.
The purpose of the GC zone Is to provide for the broadest mix of commercial,
wholesale,service and recreation/cultural uses with compatible storage and fabrication
uses,serving regional market areas and offering significant employment.
After review of the preliminary BSP,and other supporting documentation and
materials submitted with the application the preliminary BSP and concurrent Rezone,
as conditioned herein,shall comply with all of the applicable development standards
outlined in Title 22 MMC,Unified Development Code.
c.Whether the binding site plan properly takes into account the topography,drainage,
vegetation,soils and any other relevant physical elements of the site.
Staff Comment;A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA)was prepared by
Adapt Engineering,Inc.,dated February 15,2012 (Exhibit 39)for the entire 39.4-acre
project site.A Phase I ESA was also prepared by Earth Solutions NW,dated
November 9,2007 (Exhibit 41),for the 19-acres located east of 25th Avenue NE.The
Phase 1 ESAs were prepared in order to identify recognized environmental conditions
in connection with the subject property.According to the ESAs,no evidence or
recognized environmental conditions In connection with the property were revealed.
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 8
A Geotechnical Engineering Study (GES)was prepared by Earth Solutions NW,LLC
(Exhibit 14),in order to evaluate:the subsurface conditions and characterization of
the soil and groundwater conditions;recommendations for site grading,drainage and
structural fill placement;recommendations for soil bearing capacity,subgrade
preparation,foundations and pavements;and preliminary geotechnical
recommendations for stormwater infiltration and pervious pavements.The
applicant/contractor shall adhere to the recommendations outlined in the GES,dated
May 21,2012,or as amended.
d.Public Services:
i.Adequate water su pply
Staff Comment:A 12"ductile-iron water main is located in 25th Avenue NE,
an 8"Dr water main is located in 27th Avenue NE,and a 12"cast-iron water
main is located within 172"'Street NE (SR 531).The applicant is proposing
to tap the existing mains and loop the water service throughout the
development in order to provide service to each bUilding and provide
adequate fire flow.The existing water main located within 25th Avenue NE
shall be required to be relocated in order to vacate a portion of 25th Avenue
NE.
Water improvements will be designed in accordance with the applicable
provisions of the MMC,which will be specifically addressed during civil
construction plan review.
ii.Adequate sewage disposal
Staff Comment:A 6"sewer force main is located in 25th Avenue NE,which
serves the townhome development to the north,known as Carol's Creek
Landing.The applicant shall not be allowed to connect to the existing force
main.A 10"PVC sewer main is located in 25th Avenue NE and 172"'Street
NE (SR 531).The applicant is proposing to extend the sewer mains within
25th Avenue NE and 172"'Street NE (SR 531)to serve the development.
However,due to the limited depth of the existing sewer main within 172"'
Street NE (SR 531),the applicant is proposing to extend the sewer main
within 27th Avenue NE,west to 25th Avenue NE,in order to provide
properties north of the proposed development,along 25th Avenue NE,
adequate sanitary sewer service In the future.
Sewer improvements will be designed in accordance with the applicable
provisions of the MMC and specifically addressed during civil construction
plan review.
iii.Appropriate storm drainage improvements
Staff Comment:A Preliminary Drainage Report (PDR),dated June 2012
(Exhibit 28),and revised on October 2012 (Exhibit 42),was prepared by
Joseph M.Smeby,PE.According to the PDR,roof runoff from the new
bUildings is proposed to be connected to individual infiltration systems,or
will be collected and conveyed to one of the on-site wetlands to prOVide
flows to maintain their current function.Road runoff and the parking lot
run-off is proposed to be directed to catch basins and infiltration trenches
spread out around the site.
Storm drainage improvements will be designed in accordance with the
Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (SMMWW)and
applicable provisions of the MMC.Storm drainage improvements will be
specifically addressed during civil construction plan review.
iv.Adequate fire hydrants
Staff Comment:In a memo dated November 6,2012 (Exhibit 45),Assistant
Fire Marshall,David Vanbeek,commented that the size and locations of
water mains appears to be generally adequate.The locations of some
hydrants exceed the City standard for spacing between hydrants.Standard
hydrant spacing for the proposed use is 300 feet.Some hydrants should be
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 9
relocated,or additional hydrants provided,to improve their spacing.Further
evaluation of hydrant locations will be part of the civil plan review and
approval process.
v.Appropriate access to all anticipated uses within the site
Staff Comment:After review of the preliminary BSP,it has been determined
that,as conditioned herein,the proposed motor vehicle and pedestrian
accesses generally comply with the applicable provisions outlined in the MMC
and the Marysville Engineering Design and Development Standards (EDDS).
Final motor vehicle and pedestrian accesses improvements will be
specifically addressed during civil construction plan review.
vi.Provisions for all appropriate deeds,dedications,and/or easements
Staff Comment:Final deeds,dedication,and/or easements shall be required
in accordance with the applicable provisions in the MMC and reviewed and
approved,prior to recording the final BSP.
vii.Examination of the existing streets and utilities and how the proposed BSP
relates to them.
Staff Comment:After review of the preliminary BSP,it has been determined
that,as conditioned herein,the proposed streets and utilities generally
comply with the applicable provisions outlined in the MMC and the Marysville
Engineering Design and Development Standards (EDDS).Final street and
utility improvements will be specifically addressed during civil construction
plan review.
e.Examination of the project through the SEPA process and a determination of whether
the proposed binding site plan complies with the SEPA requirements.
