Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit L06-060 - LE TIEN - APPEALTIEN LE SHORT PLAT 14226 - 56 AV S L06 -060 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director STAFF REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER Prepared September 15, 2006 • FILE NUMBER: L06 -060 APPLICATION: Appeal of Code Interpretation issued by the Director on August 11, 2006 SITE ADDRESS: 14226 56 AV S PROPERTY OWNER: Tien Le ZONING: Low Density Residential NOTIFICATION: Notice of Appeal Date was mailed to the appellant on August 28, 2006 via regular US Mail. PREPARED BY: Brandon J. Miles, Assistant Planner ATTACHMENTS: BACKGROUND A. Aerial Photo 13. Notice of Appeal C. Code Interpretation issued by the Director D. Letter from Ryan Neal requesting Code Interpretation, dated June 21, 2006 E. Letter from Ryan Neal, dated August 1, 2006 F. Survey of Property submitted by appellant G. Survey of short plat L03 -014 On June 1, 2006 the City conducted a pre - application meeting for the real property located at 14226 56th Avenue South, Tukwila, Washington. Tien Le (appellant) proposed a two lot short plat for the property. The plan that the appellant submitted to the City indicated that proposed lot "A" would have an irregular lot pattern. The purpose of this irregular pattern was to allow proposed lot "A" to have sufficient lot area to meet the minimum lot area requirements for the LDR zoning. Planning Staff notified the appellant that the proposed pattern did not appear to meet code and suggested that the applicant submit for a Code Interpretation. On August 1, 2006, the City received a complete application for a code interpretation. On August 11, 2006, the Deputy Director of Community Development issued a code interpretation. The interpretation noted, "Tukwila finds that the proposed lot lines are not appropriate for the type of development and do not provide the amount of usable lot area anticipated by the 6,500 square foot minimum lot size required by the zone ". Steven M. Mullet, Mayor 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Staff Report Tien Le Appeal, L06 -060 Under Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) 18.116 the appeal filed by the appellant is limited only to those issues raised in the Notice of Appeal submitted to the City on August 25, 2006. The appellant is asking that the Hearing Examiner overturn the City's Code Interpretation regarding the shape of the proposed lot. The City requests that the City's Code Interpretation be affirmed and that the appeal be dismissed. FINDINGS OF FACT • • SCOPE OF HEARING 1. The property in question is located at 14226 56 Avenue South, Tukwila, King County, Washington, King County Parcel Number 336590 -0290 (Attachment A: Aerial Photo). Tien Le (appellant) is the legal owner of the subject property. The appellant purchased the property on March 1, 2006 for the sum of $294,000. There is currently a house located on the subject property. 2. The subject property is zoned Low Density Residential (LDR). The minimum lot size for new lots within the LDR zone is 6,500 square feet. The LDR zone requires the following setbacks, 20 feet front, five feet sides, ten foot second front, and ten foot rear. The existing home would be required to meet setbacks. 3. According to a survey dated May 9, 2006 (Attachment F), the property is 13,051 square feet + / -. The appellant proposes a two lot short plat. Lot "A" would be located towards the front of the property near 56 Avenue South. Lot "A" is a panhandled lot. A portion of proposed lot "A" extends along the north side of the existing house on proposed lot `B ". This panhandle portion of the lot occupies approximately 672.62 square feet. There is a currently a wood retaining wall located on the panhandle area. The existing home would be located on proposed lot `B ". 4. The approval of a short plat also known as a short subdivision is made by the City's short plat committee (TMC 17.28.010 (A) (1)). The short plat committee is comprised of the Director of Community Development, Director of Public Works, and the Fire Chief. The Director of Community Development is the chair of the committee. 5. On June 21, 2006, the appellant's agent, Ryan Neal submitted a code interpretation request to Nora Gierloff, Planning Supervisor (Attachment D). The code interpretation letter dated, June 21, 2006 noted the following, "In order to comply with the minimum square footage and setback requirements within the LDR zone, we are proposing a flag -lot design of the new lot to compensate for the location of the existing residence ". The applicant was subsequently deemed incomplete because the required fee was not provided. On August 1, 2006 the applicant provided the necessary items to allow the application to be complete (Attachment E). 6. On August 11, 2006, the City issued the code interpretation regarding the applicant's request to create a panhandle lot (Attachment C). The code interpretation noted the following, "The City cannot approve the lot configuration you have proposed for a short plat at 14226 56 Avenue South. It would result in 53 feet of the northem side yard of the existing house belonging to the lot with the new house, yet being unusable to those owners ". Created by Brandon -M Q:\Appeals \Tien Le\HE Staff Report.doc 2 Staff Report Tien Le Appeal, L06 -060 ic t5 eti 7. TMC 17.20.030 (F) notes 1. ARRANGEMENT: Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial to curved street lines. Each lot must have access to a public street that is approved at the time of plat review; however, rather than design flag lots, access shall be accomplished with common drive easements. 2. LOT DESIGN: The lot area, width, shape, and orientation shall be appropriate for the location of the subdivision, for the type of development and land use contemplated, and shall conform with the requirements of the zoning ordinance. (6t1 8. The applicant filed a timely appeal on August 25, 2006 (Attachment. 00.0 oc t DISCUSSION /C,C.\\Jµ \6" Questions before the Hearing Examiner: TMC 18.96.020 notes that any code interpretation of the Director shall be given substantial weight, and the burden of establishing the contrary shall be upon the appellant. Has the appellant met his burden of proof? Question 1: How the appellant met his burden of proof to allow the Hearing Examiner to reverse the Director's Interpretation. The answer to the above question is no. The appellant's Notice of Appeal (Attachment B) notes "It would be financially hard ship to tear down the house base on the decision on the letter received 8/10/2006 ". The Notice of Appeal goes on to note, "It addition that the City of Tukwila approved the project similar design per recording number 20050225900002 ". The purpose of a minimum lot area is to ensure that there is suitable area in order to construct a typical single family house. A "lot" provides the following essential activities for a single family development: 1. Development site for a single family home; 2. Area for out buildings; 3. Driveway; 4. Utility Easements; 5. Recreation space; 6. Storage; 7. Separation from other homes. The appellant is requesting that the hearing examiner ignore the fact that the flag area will be unable to provide any of the above attributes. The odd configuration of the lot is being done solely so that Created by Brandon -M Q:\Appeals \Tien Le\HE StaffReport.doc 3 • • Staff Report Tien Le Appeal, L06 -060 the applicant can meet the minimum lot area. The flag area will provide no function to lot "A" and will appear and act as if it is part of lot "B ". The applicant references an old short plat where the City permitted a slight irregular lot configuration (L03 -014). The appellant's reliance on this old short plat does not help the appellant's cause. A complete review of this short plat justifies why the City has not approved the appellant's current lot configuration. The City did allow a slight flag area in order to allow Mr. Tien Le to be able to meet minimum lot area. However, the flag area provided direct access to the lot. Unlike the appellant's current proposal, the flag area provided a beneficial use (access) to the lot that it was include with. The appellant's argument that it would be a financial hardship to remove the house in order to allow for a logical configuration for the proposed short plat is insufficient to warrant a reversal of the City's decision. The conditions of the property are unchanged from when the appellant purchased the property. The applicant purchased a residential property where the house was located directly in the middle of the lot and the lot area was just barely enough to allow a short plat. The appellant has other options available in order to permit a short plat on the property. 1) The appellant could acquire additional property from adjacent properties and do a Boundary Line Adjustment. 2) The appellant could remove or relocate the home on the property in order to allow the lots to have a logical configuration. 3) The appellant could petition the City Council to reduce the minimum lot size. TMC 17.20.030 (F) (2) requires that the "The lot area, width, shape, and orientation shall be appropriate for the location of the subdivision, for the type of development and land use contemplated ". The applicant's proposal is not appropriate for the land use contemplated (single family home). The applicant's proposal creates "dead space" unusable to the lot that it would be legally part of. If such a plat were approved a future landowner would be responsible for property taxes, storm -fees, legal liability, and maintenance of the existing retaining wall but would receive no beneficial use from the dead space. The retaining wall would actually benefit proposed lot `B ". The appellant has not met his burden of proof and thus the City's Code Interpretation should be affirmed and the appeal dismissed. Created by Brandon -M Q:\Appeals \Tien Le\HE Staff Report.doc 4 • Subject Property • ATTACHMENT A h ttn• / /mane rlinitalmanrPntra1 rnm/nrnrinrt;nn /('nrP(:TCA,Pr1 7(,r /inrlwv html Page 1 of 1 4 ° N cat Copyright O 2006 All Rights Reserved. The iMormation contained contributor supplied under license and may not be approved excel n4/1 a/')nnti August 25, 2006 Tien Le 9420 8 Ave. S.W. Seattle, WA 98106 (206) 778 -2655 RECEIVED KAU6 2 5 2006 DEVELOPMENT Subject: Notice of Appeal — Letter received on the decision on 8/10/2006 on code Interpretation for PRE 06 -024. Dear Ms. Gierloff, I request for Notice of Appeal for the decision on 08/10/2006 that denied for two - lot short plat on parcel located 14226 56 Avenue S, APN 336590 -0290. It would be financially hard ship to tear down the house base on the decision on the letter received 8/10/2006. Would