HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAR Ordinance SFR Staff Report - VAR Letters / Memos - 4/16/2009 TO BE KEPT IN THE
April 16,2009 PARCEL FILE EXHIBIT 1
TO: Phil Olbrechts,Mason County Hearings Examiner
FROM:Grace Miller,Senior Planner,(360)427-9670,ext 360.E-mail:gbm@co.mason.wa.us
RE: Resource Ordinance Variance#VAR2009-00001 request by Timothy Zimny
STAFF REPORT
I. INTRODUCTION.The request is for a variance from the Mason County Resource Ordinance. The
single family residence is proposed to be partially located within the Fish and Wildlife Habitat
Conservation Area buffer of a Type 1 shoreline.
II. APPLICANT. The applicant is Timothy Zimny.
III. PROPERTY LOCATION.The property is located in Grapeview,Tract 4 of the Mountain Shores
subdivision.The address is 571 Rauschert Road,Grapeview. Sec 18,Twn 21 N,R 1 W.Parcel
No.22018-50-00004.
IV. EVALUATION.
PROPOSAL: The applicant requests a reduction within the regulated saltwater shoreline buffer,
1,350 square feet of deck and building will be constructed 22 feet from the shoreline at the nearest
point. There will be approximately 585 square feet of building within the regulated setback or 13'
of encroachment into the minimum 35'building setback. A Habitat Management Plan has been
submitted for the proposal.The site plan indicates a building footprint that includes a deck.
A. Characteristics of the site.The property is 0.28 acre in size,60 feet wide and approx.200 feet deep
from road to shoreline.East Rauschert Road borders the parcel to the north.The lot is roughly
rectangular in shape and is oriented to the south.Case Inlet is located south of the property.There
is an existing rock bulkhead along the shoreline.The northern half of the parcel is dominated by a
dense community of scotchbroom which abruptly transitions to a lawn area extending south to the
shoreline bank. With the exception of the steep bank to the shoreline,topography within the parcel
slopes is relatively flat,sloping at a low gradient southerly toward the shoreline.
There is an existing septic system near the road,located approximately 86' from the OHWM.The
site plan indicates there is a 10'wide drainage easement along the west side of the parcel,from the
road to the shoreline.
B. Characteristics of the area. The surrounding area within the Mountain Shores subdivision contains
similar single family residential lots with varying sized residences.The view from the site is to the
south,across Case Inlet.There are residences located on either side of the proposal.The residence
to the west is smaller in size at approximately 640 square feet in size.The residence to the east is
similar to the proposed residence and larger in size at 1593 square feet.
The adjacent residence to the west is located 15 feet from the OHWM and has a concrete bulkhead
The adjacent residence to the east is 28 feet from the OHWM and has a terraced concrete and rock
1
H:1ROvarstf7.doc.gbm
patio out to the bulkhead which projects several feet beyond the OHWM.There are also residences
on the upland parcels above the applicants where the lots go up the hill to another road to the north.
It appears that the lot immediately above the applicants is vacant at this time.
C. Zoning: The property is zoned as Rural Residential 5.
D. The Comprehensive Plan Designation is Rural.
E. Shoreline Designation.The shoreline environment is Urban Residential.
F. SEPA Compliance.The proposal is SEPA exempt per WAC 197-11-800(1),(iii).
G. Other Permits.The proposal also requires a Building Permit that will be evaluated by the Mason
County Environmental Health Department because there is an existing septic system on the site.
H. Habitat Management Plan. A copy of the Habitat Management Plan was sent to the Squaxin Island
Tribe and the Dept of Fish and Wildlife.Comments have not been received to date.The HMP states
that the residence and deck will encroach into an area occupying 800 square feet within the regulated
buffer of a saltwater shoreline,Case Inlet.The total proposed development entails the SFR and deck
occupying 1,350 and a 600 square foot attached garage for a total of 1,950 square feet.
The proposed SFR will be located 30 feet from the OHWM of Case Inlet and the uncovered deck will
extend to 22 feet(IR P corrected by staff per applicant)from the OHWM of Case Inlet.Given the
existing septic and drainfield location coupled with the size and configuration of the parcel this is the
farthest distance from the shoreline that is feasible while meeting project objectives. Mitigation
Measures and Best Management Practices have been identified to avoid,minimize and mitigate for
impacts associated with the proposed construction.