Staff Comment:After evaluation of the applicant's environmental checklist submitted
with the application,and other supporting documentation and application materials,a
Mitigated Environmental Threshold Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS)was
issued on February 15,2012 (Exhibit 59).The appeal period for the MDNS expired on
March 4,2013.No appeals were filed.
f.Binding site plans shall comply with the critical areas land division requirements of
MMC 22E.Ol0.350.
Staff Comment:The proposed lots within the BSP contain at least one building site,
including access that is suitable for development and is not within the critical areas or
its associated setback in accordance with MMC 22E.Ol0.350(1).Prior to recording the
final BSP,the critical areas and associated buffers and setbacks shall be placed in a
separate tract on which development is prohibited in accordance with MMC
22E.01O.350(2).
19.MMC 22G.01O.420(1)requires the applicant to demonstrate that the proposal is consistent
with the comprehensive plan,and applicable functional plans,and compiles with the
following criteria:
a.There is a demonstrated need for additional zoning as the type proposed;
b.The zone reclassification is consistent and compatible with uses and zoning of the
surrounding properties;
c.There have been significant changes in the circumstances of the property to be
rezoned!or surrounding properties,to warrant a change in classification;and
d.The property is practically and physically suited for the uses allowed in the proposed
zone reclassification.
The applicant submitted a written response to the rezone criteria outlined above (Exhibit 5).
After evaluation of the applicant's written response,and other supporting documentation
and application materials,the proposed rezone,as conditioned herein,complies with the
rezone criteria and applicable development standards outlined in Title 22 MMC,Unified
Development Code.
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 10
20.Pursuant to MMC 22G.01O.420(2),properties at the edges of land use districts can make
application to rezone property to the bordering zone without applying for a comprehensive
plan map amendment if the proponent can demonstrate,the following:
a.The proposed land use district will provide a more effective transition point and edge
for the proposed land use district than strict application of the comprehensive plan
map would provide due to neighboring land uses,topography,access,parcel lines or
other property characteristics;
b.The proposed land use district supports and implements the goals,objectives,policies
and text of the comprehensive plan more effectively than strict application of the
comprehensive plan map;and
c.The proposed land use change will not affect an area greater than 10 acres,exclusive
of critical areas.
The applicant submitted a written response to the rezone criteria outlined above (Exhibit 5).
After evaluation of the applicant's written response,and other supporting documentation
and application materials,the proposed rezone,as conditioned herein,will be consistent
with the applicable development goals and policies outlined in the Marysville
Comprehensive Plan.
21.After evaluation of the application materials and other supporting documentation available
to the City,Staff concludes that,as conditioned,the proposed development is beneficial to
the public health,safety and welfare and is in the public interest.
22.After evaluation of the application materials and other supporting documentation available
to the City,Staff concludes that,as conditioned,the proposed development does not lower
the level of service of transportation and/or neighborhood park facilities below the
minimum standards established within the comprehensive plan.
23.After evaluation of the application materials and other supporting documentation available
to the City,Staff concludes that,as conditioned,the area,location and features of iand
proposed for dedication are a direct result of the development proposal,are reasonably
needed to mitigate the effects of the development,and are proportional to the impacts
created by the development.
2.0 RECOMMENDATION
Based on the foregoing findings and conclusions,review of the environmental documents
submitted by the applicant,and the City's regulatory authority to implement the policies,
standards,and regulations of the Marysville Comprehensive Plan and MMC,the Community
Development Department hereby recommends the Hearing Examiner APPROVE the preliminary
BSP and forward a recommendation of APPROVAL of the Rezone,for Lakewood Station,to
Marysville City Council,subject to the following conditions:
1.The preliminary BSP received by the Community Development Department on March 1,
2013 (Exhibit 66)shall be the approved preliminary BSP layout.
2.Project design shall comply with the condition of the Comprehensive Plan Map
Amendment and concurrent rezone Ordinance No.2755,requiring two (2)east-west
road connections,one located at approximately the 17300 Block and the other located
at approXimately the 17500 Block.
3.All power lines,telephone wires,television cables,fire alarm systems and other
communication wires,cables or lines shall be placed underground either by direct burial or
by means of conduit or ducts providing service to each building.
4.A six (6)to eight (8)foot CMU wall shall be installed along the east perimeter of the
development from 173"Street NE to the northeast property corner,separating the muiti-
family and commerciai uses from the Lakewood Commons single-family condominium
development.This detail shall be provided on the on the civil construction,and/or
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 11
architectural plans.