you re- consider the proposed a flag -lot design of the new lot to compensate for the existing residence. The proposed panhandle is approximately fifty - one feet in length and runs underneath the proposed access easement which will serve the existing residence post -short plat. The new lot created will meet all zoning and code requirements except for the City preference against odd - shaped lots. In addition that the City of Tukwila approved the project similar design per recording number 20050225900002. Please contact me for any additional information you need in -order to reconsider. Sincerely, Tien Le Property owner. Attachment B August 11, 2006 Ryan Neal Cramer Northwest Inc. 945 N. Central, Suite #104 Kent, WA 98032 RE: Code Interpretation related to PRE06 -024 Dear Mr. Neal: • Ciiy of Tukwila • Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director ATTACHMENT C Steven M. Mullet, Mayor The City cannot approve the lot configuration you have proposed for a short plat at 14226 56 Avenue South. It would result in 53 feet of the northern side yard of the existing house belonging to the lot with the new house, yet being unusable to those owners. While you have noted that the wood retaining walls in this panhandle area could be removed, there is no indication of what would replace them and which lot would be responsible for maintenance of future retaining structures. There is a similar problem with the existing stairs along the north side of the house. The majority (33 feet) of the panhandle would not contain a driveway or be needed for access. Previously I had requested that if you intended to remove the concrete pad of the carport and provide parking for the existing house in the rear yard that you provide a drawing that identifies how this would be accomplished through grading, new retaining walls etc. Your current submittal does not contain that information. Tukwila's Subdivision Code, TMC Chapter 17 addresses requirements for lot design as follows: 17.20.030 F. Lots: 1. ARRANGEMENT: Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial to curved street lines. Each lot must have access to a public street that is approved at the time of plat review; however, rather than designing flag lots, access shall be accomplished with common drive easements. 2. LOT DESIGN: The lot area, width, shape, and orientation shall be appropriate for the location of the subdivision, for the type of development and land use contemplated, and shall conform with the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Q: \LETTERS \Neal_Denial. DOC 1 08/10/2006 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665 Tukwila finds that the proposed lot lines are not appropriate for the type of development and do not provide the amount of usable lot area anticipated by the 6,500 square foot minimum lot size required by the zone. If you have any questions with this matter please call me at (206) 431 -3670. Sincerely, Ja $ Pace Deputy Director • • Q:\LETTERS\Neal_Denial.DOC 2 08/10/2006 6N June 21, 2006 Cramer Noiwest, Inc. Surveyors •Planners •Engineers City of Tukwila c/o Nora Gierloff, Planning Supervisor Department of Community Development 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 -2544 Re: Code Interpretation for PRE06 -024 RECEIVED 'JUN 2 6 2006 C OMMUNITY D EVELOPMENT Dear Ms. Gierloff, Per the request of Brandon Miles, I am writing to request a code interpretation for our client, Tien Le, regarding the project associated with the above- referenced pre- application number. We are proposing a residential two -lot short plat on the parcel located at 14226 56 Avenue S, APN 336590-0290. Based upon the comments from our pre- application meeting, we are requesting that you approve our lot configuration as proposed in the pre- application meeting. In order to comply with the minimum square footage and setback requirements within the LDR zone, we are proposing a flag -lot design of the new lot to compensate for the location of the existing residence. The proposed panhandle is approximately fifty -one feet in length and runs underneath the proposed access easement which will serve the existing residence post -short plat. The new lot created will meet all zoning and code requirements except for the City's preference against odd- shaped lots. In addition to those points previously mentioned, it is worth noting that our client recently recorded a project of similar design as approved by the City of Tukwila per recording number 20050225900002. I have enclosed a copy of that approved map as well as copies of our pre- application meeting notes and proposed short plat map for your review. Please feel free to contact me for any additional information you may need in reaching your decision. Sincerely, Ryan Neal Planner cc: Mr. Tien Le Attachment D 945 N. Central, Suite #104 Kent WA 98032 (253) 852 -4880 Fax (253) 852 -4955 www.cramernw.com E -mail: cni @cramernw.com GNI elp August 1, 2006 Cramer Norttwest, Inc. Surveyors *Planners *Engineers City of Tukwila c/o Nora Gierloff, Planning Supervisor Department of Community Development 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 -2544 • Re: Code Interpretation for PRE06 -024 Dear Ms. Gierloff, I have enclosed revised plans for your review along with the requested $100 fee in order to complete the application for the above- referenced code interpretation. The proposed 22' wide fire access road and 14' access road will allow for a retaining wall and sufficient grade to comply with City of Tukwila setback requirement as well as public works and fire codes. Sincerely, Ryan Ile Planner cc: Mr. Tien Le Please feel free to contact me for any additional information you may need in reaching your decision. ATTACHMENT E 945 N. Central, Suite #I04 Kent WA 98032 (253) 852 -4880 Fax (253) 852 -4955 www.cramernw.com E -mail: cni @cramernw.com RECEIVED AUG 01 M06 COI. DEVELuv :.LNT City of Tukwila Dep�tment of Community Development A9a0 Boulevard. Tukwila. TA 96168 Telephone (906) 481 -3870 1a (206) 431 -3666 2 -mail tukp)anotuk.8a.wa.uI HORT PLAT NUMBER_ Alt UT PO • a rr It MIND: • FOt.O IRIla011 AS mama ® UPC Pas va FOaa MOM O 410 1eNa a RION= m • 00• Mt • w0 Nloawr in am moo OR 0001 a•I ▪ away aaa menu MOM 000 HAD SURVEY COB ROL METHOD: MOM LOOP 010100E NNW. a oot t OF M N J0 -000 33$590 6 4 c filAr a OP IT1171114 SHOW PAM R LOCATED IN THE 32 OP THE 3.1r. 1/4 OF SECTION 14 TO HIP 1813 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, T M.. NANO COUNTY, DASHHIG ON (yak wawa TRA�n lauours \ \ SOUTH 1 44TH STREET e.mav mer r 0101 /Je Ma ONO a An ONUS MOM 6120 em AYL SW }* 140211t 200.-7713-200 am SW= ipmer4L /101 LE STATf• WASIONONN TNk 98118 " t MIEN �i O C m Xi ,CONTOUR DI L• VA r -3 ▪ C) aw1yA.7 $ 0 m 1. 112114•11 SOME 010e1 Late AOCb10N0 ID Z mar 2 m MAW, 1 I M1900 011 �, - m a .a M Mk Me 1 N MO . N wi 110 e1. 11001103 a tan COMFY. cm C7 Snort o M.c. 1/1 or Ix. I/O or ste oR-14_. ■ 4 tt MAL. 0b1� W 1„ 010CUD WY 0.9.N. alma SCAB myna 1 110101101111 LAST wmm 0401.01 1 DRS SWAY NM MNaUD 11111101/1 111t MOW OF A aa.T MLR sore 00 ®OtM COD 00/ /UMW ID WOO All 000/0/004 to r //ff. Olt 001100.13 SNOW ON MO SLOW 100 R 00121111110% VIRITCAL DAVID 11011111 MINNOW 100011. COMM Or MO AK NOM ION 111.0 I1001 MOD 1180,. ammo* man U.S. PUT OAR 6/22/2001 I JOS Nl1YBER 3012 1 , �, SNOT e 80 0 20 BASSO OP BMW NON /MON AU aam ON Dm 1011M0100 COMM Of SOWN URN NM SOWN MESPVIIN If SOON O T , sia 1001001011 t x.7150 0101. MOMS mr OD COUNTY. MIL DESCRIPTION: N 1a ISt sa, ant x IaOOlae o7 1a0 COWS 11011110101 PAGE DENCIDIARIC ION COWIN ARM COMM A I I WI A � aw _am . PS N A OW MD AMAX WAD 00atpk 174N U./ AU 2000 -0418 20F2 20050225900002 sHORT „PLAT SNORT PLAT :•• L03 —Q14 s" of ..3"ukwila Kin Count y, YJOshin gton r s l0 i I '.• »•D f >''ACce, b & Ut01ty'CBsement y K.C.,{tec. No.�op�p11 0000 R y' 20.00' ..,N8713.12:4ti r - ' • •. \ • ;�� °LOT::�1 S87'53'12'E 2.00' IS N7 N87'S3'12'W 2.00' r w In � � N z 4s W A= 88'59'26' R . 20.00' L. 31.06' N87'53'12.n.6' 3 °.R 5‘ 20.00':1 ,... N87'53'12'W Mar. Suot. of Records 8 'a NP Attachment G LOT AREAS: NOTES! • The City of Tukeaa has no responsibility to build, improve, maintain or olne'wise serve the private rood(s) within or providing access to the property described in this short plot. 2. House more than 250 feet fro a fire hydrant shall hove either fire so•inklers installed or a hydrant shall be installed within 250 feet of the house. 3 Field aoto for this survey was obtained by direct field measurements. Angular and linear relationships were measured with a six second theodolite and electronic measuring device, supplemented by a steel tope. l l i RE CORDER'S CERTIFICATE files for record this day of 20 of M 'n book... .of of po a pt the req�est of '�ia��+.� - � �.e � Cary efr "f rr� •/ •.� LOT 1 - Area (Including easement ) . 8,935 sq.ft. +/- LOT 1 - Areo (Excluding easement ) - 6,500 sq.ft. +/- LOT 2 - Area (Including easement) w 6,500 sq.ft. +/- LOT 3 - Area - 6,842 sq.ft. +/- Easement Area - 5,493 sq.ft. +/- 20.0' 587'53'12 "E .f' uo•r•c,.•. ,., ._ _ 657.88' _- _-- .__._ -__ comer Original Lot 12 - (ROB) So. 148th Street 50.60' 'N87'S3't 2'W 2.00' 13.3' LOT 1 Ndrth end oho n .NTk ;Janet) Is 0.j! 4h,Jr 1,5' east. f se't r w /cop I Exlst)rig Route )(st001 Existing garage • Existin House LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE '1, Richarn Schroeder o registered as a land surveyor by the State of Washington, certify that this plat Is based on an actual survey of the land described herein, conducted by me or under my supervision; that the distances, courses and angles are shown thereon correctly, and that monuments other than those monuments approved for setting at a later dote, have been set and lot cane okedD.O gyund as depicted on the plot.' C�1J G f! / / DCICL . Certificate No. LEGEND ® Concrete Monument in Case + Monument 60 Bronze plug }( Tack in Lead or Noll & Disk O Set rebar w /cap / • Found pipe or rebar SURVEY FOR: Tien Le 9420 8th Ave. S.W. Seattle, WA See Detoll "A" for Existing House dr East Line Easement • wAA�'Np sc. E\RS. ...... P Oe� D V1 - en 70.59' metol fence 35.8' east 70.60' N875736 hog wire fence-if '''W of set rebar w /cap William Stock (23) Chain link fence is 3.8' north is 1.3' coal yf set rebar w /cop Kathryn Hurst PORTION OF _S� _i /4 o f (13) RECORDING NO. VOL. /PAGE .t0o 'o2.2s'gn nnez 183 f OS9 So. 144th St. NW_ / S._22_ T.23_N., R. 4 _E., W.M. GRAPHIC SCALE .5 0 OWN. BY law CHKO. BY Revised 1/27/05 (Of FEET) 1 Lack - 50 n. N87'33'12 "W 20.00 uo Found 2" brass disk in conc. in case - 1/14/03 (TYP) Detail "A” Existing House 84009 & the East Line of Easement N87 W U • 'StHR...OETER�LAND :'SUR.' : ;�f' ... ''•P•,ROFSSIONAL LAND SW ` r PD. sox M. befi...4e, weshkgten 95a62.