III. ANALYSIS:
A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW:
Type III review for permit applications require that the Hearing Examiner evaluate the proposal for
consistency with the County's Development Code,adopted plans and regulations.The Hearing
Examiner shall review the proposal according to the following criteria: 1)The development does not
conflict with he Comprehensive Plan and meets the requirements and intent of the Mason County
Code,especially Title 6,8 and 16.2)The development does not impact the public health,safety and
welfare and is the public interest.3)The development does not lower the level of service of
transportation and/or neighborhood park facilities below the minimum standards established within
the Comprehensive Plan and meets the requirements and intent of the Mason County Code.
The Mason County Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas Chapter 17.01.110(D)(1)of the
Resource Ordinance details buffers on Type I waters such as this.The setbacks for the proposed structures
were determined by Planner,Allan Borden,on 8/11/08 during a requested site pre-inspection,#SPI2008-
00136. Allan determined the setbacks to be the minimum 20'of vegetated buffer with an additional 15'to
the building setback,a total of 35' from the OHWM for the residence.Allan also determined that the
shoreline common line setback drawn between the adjacent residences is 22 feet.It appears this
measurement was taken"at its nearest point"because the shoreline is curved with the rock bulkhead
projecting out further on the east side.
2
H:\ROvarstf7.doc.gbm
A Shoreline Variance is not required because under the Mason County Shoreline Master Program setback
requirements. Staff used the minimum shoreline setback of 22',drawn between the adjacent roof fines and
considered the"common line."The average of the neighbor's residences is 22' from the OHWM.The
variance is required under the Resource Ordinance because of the minimum 35' building setback with a
minimum 20' buffer requirement.The existing septic system is located approximately 86' from the
shoreline.
A Habitat Management Plan was prepared by Heather Lane and Lee Boad of The Wetland Corps,dated
January 2009.The Habitat Management Plan meets the requirements of the ordinance but contains some
discrepencies as to the proposed location of the deck in relation to the shoreline.The HMP states that the
deck will be located 15'from the shoreline but staff clarified with the applicant that the deck,as well as the
residence,are being proposed at the minimum 22' from the shoreline.The HMP contains recommendations
for minimizing impacts which include limiting the footprint of the SFR to 960 square feet.The proposed
structure is located 22 feet from the bulkhead at its nearest point.This is the greatest possible distance from
the OHWM given the size of the lot and the existing septic system location.
VI. VARIANCE CRITERIA.
The Mason County Resource Ordinance Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas Chapter 17.01.110
details buffer requirements and the content of the Habitat Management Plan.The Variances from Standards
Section 17.01.150(E)and the Mason County Code review standards Section 15.09.057 provide that no
variance shall be granted unless the County makes findings of fact showing that the following
circumstances exist:
1. That the strict application of the bulk,dimensional and performance standards precludes or
significantly interferes with a reasonable use of the property not otherwise prohibited by County
regulations.
Due to the presence of critical areas within the property the strict application of buffer and setback
requirements listed in the Mason County Resource Ordinance would not allow adequate space to
accommodate the proposed residence.The applicant is actually asking for a footprint of 30 by 45 feet(1350
sf)which would contain both a residence(960 sf)and a deck(390 sf).The applicant is also asking for an
attached garage(24'X25',600 square feet).The area outside the shoreline setback is currently occupied by
an on-site septic system.
2. That the hardship which serves as a basis for the granting of the variance is specifically related to the
property of the applicant,and is the result of unique conditions such as irregular lot shape,size or
natural features and the application of the County regulations and not,for example from deed
restrictions or the applicant's own actions.
Due to the presence of critical areas and an on-site sewage system within the property,the strict application
of buffer and setback requirements listed in the Mason County Resource Ordinance would only allow for
construction of a 765 square foot building.This is far less than what is defined as reasonable use for
residential construction under the Mason County Resource Ordinance.The hardship is specifically related
to this parcel due to the limited area,the presence of the type 1 water buffer requirements and the location
of the on-site septic system.
3
H:\ROvarstf7.doc.gbm
3. That the design of the project will be compatible with other permitted activities in the area and will not
cause adverse effects to adjacent properties or the environment.