5.The following design elements shall be incorporated into the commercial portion of the BSP:
a.Public entrances for the buildings located along 25th Avenue NE,27th Avenue NE,
172"'Street NE (SR 531)and 173"Street NE shall be visible and accessible from
public streets and sidewalks.Preferably these access ways should be separated
from the parking and drive aisles.If access traverses the parking lot,then it should
be raised and clearly marked.
b.Pedestrian-oriented space shall be required at intersections and street corners
leading directly to a building entry or entries,such as:
i.Pedestrian access to the abutting structures from the street;
ii.Paved walking surfaces of either concrete or approved unit paving;
iii.Pedestrian scaled lighting (no more than 15'in height)at a level averaging
at least 2 foot candles throughout the space;
iv.Landscaping components that add seasonal interest to the space;
v.Pedestrian amenities,such as a water feature,drinking fountain,tables,
and/or distinctive paving or artwork.
vi.A pedestrian-oriented bUilding fa~ade.
vii.If providing pedestrian oriented space is not feasible or desirable per the
director,consider the following:
A.Install substantial landscaping (at least 30 x 30'or 900 SF of ground
surface area with trees,shrubs,and or groundcover).The space may
include a special architectural element,such as a trellis,to add identity
or demarcation of the area.Such an architectural element may have a
sign incorporated into it (as long as such sign does not identify an
individual business or businesses).
B.other treatments will be considered by the Director,provided they meet
the intent of the standards and gUidelines outlined above.
c.Blank walls shall not be allowed on elevations facing a public or private road.A
blank wall is a ground floor wall,or portion of a ground floor wall,over 4'in height
having a horizontal length greater than 15'that does not include a transparent
window or door,or,any portion of a ground floor wall having a surface area of 400
SF or greater that does not include a transparent window.Design Treatments to
eliminate blank walls shall include,but shall not be limited to:
i.Transparent windows or doors;
ii.Display windows;
iii.Landscape planting bed at least 5 feet wide or a raised planter bed at least 2
feet high and 3 feet wide in front of the wall.Such planting areas shall
include planting materials that are sufficient to obscure or screen at least
60%of the wall's surface within 3 years;
iv.Installing vertical trellis in front of the wall with climbing vines or plant
materials sufficient to obscure or screen at least 60%of the wall's surface
within 3 years.For large areas,trellises should be used in conjunction with
other blank wall treatments.
v.other methods such as murals or special building material treatments that
meet the intent of the standards outlined above may be approved by the
director.
d.Street furniture,including the follOWing elements,shall be prOVided and strategically
located throughout:
i.Trash Receptacles:Ironsites Series S-20 as manufactured by Victor Stanley;
Powdercoating Victor Stanley,or comparable.
ii.Ash Urn:Ironsites Series S-20 as manufactured by Victor Stanley;
Powdercoating Victor Stanley,or comparable.
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 12
iii.Benches:Victor Stanley RB-28 steel sides bench or Timber Form
Renaissance Model 2806-5,5'-1"length with arm rest;Powdercoat over
galvanized zinc,or comparable.
e.Plazas and gathering places for relaxing,eating,socializing and recreating shall be
provided and designed,as follows:
iv.Sized between 5,000 to 10,000 SF.
v.Able to serve as a center for daily activities.
vi.Paving should be unit pavers or concrete with special texture,pattern,
and/or decorative features.
vii.Pedestrian amenities should be provided,including features such as seating,
plants,drinking fountains,artwork,and such focal points as sculptures or
water features.
6.Detailed recreational site amenities and boundaries of proposed recreational facilities shall
be provided on the civil construction,architectural,or landscape plans for the multi-family
portion of the site in accordance with MMC 22C.020.270 &MMC 22C.020.280.Recreational
amenities shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks Director.
7.A detail of the bicycle parking spaces shall be provided on the civil construction or
architectural plans,and designed in accordance with MMC 22C.130.060.
8.A lighting plan and details for parking lot illumination locations,materials and fixture design
shall be prOVided on the civil construction or architectural plans.Lighting shall comply with
the following design standards:
a.25'maximum height.
b.Fixtures shall be full cut-off,dark sky rated,with lower fixtures preferable so as to
maintain a human scale.
c.Parking lot lighting shall be designed to provide security lighting to all parking
spaces.
d.Lighting shall be shielded in a manner that does not disturb residential uses or pose
a hazard to passing traffic.Lighting should not be permitted to trespass onto
adjacent private parcels nor shall light source (Iuminaire)be visible at the property
line.
e.Fixture design shall incorporate unique design features that coincide with the
architectural design of the development.
f.Pedestrian scale lighting (light fixtures no taller than 15')is required in areas of
pedestrian activity.Lighting shall enable pedestrians to identify a face 45'away in
order to promote safety.
g.Exterior lighting shall be part of the architectural concept.Lighting shall enhance
the building design and adjoining landscaping.It should provide adequate lighting
to ensure safety and security,and enhance and encourage evening activities.In
addition,the following shall be addressed:
i.The site plan shall identify lighting equipment and standards.Uplighting on
trees and provisions for seasonal lighting are encouraged.
ii.Accent lighting on architectural and landscape features is encouraged to add
interest and focal points.
9.Prior to civil construction plan approval,a detailed landscaping plan depicting all of the
applicable elements outlined in MMC 22C.120.030 will be required to be submitted for review
and approval.The landscape plan shall incorporate the following design elements,as
outlined in Chapter 22C.120 MMC:
a.All landscaped areas shall be provided with an irrigation system or a readily available
water supply with at least 1 outlet located within 50'of all plant material.
b.Water conservation measures shall be applied as outlined in MMC 22C.120.050.
