HEX Tawresey Recommendation 9-22-11RECOMMENDATION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
TO THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF BAINBRIDGE ISLAND
In the Matter of the Application of
John and Alice Tawresey SUB15353
For a Preliminary Subdivision Approval
Introduction
John and Alice Tawresey seek preliminary subdivision approval for a multifamily
subdivision of four parcels totaling 2.39 acres located between Cave Avenue North and
Highway 305 into five multifamily lots. The current application is a revision of the
original application and eliminates an earlier requested critical areas buffer reduction.
Public Hearings: An open record public hearing was initially held October 1,
2010. After the close of the hearing, additional public comment was accepted until 4 p.m.
and additional City response until October 4, 201-0, 4 p.m. At the request of the applicant,
the time for Applicants' response was extended until October 15`h. On October 25, 2010,
an order remanding the application for. additional analysis was entered. The Department of
Planning and Community Development filed its response to the order on December 8th and
other parties filed their comments to that response. Applicants filed an alternative plan
revising the proposed plat on March 9, 2011, and the application was then remanded to the
department for review. A public hearing on the revised plat was held May 27, 2011, at the
end of which the record was closed. After the hearing examiner's recommendation was
forwarded to the City Council, Applicants withdrew that application and modified it to
show conformance to the requirement for a geologically hazardous area buffer. The public
hearing on the revised application was held September 9, 2011. Heather Beckmann,
Associate Planner, represented the Director, Department of Community Development at
the hearing and Applicants appeared for themselves.
Record: The record on the application includes Exhibits 1-135 and testimony from the
two earlier hearings, and Exhibits 1-12, which shall be referred to with a "R" suffix (for
revised) to differentiate them from those of the same number from the earlier hearings, and
testimony adduced at the September 9th hearing.
Code References: All references to sections in this decision are to the Bainbridge Island
Municipal Code, unless otherwise indicated.
SUB15353
Page 1 of 19
After due consideration of all the evidence in the record including testimony and
written submittals, the following shall constitute the findings, conclusions, and
recommendation of the Hearing Examiner to the City Council on the revised application.
Findings
1. John and Alice Tawresey, hereafter "Applicants", applied on December 23, 2009,
for approval of the preliminary subdivision (Cave Landing) of four parcels totaling 2.39
acres into eight multifamily lots. After a remand of the application to City departments for
additional analysis and information and the City's response to the remand, Applicants
revised the application to propose division into five multifamily lots, a smaller buffer
reduction, and a sidewalk on Cave Avenue. On July 21, 2011, Applicants further revised
the application to eliminate the buffer reduction entirely. In all other respects, the
application is identical to the first revised application.
2. The subject site is located largely to the west of the lots at 263-487 Cave Avenue
NE, a dead end street, and east of State Route 305, but also includes a lot with street
frontage at 439 Cave Avenue NE. The proposal includes a reduction to the minimum lot
area and a density bonus based on open space.
3. The subject site is currently undeveloped except for a single-family house on the lot
at 439 Cave Avenue, and a pedestrian trail. The site has a moderate coverage of coniferous
and deciduous trees with some understory.
4. The Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations for the site are Urban Residential
District (UR, R-4.3) and zoning of R-4.3, 4.3 units per acre for the single lot fronting on
Cave Avenue, and Urban Multifamily District (UMF, R-8) and zoning of R-8, eight units
per acre, for the remainder. The site is within the Winslow Master Plan Study Area.
5. The site adjoins the Winslow Ravine to the north of the property and the land on the
subject site slopes about 6 percent down toward the west and south from an elevation of
approximately 150 feet in the northeast corner to approximately 115 at the southern tip.
6. State Route 305 separates the site from development and uses to the west.
Development of the surrounding properties to the south, east, and north across the ravine is
single family and multi -family residential plus a preschool and daycare center.
THE PROPOSAL
7. Applicants propose that each of the five lots to be created would be developed with
at least two dwelling units for a maximum of 22 dwelling units. The allowed density based
on the zoning of the site is 17 dwelling units, including the unit for the R- 4.3 lot, however
Applicants propose to utilize the density bonus in Section 18.15.080 by providing 23,253
square feet of the proposed open space, or 27 percent of lot area zoned R-8, i.e., proposed
Lots A, B and E, to be permanent public open space which would allow a 50 percent bonus
or eight units for a total of 24 plus one unit for the lot in the R-4.3 zone. Exhibit 133;
Testimony of Beckman. Applicants chose to propose the lower number of units to be
sensitive to neighborhood character. Testimony of J. Tawresey. The density bonus
SUB15353
Page 2 of 19
proposal is not part of the preliminary subdivision approval but would be considered at the
time that applications for building permits exceed 17 units.
8. In addition to the residential lots, the subdivision would provide a combination of
public and private open space areas totaling 43,914 square feet or about 44 percent of the
total area. Exhibit 135. The triangular parcel at the south end of the site would be retained
as open space, along with additional open space to the north of the entrance roadway, along
the east perimeter north of the access roadway to the slope buffer, the northern geologically
hazardous area buffer, and the 25 ft. wide vegetative buffer next to SR 305.
9. Lot sizes in the plat would vary from 7,006 to 28,548 square feet. The minimum lot
size in the R-8 zone is 5,400 square feet per unit (10,800 for two units) or 5,000 square feet
for single family, but an open space option is available to allow smaller lots if an additional
15 percent of permanently protected open space above that otherwise required is provided,
which Applicants propose. Sections 17.04.082D.3 and 17.04.085D. A multifamily
subdivision is not required to provide open space beyond that required by the Critical
Areas Ordinance and Shoreline Master Plan, when applicable. The proposal meets the
requirements of those code provisions.