(E063 24 - FAX re -9679 OAT /3 /.6 d3 0 NO. 4 {y /9 DATE FIELD 1/14 /03 iWJECT 4043005sp SCALE . t1, 1 . 30' :c;2,.✓AF 2 • • FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF TUKWILA In the Matter of Appeal of TIEN LE from a Code Interpretation by the Director, Department of Community Development Introduction The following exhibits were entered into the record on this matter: File: L06 -060 RECEWED OCT 0 9 2606 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The Director issued a Code Interpretation and the appellant timely filed an appeal. The appeal hearing was held before the City Hearing Examiner on September 28, 2006. Represented at the hearing were: the Department, by Brandon J. Miles, Assistant Planner, and Nora Gierloff, Planning Supervisor; and the appellant, Tien Le, by Ryan Neal. The record was held open for purposes of the Examiner's inspection of the site, which occurred on October 5, 2006. Exhibit 1: Staff Report with attachments Attachment A: Aerial Photo Attachment B: Notice of Appeal Attachment C: Code Interpretation issued by Director Attachment D: Letter from Ryan Neal to Nora Gierloff, dated 6/21/06 Attachment E: Letter from Ryan Neal to Nora Gierloff, dated 8/01/06 Attachment F: Survey of property Attachment G: Survey of short plat L03 -014 Exhibit 2: Survey of Property (full size drawing) Findings of Fact 1. The subject property is located at 14226 56 Avenue South in Tukwila, Washington. The King County Parcel Number is 336590 -0290. The property is approximately 13,051 square feet in size, and there is a single family residence on the property. There are wood retaining walls near the house on the north and east sides, and a concrete pad west of the house. The site slopes down from 56 Avenue South to the eastern end of the property. 2. The property is zoned Low Density Residential (LDR). The minimum lot size for new lots in this zone is 6,500 square feet. The minimum setback requirements in the Tukwila Hearing Exam!" L06 -060 Page 2 of 4 • zone are 20 feet for the front yard, 10 feet for the rear yard, and five feet for the side yards. 3. The proposal is to short plat the property into two lots. Lot "A" would be located on the western portion of the site, near 56 Avenue South, and would have a "panhandle" running east along the north side of the existing house on proposed Lot `B." Lot A would be approximately 6,501 square feet; its panhandle area would be approximately 53 feet long and 672.62 feet in size. Lot B would be located on the eastern portion of the site, and would be approximately 6,504 square feet. The proposed plat would retain the existing house on Lot B. 4. The appellant purchased the property on March 1, 2006, for $294,000. On June 21, 2006, the appellant requested a Code Interpretation, seeking approval of his proposed lot configuration. 5. The Department issued a Code Interpretation on August 11, 2006, which concluded that the City could not approve the proposed lot configuration. The interpretation stated that the "proposed lot lines are not appropriate for the type of development and do not provide the amount of usable lot area anticipated by the 6,500 square foot minimum lot size required by the zone." 6. The interpretation identified several problems with the proposed short plat: Fifty- three feet of the northern side yard would be rendered inaccessible to the owners of a house built on Lot A; the existing wood retaining walls and stairs were proposed to be removed without indicating what would replace them, and who would be responsible for their maintenance; the majority of the panhandle area would not contain a driveway or be needed for access; and the submittal did not identify how the removal of the existing parking pad and creation of a new parking area on Lot B would be accomplished. 7. The interpretation noted that there were other options that would allow a short plat on the property, including the acquisition of additional property from adjacent properties, removal or relocation of the existing house in order to allow for a different lot configuration, or petitioning the City Council for a reduction in the minimum lot size. 8. The appellant previously received approval for a short plat (L03 -014) which included a flag - shaped area (Exhibit 1, Attachment G). In that case, the flag- shaped lot took its street access by way of its panhandle. 9. The appellant has argued that the interpretation is in error, because it is based on an aesthetic concern, i.e., how the lots appear on a map or site plan, rather than how the lots would function. The appellant noted that he had previously received approval for a flag- shaped lot, and that the demolition of the existing structure would be a financial hardship. 10. TMC 17.20.030.F provides: 1. ARRANGEMENT: Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial to curved street lines. Each lot must have access to a public street that is approved at the time of plat review; however, rather than designing flag lots, access shall be accomplished with common drive easements. 2. LOT DESIGN: The lot area, width, shape, and orientation shall be appropriate for the location of the subdivision, for the type of development and land use contemplated, and shall conform with the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Conclusions ila Hearing Examiner L06 -060 Page 3 of 4 1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to TMC 18.108.020. Under TMC 18.96.020, the Director's interpretation is to be given substantial weight, and the burden of establishing the contrary is on the appellant. 2. The Director's interpretation adheres to the language of TMC 17.20.030.F, which favors side lot lines at right angles to street lines, and specifically disfavors flag lots, even in the context of providing access to public streets. In the previous decision cited by the appellant, the Director apparently exercised his discretion to allow a flag lot in order to provide access to the street. But in this case, the flag- shaped lot is not required for street access, so that factor cannot be relied upon to allow an exception to the Code's language concerning flag lots. 3. The appellant has argued that the denial of the proposed configuration is based on an aesthetic preference, rather than a practical consideration of how the lots will function. However, the record shows that the flag area will not perform any of the typical functions of a lot, such as providing usable space or separation between lots. Moreover, even if TMC 17.20.030.F was based on the City Council's "aesthetic preference" for a particular shape of lot, the Director would nevertheless be required to administer the Code as written. 4. The appellant has also argued that it would be a financial hardship to change his proposed lot configuration, but that is not a basis for concluding that the interpretation is in error. Furthermore, as noted by the Director, the conditions of property, including the presence of the structure and the lot size, have not changed since the appellant purchased the property. 5. The appellant has not shown that the Director's interpretation was in error. The appeal must therefore be denied. Tukwila Hearing Exam!? L06 -060 Page 4 of 4 Decision The Director's Code Interpretation is hereby AFFIRMED and the appeal is hereby denied. Entered this 6 day of October, 2006. a /k/v-e.. Anne Watanabe, Hearing Examiner City of Tukwila Concerning Further Review TMC 18.108.020.H provides that "The decisions of the Hearing Examiner, the Planning Commission and the City Council regarding Type 2 decisions shall be final and shall be appealable only to Superior Court pursuant to RCW 36.70C." August 1, 2006 City of Tukwila do Nora Gierloff, Planning Supervisor Department of Community Development 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 -2544 Re: Code Interpretation for PRE06 -024 Dear Ms. Gierloff, I have enclosed revised plans for your review along with the requested $100 fee in order to complete the application for the above - referenced code interpretation. The proposed 22' wide fire access road and 14' access road will allow for a retaining wall and sufficient grade to comply with City of Tukwila setback requirement as well as public works and fire codes. Sincerely, cc: Mr. Tien Le Cramer Inc. C a e Northwest, Surveyors *Planners *Engineers Please feel free to contact me for any additional information you may need in reaching your decision. 945 N. Central, Suite #104 Kent WA 98032 (253) 852 -4880 Fax (253) 852 -4955 www.cramernw.com E -mail: cni @,cramernw.com RECEIVED AUG 01 2fl06 coi.. DEVELu�:.LNT June 27, 2006 Ryan Neal Cramer Northwest Inc. 945 N. Central, Suite #104 Kent, WA 98032 RE: Code Interpretation related to PRE06 -024 Dear Mr. Neal: Your application for a code interpretation related to a residential short plat has been found to be incomplete. In order to be a complete application you must submit the $100 fee. In addition the drawing you have submitted does not support your claim that the proposed panhandle "runs underneath the proposed access easement which will serve the existing residence post -short plat." In fact the carport for the existing house is to the west of the house and only the first twenty feet of the panhandle would be needed to access that parking pad. The remainder of the panhandle extending to the east contains retaining walls and so appears unsuitable for parking or access purposes. If you intend to remove the concrete pad of the carport and provide parking for the existing house in the rear yard please provide a drawing that identifies how this will be accomplished through grading, new retaining walls etc. Upon receipt of these items, the City will re- review them for completeness and will mail you written notification of completeness or incompleteness within 14 days. This request will be returned to you if we do not receive the additional information within ninety days of the date of this letter unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 18.105.070(E). If you have any questions with this matter please call me at (206) 433 -7141. Sincerely Nora Gierloff Planning Supervisor SO City of Tukwila Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION Steven M. Mullet, Mayor 6300 Southcenter Boulevard. Suite #100 • Tukwila. Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 - 3665 June 21, 2006 Cramer Northwest, Inc. Surveyors *Planners *Engineers City of Tukwila do Nora Gierloff, Planning Supervisor Department of Community Development 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 -2544 Re: Code Interpretation for PRE06 -024 Dear Ms. Gierloff, • RECEIV 'JUN 2 6 2005 _COMMUNITY N Per the request of Brandon Miles, I am writing to request a code interpretation for our client, Tien Le, regarding the project associated with the above - referenced pre - application number. We are proposing a residential two -lot short plat on the parcel located at 14226 56 Avenue S, APN 336590-0290. Based upon the comments from our pre- application meeting, we are requesting that you approve our lot configuration as proposed in the pre - application meeting. In order to comply with the minimum square footage and setback requirements within the LDR zone, we are proposing a flag -lot design of the new lot to compensate for the location of the existing residence. The proposed panhandle is approximately fifty -one feet in length and runs underneath the proposed access easement which will serve the existing residence post -short plat. The new lot created will meet all zoning and code requirements except for the City's preference against odd - shaped lots. In addition to those points previously mentioned, it is worth noting that our client recently recorded a project of similar design as approved by the City of Tukwila per recording number 20050225900002. I have enclosed a copy of that approved map as well as copies of our pre- application meeting notes and proposed short plat map for your review. Please feel free to contact me for any additional information you may need in reaching your decision. Sincerely, Ryan Neal Planner cc: Mr. Tien Le 945 N. Central, Suite #104 Kent WA 98032 (253) 852 -4880 Fax (253) 852 -4955 www.cramernw.com E -mail: cni @,cramernw.com SHORT PLAT NUMBER DECLARATION: KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENT THAT WE, THE UNDERSIGNED. OWNER(S) IN FEE SIMPLE OF THE LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED DO HEREBY MAKE A SHORT SUBDMSION THEREOF PURSUANT TO RCW 58.17.060 AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT SAID SUBDMSION SHALL NOT BE FURTHER DMDED IN ANY MANNER WITHIN A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS. FROM DATE OF RECORD, WITHOUT THE FlUNG OF A FINAL PLAT. THE UNDERSIGNED FURTHER DECLARE THIS SHORT PLAT TO BE THE GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION OF SAID SHORT SUBOMSION AND THE SAME IS MADE WITH THE FREE CONSENT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DESIRE OF THE OWNER(S). IN WITNESS WHEREOF WE HAVE SET OUR HANDS AND SEALS. NAME NAME NAME NAME .. STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ON THIS DAY PERSONALLY APPEARED BEFORE ME TO ME KNOWN TO BE THE INDMDUAL WHO EXECUTED THE WITHIN AND FOREGOING INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED THAT HE/SHE SIGNED THE SAME AS HIS /HER VOLUNTARY ACT AND DEED FOR THE USES AND PURPOSES THEREIN MENTIONED. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL THIS DAY OF 20_ LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE: CHAIRPERSON; SHORT SUBDMSION COMMITTEE SURVEY IN S.E. OF S•W• 1 /4 4 OF SECTION 14 T. 23 N., R._ 4 _E., W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E —mail: tukplan @tukwila.wa.us 1/4 SIGNATURE NAME AS COMMISSIONED' TTR E • MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRFS• STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ON THIS DAY PERSONALLY APPEARED BEFORE ME TO ME KNOWN TO BE THE INDIVIDUAL WHO EXECUTED THE WITHIN AND FOREGOING INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED THAT HE/SHE SIGNED THE SAME AS HIS/HER VOLUNTARY ACT AND DEED FOR THE USES AND PURPOSES THEREIN MENTIONED. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL THIS DAY OF 20 SIGNATURE' NAME AS COMMISSIONED TM F• MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES. . REGISTERED AS A LAND SURVEYOR BY THE STATE OF WASHINGTON. CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAT IS BASED ON AN ACTUAL SURVEY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN. CONDUCTED BY ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION; THAT THE DISTANCES. COURSES AND ANGLES ARE SHOWN HEREON CORRECTLY; AND THAT MONUMENTS OTHER THAN THOSE MONUMENTS APPROVED FOR SETTING AT A LATER DATE. HAVE BEEN SET AND LOT CORNERS STAKED ON THE GROUND AS DEPICTED ON THE PLAT. TUKWILA SHORT SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE APPROVAL: REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE SHORT SUBDMSION COMMITTEE AND HEREBY CERTIFIED FOR FlUNG THIS DAY OF 20 RECORDING CERTIFICATE: FILED FOR RECORD AT THE REQUEST OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA THIS DAY OF , 20 AT MINUTES PAST M, AND RECORDED IN VOLUME OF PLATS, ON PAGE , RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. KING COUNTY MANAGER SUPT. OF RECORDS AND ELECTIONS APPROVALS: KING COUNTY FINANCE DMSION I CERTIFY THAT ALL PROPERTY TAXES ARE PAID AND THAT A DEPOSIT HAS BEEN MADE IN SUFFICIENT AMOUNT TO PAY THE TAXES FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR; THAT THERE ARE NO DELINQUENT SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS CERTIFIED TO THIS OFFICE FOR COLLECTION; AND THAT ALL SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON ANY OF THE PROPERTY HERON DEDICATED AS S1ar_ua, ALLEYS, OR FOR OTHER PUBUC USE ARE PHD IN FULL. THIS KING COUNTY TREASURER DEPUTY KING COUNTY TREASURER NEW LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS: CITY OF TUKWILA SHORT PLAT FOR TIEN LE LOCATED IN THE S.E. 1/4, OF THE S. W. 1/4, OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON DAY OF 29 OWNER(S): ADDRESS: PHONE: CITY' STATE. ZIP. ••-t B. 4 `ctsr 0018 q onto winizee 0 DRAWN BY CHECKED BY KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S APPROVAL EXAMINED AND APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENTS THIS DAY OF q0 KING COUNTY ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER(S) 336590 -0290 DEVELOPER /OWNER INFORMATION :: TIEN LE 9420 8TH AVE SW SEATTLE; WA 98168 206 - 778 -2655 ZONING, SERVICE & UTILITY INFORMATION: NUMBER OF L075: XXX PROPOSED DENSITY: XXX PARENT PARCEL ZONED: XXX PROPOSED USE XXX SEWER SERVICE PROVIDER: XXX WATER SERVICE PROVIDER: XXX SCHOOL DISTRICT: XXX FIRE DISTRICT: XXX TELEPHONE SERVICE: XXX POWER SOURCE XXX DATE J.A.C. 7/31/2006 SCALE O.B.H. 1. =20' DEPUTY ASSESSOR ITN Cramer Northwest Inc. Surveyors Planners & Engineers 945 N. CENTRAL, STE. #104, KENT, WA 98032 E —MAIL enIOcramamw.cam (253)852 -4880 (local) or 1— (800)251 -0189 (toll trio) (253)852 -4955 (tax) JOB NUMBER SHEET VOLUME PAGE RECEIVED AUG 01 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2006 -0415 1 of 1 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E —mail: tukplan @tukwila.wa.us SHORT PLAT NUMBER CALCD. POINT Ffl1 FLAT 20' 91 b ASPHALT DRIVEWAY 789 3138E "5138'W 19194 N89 '5138E 19194' LOT B 6550± 99. FT. T6 4093 T4 21 20' co LEGEND: raa am ID FOUND MONUMENT AS DESCRIBED LIGHT POLE POWER METER GAS METER TELEPHONE RISER WATER VALVE FIRE HYDRANT WATER METER CATCH BASIN ® SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE BUILDING LINTAIES N09T11 2' EA1ES N °'STRUCTURES TO BE REMOVED LOT 7 oti 336590 -0295 ti ' ti ° m « / w \1_ EMS N INSTRUMENTATION: INSTRUMENT USED: GEODIMETER 600 FIELD SURVEY CONTROL METHOD: CLOSED LOOP TRAVERSE MINIMUM CLOSURE 1:22,000 IN COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF 19194' TREE LEGEND: CONIFER TREE Ni DECIDUOUS TREE TI: z7' CEDAR T2: 28' JUNIPER T3: Jr DECIDUOUS T4: (2) 9" DECIDUOUS 13: 9' DECIDUOUS T6: 10" & 15" DECIDUOUS 77: 9" DECIDUOUS T8: 10' DECIDUOUS T9: 8' DECIDUOUS T10: 10' CEDAR lo 0 a� a ' BLOCK 4 HILLMAN'� TRACTS SEATTLE GARDEN T10 LOT 5 336590 -0285 0 0 O W O+ CITY OF TUKWILA SHORT PLAT FOR TIEN LE LOCATED IN THE S.E. 1/4, OF THE S. W. 1/4, OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON a1 0 SOUTH 144TH STREET S89'5138 W 423.87' § \ TIEN LE OWNER(S): ADDRESS:. 9420 8TH AVE. SW PHONE: 206- 778 -2655 CITY. SEATTLE 0 N LOT 24 336590 -0380 4' CHAIN LINK FHE DRYER IS 05't AOYTH ff LDE SURVEY IN S_E• 1/4 OF S.W. 1/4 OF SECTION 14 T 23 N R. 4 E W M IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON DRAWN BY J.A.C. IrN Cramer Northwest Inc. Surveyors Planners & Engineers 945 N. CENTRAL, STE. #104, KENT, WA 98032 E -MAIL cnlOcramemw.com (253)852 -4880 (local) or 1- (800)251 -0189 (toll free) (253)852 -4955 (tax) DATE 7/31/2006 (JOB NUMBER 2006 -0415 LOT 25 336590 -0 4' MBE FBO OTRE1 IS 13± N. 702± E. CQIV51 rn LOT 26 336590 -0390 *lO Jo ti T A 1 GRAPHIC SCALE 20 0 20 BASIS OF BEARINGS: BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THE MONUMENTED CENTERLINE OF SOUTH 144TH STREET, BEING SOUTH 89 WEST, AS SHOWN ON THAT CITY OF TUKWILA SHORT PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 189 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 219, UNDER RECORDING NO. 20050713900001, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 6, BLOCK 4, HILLMANS SEATTLE GARDEN TRACTS ACCORDING TO THE FIAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS PAGE 24, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. NOTES: 1. MONUMENTS LAST VISITED 04 -04 -06. 2. THIS SURVEY WAS PERFORMED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A CURRENT TITLE REPORT AND THEREFORE DOES NOT PURPORT 10 SHOW ALL EASEMENTS, COVENANTS, CONDmONS OR RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY. 3. THE 6UUIL±.4IES SHOWN ON TY, SURVEY RrJ'RE.SE':T DEED LINES ONLY, ACTUAL OWNERSHIP MAY OTHERWISE BE DETERMINED. VERTICAL DATUM: NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 BENCHMARK:: KING COUNTY SURVEY CONTROL POINT NO. 93V -901, DESCRIBED AS: A BRASS PIN IN A r CONCRETE FILLED PIPE IN A MONUMENT CASE LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTH 144TH STREET AND 59TH AVENUE SOUTH. ELEVATION: 174.18 U.S. FEET. SITE BENCHMARK: $ CHISELED BOX AT BACK OF CURB ON WEST SIDE OF 56TH AVE SOUTH, NEAR TELEPHONE RISER NUMBER 14227. ELEVATION: 216.21 U.S. FEET CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2.00 U.S. FEET REFERENCE SURVEYS: 1. HILLMANS SEATTLE GARDEN TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 24, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. 2. CITY OF TUKWILA SHORT PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 189 OF SURVEYS. PAGE 219, UNDER RECORDING NO. 20050713900001, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. (VOLUME PAGE 1" =20' HEARING EXAMINER FILE L06 -060 TIEN LE CODE INTERPRETATION APPEAL APPEAL DENIED Case Name Tien Le - CITY OF TUKWILA Property Address 14226 56" Avenue South Hearing Examiner Assigned: ❑ Sue Tanner Anne Watanabe ❑Other Dept. Contacts Notified By: Date Notified: Filing Fee: $ (check #: ) Appeal Information ❑ CITATION ENFORCEMENT ❑ SDOT or DPD ❑ i Citation / H.E. File #: , , ❑ Contested or Mitigation ❑ Date Received: ❑ Fine Paid /No Hearing $ Date Violation Type: Select Type Select Type ❑ Default/No Hearing $ Date ❑ MASTER USE PERMIT see Types H.E. File #: Date Received: Dept. Ref. #: ® OTHER TYPE OF APPEAL: Code Interpretation H.E. File #: A060 Date Received: 8/30/06 Dept. Ref. #: r t Party Contacts: Appellant Name: Tien Le Email: Address: 9420 811, Avenue SW Phone: ( 206) 778 -2655 Seattle , WA 98106 Fax: ( ) Department Name: Brandon Miles, Assistant Planner Email: bmiles @ci.tukwila.wa.us Address: 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Ste. 100 Phone: ( 206) 431-3684 Tukwila , WA 98188 Fax: ( ) Select Party Name: Email: Address: Phone: ( ) Fax: ( ) Select Party Name: Email: Address: Phone: ( ) Fax: ( ) Select Party Name: Email: Address: Phone: ( ) Fax: ( ) Select Party Name: Email: Address: Phone: ( ) Fax: ( ) kkL�f�t /nm.