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 13
c.The proposed and existing residential structures shall be buffered from commerciai
structures and adjoining parking lots by use of vegetation,landscaping,fencing,
walls,berms or other similar methods which are deemed under the circumstances to
create effective and aesthetically pleasing screens or buffers between such diverse
land uses.
d.Site deveiopment shall be sensitive to the preservation of native trees,where
applicable.
e.A 20'L1 landscape buffer,plus a quality 6'minimum height,sight-obscuring fence
or wall,is required to be installed to create a buffer between the commercial portion
of the site and the existing single-family residential properties.
f.A 10'L1 landscape buffer,plus a quality 6'minimum height,sight-obscuring fence
or wall,is required to be installed to create a buffer between the multi-family portion
of the site and the existing single-family residential properties.
g.A 10'L2 landscape buffer,plus a quality 6'minimum height,sight-obscuring fence
or wall,is required to be installed to create a buffer between the commercial portion
of the site and the proposed multi-family residential properties.
h.A lS'L3 landscape buffer is required between off-street parking and drive-aisles and
172"Street NE (SR 531).
i.A 10'L3 landscape buffer is required between off-street parking and drive-aisles and
27th Avenue NE,25th Avenue NE,173"Street NE and 174th Street NE.
j.The development shall create a well-defined streetscape to allow for the safe
movement of pedestrians.Whenever possible,building setbacks shall be minimized
and parking and drive-through passageways shall be relegated to the side and rear
of buildings.
k.Attractive landscape transition to adjoining properties shall be provided.
I.Where buildings are not located along the street frontages,enhanced landscaping
shall be required in order to create an attractive street edge.
m.Ten (10%)percent of the required parking areas shall be landscaped with L4
landscaping,provided that:
i.No parking stall shall be located more than 45'from a landscaped area;
ii.All landscaping must be located between parking stalls,at the end of parking
columns,or between stalls and the property line;
iii.All individual planting areas within parking lots shall be planted with at least
one tree,be a minimum of 5'in width and 120 SF in size,and in addition to
the required trees,shall be planted with a living groundcover;
iv.All landscaped areas shall be protected from vehicle damage by a 6"
protective curbing.Wheel stops may be substituted when required to allow
storm water to pass.
v.A minimum 2'setback shall be provided for all trees and shrubs where
vehicles overhang into planted areas.
n.Pursuant to MMC 22C.130.050(6),screening in the form of a solid masonry wall,
architectural fence or dense coniferous hedge shall be effected or planted and
maintained to a height of not less than 5'where a parking lot has a common
boundary line with any residentially developed property.
o.Street trees are required to be planted along all public streets and access
roads/easements and comply with the following:
i.Street trees shall be planted between the curb and the walking path of the
sidewalk.Either 5'x 5'pits with tree grates or a continuous planting strip
with groundcover that is at least 5'wide may be used.Where planting strips
are not incorporated into the design,street trees shall be located behind the
sidewalk.
ii.Street trees shall meet the most recent ANSI standards for a 1 V2'caliper
tree at the time of planting,and shall be spaced to provide a continuous
canopy coverage within 10-years.
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 14
p.Utility meters,electrical conduit,and other service utility apparatus shall be located
and/or designed to minimize their visibility to the public.If such elements are
mounted in a location visible from the street,pedestrian pathway,common open
space,or shared auto courtyards,they shall be screened with vegetation or by
architectural features.
q.Additional landscaping design standards related to site and bUilding design are
outlined in MMC 22C.020.250.
10.The following calcuiations and design eiements for storage space and collection points for
recyclabies shall be provided on the civii construction or architectural plans and approved by
the Sanitation Division:
a.Residential:
i.1 '12 SF per dwelling unit.
ii.The storage area shall be dispersed in collection points throughout the site.
iii.Minimum of 1 collection point for every 30 dwelling units.
iv.Collection points may be located within residentiai bUildings,in separate
buildings/structures without dwelling units,or outdoors.
v.Collection points located in separate buildings/structures or outdoors shall be
no more than 200'from a common entrance of a residential building.
vi.Collection points shall be located in a manner so that hauling trucks do not
obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic on-site,or project into any public right-
of-way.
b.Commercial:
i.5 SF per every 1,000 SF of commercial GFA.
ii.Storage space may be allocated to a centralized collection point.
iii.Outdoor collection points shall not be located in any required setback areas.
iv.Collection points shall be located in a manner so that hauling trucks do not
obstruct pedestrian or vehicle traffic on-site,or project into any public right-
of-way.
v.Access to collection points may be limited,except during regular business
hours and/or specified collection hours.
c.Generally:
i.Dimensions of the collection points shall be of sufficient width and depth to
enclose containers for recyclables.
ii.Architectural design of any structure enclosing an outdoor collection point,or
any building primarily used to contain a collection point,shall be consistent
with the design of the primary structure(s)on the site.
iii.Collection points shall be identified by signs not exceeding 2 SF.
iv.A 6'wall or fence shall enclose any outdoor collection point.
v.Enclosures for outdoor collection points and buildings used primarily to
contain a collection point shall have gate openings at least 12'wide for
haulers.In addition,the gate opening for any building or other roofed
structure used primarily as a collection point shall have a vertical clearance
of at least 12'.
vi.Weather protection of recyclables shall be ensured by using weather-proof
containers or by providing a roof over the storage area.