10. Section 18.15.050 limits -lot coverage to 40 percent when the bonus density
provisions are utilized. The proposed plat shows 40 percent but compliance with the lot
coverage limitation would be reviewed during the required site plan review and during
building permit review. Testimony of Beckmann.
CRITICAL AREAS BUFFER
11.. The south slope of the ravine, adjacent to proposed lots A and B, is designated as a
geologically hazardous area. The minimum no -disturbance buffer required from the edge
of the geologically hazardous area is 80 feet, based on the height of the slope, Section
16.20.150E.2(a), "except where no other reasonable alternative exists." Section 16.20.150
E.2 (a)(iii) requires that all buildings and structures be set back a minimum of 15 feet -from
the outer edge of the buffer. This is depicted on the site plans. Section 16.20.150E.2(b-h)
establishes standards regarding development design and location that apply at the time of
development proposals. Applicants initially proposed a reduction of the required buffer to
25 ft. plus the required 15 ft. building setback but amended their proposal to provide 60 feet
of buffer plus the 15 ft. building setback. The current proposal is to provide the full 80 ft.
buffer and the 15 ft. building setback so complies with the minimum required buffer and
setback.
12. A critical area report (Exhibit 4) was submitted as required by Section 16.20.150.
The engineering geologist analyzed the slope's stability and concluded that it appears to be
stable now and historically but that making cuts or fills or increasing moisture through the
addition of drain fields or stormwater ponds and runoff from impervious surfaces may
increase the potential for slope instability. The City's technical review committee
reviewed and commented on the report and received comments from its third party
geotechnical review consultant. The comments were forwarded to Applicants'
geotechnical engineer for response. Exhibit 52. The technical review committee observed
that the proposal provides the required stream buffers and that the development would have
little impact on stream or wildlife habitat because the property is, not part of a wildlife
SUB15353
Page 3 of 19
corridor and because of the narrowness of the strip of forest between SR 305 and existing
residential development. Applicants' consulting engineering geologist prepared an
addendum to the critical area report with information from additional subsurface
exploration and laboratory analyses and using a different computer program for stability
analysis. Exhibit 56. The additional work confirmed the initial value of 1.5 factor of safety
for static conditions and 1.2 for dynamic conditions. Though all the samples were moist,
no groundwater was encountered and the nature of the soils suggested low permeability. It
found the site isolated from the surrounding shallow groundwater regime because of the
ravine to the north and west. The addendum again found that even a 25 ft. buffer with 15 ft.
building setback would be adequate to protect the proposed development and the critical
area and would not decrease the factor of safety for slope failure.
13. The proposal provides the required stream buffers. Exhibit 52.
VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS
14. Cave Avenue is classified as a residential -urban street with a standard 40 ft. wide
right-of-way except for some portions where the full width has not been dedicated, with a
paved roadway on average 19 ft. wide narrowing to just over 18 ft. at one point. Exhibit 45.
The street dead ends at the north and terminates at its intersection with Winslow Way,
where it is controlled by a stop sign. The intersection is 160 ft. east of the intersection of
SR 305 and Winslow Way. A marked crosswalk across Winslow Way on the east side of
the intersection serves pedestrians.
15. The southern portion of Cave Avenue serves an office building and commercial
parking lot and provides access for a residential condominium/retail development on
Winslow Way, among other uses. The more northern portion serves about 20
single-family residences, a residential condominium, a day care facility and a nursery
school facility. Sidewalks extend some 300 feet northerly from Winslow Way but the
remainder of Cave Avenue does not have sidewalks and, because of conditions such as
brush and a steep slope lining the street, pedestrians must walk in the street for most of the
distance. Exhibit 45.
16. According to residents of the neighborhood, the posted speed limit on the street is
15 miles per hour, contrary to the statement in Exhibit 104. It is often exceeded. Exhibit
45.
17. A pedestrian trail runs through the SR 305 right-of-way next to the northern
portions of the subject site and then through the southern open space designated for Lot E.
Applicants conveyed an easement for the path in that portion of the site to the City. To
connect with Cave Avenue, the easement continues across a lot owned by Applicants to the
south of the site. Testimony of J. Tawresey.
18. There are four streetlights on the west side of Cave Avenue, but they are reported to
be far enough apart that much of the street is unlit. Exhibit 45. The pedestrian trail is not
lighted. Though described by some residents as unusable in rainy periods due to mud, the
surface is crushed rock and was not muddy after two days of rain. Exhibit 101.
19. Vehicular access to the new lots would be via a new roadway through a 40 ft. wide
public right-of-way from Cave Avenue NE across the lot with frontage on Cave Avenue
SUB15353
Page 4 of 19
(existing Lot 10) and ending in a cul-de-sac. A sidewalk is to be installed on both sides of
the new street and around the cul-de-sac. All five lots would have at least 25 feet of
frontage on the new right of way. A 5 ft. wide pedestrian easement, with 2.5 feet on each
of Lots B and C, would extend from the cul-de-sac to the existing pedestrian trail.
20. Section 17.04.080C requires that the existing roadway character be maintained
where practical and that roads and access be consistent with the City's Design and
Construction Standards and Specifications. The Public Works Department found that the
proposed public right of way, access easement and roadway widths are not greater than the
minimum requirements. The City Engineer has recommended conditions of approval
regarding street standards, the sidewalk, etc.
