WINSLOW MANOR CUP02-24-86-1The application of Troy Partnership (Applicant) for a Conditional Use
Permit for the Winslow Manor Apartments for senior citizens (the
Project) came before the Hearing Examiner at a public hearing in
Winslow City Hall on May 20, 1986, at 7.00 P.M. Applicant appeared
through Brad Brown. Mike Regis, Interim Land Use Administrator,
appeared on behalf of the City of Winslow (the City). Melanie Palmer,
secretary for the Land Use Department, monitored the recording of the
hearing. Three other persons were present.
Two persons, Robert Pierce and Judy Carlyle, spoke in favor of the
Project. Both live in the neighborhood of the proposed development.
Mr. Pierce questioned the adequacy of any sewer hookup along Wood
Avenue, where several problems have been experienced in the past. Mrs.
Carlyle, who lives across Wood Avenue from the Project site, expressed
concern about headlights projecting across Wood Avenue from the
Project's front parking lot, where low plantings are currently
proposed. Mrs. Carlyle also pointed out that many children and senior
citizens walk along Wood Avenue. On May 19, 1986, Wilbur Nystrom wrote
a letter in support of the Project.
The Hearing Examiner also asked the Applicant questions concerning
retention of existing trees, parking lot drainage, pedestrian access
from Wood Avenue, the possibility of a hedge between the west side of
the parking lot and the Wood Avenue sidewalk, whether the crushed rock
surface proposed for the Wood Avenue sidewalk would be smooth enough
for senior citizens to walk on safely, and whether there was any
assessment of need for more senior citizen housing. The Hearing
Examiner also asked the City what proportion of the west parking lot
was landscaped.
From the testimony heard, the record examined, and an on-site
inspection of the property and surrounding neighborhood, the Hearing
Examiner makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I.
Applicant wishes to develop a 39 -unit senior citizen apartment complex
on a .90 acre site located on the east side of Wood Avenue between
-1-
DR
-J u u
161986
BEFORE THE
C#T�Y FWIN$LOW
.
HEARING EXAMINER
By,
CITY OF WINSLOW
In the Matter of the )
File No. X-2-86
Conditional Use Permit )
my PMP,
for Winslow Manor )
Senior Citizens Apartments )
FINDINGS OF
FACT,
Sought by j
CONCLUSIONS
OF LAW,
Troy Partnership, Applicant
AND ORDER
The application of Troy Partnership (Applicant) for a Conditional Use
Permit for the Winslow Manor Apartments for senior citizens (the
Project) came before the Hearing Examiner at a public hearing in
Winslow City Hall on May 20, 1986, at 7.00 P.M. Applicant appeared
through Brad Brown. Mike Regis, Interim Land Use Administrator,
appeared on behalf of the City of Winslow (the City). Melanie Palmer,
secretary for the Land Use Department, monitored the recording of the
hearing. Three other persons were present.
Two persons, Robert Pierce and Judy Carlyle, spoke in favor of the
Project. Both live in the neighborhood of the proposed development.
Mr. Pierce questioned the adequacy of any sewer hookup along Wood
Avenue, where several problems have been experienced in the past. Mrs.
Carlyle, who lives across Wood Avenue from the Project site, expressed
concern about headlights projecting across Wood Avenue from the
Project's front parking lot, where low plantings are currently
proposed. Mrs. Carlyle also pointed out that many children and senior
citizens walk along Wood Avenue. On May 19, 1986, Wilbur Nystrom wrote
a letter in support of the Project.
The Hearing Examiner also asked the Applicant questions concerning
retention of existing trees, parking lot drainage, pedestrian access
from Wood Avenue, the possibility of a hedge between the west side of
the parking lot and the Wood Avenue sidewalk, whether the crushed rock
surface proposed for the Wood Avenue sidewalk would be smooth enough
for senior citizens to walk on safely, and whether there was any
assessment of need for more senior citizen housing. The Hearing
Examiner also asked the City what proportion of the west parking lot
was landscaped.
From the testimony heard, the record examined, and an on-site
inspection of the property and surrounding neighborhood, the Hearing
Examiner makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I.
Applicant wishes to develop a 39 -unit senior citizen apartment complex
on a .90 acre site located on the east side of Wood Avenue between
-1-
Winslow Way West and Parfitt Way South, in Winslow, Bainbridge Island,
Washington. The legal description attached to the January 17, 1986,
title insurance commitment by Merrill Cronk is hereby incorporated by
reference. Attachment to Exhibit 1. The property is zoned Medium
Density Multi -family Residential, which would allow 7 units without the
senior citizen density bonus of WMC 18.20.080. Exhibit 8.