11.The following solid waste details will be required to be provided on the civil construction,
architectural,or landscape plans:
a.Service elements shall be located to minimize the negative visuai,noise,odor,and
physicai impacts to the street environment,adjacent (on and off-site)residents or
other uses,and pedestrian areas.
b.The designated spot for service elements shall be paved with concrete.
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 15
c.Appropriate enclosure of the common trash and recycling elements shall be
required,as determined by the Director.Requirements and considerations:
i.A 6-foot fence constructed of concrete block or brick enclosing trash and
recycling receptacles is required.Coordination with the current franchise
hauler is required.The sides and rear of the enclosure must be screened
with Type Ll,L2, L3,or L4 Landscaping at least 5'deep in visible locations,
as determined by the director,to soften the views of the screening element
and add visual interest.
ii.Preferably,service enclosures are integrated into the building itself.
3.0 MONS CONDITIONS
A Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (MDNS)was issued on February 15,2013.The
mitigation measures imposed to minimize the probable significant adverse environmental
impacts of the proposed BSP and concurrent Rezone for Lakewood Station are referenced below:
1.The appiicant/contractor shall adhere to the recommendation outlined in Geotechnical
Engineering Study,prepared by Earth Solutions NW,LLC,dated May 21,2012,or as
amended.
2.Prior to civil construction plan approval,the applicant shall submit a more detailed noise
analysis in order to determine the extent of required mitigation,as recommended in the
preliminary noise analysis,prepared by The Greensbusch Group,Inc.,dated December 5,
2012.This noise analysis shall include,but not be limited to,a review of any externai
mechanical equipment,delivery and loading areas,parking lot traffic,street sweeping lot
parking lots,as well as recommendations to mitigate any noise impacts the proposed
commercial development will have on the adjacent single-family (existing)and multi-family
(proposed)properties.
3.The applicant shall be required to replace the off-site stormwater cuivert under 172"'Street
NE,which is located at 2131 172nd Street NE.Additionally,the applicant shall be required
to analyze the peak flows for this system to ensure that the new culvert and existing ditch
can convey developed peak flows.
4.The applicant shall obtain all necessary state and federal authorizations for wetland impacts
prior to beginning any ground disturbing activities within the wetland areas or associated
buffers.
5.The existing on-site sewage system(s)shall be abandoned by having the septic tank(s)
pumped by a certified pumper,then having the top of the tank removed or destroyed and
filling the void (WAC 246-272A-0300).Documentation demonstrating completion of this
work shall be submitted prior to final asp approval.
6.The existing on-site well(s)shall be decommissioned in accordance with WAC 173-160-381.
A copy of the well contractor's decommissioning report(s)shall be submitted prior to final
asp approval.
7.A street vacation for 25th Avenue NE shall be required to be approved by Marysville City
Council in accordance with Chapter 12.32 MMC.The street vacation shall be reviewed by
Marysville City Council concurrently with the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation on the
proposed rezone.
8.Public right-of-way (ROW)shall be dedicated along 172"'Street NE (SR 531)in order to
accommodate the 90'principal arterial 5-lane public ROW section (EDDS SP3-201-002),in
accordance with MMC 12.02A.ll0(1)(c),unless additional ROW is required to be dedicated
by Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT).The City Engineer and
WSDOT shall review and approve the required ROW dedication,prior to civil construction
plan approval.
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 16
9.Thirty-feet (30')of public ROW shail be dedicated along 174th Street NE,west of 25th Avenue
NE,in order to accommodate the half-street 60'neighborhood coilector public ROW section
(EDDS SP3-202-001)in accordance with MMC 12.02A.110(1)(c).
10.Public ROW shail be dedicated along 25th Avenue NE and 27th Avenue NE,in order to
accommodate the 60'coilector arterial/commercial access street public ROW section (EDDS
SP3-201-003)in accordance with MMC 12.02A.110(1)(c).
11.173"Street NE is approved as a private road.173"Street NE shail be designed and
constructed to the pubic road standard,including two 11'travel lanes,two 5'bicycle lanes,
curbs &getter per EDDS Section 3-514,two 5'planter strips and two 5'sidewalks.A public
utility and access easement for the private road shail be reviewed and approved by the City
Engineer and recorded concurrently with the asp.
12.The applicant shail be required to construct frontage improvements aiong 172"'Street NE
(SR 531),173"Street NE (private),174th Street NE,25th Avenue NE and 27th Avenue NE,in
accordance with MMC 12.02A.090,prior to recording the asp.Frontage improvements shall
include street lighting and signal communications conduit.Roadway improvements,
channelization and site access plans wiil be reqUired to be reviewed and approved by the
City Engineer and WSDOT (SR 531 and traffic signals)prior to construction plan approval.
13.Frontage improvements along 172"'Street NE (SR 531)shail be credited against the traffic
impact fees in accordance with Section 22D.030.070(5)MMC.The amount of credit for
improvements to 172"'Street NE (SR 531)shail be approved by the City Engineer.
14.The appiicant shail construct a traffic signal at the intersection of 25th Avenue NE and 172"'
Street NE (SR 531)prior to recording the asp.Traffic signal design shall consider both the
short-term (one eastbound through lane)and long-term (two eastbound through lanes)at
this location.Signal design shail include protected phasing for the eastbound left-turn.