21. Applicants' consultants, RTC Transportation Consulting, provided a memorandum
identifying estimated trip generation and potential impacts of the proposed development as
initially proposed. Exhibit 16. The consultant estimated that the development would
generate a total of 9 new trips during the PM peak hour and 107 in the average weekday.
With a 25 percent reduction for location within the core area of Bainbridge Island, those
numbers would be 7 trips during the PM peak hour and 80 for the average weekday.
22. Residents describe delays at the intersection, especially during ferry commuter
times, due to backup from the congested intersection of Winslow Way and SR 305.
Exhibit 83, among others. Residents pointed out that the addition of 20 dwelling units
would double the residential use of the street; that the evaluation of impacts did not and
should have considered the two children's facilities' traffic, and the impact on safety of
pedestrians, both existing and future, on a street without sidewalks. The Bainbridge
Cooperative Nursery School serves 40 families in two sessions, and estimates that 15-20
cars are using Cave Avenue at 9:00 a.m., 11:15 a.m., 12:30 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. The
Bainbridge Island Child Care Center with 34 students and seven staff reports that the
students arrive between 7 and 9 a.m. with half of the students leaving at 1:00 p.m. and half
between 3 and 6:30 p.m. Staff members arrive at 6:30 a.m. and leave at 6:30 p.m. Exhibit
46. Many residents walk to the ferry, to the bus, their children walk to the school bus stop
on Winslow Way (Exhibit 29), residents walk to the town center, etc. Those using the
pedestrian trail are forced to walk in the street as the trail joins the street before the
sidewalk begins. In addition to the residents on Cave Avenue, some residents of Vineyard
Lane also use the trail. The 46 -unit Housing Resources Board's "Ferncliff Project," on
which construction is to begin in 2011, is to be connected by trail to the north end of Cave
Avenue as well. Exhibits 83, 89. Vehicles using a small road, Gilmore, for access would
also add to the hazard to pedestrians. Testimony of Barbo.
23. Section 15.32.030A provides that a concurrency test is to be conducted for
applications for preliminary plats, site plans and design review, and "any other land use
plan or permit the granting of which would increase the demand for transportation facilities
by 50 or more trips per day." Certain development permits are exempt from the
concurrency requirement including applications vested prior to the requirement and "any
development permit for development that generates less than 50 trips per day, except as
provided for in subsection A of this section." Section 15.32.030B.
SUB15353
Page 5 of 19
24. The concurrency test is passed if the capacity of the transportation facilities
affected by the proposed development is equal to or greater than the capacity required to
maintain the level of service (LOS) standard with the addition of the trips generated by the
proposed development. Section 15.32.040B.
25. Members of the Cave Avenge neighborhood contended that the City may not
informally exempt a project that does not qualify for exemption under these provisions. A
memorandum from the city engineer in response to the contention (Exhibit 9913) provided
an expanded discussion on the issuance of a certificate of transportation concurrency
explaining that in accordance with Section 15.32.04013 it reviewed the Applicants' initial
traffic study, the Island Wide Transportation Study (2004), and the traffic analysis for the
Ferry Gateway Environmental Impact Study (EIS). The 2004 study identified Cave
Avenue as a residential street within the urban zone of the City with a standard level of
service (LOS) C. LOS C is defined as a stable operating condition with average traffic
delays at intersections, with a volume to capacity ratio of 0.7-0.8, and an unsignalized
delay per vehicle at intersections of between 15 and 25 seconds. The 2007 study for the
EIS indicated that the intersection was maintaining a LOS C during the PM peak hour.
Department of Public Works determined that the proposed development would meet the
concurrency test in that: 1) little or no traffic-gerierating development has occurred in the
vicinity or on Cave Avenue since time of the 2007 study; 2) the addition of one vehicle
every seven minutes on average due to the proposal would not likely cause the wait times
to exceed 25 seconds per vehicle and noted that signage was added earlier this year
indicating that vehicles are not permitted to block north -bound turning movements; and 3)
it is unlikely that the capacity of the intersection would be further degraded because land
along Cave Avenue will be almost fully developed with the proposed development. The
hearing examiner, understanding the evidence that a complete transportation analysis had
not been performed showed a failure to do the required concurrency, remanded the
application for that purpose, among others. In response, Planning and Community
Development Department again explained that the concurrency test was performed but,
because the information was several years old, the city engineer asked Applicants to
provide updated information. Exhibit 104.
26. Applicants' consultants arranged for an updated traffic count at the Cave
Avenue -Winslow Way intersection. Data was collected in January, 2011, between 4:15
and 6:30 p.m. The peak hour for the intersection was observed to be 5:15 to 6:15 p.m. with
a total of 544 trips during that hour. Ten percent of those trips utilized Cave Avenue. The
Highway Capacity Manual 2000 methodology was used to calculate the LOS with and
without the proposed development. The report of the analysis, Exhibit 123, states that the
model used accounts for the effect of traffic backed up beyond Cave Avenue from
Winslow Way's intersection with SR 305, pedestrian traffic, etc. The current intersection
operation is at LOS B with 12.9 seconds of delay. Using the volume of trips estimated by
the ITB to be generated by 25 units, instead of the maximum of 22 proposed, and with
reductions allowed for the core area, there would be nine PM peak hour trips generated by
the project. The LOS would remain `B" after the proposed development, with 13.0
seconds of delay. That meets the City's LOS standard, LOS C, for Cave Avenue, and the
concurrency requirements.