II.
The site is vacant, covered with tail grasses, and has three tall fir
trees along the Wood Avenue property line. The land slopes slightly
from north to south.
The neighborhood along Wood Avenue between Winslow Way West and
Parfitt Way South is used primarily for single family residences.
There appears to be one small multifamily residence across the street
to the north from the Project site. Trees or shrubs line most of Wood
Avenue. There are no sidewalks. Many of the residences have large
grass yards, small orchards and gardens. The yard directly north of
the Project site contains many old vehicles.
Directly north, west and south of the Project site are single family
residences. East is the Winslow Arms Planned Unit Development, housing
senior citizens. Exhibit 3A.
IV.
The Wood Avenue neighborhood is zoned Medium Density Multi -family
Residential. The Comprehensive Plan designates it as high density
single family residential. Exhibit 3A.
V.
The lot size is 39,101.70 square feet, yielding 1002.6 square feet of
lot area per unit. The building would cover 25% of the lot. The
height would be three stories or 35 feet, screened by trees along the
west walls. Exhibits 1, 3A and 18.
VI.
On February 20, 1986, Troy Partnership filed with the City an
application for a Conditional use Permit for the subject Property,
seeking the density and parking bonuses allowed by WMC 18.20.080 for
qualified senior citizen housing projects. Exhibit 1.
VII.
On March 3, 1986, the City issued a Determination of Nonsignificance,
eliminating the need for an environmental impact statement. Exhibit 7.
-2-
4 ,
M
VIII.
On March 11, 1986, Bradley M. Brown, General Partner of Troy
Partnership, wrote a letter to the City of Winslow Land Use Department,
agreeing that:
1. As long as Winslow Manor utilizes the bonus densities of WMC
18.20.080, it shall rent only to elderly persons.
2. The Conditional use Permit may be revoked if applicable
conditions are not met.
3. Troy Partnership will execute a covenant to run with the land
naming the City of Winslow as grantee such that if the Conditional Use
Permit is revoked, the property will revert to use as seven dwelling
units and fourteen parking spaces.
4. The area which would otherwise be used for parking but for the
decreased number of spaces shall be landscaped. Exhibit 8.
IX.
On February 10, 1986, Bainbridge Fire Chief Gary Clough wrote a letter
to Brad Brown, Puget Sound Property Management, Inc., indicating the
following fire safety needs for the Project:
1. A fire hydrant on the east side of Wood Avenue at a driveway
entrance, to be installed prior to construction.
2. Water mains for fire protection with a minimum diameter of 6
inches.
3. Emergency vehicle access to three sides of the building.
4. Fire flow (need more information to determine).
Exhibit 2.
X.
On March 7, 1986, Keith Stone of the City Public Works Department wrote
a letter to the City Land Use Department outlining utilities
requirements for the project:
1. Installation of an additional 6" water line from Winslow Way
West, along the east side of Wood Avenue, up to and across the project
site.
2. Rehabilitation of the existing sewer line along Wood Avenue.
3. Provision for storm water runoff.
4. Review of sidewalk proposal.
Exhibit 3.
-3-
S
I
XI.
Following a series of meetings with the Winslow Planning Agency, the
number of parking spaces was reduced and more landscaping added. On
April 3, 1986, the Winslow Planning Agency recommended that the Project
be approved, subject to the following conditions:
1. Retention of three existing fir trees along Wood Avenue,
rather than spacing new trees on 40 -foot centers.
2. Pedestrian traffic access across the property between Wood
Avenue and Winslow Arms.
3. Setting aside some landscaping area for tenant gardening.
4. Follow through with the proposed three adjoining but distinct
building elements with sloping roofs to reduce visual mass impact on
nearby single-family homes.
5. On-site, low-level, safety and security lighting in parking
areas and along walking routes.
6. Deletion and shortening of certain parking spaces to provide
less asphalt and more landscaping.
7. Utilities improvements necessary to serve the site.
Exhibit 14.
XII.
At the request of the Planning Agency the number of parking spaces has
been reduced from 39 to 31. The area which otherwise could have been
devoted to those eight parking stalls has been replaced by landscaping.
The west parking lot along Wood Avenue contains 14% landscaping between
parking stalls and between stalls and the west property line. Exhibits
11 and 18.
XIII.
Crushed rock is currently proposed for the sidewalk along Wood Avenue.
See February 14, 1986, site plan, Exhibit 18.
XIV.