— ,.'- ,rr,l /rk9 ru.: �eL ..:.✓r�G1271i1'�e�'11��;"„d _ „Y_Jr .U7YIi.,YVr uy.;: oi, YJZ., /nrkaa (vmv011ar Continuance 1: Continuance 2: Decision Issued: °-61® N11TR4Z a"A A4TT Pre Hearing Conf.: Hearing: Thursday, September 28, 2006 0- 9 a.m. Continuance 3: Record Closed: - OLP �Jb r-,/t Cl e r%> JAe-t Pyre... diem I-e a ,Cj aye A% I ” lei J'. . FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF TUKWILA In the Matter of Appeal of TIEN LE File: L06 -060 from a Code Interpretation by the Director, Department of Community Development Introduction The Director issued a Code Interpretation and the appellant timely filed an appeal. The appeal hearing was held before the City Hearing Examiner on September '28, 2006. Represented at the hearing were: the Department, by Brandon J. Miles, Assistant Planner, and Nora Gierloff, Planning Supervisor; and the appellant, Tien Le, by Ryan Neal. The record was held open for purposes of the Examiner's inspection of the site, which occurred on October 5, 2006. The following exhibits were entered into the record on this matter: Exhibit 1: Staff Report with attachments Attachment A: Aerial Photo Attachment B: Notice of Appeal Attachment C: Code Interpretation issued by Director Attachment D: Letter from Ryan Neal to Nora Gierloff, dated 6/21/06 Attachment E: Letter from Ryan Neal to Nora Gierloff, dated 8/01/06 Attachment F: Survey of property Attachment G: Survey of short plat L03 -014 Exhibit 2: Survey of Property (full size drawing) Findings of Fact 1. The subject property is located at 14226 56a' Avenue South in Tukwila, Washington. The King County Parcel Number is 336590 -0290. The property is approximately 13,051 square feet in size, and there is a single family residence on the property. There are wood retaining walls near the house on the north and east sides, and a concrete pad west of the house. The site slopes down from 56h Avenue South to the eastern end of the property. 2. The property is zoned Low Density Residential (LDR). The minimum lot size for new lots in this zone is 6,500 square feet. The minimum setback requirements in the f Tukwila Hearing Examine. L06 -060 Page 2 of 4 zone are 20 feet for the front yard, 10 feet for the rear yard, and five feet for the side yards. 3. The proposal is to short plat the property into two lots. Lot "A" would be located on the western portion of the site, near 56d Avenue South, and would have a "panhandle" running east along the north side of the existing house on proposed Lot `B." Lot A would be approximately 6,501 square feet; its panhandle area would be approximately 53 feet long and 672.62 feet in size. Lot B would be located on the eastern portion of the site, and would be approximately 6,504 square feet. The proposed plat would retain the existing house on Lot B. 4. The appellant purchased the property on March 1, 2006, for $294,000. On June 21, 2006, the appellant requested a Code Interpretation, seeking approval of his proposed lot configuration. 5. The Department issued a Code Interpretation on August 11, 2006, which concluded that the City could not approve the proposed lot configuration. The interpretation stated that the "proposed lot lines are not appropriate for the type of development and do not provide the amount of usable lot area anticipated by the 6,500 square foot minimum lot size required by the zone." 6. The interpretation identified several problems with the proposed short plat: Fifty - three feet of the northern side yard would be rendered inaccessible to the owners of a house built on Lot A; the existing wood retaining walls and stairs were proposed to be removed without indicating what would replace them, and who would be responsible for their maintenance; the majority of the panhandle area would not contain a driveway or be needed for access; and the submittal did not identify how the removal of the existing parking pad and creation of a new parking area on Lot B would be accomplished. 7. The interpretation noted that there were other options that would allow a short plat on the property, including the acquisition of additional property from adjacent properties, removal or relocation of the existing house in order to allow for a different lot configuration, or petitioning the City Council for a reduction in the minimum lot size. 8. The appellant previously received approval for a short plat (1,03 -014) which included a flag - shaped area (Exhibit 1, Attachment G). In that case, the flag- shaped lot took its street access by way of its panhandle. 9. The appellant has argued that the interpretation is in error, because it is based on an aesthetic concern, i.e., how the lots appear on a map or site plan, rather than how the lots would function. The appellant noted that he had previously received approval for a flag- shaped lot, and that the demolition of the existing structure would be a financial hardship. fukwila Hearing Examiner L06 -060 Page 3 of 4 10. TMC 17.20.030.17 provides: 1. ARRANGEMENT Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial to curved street lines. Each lot must have access to a public street that is approved at the time of plat review; however, rather than designing flag lots, access shall be accomplished with common drive easements. 2. LOT DESIGN.- The lot area, width, shape, and orientation shall be appropriate for the location of the subdivision, for the type of development and land use contemplated, and shall conform with the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Conclusions 1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to TMC 18.108.020. Under TMC 18.96.020, the Director's interpretation is to be given substantial weight, and the burden of establishing the contrary is on the appellant. 2. The Director's interpretation adheres to the language of TMC 17.20.030.17, which favors side lot lines at right angles to street lines, and specifically disfavors flag lots, even in the context of providing access to public streets. In the previous decision cited by the appellant, the Director apparently exercised his discretion to allow a flag lot in order to provide access to the street. But in this case, the flag- shaped lot is not required for street access, so that factor cannot be relied upon to allow an exception to the Code's language concerning flag lots. 3. The appellant has argued that the denial of the proposed configuration is based on an aesthetic preference, rather than a practical consideration of how the lots will function. However, the record shows that the flag area will not perform any of the typical functions of a lot, such as providing usable space or separation between lots. Moreover, even if TMC 17.20.030.F was based on the City Council's "aesthetic preference" for a particular shape of lot, the Director would nevertheless be required to administer the Code as written. 4. The appellant has also argued that it would be a financial hardship to change his proposed lot configuration, but that is not a basis for concluding that the interpretation is in error. Furthermore, as noted by the Director, the conditions of property, including the presence of the structure and the lot size, have not changed since the appellant purchased the property. 5. The appellant has not shown that the Director's interpretation was in error. The appeal must therefore be denied. Tukwila Hearing Examine. L06 -060 Page 4 of 4 Decision The Director's Code Interpretation is hereby AFFIRMED and the appeal is hereby denied. Entered this 6h day of October, 2006. Anne Watanabe, Hearing Examiner City of Tukwila Concerning Further Review TMC 18.108.020.11 provides that "The decisions of the Hearing Examiner, the Planning Commission and the City Council regarding Type 2 decisions shall be final and shall be appealable only to Superior Court pursuant to RCW 36.70C." BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF SEATTLE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY MAIL I, Alicia Holiwell, certify that on the 6th day of OCTOBER, 2006 I deposited in the mail of the United States (with postage prepaid) and in the City's Mail/Messenger Service (used for City personnel only) a sealed envelope containing the attached FINDINGS AND DECISION to each person listed on the back of this certificate or on the attached mailing list, in the matter of TEny LE. Hearing Examiner file: FILE: L06 -060. I further certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct and that this certificate of service was executed this 6rn day of October, 2006, at Seattle, Washington. Name: Alicia Holiwell Title: Administrative Specialist I MAILING LIST FOR HEARING EXAMINER FILE NO. L06 -060 TIEN LE C/O RYAN NEAL, PLANNER CRAMER NW INC. 945 N. CENTRAL, STE.104 KENT, WA 98032 BRANDON MILES, ASST. PLANNER CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD. TUKWILA, WA 98188 NORA GIERLOFF, PLANNING SUPERVISOR CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD. TUKWILA, WA 98188 JACK PACE CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD. TUKWILA, WA 98188 FILE NUMBER: L06 -060 APPLICATION: Appeal of Code Interpretation issued by the Director on August 11, 2006 SITE ADDRESS: 14226 56 AV S PROPERTY OWNER: Tien Le ZONING: Low Density Residential NOTIFICATION: Notice of Appeal Date was mailed to the appellant on August 28, 2006 via regular US Mail. PREPARED BY: Br ATTACHMENTS: A. B. C. D. E. F. G. BACKGROUND radon J. Miles, Assistant Planner Aerial Photo Notice of Appeal Code Interpretation issued by the Director Letter from Ryan Neal requesting Code Interpretation, dated June 21, 2006 Letter from Ryan Neal, dated August 1, 2006 Survey of Property submitted by appellant Survey of short plat L03 -014 On June 1, 2006 the City conducted a pre - application meeting for the real property located at 14226 56th Avenue South, Tukwila, Washington. Tien Le (appellant) proposed a two lot short plat for the property. The plan that the appellant submitted to the City indicated that proposed lot "A" would have an irregular lot pattern. The purpose of this irregular pattern was to allow proposed lot "A" to have sufficient lot area to meet the minimum lot area requirements for the LDR zoning. Planning Staff notified the appellant that the proposed pattern did not appear to meet code and suggested that the applicant submit for a Code Interpretation. On August 1, 2006, the City received a complete application for a code interpretation. On August 11, 2006, the Deputy Director of Community Development issued a code interpretation. The interpretation noted, "Tukwila finds that the proposed lot lines are not appropriate for the type of development and do not provide the amount of usable lot area anticipated by the 6,500 square foot minimum lot size required Staff Report Tien Le Appeal, L06 -060 SCOPE OF HEARING Under Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC)18.116 the appeal filed by the appellant is limited only to those issues raised in the Notice of Appeal submitted to the City on August 25, 2006. The appellant is asking that the Hearing Examiner overturn the City's Code Interpretation regarding the shape of the proposed lot. The City requests that the City's Code Interpretation be affirmed and that the appeal be dismissed. FINDINGS OF FACT The property in question is located at 14226 56`h Avenue South, Tukwila, King County, Washington, King County Parcel Number 336590 -0290 (Attachment A: Aerial Photo). Tien Le (appellant) is the legal owner of the subject property. The appellant purchased the property on March 1, 2006 for the sum of $294,000. There is currently a house located on the subject property. 