SUB15353
Page 6 of 19
27. Community members testified that this traffic analysis is flawed for failing to take
into account the heavy traffic associated with the preschool not at the PM peak hour and the
potential build -out of the area, given there is around seven acres still vacant on Cave
Avenue. Testimony of Johannsen. The methodology, however, properly utilized the peak
hours for residential uses, either AM or PM. Testimony of Wierzbicki. The peak hours for
the preschool and daycare would be around the morning arrivals from 7-9 a.m. and the
afternoon arrivals and departures spread from 12:30=6:30 p.m. Because the greatest
number of trips generated by the new residential development would be during the p.m.
commute hour that does not coincide with the preschool and day care peak hours, the
methodology used should show the greatest impact on the operation of the intersection.
Forecasting the effect of traffic generated by total build -out of the area is not a requirement
for reviewing the effect of a specific project on the existing system. Testimony of
Wierzbicki
28. The Cave Avenue Community Council submitted a traffic report (Exhibit No. 8R)
prepared by Vince Mattson, PE, who was a design engineer during part of his career with
the Washington State Highway Department, at the most recent hearing. Mr. Mattson
reviewed the applicants' consultant's study and conducted traffic counts on August 17th'
18th and 23rd and again on September 1St at the intersection to validate the study. He found
the numbers comparable and that the difference that did appear was likely attributable to
the on-going construction work on Winslow Way. In his opinion,'the controlling factors
for the LOS determination for the intersection would be the volume of westbound traffic on
Winslow Way and the timing of the signal on SR 305 and that only by ignoring the effect of
that signal, such as back-up across the Cave Avenue intersection that inhibits right turns
from Cave, could the traffic analysis produce an LOS B for the Cave Avenue intersection.
He also considered the Island -Wide Transportation Study adopted in 2004 that showed the
pm peak hour LOS in 2002 for the SR305/Winslow Way intersection to be "D" for
westbound and a forecast for the year 2008 of LOS E, but felt that even with less
population and development than projected the LOS would not have improved from the
LOS D.
29. Given the probable effect of the construction activity on traffic and the preferred
non -summer months for LOS analyses, the January traffic counts likely reflect the more
typical condition. Testimony of Davies.
30. The intersection analysis methodology used by the City, from the Highway
Capacity Manual, determines the LOS for a stop -controlled intersection by the delay
associated with the controlled movement, or in this case the southbound stop -sign
controlled leg, though there are "inputs" that consider the effect of the signalized
intersection on the operation of the stop -controlled intersection. The results of the August
23rd observation of vehicle delay show a maximum delay of vehicles southbound on Cave
Avenue, the controlled leg during one fifteen minute period of 21 seconds, which would
result in an LOS C, and using the average delay over the entire hour, the LOS would be
"B", both meeting the City's standard for a residential street.
31. The pedestrian and bicycle circulation and access to and within a subdivision are to
be consistent with the non -motorized transportation plan, Ordinance 2002-09. Staff found
SUB15353
Page 7 of 19
that plan did not recommend any improvements for the area. However, after doing further
analysis after the remand, the Department determined that the approximately 50 percent
increase in the amount of vehicular traffic on the more southerly part of the street would
impact pedestrian traffic from the existing residences that use Cave Avenue so that
improvements to pedestrian safety must be provided. Exhibit 104. As the subject site does
not have Cave Avenue frontage beyond the one lot, the improvements need to extend
beyond that frontage. Given the lack of, and uncentered, right-of-way, private structures
adjacent to the paved street, etc., the city engineer decided to require a five foot wide
sidewalk on the west side of Cave Avenue north from the existing sidewalk to the trail head
and a three foot wide gravel shoulder where right-of-way is available on the east side of
Cave Avenue north from the "Maes" property for some separation from vehicles in the
travel lane. Exhibit 104.
32. Applicants responded with a proposal to provide a sidewalk from the entrance road
of the new subdivision extending south on Cave Avenue to meet the existing sidewalk on
the west side of Cave Avenue south of Gilmore Way. Though Applicants communicated
with the owners of vacant property on the east side regarding an easement or dedication so
that the sidewalk could be extended the entire way on one side, they were unable to obtain
agreement. So, the sidewalk may start on the east side with a signed, mid -block pedestrian
crossing to connect to the west side. The Director proposes a condition to assure this
improvement. Though requiring pedestrians to cross the street to use a sidewalk is not to
be desired, the city engineer's approval indicates that it is acceptable. Even with the
additional foot and vehicular traffic, the proposed sidewalk configuration appears to be an
improvement over the existing conditions.
33. To comply with American Disabilities Act regulations for accessible routes,
sidewalks must provide the minimum clear width of 36 inches. Exhibits 126 and 127. Any
obstructions such as utility poles or fire hydrants in the width to be improved with a
sidewalk would have to be moved.
UTILITIES AND PUBLIC SERVICES
34. Natural drainage of the site is to the west and south toward SR 305 and runoff now
flows over the highway cut slope to a rock drain along the east edge of the highway. Storm
drainage from new impervious surfaces is proposed to be directed to the SR 305 drainage
system. The initial proposal had road surfaces first drain into rain gardens located in the
cul-de-sac, south of the access roadway, and in a portion of one of the lots. In response to
community concerns about mosquito breeding and safety of children, those rain gardens
have been removed from the proposal. Runoff from roofs and other impervious surfaces
would also be conveyed to the highway system. Exhibit 62. Concern was expressed about
affect on the aquifer, however the city engineer has reviewed and approved the preliminary
drainage plans that ensure the subdivision will not cause an undue burden on the drainage
basin or water quality as meeting the standards of Chapter 15.20. Exhibit 82. The City
Engineer has approved preliminary drainage plans. Exhibit 133.