Vehicular ingress and egress to the property from Wood Avenue is by 12'
wide paved one-way driveways. There is no current plan for separate
pedestrian access from Wood Avenue, although there is a pedestrian
walkway around most of the building. At the public hearing, several
alternatives for pedestrian access were discussed. Location of the
pedestrian access to Winslow Arms has not been specified, subject to
making arrangements with Winslow Arms.
-4-
XV.
The property is within walking distance of the commercial center of the
City of Winslow, which includes medical and dental offices, a grocery
convenience store, a grocery store, pharmacies, churches, banks,
restaurants, law offices, retail stores, a post office, a senior
citizen center, a park, a marina, real estate and insurance offices,
and a bowling alley. City Hall and the Seattle ferry can be reached by
walking further east along Winslow Way. The public library, public
swimming pool, school auditorium and athletic fields, community theater
productions, and additional dental, medical and retail facilities are a
longer walk or short drive north on Madison Avenue to High School Road.
There are sidewalks in good condition along most of Winslow Way and
Madison Avenue. Sidewalks are lacking along Wood Avenue, west Winslow
Way and south Madison. Sidewalks are planned to be installed along
south Madison Avenue soon and are currently being installed along part
of west Winslow Way. Wood Avenue, Winslow Way and Madison Avenue are
paved and in good condition.
The City Clerk caused a Notice of Public Hearing on this Conditional
Use Permit application to be published in the Bainbridge Review for two
consecutive weeks, commencing April 30, 1986, and ending May 7, 1986.
Exhibit 15.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
I.
Winslow Municipal Code 18.24.030.D allows bonus density and reduced
parking for qualified senior citizen housing projects in Medium Density
Multi -family Residential zones. Section 18.20.080.A, which is
incorporated by reference into 18.24.030.D, sets forth the following
requirements for such projects;
1. A minimum of 1000 square feet of lot area per unit.
This requirement appears to be met. See Finding of Fact V.
2. One parking space per unit. ...[T]he Hearing Examiner may
reduce this requirement to as low as one space per three
units upon consideration of the following criteria:
a. Convenient walking distance to public transportation,
grocery, drug stores and other necessary services;
b. Conditions of roads and sidewalks in the vicinity;
c. Proximity to parks, cultural and recreational
facilities.
-5-
J
Although there are no sidewalks along Wood Avenue or Winslow Way where
Wood Avenue intersects, the roads do not appear to be heavily travelled
and are apparently used safely for walking by current residents. A
trail system will link the Project to Winslow Arms, bringing
pedestrians closer to existing sidewalks. Findings of Fact XIV and XV.
Thus, the three criteria above are met. Accordingly, the one parking
space per unit requirement, or 39 total, may be reduced to 31 parking
spaces as requested by the Winslow Planning Agency and the Applicant.
3. Maximum lot area covered by buildings shall not exceed that
allowed in the underlying zone.
WMC 18.24.050 provides that the maximum lot area covered by buildings
in a Medium Density Multi -family Residential zone shall not exceed 25%.
This criteria is also met. See Finding of Fact V and Exhibit 18.
II.
WMC 18.20.080.B, also incorporated by reference into 18.24.030.1), sets
forth four additional conditions which must be met by senior housing
projects desiring to utilize the increased density and reduced parking.
On March 11, 1986, Applicant wrote a letter agreeing that these four
conditions would be met. See Findings of Fact VIII and XII and Exhibit
8.
WMC 18.56.120 requires that "no less than ten percent of the area of a
parking lot shall be in landscaping...." It is also City environmental
policy to minimize surface water run-off and to encourage retention of
vegetation. WMC 16.08.050.5., and .060.
It is not clear from the ordinance whether this 10% landscaping
requirement applies only to non-residential commercial parking lots or
to all groupings of multiple parking stalls. WMC 18.08.010, however,
provides that:
The standards and criteria expressed in this title shall
be interpreted as minimum standards ....
There is nothing in the Code to suggest that the City intended a
residential parking lot to have less vegetation and more pavement than
a non-residential lot. Thus, the 10% landscaping requirement should be
interpreted as a bare minimum for a residential parking lot such as the
one proposed here. Taking into account only the landscaped areas
between stalls and between the stalls and west property line as
required by WMC 18.56.120, the 10% landscaping requirement is met for
the large western parking lot of the Project, so long as the plantings
along the west side are at least five feet wide. See Finding of Fact
XII.
The parking area along the northwest corner of the building will have
four stalls, with no landscaping between stalls. The parking area
won
along the northeast corner of the building will have six stalls, with
no landscaping between stalls. (See 2/14/86 site plan, as modified at
the 6/20/86 public hearing, Exhibit 18.) These parking areas will be
abutted by landscaped areas about the width of two parking stalls;
there will be trees in these areas.