2. The subject property is zoned Low Density Residential (LDR). The minimum lot size for new lots within the LDR zone is 6,500 square feet. The LDR zone requires the following setbacks, 20 feet front, five feet sides, ten foot second front, and ten foot rear. The existing home would be required to meet setbacks. 3. According to a survey dated May 9, 2006 (Attachment F), the property is 13,051 square feet + / -. The appellant proposes a two lot short plat. Lot "A" would be located towards the front of the property near 56t' Avenue South. Lot "A" is a panhandled lot. A portion of proposed lot "A" extends along the north side of the existing house on proposed lot `B ". This panhandle portion of the lot occupies approximately 672.62 square feet. There is a currently a wood retaining wall located on the panhandle area. The existing home would be located on proposed lot `B ". 4. The approval of a short plat also known as a short subdivision is made by the City's short plat committee (TMC 17.28.0 10 (A) (1)). The short plat committee is comprised of the Director of Community Development, Director of Public Works, and the Fire Chief. The Director of Community Development is the chair of the committee. 5. On June 21, 2006, the appellant's agent, Ryan Neal submitted a code interpretation request to Nora Gierloff, Planning Supervisor (Attachment D). The code interpretation letter dated, June 21, 2006 noted the following, "In order to comply with the minimum square footage and setback requirements within the LDR zone, we are proposing a flag -lot design of the new lot to compensate for the location of the existing residence ". The applicant was subsequently deemed incomplete because the required fee was not provided. On August 1, 2006 the applicant provided the necessary items to allow the application to be complete (Attachment E). 6. On August 11, 2006, the City issued the code interpretation regarding the applicant's request to create a panhandle lot (Attachment Q. The code interpretation noted the following, "The City cannot approve the lot configuration you have proposed for a short plat at 14226 50h Avenue South. It would result in 53 feet of the northern side yard of the existing house belonging to the lot with the new house, yet being unusable to those owners ". Created by Brandon -M 2 Q:\Appeals \Tien Le\IE Staff Report.doc Staff Report Tien Le Appeal, L06 -060 TMC 17.20.030 (F) notes 1. ARRANGEMENT: Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial to curved street lines. Each lot must have access to a public street that is approved at the time of plat review; however, rather than design flag lots, access shall be accomplished with common drive easements. 2. LOT DESIGN: The lot area, width, shape, and orientation shall be appropriate for the location of the subdivision, for the type of development and land use contemplated, and shall conform with the requirements of the zoning ordinance. 8. The applicant filed a timely appeal on August 25, 2006 (Attachment. DISCUSSION Questions before the Hearing Examiner: TMC 18.96.020 notes that any code interpretation of the Director shall be given substantial weight, and the burden of establishing the contrary shall be upon the appellant. Has the appellant met his burden of proof? Question 1: How the appellant met his burden of proof to allow the Hearing Examiner to reverse the Director's Interpretation. The answer to the above question is no. The appellant's Notice of Appeal (Attachment B) notes "It would be financially hard ship to tear down the house base on the decision on the letter received 8/10/2006 ". The Notice of Appeal goes on to note, "It addition that the City of Tukwila approved the project similar design per recording number 20050225900002 ". The purpose of a minimum lot area is to ensure that there is suitable area in order to construct a typical single family house. A "lot" provides the following essential activities for a single family development: 1. Development site for a single family home; 2. Area for out buildings; 3. Driveway; 4. Utility Easements; 5. Recreation space; 6. Storage; 7. Separation from other homes. The appellant is requesting that the hearing examiner ignore the fact that the flag area will be unable to provide any of the above attributes. The odd configuration of the lot is being done solely so that Created by Brandon -M Q:\Appeals \Tien Le\HE Staff Report.doc Staff Report Tien Le Appeal, L06 -060 the applicant can meet the minimum lot area. The flag area will provide no function to lot "A" and will appear and act as if it is part of lot `B ". The applicant references an old short plat where the City permitted a slight irregular lot configuration (1,03 -014). The appellant's reliance on this old short plat does not help the appellant's cause. A complete review of this short plat justifies why the City has not approved the appellant's current lot configuration. The City did allow a slight flag area in order to allow Mr. Tien Le to be able to meet minimum lot area. However, the flag area provided direct access to the lot. Unlike the appellant's current proposal, the flag area provided a beneficial use (access) to the lot that it was include with. The appellant's argument that it would be a financial hardship to remove the house in order to allow for a logical configuration for the proposed short plat is insufficient to warrant a reversal of the City's decision. The conditions of the property are unchanged from when the appellant purchased the property. The applicant purchased a residential property where the house was located directly in the middle of the lot and the lot area was just barely enough to allow a short plat. The appellant has other options available in order to permit a short plat on the property. 1) The appellant could acquire additional property from adjacent properties and do a Boundary Line Adjustment. 2) The appellant could remove or relocate the home on the property in order to allow the lots to have a logical configuration. 3) The appellant could petition the City Council to reduce the minimum lot size. TMC 17.20.030 (F) (2) requires that the "The lot area, width, shape, and orientation shall be appropriate for the location of the subdivision, for the type of development and land use contemplated". The applicant's proposal is not appropriate for the land use contemplated (single family home). The applicant's proposal creates "dead space" unusable to the lot that it would be legally part of. If such a plat were approved a future landowner would be responsible for property taxes, storm -fees, legal liability, and maintenance of the existing retaining wall but would receive no beneficial use from the dead space. The retaining wall would actually benefit proposed lot `B ". The appellant has not met his burden of proof and thus the City's Code Interpretation should be affirmed and the appeal dismissed. Created by Brandon -M Q:\Appeals \Tien Le\IE Staff Report.doc Page 1 of 1 Subject Property N Cit Copyright © 2006 All Rights Reserved. The information contained contributor supplied under license and may not be approved excel ATTACHMENT A httn• / /manc Aitritalmnnrantral ' r-AnA, v lktml no /1 n /)nn,< " August 25, 2006 RECEIVED Tien Le AUG 2 5 2006 9420 8`h Ave. S.W. � Seattle, WA 98106 (206) 778 -2655 Subject: Notice of Appeal — Letter received on the decision on 8/10/2006 on code Interpretation for PRE 06 -024. Dear Ms. Gierloff, I request for Notice of Appeal for the decision on 08/10/2006 that denied for two - lot short plat on parcel located 14226 56th Avenue S, APN 336590 -0290. It would be financially hard ship to tear down the house base on the decision on the letter received 8/10/2006. Would you re- consider the proposed a flag -lot design of the new lot to compensate for the existing residence. The proposed panhandle is approximately fifty - one feet in length and runs underneath the proposed access easement which will serve the existing residence post -short plat. The new lot created will meet all zoning and code requirements except for the City preference against odd- shaped lots. In addition that the City of Tukwila approved the project similar design per recording number 20050225900002. Please contact me for any additional information you need in -order to reconsider. Sincerely, Tien Le Property owner. Attachment B Oir � CV « Steven M. Mullet, Mayor J= O G) Of ,_= Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster= Director 1908 August 11, 2006 Ryan Neal Cramer Northwest Inc. 945 N. Central, Suite # 104 Kent, WA 98032 RE: Code Interpretation related to PRE06 -024 Dear Mr. Neal: ATTACHMENT C The City cannot approve the lot configuration you have proposed for a short plat at 14226 56 Avenue South. It would result in 53 feet of the northern side yard of the existing house belonging to the lot with the new house, yet being unusable to those owners. While you have noted that the wood retaining walls in this panhandle area could be removed, there is no indication of what would replace them and which lot would be responsible for maintenance of future retaining structures. There is a similar problem with the existing stairs along the north side of the house. The majority (33 feet) of the panhandle would not contain a driveway or be needed for access. Previously I had requested that if you intended to remove the concrete pad of the carport and provide parking for the existing house in the rear yard that you provide a drawing that identifies how this would be accomplished through grading, new retaining walls etc. Your current submittal does not contain that information. Tukwila's Subdivision Code, TMC Chapter 17 addresses requirements for lot design as follows: 17.20.030 F. Lots: 1. ARRANGEMENT.- Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial to curved street lines. Each lot must have access to a public street that is approved at the time of plat review; however, rather than designing flag lots, access shall be accomplished with common drive easements. 2. LOT DESIGN. The lot area, width, shape, and orientation shall be appropriate for the location of the subdivision, for the type of development and land use contemplated, and shall conform with the requirements of the zoning ordinance. QALETTERS \Neal_Denial.DOC 08/10/2006 Fax: 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 « Tukwila, Washington 98188 * Phone: 206 - 431 -3670 • 206 - 431 - 3665,; Tukwila finds that the proposed lot lines are not appropriate for the type of development and do not provide the amount of usable lot area anticipated by the 6,500 square foot minimum lot size required by the zone. If you have any questions with this matter please call me at (206) 431 -3670. Sincerely, J Pace Deputy Director QALETTERS \Neal_Denial.DOC 2 08/10/2006 Cramer Northwest, Inc. RE Surveyors •Planners *Engineers CEIVED !JUN 2 6 2006 COMMUNI � D�l/Ei.OP1�pE VT June 21, 2006 City of Tukwila c/o Nora Gierlo$ Planning Supervisor Department of Community Development 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 -2544 Re: Code Interpretation for PRE06 -024 Dear Ms. Gierlo$ Per the request of Brandon Miles, I am writing to request a code interpretation for our client, Tien Le, regarding the project associated with the above - referenced pre- application number. We are proposing a residential two -lot short plat on the parcel located at 14226 56* Avenue S, APN 336590-0290. Based upon the comments from our pre - application meeting, we are requesting that you approve our lot configuration as proposed in the pte- application meeting. In order to comply with the minimum square footage and setback requirements within the LDR zone, we are proposing a flag -lot design of the new lot to compensate for the location of the existing residence. The proposed panhandle is approximately fifty -one feet in length and runs underneath the proposed access easement which will serve the existing residence post -short plat. The new lot created will meet all zoning and code requirements except for the City's preference against odd- shaped lots. In addition to those points previously mentioned, it is worth noting that our client recently recorded a project of similar design as approved by the City of Tukwila per recording number 20050225900002. 1 have enclosed a copy of that approved map as well as copies of our pre- application meeting notes and proposed short plat map for your review. Please feel free to contact me for any additional information you may need in reaching your decision. Sincerely, Ryan Neal Planner cc: Mr. Tien Le A aehluent D 945 N. Central, Suite #104 Kent WA 98032 (253) 852 -4880 Fax(253)8524955 www.cramemw.com E -mail: cni@cramemw.com Cramer Northwest, Inc. Surveyors *Planners *Engineers August 1, 2006 City of Tukwila c% Nora Gierlof� Planning Supervisor Department of Community Development 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 -2544 Re: Code Interpretation for PRE06 -024 Dear Ms. Gierlof� I have enclosed revised plans for your review along with the requested $100 fee in order to complete the application for the above - referenced code interpretation. The proposed 22' wide fire access road and 14' access road will allow for a retaining wall and sufficient grade to comply with City of Tukwila setback requirement as well as public works and fire codes. Please feel free to contact me for any additional information you may need in reaching your decision. Sincerely, Ryan Planner cc: Mr. Tien Le ATTACHMENT E RECEIVED AUG 01 7006 cot.. DEVEL4r;..r.NT 945 N. Central, Suite #104 Kent WA 98032 (253-)852-4880 Fax(253)852-4955 www.cramemw.com E -mail: cniAcramemw.com s S E� E 1 1 III M a i n I I • ATTACHMENT F as e �i 9�� o SKI h I 6 b y � ILI M m H ma as e �i 9�� o SKI h I oo, SVJ% ,SZ'LZ£t z0aw tZ'CZ[t � " 0 bwma1110 s1s0g 3.80,90. tON 3�V'ZL• Z :: Q( lal a 1 W .SBB£t 3.St,9o.t0N , O` a. L mp `auv Q eJ a n H� ' m H r m• O Q p Z ��' nV 2 3.S190.tON/ B$ mg /• Z _ �[ ZZ..�YY�ppL1 I(n t7� I WTI .0035 ZN� ` 1, Q•A•.R.p C,41 i 1-= 1.90.1OK SH O �... ::. Im W' Ur r WON �A.IWI 10 1" Oo'99 iSOM 941 to awl 1203 co F: LAJ 0 Qi- 0 I i _ C I IF , c .y...::d• 6 c � p 2 I ��� O •� a '•� � .. '� 0 3 i 0 e Q ° • .. C -- g S r r0 I G1 « = E o t _ �£M::•° •• =- I 09'6 6 - ;SO'Y a Fpvr � � � m � " 3 ,y • Qs a.e� �... 1 n N , N N . J, R �• Dx I 9YSZ�DozzaooZ�'�a''•: :�.: � •+T Z `.:: _--F •. � h r liffln i t4i�aV .01`' S1.90.10N + + \ 'S6 z ,*L'CZl .mil N •• .Yt'1i,6 E Eo 3.91.90AON - Q'r,• La X ° 1 —� F �O $gO t � 8 � 'vSx -° I .gig y�a:�S>< m o n h "•`.� ',•ter � �.,1�. � •• W p ••,. . •g •, s m s .o c J '. ; • "• Zi 701 10 1"i 00'99 12211 Is4L 10 2141 1Cb3 ', j = _ m L o s � o'r• o ° � $ Pi o C35 __ 2\ N �Y r Sj• .�i i t a ; jib W S t rlz 4 o T e 'rd € e ++ 1 � c ••�:. I - .i I � �cr$ $_ga.r�°E ty� cY7 Bo�O$° E �[O$oc S o .9 m coo L Wv $ $ a qT 27^ d xS 0 s$a9 Q t I 1 l e .'�• _ 6 o O w $ E.O. i0 -oScS o L G c E F f r :•M.S I,90tz- awl a' Z e o u u T y N i �, 2 (' 3A,CpN H 1 O m 3.St.90XDN uiN c ` : e T< q z St.90.IQN wV 3 L E F- Z ~ .SY'6Y;: = r i e I--:' Y •::; 0: K g F •'::. L-'- i a twum03 c r ° g b r '. U n e . O d'k ? ..,< d n Zt8O11 >p ssaasV .OZ Y 4 e o ° $ s ° o, E in O'er .S9'8IZ $ $ 3 E `a 35 ZI 101 l0 1221 OO*8S IsaM 241 l0 ayl 1-3 y r u o ^ E � OU ••,V Y cn I's e 4 eOO 41 9 4 LL1pJ Y c ; -a`. c-i rio esE City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98186 Telephone (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E —mail: tukplan @tukwila:wa.us SHORT PLAT NUMBER DECLARATION: KNOw ALL MEN BY HEREIN DESCRIBED DO�HEREBY MAKE TA SHORT SUBDMSI�ON� THEREOF OWNER(S) UANT TO RCW 58.17.0 0 LAND AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT SAID SUBDMSION SHALL NOT BE FURTHER DMDED IN :AMY MANNER WITHIN A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS, FROM DATE OF RECORD, WITHOUT THE FLING OF A FINAL PLAT. THE UNDERSIGNED FURTHER DECLARE THIS SHORT PLAT TO BE THE GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION OF SAID SHORT SUBDMSION AND THE SAME IS MADE WITH THE FREE CONSENT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DESIRE OF THE OWNER(S). IN WITNESS WHEREOF WE HAVE SET OUR HANDS AND SEALS. NAME• NAMP NAME. NAME* STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ON THIS DAY PERSONALLY APPEARED BEFORE MF TO ME KNOWN TO BE THE INDMDUAL WHO EXECUTED THE WITHIN AND FOREGOING INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED THAT HE/SHE SIGNED THE SAME AS HIS /HER VOWNTARY ACT AND DEED FOR THE USES AND PURPOSES THEREIN MENTIONED. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL TIPS DAY OF 20 SIGNATURE__ NAME AS COMMISSIONED. Tm F• MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ON THIS DAY PERSONALLY APPEARED BEFORE ME .TO ME KNOWN TO BE THE INDMDUAL WHO EXECUTED THE WITHIN AND FOREGOING INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGED THAT HE/SHE SIGNED THE SAME AS HIS /HER VOLUNTARY ACT AND DEED FOR THE USES AND PURPOSES THEREN- MENTIONED. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL THIS DAY OF 20_ SIGNATURE' NAME AS .COMMISSIONED' MY APPOINTMENT ERPIRFC LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE: REGISTERED AS A LAND SURVEYOR BY THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAT IS BASED ON AN ACTUAL SURVEY OF THE LAND DESCRIBED HEREIN, CONDUCTED BY ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION; THAT THE DISTANCES, COURSES AND ANGLES ARE SHOWN HEREON CORRECTLY; MID -THAT MONUMENTS OTHER THAN THOSE MONUMENTS APPROVED FOR SETTING AT A LATER DATE. HAVE BEEN SET AND LOT CORNERS STAKED ON THE GROUND AS DEPICTED ON THE PLAT. TUKWILA SHORT SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE APPROVAL: REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE SHORT SUBDMSION COMMITTEE AND -HEREBY CERTIFIED FOR FILING THIS DAY OF 20 CHAIRPERSON, SHORT SUBDMSION COMMITTEE CITY OF TUKWILA SHORT PLAT FOR TIEN LE LOCATED IN THE S.E. 1/4, OF THE S. W. 1/4, OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON APPROVALS: KING COUNTY FINANCE DMSION KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S APPROVAL 1 CERTIFY THAT ALL PROPERTY TAXES ARE PAID AND THAT A DEPOSIT HAS BEEN MADE IN SUFFICIENT EXAMINED AND APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENTS THIS AMOUNT TO PAY THE TAXES FOR THE FOLLOVANG YEAR; THAT THERE ARE NO DELNQUENT SPECIAL DAY OF �^ ASSESSMENTS CERTIFIED TO THIS OFFICE FOR COLLECTION; AND THAT ALL SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS DAY ANY OF THE PROPERTY HEREIN DEDICATED AS SIKtL;. ALLEYS. OR FOR OTHER PUBLIC USE ARE PAID IN FULL THIS DAY OF 20 KING COUNTY TREASURER DEPUTY KING COUNTY TREASURER NEW LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS: KING COUNTY ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER(S) VOLUME PAGE RECEIVED AUG 01 2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 3.36590-0290 DEPUTY ASSESSOR DEVELOPER /OWNER INFORMATION: TIEN LE 94208711 AVE SW SEATTLE, WA 98168 206 - 778 -2655 ZONING, SERVICE & UTILITY INFORMATION: NUMBER OF LOTS: XXX PROPOSED DENSITY: XXX PARENT PARCEL ZONED: XXX PROPOSED USE XXX SEWER SERVICE PROVIDER: XXX WATER SERVICE PROVIDER: XXX SCHOOL DISTRICT: XXX FIRE DISTRICT: XXX TELEPHONE SERVICE XXX POWER SOURCE XXX SURVEY IN_ _S•E__1 /4 OF S.W. 1/4 OF SECTION 14 T._ 23 N., R._ 4 _E., W.M., RECORDING CERTIFICATE: FILED FOR RECORD AT THE REQUEST OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA THIS_ DAY OF 20 , AT MINUTES PAST - M, AND RECORDED IN VOLUME _OF PLATS, ON PAGE —, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. OWNER(S). ADDRESS. PHONE: i:..Pa.''DOl�• ClisT Cramer Northwest Inc. Surveyors Planners & Engineers 945 N. CENTRAL. STE. #104, KENT, WA 98032 E—MAIL: anlOoramernw.aom (253)852 -4880 (local) or 1— (800)251 -0189 (toll fres) (253)852-4955 {f a:) DRAWN BY J.A.C. DATE 7/31/2006 lJOB NUMBER 2006 -0415 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 8300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone (208) 431 -3670 FAX (208) 431 -3685 E -mail: tukplanOtukwila.wa.us SHORT PLAT NUMBER CALCD. P001T ISM RAT 20' No LEGEND: ® FOUND MONUMENT AS DESCRIBED ® UGHT POLE 69 POWER METER M GAS METER m TELEPHONE RISER • WATER VALVE * FIRE HYDRANT ® WATER METER EM CATCH BASIN ® SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE (**STRUCTURES TO BE REMOVED amnOs 07YTNF"u WIN ,_ 2' EAVES CITY OF TUKWILA SHORT PLAT FOR TIEN LE LOCATED IN THE S.E. 1/4, OF THE S.W. 1/4, OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON TREE LEGEND:. CONIFER TREE '"PP`` DECIDUOUS TREE T1: 27' CEDAR T2: 28' JUNIPER T3: 33' DECIDUOUS T4: (2) 9' DECIDUOUS 75: 9` DECIDUOUS T8: 10' & 1S DECIDUOUS 77: 9' DECIDUOUS 78: 10' DECIDUOUS T9: 8' DECIDUOUS T10: 10' CEDAR i % a L07 � � � 336590 -0295 LL -a BLOCK G&ROEN TRACTS '' Ha/JAWS SEATTLE 24) 8 ti * Q \ 1' EAA%6S ei 0/01_ 1, PG. N LOT 24 336590 -0380' 4' OWN LAN FENS COMM m 0.5't 70I171 CF L.DE LOT 8 I 655N 87, FT. 21 LOT 25 336590-0385 A V. 4' we 179E COMV31 19 13'3 N. & 023 E. ff PRiHiTY 097'E .94' ■ LOT 5 336590- 0285�o spy O1 N y gN g N > O . m m - J 3, . 