35. The City issued a Non-binding Commitment for Water and Sewer System
Capacity, Exhibit 9, determining that the property is within the City's service areas, that
water and sewer mains are adjacent to the property, and that the mains are in service. The
SUB15353
Page 8 of 19
Commitment letter shows that the City currently has sufficient water and sewer capacity
for the proposed development.
36. Residents of the Cave Avenue neighborhood complained of low water pressure at
the upper end of Cave and expressed concern about the effect of additional users. Exhibit
47 and others. The community called attention to the 2006 Winslow Water System Plan
that identifies the Cave Avenue neighborhood as an area that cannot meet fire flow
standards due to undersized water mains in the 2006 Winslow Water System Plan. The
Public Works Department provided an analysis by Browne Engineering, Inc. (Exhibit 9R)
that determined fire flow capacity and expected water pressures with the addition of the
proposed subdivision. Cave Avenue is served by the low pressure system fed through a 6
inch main from the Femcliff pressure reducing valve and from Winslow Way through 8
inch, 4 inch and 6 inch mains running along Cave Avenue. The pressure in the upper
portion of the Cave Avenue area is "well below" the standard of 30 psi during peak demand
periods, according to the analysis. Because the flow standard would not be met at the
proposed fire hydrant location within the proposed subdivision, and the pressure would
drop to less than 30 psi under peak hour demand conditions, various alternatives for
upgrade were evaluated. The Director recommended that approval of the preliminary
subdivision be conditioned (Condition No. 13, Exhibit l OR) on working with the City to
meet the fire flow capacity and water pressure standards for the project. The alternative
upgrades would not necessarily improve water pressure for the existing development on
the upper portion of Cave Avenue, contrary to the desires of the community.
37. The non-binding sewer availability letter, May 11, 2010, states that the sewer
system has capacity for the proposed development. Exhibit l OR. The sanitary sewer line,
as proposed initially, would run along the eastern side of the southerly triangular open
space parcel. The owners of two lots adjacent to the open space parcel, 317 and 327 Cave
Avenue, on its east side, hold an easement, Greenbelt Easement (Exhibit 36), that preserves
the existing condition of the area and limits the use. It allowed the pedestrian path that is
now through the area and installation of utilities under that path. The initially proposed
location of utilities may be contrary to the terms of that easement. Applicants had
identified several alternatives for locating the new sewer line such as accessing the public
line on Cave Avenue via the proposed new right-of-way, or over an existing sewer
easement on Lot 8 where there is an existing sewer line, and now propose a direct
connection to the public line on Cave Avenue. Testimony of A. Tawresey. Staff has
proposed a condition requiring showing the location on the final plat drawings.
38. The Bainbridge Island Fire Department requires locating the proposed fire hydrant
at the entrance of the project on Cave Avenue. It found that the access to the subdivision is
acceptable and will be required to meet all City standards. Exhibit 17.
39. The Department of Public Works and the city engineer have reviewed the proposal
for consistency with the City's Design and Construction Standards and Specifications and
state and federal regulations and have determined that the proposal is in conformance with
those that are applicable at this stage and recommended conditions to assure that the
subdivision will conform to all applicable standards and regulations.
SUB15353
Page 9 of 19
40. The subject site is not in an aquifer recharge area or a fish and wildlife conservation
area. Exhibit 101.
41. The payment of school impact fees pursuant to Chapter 15.28 has been waived for
all new development per Resolution 2011-05. A condition is proposed to require fees if
they have been reinstituted.
OPEN SPACE AND VEGETATION
42. Section 18.85.060 requires that all trees in the perimeter landscape areas be
retained and that either 15 percent of the total number of significant trees on the entire site
of 30 percent of the significant tree canopy be retained. A tree retention plan was
submitted. Exhibit 7. It shows a total of 116 significant trees and that approximately 49
percent of those trees would be retained. A schematic landscape plan, Exhibit 66, shows
the retention of significant trees in perimeter areas, plus other native trees and understory.
A condition is required to assure those standards will be met.
43. To take advantage of the open space incentive for reduction in lot size, the open
space must meet the objectives, criteria and standards of Section' 17.04.082. The proposed
open space at the steep slope and ravine accomplishes the objective of protecting the
stream and conservation of soils and the SR 305 buffer preserves some visual qualities.
The design guidelines are satisfied in that there are concentrated, consolidated, usable
areas of open space. The proposal addresses several of the valued features listed, namely
critical areas and buffer, native forests and significant trees, and trails.
44. An open space management plan has been proposed showing proposed ownership
of the various open spaces and approved uses, Exhibit 67, but with the revised plans, staff
recommends a condition requiring a final open space management plan.
45. Comprehensive Plan policy for Winslow Residential Districts, W7.3, is to "Provide
landscape buffers between any multi -family and existing single family." Section
18.85.070 establishes a maximum perimeter width of 20 ft. and a minimum of 15 ft. with a
partial screen buffer for urban multifamily districts abutting single-family zoning or use.
The Director found that the proposed twenty feet along the east perimeter north of the
access roadway, fifteen feet adjacent to proposed Lot E and 25 feet along the east perimeter
of the bonus open space associated with Lot E is an appropriate amount of screening
between the multifamily and single family districts.