It seems unlikely that the 10% "parking lot" landscaping requirement of
WMC 18.56.120 was meant to apply to these smaller parking areas. The
first sentence of this ordinance provides that landscaped areas in
parking lots must contain at least one hundred square feet and must be
at least five feet wide. As the number of parking spaces decreases to
below ten, this distribution of landscaping becomes impossible to
accomplish without disproportionately exceeding the 10% requirement and
displacing major portions of the parking area. Thus WMC 18.56.120 will
not be deemed applicable to these smaller parking areas at the
northwest and northeast corners of the building.
IV.
WMC 18.56.130 requires a fence screening a parking lot which abuts a
side or rear property line. The Code does not require screening for a
parking lot abutting a sidewalk or road, even though there exists the
same considerations of visual screening and prevention of erratic
pedestrian flow into vehicular parking areas.
Both headlight screening and pedestrian safety along the Wood Avenue
sidewalk abutting the western parking lot of the Project were discussed
at the public hearing. In lieu of the low planters along the western
edge of the parking stalls a hedge was favorably discussed by neighbors
and Applicant. Something like a hedge of sufficient density and height
to screen headlights and prevent pedestrian collision with parking
vehicles appears necessary for the health, safety and welfare of all
persons affected by the Project. WMC 18.68.040.B.
V.
The Project meets the WMC 18.24.070.3 requirement of paved one-way
access drives of at least 12' width. Finding of Fact XIV. Since there
are landscaped areas between the north and south borders of the western
parking lot and the access drives to Wood Avenue, the one-way drives
are not abutted by parking and therefore need not be 20' wide as
required by WMC 18.24.070.8.4. The drives adjacent to the smaller
northwestern and northeastern parking areas, however, do appear to
widen to meet this 20' requirement. See Exhibit 18.
VI.
There is no ordinance similarly specifying criteria for pedestrian
access to the property. It appears dangerous to require elderly and
other pedestrians to share with vehicles 62 feet of 12' wide road from
Wood Avenue in order to reach the pedestrian walkways within the
Project. See Exhibit 18. Both the general health, safety and welfare
provision of WMC 18.68.040.B. and the implied concern for pedestrian
safety and access expressed by WMC 18.20.080.A.2. require addition of a
-7-
pedestrian walkway from Wood Avenue into the project, separate from the
vehicular access. At the hearing, a west to east pedestrian walkway
from Wood Avenue through the middle landscaped area of the western
parking lot was favorably discussed by neighbors, the Applicant, and
the Hearing Examiner,
VII.
WMC 18.24.060.0 requires that for structures over 3 stories high, front
and rear yard requirements shall be increased by 4' and side yard
requirements increased by 10' for each story over 2. This requirement
appears to be met. See Exhibits 18 and 1.
VIII.
WMC 16.08.050.B provides that no development shall increase the pre -
development runoff water and should minimize surface water and ground
water runoff and diversion. The amount of vegetation and ground to be
covered with asphalt and building is likely to increase the water
runoff rate unless an adequate drainage system is installed. None is
shown yet in the plans though the City engineer has stated some
requirements (see Finding of Fact X), and Applicant mentions
development of "an onsite water retention system" to reduce or control
erosion. Exhibit 1, Environmental Checklist, B.i.h.
IX.
WMC 13.10.060.E. requires two fire hydrants for buildings in which the
first floor covers more than 5000 square feet. Since the first floor
of this project will cover 9750 square feet, two fire hydrants would
appear to be required. The Bainbridge Island Fire Chief in his letter
of February 10, 1986, specifically mentioned the location of only a
single fire hydrant. He also mentioned, however, that the Uniform Fire
Code, as adopted by the City, must be followed. Exhibit 2. Nothing
was mentioned at the hearing or in the Application to suggest an
alternative equivalent to a second fire hydrant, such as a sprinkler
system inside the building.
X.
WMC 11.08.160 provides that it is a City policy to encourage
development which maintains and improves the existing character of our
neighborhoods. The Comprehensive Plan states as its first goal
3.1.1.1, that:
Winslow should retain the present character of a primarily
single-family, residential community with moderate population
density.