A Habitat Management Plan has been prepared which identifies measures necessary to avoid,minimize and
compensate for potential negative effects to the environment.The applicant is seeking compliance with the
county regulations,specifically, FWHCA standards. Similar projects have been approved in Mason
County allowing residences to be constructed within regulated shoreline buffers.It does not appear that
view corridors will be obstructed or modified.One of the neighbors has stated that it will impact their view.
The shoreline"common line"setback is used to protect adjacent property owners view corridors.
The findings of the Habitat Management Plan conclude that no impacts to habitat or the use of the site by
threatened or endangered species are expected to occur.All recommendations listed in the HMP will be
followed which will restore and preserve the buffer area within the property and minimize potential for
long term environmental impacts.
4. That the variance authorized does not constitute a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by
other properties in the area and will be the minimum necessary to afford relief.
The proposed footprint is designed to accommodate a 1,350 square foot single family residence with an
attached deck and an attached garage.The resulting overall footprint has been proposed under the guidance
of the reasonable use criteria described in chapter 17.01.150 Section E of the Mason County Resource
Ordinance.Residences in proximity to the project site are comprised of similar footprints in similar
proximity to the saltwater.
5. That the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect.
Increased traffic and noise will not be of a magnitude that would substantially effect nearby residences.The
application of standards listed in the Habitat Management Plan will insure that natural features associated
with the project site are restored and preserved.There will be no detrimental effect to the public interest
resulting from the proposed project.
6. No variance shall be granted unless the owner otherwise lacks a reasonable use of the land.Such
variance shall be consistent with the Mason County Comprehensive Plan,Development Regulations,
Resource Ordinance and other County ordinances and with the Growth Management Act.Mere loss in
value only shall not justify a variance.
The property is zoned as Rural Residential 5.Residential development is an allowed use under these
regulations and policies.The lot is of sufficient size to accommodate residential development consistent
with the surrounding area.The project is consistent with the Mason County Comprehensive Plan and the
Growth Management Act.It appears that the project has been proposed to address all environmental
impacts associated with development near the shoreline.
VIl. CONCLUSION.
The review Standards of the Mason County Resource state that"In addition to the review criteria in Mason
County code 15.09.057,the minimum reasonable use for a residence in a residentially zoned area shall be
defined by the lesser of a)40%of the area of the lot,or b)2,550 square feet."Forty percent of the lot size is
approximately 4,956 square feet and the footprint of the residence and garage is 1,950 square feet,
assuming it is a one-story residence.Therefore,both are under the maximum size allowed under reasonable
use.
4
H:\ROvarstf7.doc.gbm
It appears to staff that if the permit is approved by the Hearings Examiner with the recommended
conditions,the proposal meets the County criteria and regulations for approval of a Variance. The
conditions require incorporation of the Habitat Management Plan into the site development.The Habitat
Management Plan was developed for this proposal by the'Wetland Corps and offers mitigation.The
mitigation includes a proposed 800 square foot Enhancement Zone within the buffer because the biologist
stated that this would compensate for the proposed total displacement of shoreline buffer.The numbers for
the displacement cannot be completely accurate because the biologist also stated that the deck would be 15'
from the shoreline and the applicant has said that even the deck will meet the minimum 22'common line
shoreline setback.
It appears that the only area that the parcel has available for construction of a residence is the building area
footprint shown on the site plan. Without this approved variance,the applicant would need to propose a
smaller footprint for a smaller residence and/or forego the proposed garage in order to be outside the
required 35'building setback with the residence and deck.
To date,two comment letters opposing the approval of the variance,have been received from adjacent
property owners.The letters are attached.If approved,staff recommends that the following conditions be
placed on the permit.
1) No portion of the proposed development,including decks,patios,rooflines,structures or
portions of structures shall be closer than the shoreline common line setback from the top of
the rock bulkhead(OHWM)at it's closest point.This measurement may increase from 22'
across the parcel but has been measured at 22'at its closest point.Once building footprint has
been marked on site,applicant should request an inspection by the Planning Department staff
to verify compliance with this condition.
po 2) Owner shall be required to control erosion during construction.Any disturbed areas should be
arestored to prevent erosion and other environmental impacts.Erosion and best management
t)o practices must be incorporated during all development for the residence.