46. SR 305 is defined in the comprehensive plan as a scenic road and by statute is
designated a scenic highway. RCW 47.39.020. For a multifamily subdivision, Section
17.04.08513 establishes the requirement for a minimum 25 ft. vegetative buffer adjacent to
scenic roads. The proposal includes a 25 ft. full screen buffer meeting the minimum
requirement. Neighborhood residents urge that a 25 ft. buffer in this location would be
anomalous as wider buffers, 50 feet with a 35 ft. minimum, are required in the abutting
districts to the north and south and urge that a deeper buffer be required to maintain the
rural character of the highway and avoid aesthetic impact along SR 305 and to avoid
increased highway noise and pollution from vehicles in their neighborhood. Exhibit 49;
Testimony of Johansen, Schmid, and others. The buffer would actually be deeper than 25
ft. because part of the highway right-of-way is not developed, at least until such time as the
SUB15353
Page 10 of 19
highway is widened. Testimony of Beckman. Staff pointed out that if the site were
developed with a multifamily structure, which would not require further subdivision, only
a 15-20 ft. partial screen buffer would be required under the landscape standards of Section
18.85.070 that do not establish any perimeter landscape requirement specific to scenic
highways in urban multifamily districts, so the 20 ft. partial screen requirement would
presumably apply. Testimony of Beckman. Staff proposed conditions for the recording of
open space easements or covenants, recording of a management plan,, and signage along its
border.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES
47. The Winslow Master Plan targets the Winslow Master Plan Study Area to
accommodate fifty percent of the future population growth for the island through denser
single-family and multifamily development.
48. The proposed density amounts to approximately nine units per acre. The density of
the Cave Avenue single-family subdivision is approximately three units per acre. The
density of the development to the north, the Vineyard Lane condominium development, is
approximately 14 units per acre; of the Cave Avenue condominiums to the south is
approximately twelve units per acre; and of the Harbor Square mixed-use development is
approximately 43 units per acre. Community members urge that the appropriate
comparison is the more immediate single-family subdivision and that the density proposed
is incompatible with that.
49. The proposed preliminary subdivision is consistent with the designation in the
Comprehensive Plan's land use map for Urban Multifamily District.
50. The Comprehensive Plan policy TR 1.5, SR 305 scenic character, is to "(r)etain the
scenic character of SR 305 by minimizing the placement of signs, discouraging new access
points, and maintaining vegetative buffers." There are no signs or new access points
proposed and a buffer would be maintained, consistent with this policy.
51. Comprehensive Plan Policy W 7.4 is to have regulations addressing the
compatibility of multi -family developments with adjacent uses and to retain the scale of
development in Winslow. During site plan and design review, required by Section
18.105.020, the design standards addressing compatibility and scale would be applied to
the proposal to assure compliance with the policy. The Director recommends a condition
addressing the requirements for site plan review.
PROCEDURAL COMPLIANCE
52. The City's responsible official issued a Mitigated Determination of
Nonsignificance (MDNS) August 20, 2010. Exhibit 59. Though the hearing record
contains comments critical of the MDNS, Exhibit 97, the MDNS was not appealed.
Conditions of the MDNS are proposed to be listed as conditions of subdivision approval.
53. Notice of the revised application was. published, mailed and posted on August 12,
2011. Notice of the September 9, 2011, public hearing was published in the official
newspaper, mailed to interested persons and to property addresses within 300 ft. of the
subject property, and posted August 19, 2011. Exhibits 4R and 5R.
SUB15353
Page 11 of 19
54. An objection was lodged that the community association's attorney provided
unsworn testimony at the initial hearing. An examination showed that the record did not
support the objection in that the attorney provided argument based on facts in the record.
55. The requirements that must be met for preliminary subdivision approval are set out
in Section 17.04.094 and RCW 58.17.110.
56. The Hearing Examiner is authorized by Section 2.16.110C to hold a public hearing
and make a recommendation to the City Council on a preliminary subdivision.
Conclusions
1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to hear and make a recommendation on this
application.
2. Notice was given as required by Section 2.16.085D.
3. The findings show that the subdivision standards of Section 17.04.085 for
multifamily subdivisions are met as required by Section 17.04.094A.1 in that:
A. Through use of the incentive for open space in a multifamily subdivision, the
sizes of the proposed lots do comply with Code requirements for the zoning district;
B. The proposed preliminary plat provides for the minimum 25 -foot full screen
vegetative buffer along SR305, a scenic road. Without a clearer statement of intent
or criteria for requiring more than the minimum, and recognizing that the City
Council has determined that an even lesser buffer would be allowed in multifamily
districts if it were not for the proposal to subdivide the property, the minimum
width must be regarded as acceptable.
C. Road, bicycle and pedestrian access performance standards, pursuant to Section
17.04.080.0 and with the new sidewalk proposal are satisfied. The proposal
maintains existing roadway character and minimizes impervious surfaces as the
width of the new roadway and access easements are not greater than the minimum
required consistent with the performance standards of the section. The design for
roads and access is consistent with City standards. The proposed sidewalk, though
not optimum with its mid -block crossing, is an improvement over the current
condition and provides for adequate pedestrian safety. Conditions proposed by the
city engineer are appropriate and should be imposed.
D. Open space satisfies the requirements of Section 17.04.082 for flexible lot
design.