In contrast with these City policies, the high density allowed by the
senior citizen housing bonus of WMC 18.24.030.D., even with reduced
parking, appears to encourage the most dense development with the most
pavement and the least vegetation and landscaping. The senior citizens
housing bonus ordinance is unlike the PUD ordinance, which requires
excellent design and open space as trade-offs for the increased density
allowed by WMC 18.40. Thus the Planning Agency's suggestions
concerning gardening areas and roof and building design, though
commendable, are not enforceable under the applicable Code provisions;
these proposed conditions do not appear to be required by the "health,
welfare, safety and rights of others" provision of WMC 18.72.010.D.1.
Perhaps the trade-off is another City goal set forth at 3.1.9 of the
Comprehensive Plan;
A wide variety of housing types to accommodate differing
income levels and housing needs will be encouraged.
It is with this reservation and the other exceptions noted above, that
Applicant has demonstrated compliance with the conditional use criteria
specified in WMC 18.68.040:
A. The proposed conditional use is in harmony with the spirit and
intent of Title 18.
B. Development of the proposed use would not adversely affect the
health, welfare, safety, lands and rights of other persons.
C. The proposed conditional use meets all the criteria otherwise
applicable to the zone in which it is to be developed.
In spite of the conflict in character between the dense Project and the
surrounding single family neighborhood and the stated goals of the
City, the applicable Code provisions mandate the Project's approval so
long as certain conditions are met.
From these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Hearing
Examiner enters the following:
ORDER
Troy Partnership's application for a Conditional Use Permit to allow
a thirty-nine unit senior citizen housing project with reduced parking
is granted, subject to the following conditions:
1. Safe pedestrian access, separate from vehicular access, shall
be installed from Wood Avenue into the Project, in a manner
satisfactory to the Planning Agency and the Hearing Examiner.
2. A screen, preferably vegetative, shall be installed between
the Wood Avenue sidewalk and the west edge of the parking lot of
sufficient height and density to screen parking lot headlights and to
prevent pedestrian meandering into the parking lot, except for the
designated pedestrian access area. A specific proposal shall be
submitted to the Planning Agency and the Hearing Examiner. If it is
to be counted toward the 10% parking lot landscaping requirement of
WMG 18.56.120, this landscaped area must be at least five feet wide.
3. The Applicant shall build a pathway which will allow public
access across the property and which will tie into the Winslow Trail
System. Location and design of this pathway is subject to approval of
the City Planning Agency.
4. The surface of the sidewalk along the Wood Avenue property
line shall be safe and convenient for senior pedestrians. If the
proposed crushed rock surface is determined to be unsuitable, then a
suitable alternative shall be installed. The Hearing Examiner
suggests, but does not require, that Applicant consult with a senior
citizen organization in making this determination.
5. On-site low-level safety and security lighting shall be
installed in parking areas and along walking routes.
6. Asphalt and parking spaces shall be replaced by landscaping in
the manner suggested by the Planning Agency and agreed to by Applicant
in Exhibits 14, Paragraph 6 and 11, and as noted on the site plan
annotated at the public hearing, Exhibit 18. The three fir trees along
Wood Avenue shall be retained rather than replaced with new street
trees on 40' centers. See Exhibit 14, Paragraph 1. Any further
landscaping or parking changes shall be approved by the Planning
Agency.
7. A second fire hydrant shall be installed in a location
approved by the fire chief, unless a functionally equivalent
alternative is proposed, acceptable to the City Engineer and the fire
chief to exempt the Project from the second fire hydrant requirement.
8. Provision for storm water drainage, sewer, and water shall be
made so as 1) to minimize erosion and run-off impact on adjacent
landowners, 2) to provide adequately for the inhabitants of the Project
and 3) to meet the approval of the City Engineer.
9. So long as the project utilizes the increased density
allowance permitted by this ordinance, it shall qualify under the
insured mortgage program of the federal Department of Housing and Urban
Development or shall be rented to elderly persons as defined by HUD or
persons otherwise qualified for social security disability benefits.
10. The owner shall execute and record a covenant which shall run
with the land naming the City of Winslow as grantee, stating the number
of units which will then be permitted and the number of parking spaces
which will then be required if the Conditional Use Permit is revoked.
11. In the event that any of the conditions previously agreed to
between the Applicant and the City or imposed by the Hearing Examiner
ceases to be met, the Conditional use permit may be revoked by the
Hearing Examiner after a public hearing called for said purpose. Upon
revocation the right to maintain an increase in the number of units and
a decrease in the number of parking spaces required shall terminate,
-10-
r
and the Applicant/Owner or its successors shall be required to meet the
underlying density and parking space requirements in effect for the
property at that time.
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS L DAY OF JUNE, 1986.
J.RfIN HUNT
WINSW HEARING EXAMINER
-11-