Signal construction plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and WSDOT
prior to civil construction plan approval.Credit towards traffic impacts fees shall not be
given for any work related to design and construction of the signal.
15.The applicant shail conduct a detailed analysis in order to understand street system
operations and queuing along 27th Avenue NE between the site access and 172"'Street NE
prior to civil construction plan approval.The evaluation shail consider impacts to the
neighborhood north and east of the site.Analysis shail determine if dual southbound left-
turn lanes and/or access management is necessary to provide adequate operations and
minimize neighborhood impacts.After review of the analysis,the City Engineer shall
determine whether or not signal improvements or access management on 27th Avenue NE
wiil be required.
16.The appiicant shail instail Lemec Renaissance Series color BRTX street luminaire fixtures
along 172"'Street NE (SR 531),173"Street NE (private),174th Street NE,25th Avenue NE
and 27th Avenue NE.Street illumination shail be designed in accordance with Section 3-506
of the Marysviile Engineering Design and Development Standards (EDDS).
17.The applicant shail instail a 6'wide by 16'long concrete pad on the back side of the sidewalk
at the existing Community Transit bus stop on the northwest corner of 172"'Street NE (SR
531)and 27th Avenue NE for the future instailation of a bus shelter.
18.The applicant shail instail a 6'wide by 16'long concrete pad on the back side of the sidewalk
for a future Community Transit bus stop on the northwest corner of 172"'Street NE (SR
531)and 25th Avenue NE for the future instailation of a bus shelter.
19.In order to mitigate impacts upon the future capacity of the road system,the applicant shail
be required to submit payment to the City of Marysviile,on a proportionate share cost of the
future capacity improvements as set forth in MMC 22D.030.070(3),for the development.
Traffic impact fees shall be vested at a rate of $3,290.00 per multi-family unit and
$1,870.00 per commercial PM Peak Hour Trip (PMPHT).
20.Pursuant to the ILA with Snohomish County,the applicant is obligated to pay traffic
mitigation based on 20%of the average daily trips generated from the proposed project
multiplied by the County mitigation fee of $46.00 per new average daily trip (ADT)for the
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 17
multi-family phase and $39.00 per new ADT for the commercial phases.The applicant
submitted a signed traffic mitigation offer to Snohomish County,in the amount of
$69,404.20,calcuiated as foilows:
USE ADT RATE IMPACT
(20%)FEE
Muiti-Family 1493 $9.20 $13,735.60(348-units)
Commercial 7137 $7.80 $55,668.60
TOTAL $69,404.20
Snohomish County reserves the right to adjust the impact fee if there is a change of use or
building size within the development.
PA 12014 Lakewood Station -Staff Recommendation Page 18
z::s
0-
w
I-
(f)
10(16/12
PARCEL"C";
APORTIONOF TIfEEASTHALFOFTHESOUTHEASTQUARTEROFTHE SOUTHWESTQUARTEROf
SECT10N20,TOWNSHIP31 NORm,RANGE;EAST,1'1,M••fN SNoHoMlstJCOUNTY.WASHINGToN,
DESCRIBEDASfOllOWS'
COMMENCINGATTHESOUTHEASTCORNEROF THESOUTHWESTQUARTEROFSAID SECT10N 20;
rnENCEWESTAlONGTHESECllONLINEADISTANCEOF412.5FEETToTHETRUEPOINTOFBEGINNING;
THENCENORTHPARAlLELWiTHTHEWESTLINEOFSAID SECTlONADISTANCEOf52B FEET;
THENCEWESTONALINEPARAllEL1'1111-1 THE SOIJTHLINEOFSAlDSECTION,247.5FEET;
rnENCEPARALLELWITHTHEWESTLINEOFSAID SECTIONTOHIEsoumLINEOF SAID SECTION:
THENCEEASTTO THE POINTOFBEGINNING:
EXCEPTTHEWEST30fEETTHEREOFfORROAD:
ALSOEXCEPTTHATPORTIONlYINGWITHINlnNOSTREETNORll;EASTRUNNINGAlONGTHESOUTH
liNEOF SAIDPROPERTY:
ALSOEXCEPTlHATPORTIONCONVEYEDTOTHE STATE OfWAsHINGTONFORTHEWlOENfNGOFTHE
mINDSTREETNORTHEASTBYDEEDRECORDJANUARY29,2001 UNDERRECORDINGNO,2O~101'9004'
VICINITY MAP
SCALE:l"~2,OOO'
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (EAST LOTS)
PARCEL"A',
WEEAST16,FEETOFTHESOUTHEASTOUAfHEROFTHESOlJ1l-illl'ESTQUARTEROFSECTION 20,
TOWNSKIP31NORTH.RANGE 5EAST,W.M..INSNOHOMISHCOUNTY,WASHINGTON:
8(CEPTTHESOUTHERLY;W,02FEETTHEREOFCONDEMNS)INSNOHOMISHCOUNTYSUPERIORCOURT
CAliSENO.55-2--ro75,.3FORRoADPURPOSES:
ALSOaCEPTTrlATPORTIONTHEREOFlYINGWITHINTHEBOUNDARIESOFlnNDSTREETNOftrnEAST
RUNNINGALONGTHESOIJTHliNErnEREOF.