4. Appropriate provisions have been made for the public health, safety and general
welfare and public use and interest including those listed in RCW 58.17.110. The findings
show that the preliminary subdivision provides open spaces, for drainage, adequate streets
and sidewalks, for sanitary waste, and for schools through the condition requiring payment
of impact fees if reinstituted. A condition is appropriate to assure adequate fire flow and
water pressure. While there is concern about the density proposed, and the change to the
SUB15353
Page 12 of 19
immediate area, the Comprehensive Plan and regulations have determined the density
desired for the wider area that this subdivision would help to accomplish, and the density
proposed would be less than could be achieved through development without the
subdivision.
5. The findings show that the city engineer has determined that preliminary plans
demonstrate that the subdivision conforms to regulations concerning drainage, will not
cause undue burden on the drainage basin or water quality, the streets and pedestrian ways
are properly coordinated with other streets and are adequate to accommodate the
anticipated traffic, and the subdivision conforms to subdivision chapter requirements and
construction standards and specifications or that with conditions of approval recommended
will do so.
6. With the recommended conditions, the preliminary plat will comply with
applicable provisions of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code, Chapters 58.17 and
36.70A RCW, and other state and federal regulations.
7. The proposed subdivision, with the recommended conditions, will be consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan in that it will provide perimeter landscape buffers between
single-family residential development and the proposed multifamily development; site
plan review will assure compatibility of the development with adjacent uses; the retention
of the scenic character of SR 305 will not be affected by signage and a 25 foot wide,
vegetative buffer, though not as deep as the community desires, will respect the scenic
character of the island; and the additional density is consistent with the target to
accommodate 50 percent of future population grown in the Winslow Master Plan Study
Area.
8. The findings show that the public use and interest would be served by the platting
of the proposed subdivision, with approval subject to the recommended conditions.
SUB 15353
Page 13 of 19
Recommendation
The proposed preliminary subdivision should be approved subject to the
conditions recommended by staff as modified herein, and contained in Appendix A.
Entered this � day of September 2011.
Margaret Klockars
City of Bainbridge Island
Hearing Examiner pro tem
Concerning Further Review
The City Council will hold a public meeting to consider the application pursuant
to Sections 17.04.093, 17.04.094 and 17.04.095 and Chapter 2.16. A decision by the City
Council is final unless, within 21 days after its issuance; a person with standing appeals
the decision in accordance with Ch. 36.70C RCW.
SLTB15353
Page 14 of 19
APPENDIX A
SEPA Conditions:
All graded materials removed from the subdivision shall be hauled to and
deposited at City approved locations (Note: local regulations require that a
grade/fill permit be obtained for any grading or filling of 50 cubic yards of
material or more, and that a SEPA Threshold Determination be issued for any
fill over 100 cubic yards).
2. Prior to any construction activities, the applicant shall apply for a Construction
Stormwater General Permit through the WA State Department of Ecology.
More information about this permit can be found at:
http•//www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/stonnwater/construction/ or by calling
Charles Gilman at (360) 407-7451, email chgi461@ecy.wa.gov.
3. Prior to final subdivision application, the Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) for the proposed development shall be provided for City review
and approval in accordance with BIMC 15.20. The plans must be approved, the
improvements constructed (or a construction bond provided if applicable), and
an acceptable final inspection obtained. The design submittal shall incorporate
all proposed subdivision improvements including complete civil plans, grading
and erosion control plans, roadway plan & profile, storm drainage facilities and
drainage report, and shall be prepared by a professional engineer currently
licensed in the State of Washington. A Construction Stormwater Permit
(NPDES) will be required prior to construction plan approval in accordance
with BIMC 15.20.030.B (4).
4. To mitigate impacts on air quality during earth moving activities, contractors
shall conform to Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Regulations, which ensure that
reasonable precautions are taken to avoid dust emissions. (BIMC Section
16.08.040).
5. Prior to any construction activities associated with this project, the applicant
shall acquire a Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT)
storm water discharge permit to be able to discharge storm water to State Route
305 (SR305) right of way.
SUB15353
Page 15 of 19
6. Any non-exempt tree harvesting shall require the appropriate Forest Practices
Permit from the Department of Natural Resources.
7. On site mobile fueling from temporary tanks is prohibited unless the applicant
provides and is granted approval for a Permit and Best Management Plan that
addresses proposed location, duration, containment, training, vandalism and
cleanup. (Reference 1. Uniform Fire Code 7904.5.4.2.7 and 2. Department of
Ecology, Stormwater Management Manual, August 2001, see Volume IV
"Source Control BMPs for Mobile Fueling of Vehicles and Heavy
Equipment".) (Chapter 173-304 WAC)
8. In order to mitigate any noise impacts, all construction activities must comply
with BIMC 16.16.025, Limitation of Construction Activities.
9. All lighting within the subdivision shall comply with the City's Lighting
Ordinance, BIMC Chapter 15.34.
10. Contractor is required to stop work and immediately notify the Department of
Planning and Community Development and the Washington State Office of
Archaeology and Historic Preservation if any historical or archaeological
artifacts are uncovered during excavation or construction.
NON-SEPA Conditions:
11. Prior to the development of a second unit and/or multifamily unit on each lot,
the applicant of said development shall first apply for and receive site plan
review approval. The units are subject to the multifamily design guidelines and
the BIMC 18.105.080 (9) density bonus design requirement: building design
shall incorporate features such as pitched or terraced roof forms, upper level
stepbacks, wall recesses and/or other architectural treatment to minimize
building bulk and scale as perceived from adjoining streets and neighborhoods.
12. The final plat submittal shall include street names and indicate the location of
any traffic regulatory signs and approved mailbox locations from the United
States Postal Service.
13. Prior to final subdivision approval, the applicant shall submit to the City for
review and approval complete civil plans and drainage report for the proposed
development, and the proposed 4' wide public sidewalk along Cave Avenue
(from the proposed development south to meet existing improvements). The
plans shall include all road, sewer, water pressure, fire flow and stormwater
improvements required by the City or other governmental agency, and any
required easements. The plans shall also address surface and stormwater
pollution prevention. The plans shall be prepared by a professional engineer
licensed in the State of Washington and shall be in accordance with BIMC
SUB15353
Page 16 of 19
15.20 Surface and Stormwater management and the City's Design and
Construction Standards.
14. Open space easements or covenants shall be recorded together with the land
division and represented on the final plat.
15. Prior to final plat submittal, the applicant shall install signage designating the
open space along the open space boundary. The signs shall be a minimum of 64
square inches and made of metal, hard plastic, or engraved wood. The signs
shall be placed at approximate 50 -foot intervals along the open space perimeter.
16. Prior to final subdivision submittal, the applicant shall submit a revised
Schematic Landscape Plan for 439 Cave Avenue that includes ornamental
native trees, native and drought tolerant shrubs and a bench. Prior to the
issuance of a building permit for the first unit, the applicant shall install or
provide a performance assurance device for said landscaping and
improvements as approved in the revised landscape plan.
17. A final Open Space Management Plan shall be submitted with the final plat
application. The Plan shall designate the amount of open space per lot and it
shall list the permitted uses within that open space. The buffer to the
geologically hazardous area shall be reviewed for compliance with 16.20.150.
18. The following shall be submitted with the final plat submittal:
a. A plat certificate; and
b. Binding water availability and sewer availability letters. The location of the
connections shall be indicated on the final plat drawings.
19. School impacts fees may be required. If school impact fees are in effect at the
time of submittal for the final plat, the applicant shall pay one half of the school
impact fees for 17 of the multifamily units. The remaining half of the fees shall
be paid at the time of building permit issuance for the first 17 units (BIMC
Chapter 15.28). The school impact fee for any building permit beyond the 17th
unit shall be paid by the applicant of said building permit prior to the issuance
of the building permit.
If the fees are in effect at the time of building permit submittal rather than
subdivision submittal, than each applicant constructing a residence shall pay
the full impact fee at the time of building permit issuance for each residence.
20. At the time of Building Permit Application, demonstration of compliance with
applicable storm 'water management requirements shall be required in
accordance with BIMC 15.20.
SUB15353
Page 17 of 19
21. Prior to clearing and grading activities, the applicant shall apply for a
Construction Stormwater General Permit thru the Washington State
Department of Ecology.
22. Prior to final plat submittal, all lot comers shall be staked with three-quarter
inch galvanized iron pipe and locator stakes. The right-of-way centerlines shall
be monumented, including the center of the cul -se -sac. A survey of the property
must be completed and submitted with the final plat application.
23. The entrance road to this plat (on Cave Avenue) shall have curb returns on both
with a minimum radius of 30 feet. Both curb returns shall have two wheelchair
ramps constructed to WSDOT Standard Plan No. F-40.12-00. The sidewalk
shall terminate at the north and south property lines of this development. The
throat of said entrance shall be paved with asphalt and have a painted cross
walk. There shall be a stop sign for exiting vehicles.
24. All rights-of-way proposed to be dedicated to the City shall be 40 feet in width
as identified on the Standard Drawing No. 7-050 for a Residential Urban Street.
Only the required right-of-way width shall be conveyed to the City.
25. A right-of-way (ROW) construction permit will be required prior to any
construction activities within the right-of-way. The ROW permit will be subject
to separate conditions and bonding requirements.
26. The proposed water main shall be required to meet the Washington State
Administrative Code 246-290-230 (5) which requires a minimum of 30 psi at
the water meter for a single-family residence connecting to the proposed water
main.
27. All storm water infrastructure and/or amenities outside existing and/or
proposed rights -of -ways shall remain private property and maintained as such.
28. The proposed fire hydrant shall be placed at the intersection of the entrance
road and Cave Avenue per the Fire Marshals request. Said fire hydrant shall
also have a Storz Adapter on one of the service ports. Also it shall be the
responsibility of the applicant to verify the adequacy of the proposed water
main to meet fire flow requirements pursuant to the City of Bainbridge Island
Municipal Code 13.10.065 and meet the Fire Marshals requirements for this
site.
29. In lieu of completion of improvements according to conditions for a final plat
approval, the city council may accept an assurance device, other than a bond, in
an amount and in a form determined by the city council, which secures and
provides for the actual construction and installation of the improvements or the
performance of the conditions within one year, or such additional time as the
city council determines is appropriate after final plat approval. In addition, the
city council shall require an assurance device, including a bond, securing the
successful operation of improvements for one year after city's acceptance of the
SUB15353
Page 18 of 19
improvements; provided, that the city council may, upon recommendation of
the city engineer or the director, extend the term of the assurance device for up
to two years for improvements that will not demonstrate compliance with
construction or installation requirements within one year.
30. Except for modifications reflecting compliance with these conditions of
approval, final plat documents shall substantially conform to the documents
submitted with the subdivision application, with the exception of those revised
documents that were submitted on August 2, 2011 and any revisions requested
per the conditions of preliminary plat approval.
31. The final plat shall contain the following conditions for recording: 1, 2, 4-13,
17,21-23.
SUB15353
Page 19 of 19