20' 19194' INSTRUMENTATION: INSTRUMENT USED: GEODIMETER 600 FIELD SURVEY CONTROL METHOD: CLOSED LOOP TRAVERSE MINIMUM CLOSURE 1:22,000 IN COMPLVWCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF W.A.C. 332- 130 -090 OWNER(S)' TIEN LE 11H� LOT 26 336590-0390 co N SOUTH 144TH STREET S89 513971 42387' ADDRESS: 9420 8TH AVE. SW PHONE: CITY' STATE. 206 - 778 -2655 SEATTLE WASHINGTON jp 98168 4 of e4\ ri�_JL fit+ SURVEY IN S.E. 1/4 OF S.W. 1/4 OF SECTION 14 T., 23 N, R. 4 E., W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON `VO ,ME PAGE GRAPHIC SCALE 1" =20' 20 0 20 BASIS OF BEARINGS: BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THE MONUMENTED CENTERLINE OF SOUTH 144TH STREET, BEING SOUTH 891118' WEST, AS SHOWN ON THAT CRY OF TUKWILA SHORT PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 189 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 219, UNDER RECORDING N0. 20050713900001. RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 6, BLOCK 4, HILLMANS SEATTLE GIRDER TRACTS. ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 24, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY,. NOTES: 1. MONUMENTS LAST VISITED 04 -04-06. 2. THIS SURVEY WAS PERFORMED WITHOUT THE - BENEFIT OF A CURRENT TITLE REPORT AND THEREFORE DOES NOT PURPORT 70 SHOW ALL EASEMENTS, COVENANTS, CONDITIONS OR RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY. 3. 711E I OUNLIF ?'ES O40114 ON THIS SURVEY REPRESENT DEED UNES ONLY, ACTUAL OWNERSHIP MAY OTHERWISE BE DETERMINED. VERTICAL DATUM: NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 BENCHMARK KING COUNTY SURVEY CONTROL POINT NO. 93V -901. DESCRIBED AS A BRASS PIN IN A 2' CONCRETE FILLED PIPE IN A MONUMENT CASE LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTH 144TH STREET AND 59TH AVENUE SOUTH. ELEVATION: 174.18 U.S. FEET. SITE BENCHMAP.K + CHISELED BOX AT BACK OF CURB ON WEST SIDE OF 56774 AVE SOUTH, NEAR TELEPHONE RISER NUMBER 14227. ELEVATION: 216.21 U.S FEET CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2.00 U.S FEET REFERENCE SURVEYS: 1. HILLMAN'S SEATTLE GARDEN TRACTS. ACCORDING 70 THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 24. RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. 2. CRY OF TUKWILA SHORT PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 189 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 219. UNDER RECORDING N0. 20050713900001. RECORDS OF KONG COUNTY, WASHINGTON. Cava, Tel(WILA AaW1ru ✓ VOMIT I Rambles FILE Cramer Northwest Inc. Surveyors Planners 8: Engineers 945 N. CENTRAL. STE. #104. KENT; WA 98032 E -MAIL' enlOaramernn.com (253)852 -4880 (local) or 1- (800)251 -0189 (fou fns) (253)851-4955 (fax) DRAWN BY J.A.C. DATE 7/31/2006 JOB NUMBER 2006-041S CHECKED BY 0.B.H. SCALE 1' =20' SHEET 2 OF 2 August 25, 2006 RECEIVED Tien Le 46 2 5 2006 9420 8" Ave. S.W. � Seattle, WA 98106 (206) 778 -2655 Subject: Notice of Appeal — Letter received on the decision on 8/10/2006 on code Interpretation for PRE 06 -024. Dear Ms. Gierloff, I request for Notice of Appeal for the decision on 08/10/2006 that denied for two - lot short plat on parcel located 14226 56`h Avenue S, APN 336590 -0290. It would be financially hard ship to tear down the house base on the decision on the letter received 8/10/2006. Would you re- consider the proposed a flag -lot design of the new lot to compensate for the existing residence. The proposed panhandle is approximately fifty - one feet in length and runs underneath the proposed access easement which will serve the existing residence post -short plat. The new lot created will meet all zoning and code requirements except for the City preference against odd - shaped lots. In addition that the City of Tukwila approved the project similar design per recording number 20050225900002. Please contact me for any additional information you need in -order to reconsider. Sincerely, Tien Le Property owner. I� O 1908 City of l ukMla Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development August 28, 2006 Mr. Tien Le 9420 8`h Ave SW Seattle, WA 98106 RE: Appeal (A06 -020) Dear Mr. Tien Le: Steve Lancaster, Director The City received your appeal request on August 25, 2006. The appeal is of a code interpretation issued by Jack Pace dated August 11, 2006. The appeal has been scheduled to be held before the City's Hearing Examiner on September 28, 2006 at 9am. The appeal will be located at 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 in Conference Room #2. If you have any questions, please call (206) 431 -3684 or send an email to bmilesQ.ci.tukwila.wa.us. ?7 ly, Brandon J. Miles Assistant Planner CC. Anne Watanabe, Hearing Examiner Peter Beckwith, Assistant City Attorney File (1,06 -060) 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila. Washineton 98188 • Phone. 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax- 206 -4. 71- 1665 rnt: 4 i The City received your appeal request on August 25, 2006. The appeal is of a code interpretation issued by Jack Pace dated August 11, 2006. The appeal has been scheduled to be held before the City's Hearing Examiner on September 28, 2006 at 9am. The appeal will be located at 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 in Conference Room #2. If you have any questions, please call (206) 431 -3684 or send an email to bmilesQ.ci.tukwila.wa.us. ?7 ly, Brandon J. Miles Assistant Planner CC. Anne Watanabe, Hearing Examiner Peter Beckwith, Assistant City Attorney File (1,06 -060) 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila. Washineton 98188 • Phone. 206 - 431 -3670 • Fax- 206 -4. 71- 1665 ILA, J.1 1908 August 11, 2006 fTSteven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director Ryan Neal Cramer Northwest Inc. 945 N. Central, Suite # 104 Kent, WA 98032 RE: Code Interpretation related to PRE06 -024 Dear Mr. Neal: The City cannot approve the lot configuration you have proposed for a short plat at 14226 56 Avenue South. It would result in 53 feet of the northern side yard of the existing house belonging to the lot with the new house, yet being unusable to those owners. While you have noted that the wood retaining walls in this panhandle area could be removed, there is no indication of what would replace them and which lot would be responsible for maintenance of future retaining structures. There is a similar problem with the existing stairs along the north side of the house. The majority (33 feet) of the panhandle would not contain a driveway or be needed for access. Previously I had requested that if you intended to remove the concrete pad of the carport and provide parking for the existing house in the rear yard that you provide a drawing that identifies how this would be accomplished through grading, new retaining walls etc. Your current submittal does not contain that information. Tukwila's Subdivision Code, TMC Chapter 17 addresses requirements for lot design as follows: 17.20.030 F. Lots: 1. ARRANGEMENT: Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial to curved street lines. Each lot must have access to a public street that is approved at the time of plat review; however, rather than designing flag lots, access shall be accomplished with common drive easements. 2. LOT DESIGN: The lot area, width, shape, and orientation shall be appropriate for the location of the subdivision, for the type of development and land use contemplated, and shall conform with the requirements of the zoning ordinance. Q: \LETTERS \Nea1_Denia1.D0C 08/10/2006 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 o Tukwila, Washington 98188 o Phone: 206 -431 -3670 • Fax: 206. 431 -3665 Tukwila finds that the proposed lot lines are not appropriate for the type of development and do not provide the amount of usable lot area anticipated by the 6,500 square foot minimum lot size required by the zone. If you have any questions with this matter please call me at (206) 431 -3670. Sincerely, Ja Pace Deputy Director Q:\LETTERS\Nea1—Denia1.DOC 2 08/10/2006 FL J 1908 June 27, 2006 City of 7'ukMla Steven M. Mullet, Mayor Department of Community Development NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION Ryan Neal Cramer Northwest Inc. 945 N. Central, Suite # 104 Kent, WA 98032 RE: Code Interpretation related to PRE06 -024 Dear Mr. Neal: Steve Lancaster, Director Your application for a code interpretation related to a residential short plat has been found to be incomplete. In order to be a complete application you must submit the $100 fee. In addition the drawing you have submitted does not support your claim that the proposed panhandle "runs underneath the proposed access easement which will serve the existing residence post -short plat." In fact the carport for the existing house is to the west of the house and only the first twenty feet of the panhandle would be needed to access that parking pad. The remainder of the panhandle extending to the east contains retaining walls and so appears unsuitable for parking or access purposes. If you intend to remove the concrete pad of the carport and provide parking for the existing house in the rear yard please provide a drawing that identifies how this will be accomplished through grading, new retaining walls etc. Upon receipt of these items, the City will re- review them for completeness and will mail you written notification of completeness or incompleteness within 14 days. This request will be returned to you if we do not receive the additional information within ninety days of the date of this letter unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 18.105.070(E). If you have any questions with this matter please call me at (206) 433 -7141. Sincerely Nora Gierloff Planning Supervisor 6300 Southcenter Boulevard_ Suite #100 • rirlrwlla Wa.chinvtnn oR1RR • Dhnno- 9nA- d ?1_ ?R7/1 . c...,. ?AA 421 2AAC'