4 3) Owner shall implement all Mitigation Measures and Buffer Enhancement Recommendations
M that have been proposed within the Habitat Management Plan prepared by the Wetland Corps
dated January 2009.The bank that is between the shoreline and the proposed development be
removed of invasive species and planted with native vegetation.The total area recommended
for native planting occupies 800 square feet and will be identified as the Enhancement Zone.
4) The applicant/owner is to have a Title Notification of Habitat Management Plan recorded with
the Deed to the property in the Mason County Auditor's office.A copy of the HMP
N Notification Form has been provided by Planning staff. The Title Notification statement
indicates that the property is subject to conditions,mitigation and/or conservation measures as
contained within the HMP submitted to the MC Dept of Community Development and
approved under Resource Ordinance Variance#VAR2009-00001.
5) The three-year Monitoring Plan specified in section 7.0(page 10)of the Habitat Management
NPlan must be implemented. The information gathered by the applicant's biologist must be
submitted as an annual report to the Director of Mason County Dept of Community
Development for three years following the first fall after plantings are done in enhancement
area.
CHOICE OF ACTION:
l. Approve permit request with conditions.
2. Approve permit request without conditions.
3. Deny(reapplication or resubmittal is permitted.)
4. Deny with prejudice(reapplication or resubmittal is not allowed for one year.)
5. Remand for further proceedings and/or evidentiary hearing in accordance with Section 15.09.090 of
Title 15.
5
H:\ROvarstf7.doc.gbm
LIST OF EXHIBITS for Timothy Zimny's VARIANCE REQUEST,VAR2009-00001:
1. Staff Report,site plan and vicinity map.
2. Variance Permit Application
3. Legal Notice of Application,affidavits of posting and publication.
4. Habitat Management Plan with site plan and vicinity map.
5. Shoreline pre-inspection findings.
6. Letters from adjacent property owners
6
H:\ROvarstf7.doc.gbm
MASON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT .91
• P.O. Box 279
Shelton,WA98584 nwQ J i R"°,�✓ e
V' ® IY INIY If<1V✓f S
ni,
0004225180 MAR 2 �0 9
l
MAILED FROM 98501
RECEI IJ x,
MAR 2 6 2(29 DOUGLAS P& SUSAN M WALKER
591 E RAUSCHERT RD
M CC D - PLANNING GRAPEVIEW, WA 98546
f
KcCTUR'N TO SEN[71:R
NO MAIL. Fif Cf P'1'isCL.=EE
EEC: jj9�:�5t"-.40's 7979 *11;))16j53_E3-;110:091--20--42
sa8'S}?➢ti} l(3 ? 4:,,; III}IFI11IS1I111Ii1I11Ii11��11771171)177/I)Ilz11IIIII'IIIIIIII
00' s PN
PUNLY BOWLS
02 1A $ 00.096
0004305870 MAR 20 2009
MAILED FROM ZIPGODE 98501
I . fill 11 fill N
Cot,
TF MASON COUNTY Shelton (360) 427-9670
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Belfair (360) 275-4467
Permit Processing/Inspections/Addressing Elma (360) 482-5269
Mason County Bldg.III 426 W.Cedar
1854 P.O.Box 186 Shelton,WA 98584
NOTICE OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE FROM THE MASON
COUNTY RESOURCE ORDINANCE AND NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that Timothy Zimny, who is applicant for the following proposal,has filed an
application for:Request for Variance from Setback Requirements within a Fish and Wildlife Habitat
Conservation Area, specifically for the construction of a single family residence that will be located
approximately 22' from the Type I Water.
Project Location: Mountain Shores TR 4, Rauchert RD., Shelton. Parcel No. 12118-50-00004.
Date of Complete Application: 02/19/09
The proposed development is reviewed as a Variance under the Mason County Resource Ordinance
FWHCA Chapter 17.01.110 and Title 15,Mason County Development Code. Any person desiring to
express their view or to be notified of the action taken on the application should notify:Mason County
Planning Dept,PO Box 279, Shelton,WA 98584 in writing of their interest.
A Public Hearing will be held by the Mason County Hearings Examiner on the proposed project on
Tuesday,April 28,2009 at 1:00 PM within the Commissioner's Chambers of Building I,411 North Fifth
Street, Shelton.Please contact Grace Miller of the Mason County Planning Department at(360)427-9670,
ext 360 with any questions regarding this Variance request.
hplam
t
x:,