PARCEL"D~
A PORTIONOF THEEASTI-lALF OFTHESOUTHEASTOUARTEllOFTHE SOUTI-l'WESTQUARTEROF
SECTION20,TOWNSHIP31 NORTH.RANGE5EAST.W.M..INSNOHOMISHCOUNTY,WASi-iINOToN.
DESCRIl>EDASFOLLOWS:
COMMENCINGATTHESOUTKEASTCORNEROFTHETHE SOUltiWESTQUARTEROFSAIDSECTION20;
THENCEWESTALONGmESOUTH liNEOF SECTION20,165 FEET;
THENCE NORTHAlONGTHEWESTLINE OFTHEEAST165fEETOFSAIDSUBDIVISION704FEETToTHE
TRUEPOINTOF6EGINNfNG:
THENCE CONTINUINGNORmALONG SI>JD WESTLINEOFTHEEAST16,FEETOFSAIDSUBDIVISIONTo
THESOUTHEASTCORNEROfTHATCERTAINPROPERTYSOLDONCONmACTTOERNESTM,OlSENAND
HATTlER.OLSEN,HISWiFE INSTRUMENTRECORDEDAUGUST12.1996UNDERRECORDING NO.1889094-:
THENCEWESTALONGTHESOuTHLINEOFSAIDOLSENTRACTTOTHE SOUTHWESTCORNEROFSAID
OLSEN TRACT;
THENCESOUTHALONGTHEWESTliNEOfSAIDOLSENTRACTPRODUCEDSOuTHERlYTOAPOINT
WHICHIS 528fEETNORTH OFTHESOUTHliNEOfSAIDSECTiON;
THENCEEASTPARAlLelWITHTHESOlITHliNEOfSAIDSECTIONTOINTERSECTALINEWHICH IS
PARALlelwrrHAND .47.'FEETWESTOfTHEWESTOFTHEWESTLINEOFTHEEASTlS5FEETOFSAlD
EASTHALFOFTHESOUTHEASTQUARTEROFTHESOUTHWESTQUARTER;
THENCE NORTHAlONGSAlDLINE17,FEETTOINTERSECTALLINEWHICHIS704 FEETNORTHAND
PARALLelwm-JTHESOUTHLINE OfSAIDSECTION:
THENCE EASTAlONGSAIDliNETOTHEPOINTOFBEGINNING;
EXCEPTTHEWEST3~FEETTKEREOFFORROAD
PARCel'E~
THE NORTH440FEETOFTHEFOllOWINGDESCRIBEDPROPERTY
THE EASTHALFOFTHESQuniEASTQUJ\RTEROfTHESOUTHWESTQUARTEROFSECTION.0,
TOWNSHIP31NORTH,RANGE 5EAST,W.M.•INSNOHOMISHCOUNTY,WASHINGTON:
EXCEPTmEEA5T165FE8THEREOF:
ALSOEXCEPTTHEWEST3\lFEET TKEREOF.
PARCEL"B"',
A PORTIONOF rnEEASTrlAlF OFTHESOIJTHEASTOUARTEROFTHE SOlmMlESTOUARTEROF
SECTION20,TOWNSHIP31 NORTH.RANGE,EAST,W.M.,INSNOHOMI5HCOUNTY,WASHINGTON,
OESCRIBEOASFOLlOWS'
COMMENCINGATTHE SOUTHEASTCORNEROfTHESOUTHWESTQUARTEROFSAIDSECTlON 20,
THENCEWESTALDNGTHESOllTHSECTIoNLINE155FEETTOTHETRUEPOINTOF BEGINNING;
THENCE NORTHALONGTHEWESTLINEOF mEEAST165FEETOFSAID SUBDMSIONADISTANCEOF704
FEET;
THENCEWESTONA LINE PARAllELWITHTHEsoumLINEOFSAIDSECTION247.5FEET:
WENCE SOUTHPARAllELWITHTI-JEWESTLINE OFSAfD EAST165FEETOFSAIDSUBDMSIONToTHE
SOIlWLINEOFsAIDSECTION;
WENCE EASTTOTHE POINTOFBEGINNING;
EXCEPTTHATPORTION,LYlNGWITHIN 1nNDSTREETNORTHEASTRUNNINGALONGTHESOUTHOFSAID
PROPERTY;
ALSOEXCEPTTHATPORTIONCONVEYEDTOTI-JESTATIOOFWASHINGTONfORTHEWIOEN'NGOF1nNO
STREETNORTHEAST BYDEEDRECORD JANUARY 29,2~~1 UNDERRECORDINGNO.200101290045.
SUBJEcTTOANYANDAllEASEMENTS,COVENANTSAND RESTRICTIONSOF RECORD,IFANY.
85%
IMP,COVERAGEIMP.AREA
CIVIL ENGINEER
OMEGA ENGINEERING,INC.
JOSEPH SMEBY,PE
2829 ROCKEFELLER AVE
EVERETT,WA 98201425,387.3820
F:425.259.1958
SURVEYOR
(BOUNDARY AND TOPO-EAST)
ROTH HILL,LLC
ATTN:MICHAEL LEMASA,PLS
2600 116TH AVE.NE,#100
BELLEVUE,WA 98004
425.869.9448
PROJECT SURVEYOR
AS,P.1.
ATTN:HARLEY PAWLEY,PLS
4532-8 EVERGREEN WAY
EVERETT.WA 98203
425.252.1884
RUTLEDGE MAUL ARCHITECTS
A1.01 SITE PLAN PHASE I
A1.02 -SITE PLAN PHASE II
A2.01 -BUILDING TYPE A ELEVATIONS
A2.02 -BUILDING TYPE B ELEVATIONS
A2.03 -BUILDING TYPE C ELEVATIONS
A2.04 -BUILDING TYPE D ELEVATIONS
TALASAEA CONSULTANTI;>~"llihW1.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN
Wl.l -ASSESSMENT OF DEV.IMPACTS
&MITIGATION OVERVlEW PLAN
W2.0 -MITIGATlON GRADING PLAN &
PLANTING PLAN,SCHEDULE,
DETAIL &NOTES
SHEET INDEX ICONT.)
LLC
co,AREA
30,818 SF 22,792 SF 74%
42,948 SF 36,505 "~+-__3='=%=.__~
36,035 SF 29,594 SF 82%
65,066 SF 55,110 SF 85%
27,333 SF 23.153 SF 85%
394,152 SF 335,000 SF
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
COVERAGE TABLE
c
8
c
c
G
A
°
LOT
BASIS OF BEARING
MAG NAil &:.WASHER AT TOP OF S'LY HANDICAP RAMP AT NW QUADRANT 0,INlX Of 172ND ST.NE &:.25111 AVE.tiE
ELEV,~121.91
C£N1ERLINE OF 172ND
OWNER
SMOKEY POiNT COMMERCIAL,
AnN;STEVE MALSAM
1461 130TH AVE.NE
BELLEVUE,WA 98005
ARCHITECT
(COMMERCIAL)
DOG ARCHITECTS,LLC
ATTN:JOE DANAHOU,AlA
15398 NE 85TH ST.SUITE 101
REDMOND.WA 98052
425.285.9992
ARCHITECT
(MUl11 FAMILY)
RUTLEDGE MAUL ARCHITECTS
ATTN:DAVE MAUL
19336 47TH AVE NE
SEATTLE,WA 98155
206.440.0330
~DATUM NAVD 88
BENCHMARK
SUBJECTTOANYANDALL EASEMENTS,COvtNANTSAND RESTRICTIONSOF RECORD,WANY,
OMEGA ENGINEERING INC"
1 -SITE PLAN
2 -COMPOSITE TOPOGRAPHIC &
BOUNDARY SURVEY
3 -PRELIM.SUBDIVISION MAP
4 -PRELIM.SSP LAYOUT (SOUTH)
5 -PRELIM.SSP LAYOUT (NORTH)
6 -25lli AVE NE LAYOUT
7 -27TH AVE NE LAYOUT
8 -174TH ST NE LAYOUT
9 -PRELIM,UTILITY PLAN (SOUTH)
10-PRELIM.UTlLlTY PLAN (NORTH)
SHEET INDEX
DONAHOU 11~SIGN GROUP
A-1 -COMMERCIAl.ARCH.SITE PLAN
A-2 -COMMERCIAL BUILOING FLOOR
PLAN
A-3 -COMMERCIAL 8UILDING
ELEVATION
TOTAL
"0
100%
5
6 ,.
SO
18.75%
SITE AREA 7.12 AC""'''''''TV''''''"-7 ",,/,,-r
'8
'00
66.25%
12 18 6 24
13 9 5 6 20
TOTAL
BLDG
'415.0%
PARKING
1 BED 2 BED ,)BED
_~>O'--+_',--+_C"S_+~S_+~2~0:-~
11 12 12
REQUIRED1.5)(24 1 BED =
TOTAL
20
'0
20
J'
"8100%
5
6
3 BED
5
6
5
6
SITE AI~EA 8.85 AC
""'''''''TV '>1 '>"'"l IAr
4'
22.3%
LAKEVVOOD STATION
"5
"'8
'8
2 BED
5
5
5
"
>04
55,3%
5
1 BED,,,
1--5
6,
8,
TOTAL
BLDG,,
3,
42
22.3%
PARKING
REQUIRED
1.5)(42 1 BED =63
174TH ST NE
BUILDING
USC
;(20.86 ACRES-COMMERCIAL)
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT
;g
6!UJ'"'"o()
RESIDENTIAL
1·1 6,300 SF R[STAURANT--==-=f-:==':c-:c:=c-J 47.900 SF CINEMA (1,600 SEATS)
co,
o 7,000 SF R[TAIL SHOPS
E 4,600 SF RESTAURANT
_CC_--t_~'C4"JC4C°::..:SOC-+-"R~}~L--!_A:O==-_
G 7,600 SF RETAIL SHOPS
_cA'---t_,'C5C'00000,--50C+--,RCCC'CA::"~ANCHOR
_C8__-I_C2C'C·0~OC°:-:S::C+__R=CC"A.C"CCACNCCCH_OOR=-_
C 19,000 SF RETAIL ANCHOR
__CK--'--t__-,S".OOOO°::..:SOC+._RESTAURANT
L 2,500 SF RESTAURANT
TOTAL 173,640 SF
SITE AREA: