Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSHR2011-00006 and DDR2011-00020 Hearing - SHR Letters / Memos - 6/27/2002 May 23, 2011 Notice of Decision Case: SHR2011 -00006 and DDR2011 -00020 Applicant: Richard and Bonnie Knight Parcel No. 12220-50-05001 Notice is hereby given that Richard and Bonnie Knight, who are the property owners and applicants for the above-referenced Mason County Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Conditional Use Permit and Mason County Special Use Permit, have been granted approval with conditions as part of the Hearing Examiner's decision. The request was reviewed on April 26, 2011 by the Mason County Hearing Examiner, supplemental information on parking for the proposal was provided by the applicants' representative on May 3, 2011, and approved pursuant to the Mason County Title 17.50 Shoreline Master Program Use Regulations (for commercial development) and 17.05.044 Development Regulations (Special Use review). The proposal was subject to SEPA review due to the proposal within environmentally sensitive areas per WAC 197-11-800. This is a final County decision. No further appeals to the County are available. Appeal may be made to Superior Court or the appropriate administrative agency (WA. Shoreline Hearings Board) as regulations apply. It is the appellant's responsibility to meet all legal requirements of any appeal process. If you have questions or require clarification on these issues, please contact Allan Borden, Senior Planner with Mason County Dept. of Community Development at 360-427-9670 x365. HAWORMPermit Reviews\Decision coversheet.doc 1 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR MASON COUNTY 2 3 4 RE: Richard and Bonnie Knight 5 Shoreline Substantial Development/ FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS 6 Conditional Use Permit OF LAW AND FINAL DECISION (SHR2011-000006) 7 8 INTRODUCTION 9 The Applicants have applied for a shoreline substantial development permit and a 10 shoreline conditional use permit to finish construction of a 38 room hotel along North 11 Bay Case Inlet. The applications are approved subject to conditions. 12 TESTIMONY 13 Allan Borden, senior planner for Mason County, summarized the proposal. Mr. Borden noted that construction had commenced in 2002 and that the five year 14 deadline for shoreline construction had expired. He noted that the Knights purchased the property in 2004. In response to Examiner questions, Mr. Borden acknowledged 15 that parking is a problem because the new parking standards call for a greater number 16 of parking spaces than those required for the original permit approval. There are 13 to 15 more spaces required. 38 spaces were required and approved for the original 17 project. Mr. Borden referenced Ex. 21 as providing options to comply with parking. He acknowledged that there may be significant changes to project design to meet 18 parking requirements. There is no additional space available at the site for parking. Mr. Borden also noted that he agreed with comments from Mr. Carey that an area be 19 designated for pedestrian access along the street frontage. Mr. Borden noted that 20 there are no sidewalks that would connect to the site. There are no sidewalks along the road anywhere in the vicinity. 21 Micki Phillips, attorney for the Applicants, noted that the project has been 22 progressing with active building permits until recently when staff discovered the 23 shoreline permits had expired. Mr. Phillips also noted that the Applicants hadn't known there was any parking problem until twenty minutes earlier. Mr. Phillips 24 noted that a temporary pedestrian pathway requirement during construction was inviting a mess and his client would prefer to just build permanent sidewalks as part 25 of the frontage improvements. He noted that as to view obstruction the building at 25 feet high is ten feet lower than the height allowed for a single family home. Mr. SSD/CUP P. 1 Findings, Conclusions and Decision {PA0708548.DOC;1/13009.900000/} Borden corrected that in the zoning district of the building even residences would be 1 subject to the 25 foot building height,which is the height of the proposed building. 2 EXHIBITS 3 See Exhibits list attached to the staff report dated April 14, 2011, which are all 4 admitted into the record. The following documents were admitted during the April 26, 2011 hearing: 5 6 11 . 4/21/11 Letter from Hugh Middleton. 12. Letter from Jeff Carey. 7 13 4/26/11 letter from Daniel Bunting. 14. 4/26/11 letter from Debra Bunting. 8 15. 4/26/11 letter from indecipherable. 16. 4/26/11 letter from indecipherable. 9 17. 4/26/11 letter from Patricia McFarlane. 10 18. 4/26/11 letter from Shawn Wilkinson. 19. 4/26/11 letter from indecipherable. 11 20. 4/26/11 letter from Borsay. 21. "Additional considerations" from Knights 12 22. 5/3/11 email from Allan Borden regarding parking. 13 FINDINGS OF FACT 14 Procedural: 15 1. Applicants. The Applicants are Richard and Bonnie Knight. 16 2. Hearing. The Hearing Examiner conducted a hearing on the subject application on April 26, 2011 at 1:00 p.m., in the Mason County Commissioners 17 Meeting Chambers. The Examiner left the record open until May 3, 2011 for the 18 applicant and staff to submit a proposal to address a deficit in parking. 19 Substantive: 20 3. Site/Project Description. The Applicants request a shoreline substantial 21 development permit and a conditional use permit in order to construct a 38 room hotel composed of a 17,975 square foot two story building that will accommodate 21 hotel 22 rooms and a 1,230 square foot retail area. The proposal also includes a 9,729 square foot two story building that will accommodate 16 additional rooms. An existing 23 1,498 square foot two story building with 591 square feet of retail space and lodging above is also on the property. Exhibit 7 is a site plan for the project. 24 25 The shoreline permits for the proposal were originally approved in October 2002, but have since lapsed. The Applicants have been actively constructing the project until they were required to stop construction due to the lapse of the shoreline permits. In SSD/CUP p. 2 Findings, Conclusions and Decision {PA0708548.DOC;1/13009.900000/} addition to the 1,498 square foot building, the Applicants have also constructed some 1 foundation walls. 2 The project site is fairly flat upland area that drops 6 to 8 feet from the State Route 3 3 area to the Ordinary High Water Mark at the shoreline. Past grading and temporary land uses have left the property largely unvegetated or in commercial parking use. 4 4. Characteristics of the Area. The subject property is within an immediate 5 existing area of commercial development (Exhibit 6), with a restaurant and a few 6 retail buildings to the south, a real estate office to the north, and small retail businesses, a fire station, and a convenience store to the west across State Route 3. 7 There are residences that are upland of bulkheads to the farther north and south beyond the commercial development along the shoreline of North Bay. 8 5. Adverse Impacts. There are no significant adverse impacts associated 9 with the projects. Several adverse impacts were identified in the public comments to 10 the project, which are addressed below: 11 A. Views. Several comment letters were submitted expressing concern over views. Beyond generalized comments about view obstruction there was no 12 specific information provided on the extent of view obstruction. There are no homes directly west of the proposal and the height of the buildings is limited 13 to a relatively modest 25 feet. Further, the project was not found to create any 14 significant adverse view impacts when it was initially approved in 2002, even though view impacts were expressly addressed in the approval criteria. There 15 is nothing in the record to suggest that view impacts have changed since the 2002 approval. For these reasons, the proposal is not found to significant 16 impact shoreline views. 17 B. Parking. Jeff Carey, Ex. 12, correctly noted in his comment letter that the 18 project does not comply with new parking requirements. The project will be conditioned to comply with these requirements as proposed in the Applicant's 19 parking plan, Ex. 22. However, the Applicant's plan doesn't identify whether RV parking requirements are satisfied and it is unclear whether that is already 20 integrated into project design. The conditions of approval will require staff to 21 investigate this issue and further condition the project as necessary. The staff report also appears to incorrectly incorporate a prior shoreline standard 22 addressing landscaping and other requirements for parking. See MCC 17.50.060 Commercial Use Regulation No. 3. The conditions of approval will 23 require staff to ensure compliance with this requirement. 24 C. Seismic Hazards. Mr. Carey also asserts in this letter that the area is identified 25 as a seismic hazard area in the Mason County Comprehensive Plan. Figure IV-4.2 identifies some areas around Allyn as having seismic hazard areas but SSD/CUP p. 3 Findings, Conclusions and Decision {PA0708548.DOC;1/13009.900000/} it doesn't appear that Allyn itself has any shoreline within that designation. I Since this issue was not addressed during the hearing, the conditions of 2 approval will require staff to further investigate. 3 D. Sidewalks. Mr. Carey requests that inclusion of temporary frontage sidewalks 4 during construction. Such temporary measures would not usually be required, but the construction of this project could extend for several more years. 5 However, it is also recognized that there are no other sidewalks in the vicinity and it is unclear from the record whether the construction activities at the site 6 will encroach upon public right of way currently used by pedestrians. The 7 project will be conditioned to require room for pedestrian access if it encroaches upon right of way used b pedestrians to walk along SR 3. The p g Y by g 8 private property of the Applicant cannot be required to be used for this purpose because there is no evidence in the record to suggest that the project 9 will increase pedestrian use along its frontage during construction. 10 11 E. Shoreline Environmental Resources. The staff report concludes that with 12 proposed native replanting of vegetation and the 50 foot setback that shoreline environmental resources are not adversely affected by the proposal. There is 13 no contrary evidence in the record and nothing suggests that the project will adversely affect shoreline resources. It is determined that the shoreline is 14 adequately protected as concluded by staff. 15 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 16 Procedural: 17 1. Authority of Hearing Examiner. MCC 15.03.050(9) authorizes the 18 Examiner to review and issue a final decision regarding shoreline substantial 19 development permit requests and shoreline conditional use permits. 20 Substantive: 21 SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT: 22 MCC 15.09.055(A) requires a substantial development permit for any 23 substantial development within the shoreline jurisdiction. MCC 15.09.055(F) requires that permit for substantial development permits be subject to review by the 24 Hearing Examiner. MCC 15.09.055(F)(2)(c) provides that the Examiner shall base a decision on a substantial development permit application on the Shoreline Master 25 Program for Mason County and the policies and procedures of Chapter 90.58 RCW, the Shoreline Management Act. MCC 17.50.040 defines a substantial development SSD/CUP p. 4 Findings, Conclusions and Decision (PA0708548.DOC;1/13009.900000/) as any development of which total cost for market value exceeds $5,000 or any 1 development which material interferes with any normal public use of the water or 2 shorelines of the state. As is inherently obvious from the nature of the project, the improvements proposed by the applicant exceed $5,000 and, therefore, require a 3 shoreline substantial development permit. The Mason County Shoreline Master Program is codified as Chapter IX of the Mason County Comprehensive Plan 4 ("MCCP") and Chapter 17.50 of the Mason County Code. 5 The applicable shoreline policies and regulations, as well as state shoreline 6 policies, are listed below with accompanying analyses: 7 Chapter IX MCCP, Commercial Development Policy No. 1: Commercial development on shorelines should be encouraged to provide physical and visual 8 access to the shoreline, and other opportunities for the public to enjoy the shoreline. 9 2. The project includes an access boardwalk (see Ex. 7) and is set back 50 10 feet from the shoreline to provide space and access to use the shoreline. The criterion is satisfied. 11 Chapter IX MCCP, Commercial Development Policy No. 2: Multiple use 12 concepts which include open space and recreation should be encouraged in 13 commercial developments. 14 3• As noted above, the project incorporates an access boardwalk as well as space for shoreline use. In addition, the hotel and retail space facilitates recreational 15 use of the shoreline for out of town guests. The criterion is satisfied. 16 Chapter IX MCCP, Commercial Development Policy No. 3: Commercial development should be aesthetically compatible with the surrounding area. 17 Structures should not significantly impact views from upland properties, public 18 roadways or from the water. 19 4. As discussed in the findings of fact, there are no significant view impacts associated with the proposal. The project is also surrounded by commercial 20 development and is compatible and appropriate for its"downtown" location. 21 Chapter IX MCCP, Commercial Development Policy No. 4: The location of 22 commercial developments along shorelines should insure the protection of natural areas or system identified as having geological, ecological, biological or cultural 23 significance. 24 5. The staff report concludes this criterion is satisfied by the proposed native 25 plantings and the fifty foot setback. There is no evidence to the contrary in the record and it appears that much of the proximate shoreline work that could have damaged the shoreline has already been done under the prior approved permit. The proposed SSD/CUP p. 5 Findings, Conclusions and Decision {PA0708548.DOC;1/13009.900000/} design, which hasn't changed, was also found to be have met the criterion in the 2002 1 approval and no pertinent circumstances have changed since that approval. The 2 criterion is satisfied. 3 Chapter IX MCCP, Commercial Development Policy No. 5: Commercial development should be encouraged to be located inland from the shoreline area 4 unless they are dependent on a shoreline location. Commercial development should be discouraged over-water or in marshes, bogs, swamps and flood plains. 5 6 6. The project is moderately dependent upon a shoreline location as a hotel that provides occupants scenic views of the shoreline. Further, the hotel is setback 7 from the shoreline by 50 feet. The criterion is satisfied. 8 Chapter IX MCCP, Commercial Development Policy No. 6: New commercial development in shorelines should be encouraged to locate in those areas with existing 9 commercial development that will minimize sprawl and the inefficient use of shoreline 10 areas. 11 7• The proposal is within existing commercial development and does not qualify as "new" commercial development since a portion of the project has already 12 been developed. 13 Chapter IX MCCP, Commercial Development Policy No. 7: Parking facilities 14 should be placed inland, away from the immediate water's edge and recreational beaches. 15 8. The parking facilities are on the landward side of the proposed buildings 16 and way from the water's edge. 17 Chapter IX MCCP, Commercial Development Policy No. 8: Commercial 18 development should be designed and located to minimize impacts of noise and/or light generated by the development upon adjacent properties. Commercial g 19 developments which generate significant noise impacts should be discouraged. 20 9. As noted by the staff report, surrounding uses are commercial and there is 21 nothing about the proposal that suggests that the noise and light impacts of the proposal would adversely affect or be incompatible with these adjoining commercial 22 uses or more distant residential uses. 23 MCC 17.50.060 (Commercial Use Regulation No. 1): The County shall utilize the following information in its review of commercial development proposals: 24 25 ' Nature of activity; • Need for shore frontage; SSD/CUP p. 6 Findings, Conclusions and Decision {PA0708548.DOC;1/13009.900000/} • Special considerations for enhancing the relationship of the activity to the 1 shoreline; 2 • Provisions for public visual or physical access to the shoreline; • Provisions to insure that development will not cause severe adverse 3 environmental impact; • Provisions to mitigate any significant noise impacts; and 4 • Provisions to mitigate light or glare impacts. 5 10. All these factors are addressed in the above policy analysis for the 6 substantial development permit. The boardwalk and setback allow for shore frontage, enhance the relationship of the hotel to the shoreline and provide for public and visual 7 shoreline access. As previously discussed there are no significant noise or light impacts associated with the proposal. There are no other significant adverse impacts 8 associated with the proposal. 9 MCC 17.50.060 (Commercial Use Regulation No. 2): Commercial development 10 may be permitted on the shoreline in the following descending order of priority: water dependent, water related and water oriented. Non-water related, non-water 11 depending and non-water oriented developments in an urban and rural environment may be permitted by substantial development permit when: the parcel of land to be 12 developed is a minimum of 100 feet from OHWM, and is located on the up-line side of 13 a public roadway, railroad right-of-way or government controlled property. 14 11. The project meets the definition of "water oriented use" in MCC 17.50.040. The definition provides that a use qualifies as water oriented when it 15 provides the opportunity for a substantial number of the general public to enjoy the shoreline without causing significant adverse impacts upon other uses and shore 16 features. As previously discussed the project provides the travelling public views of the shoreline and enhanced shoreline access through the boardwalk and shoreline 17 setback and there are no significant adverse impacts associated with the proposal. 18 MCC 17.50.060 (Commercial Use Regulation No. 3): Parking and loading areas 19 shall be located well away from the immediate waters'edge and beaches, unless there is no other practical location for parking. Perimeters of parking areas shall be 20 landscaped to minimize visual impacts of the shorelines, roadways and adjacent 21 properties subject to approval by Public Works and/or Department of Transportation. Permit applications shall identify the size, general type and location of landscaping. 22 Design of parking loading areas shall insure that surface run-off does not pollute adjacent waters or cause soil or beach erosion. Design shall provide for storm water 23 retention. Parking plans shall be reviewed by Mason County Department of Public Works for compliance with applicable County Ordinances. Creation of parking areas 24 by landfilling beyond the OHW mark or in biological wetlands is prohibited. 25 12. There is insufficient information in the record to determine compliance with this criterion. The project will be conditioned to comply with this requirement. SSD/CUP p. 7 Findings, Conclusions and Decision {PA0708548.DOC;1/13009.900000/} I MCC 17.50.060 (Commercial Use Regulation No. 4): Those portions of a 2 commercial development which are not water dependent are prohibited over the water. 3 13. No part of the project is proposed over water. 4 MCC 17.50.060 (Commercial Use Regulation No. 5): Water supply and waste 5 facilities shall comply with the strictest established guidelines, standards and 6 regulations. 7 14. The project will be conditioned to comply with this criterion. 8 MCC 17.50.060 (Commercial Use Regulation No. 6): New commercial developments shall be located adjacent to existing commercial developments 9 whenever possible. 10 15. The proposal is arguably not a new commercial development and is 11 adjacent to existing commercial development. 12 MCC 17.50.060 (Commercial Use Regulation No. 7): New or expanded structures 13 shall not extend more than 35 feet in height above average grade level. 14 16. The proposed buildings will not be more than 25 feet in height. 15 MCC 17.50.060 (Commercial Use Regulation No. 8): Commercial developments adjacent to aqua-culture operations shall practice strict pollution control procedures. 16 17. There is nothing to suggest that the project is adjacent to an aqua-culture 1 operation. 18 MCC 17.50.060 (Commercial Use Regulation No. 9): Commercial development 19 shall be located and designed to minimize noise impacts on adjacent properties. 20 18. As previously discussed, there are no significant noise impacts associated 21 with the proposal. 22 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: 23 The shoreline master program designation for the proposal is "Urban Commercial 24 Development". The project classification table in MCC 17.50.050 provides that non- 25 water dependent/with waterfront uses are allowed in urban shoreline designations with a conditional use permit. MCC 17.50.080 governs criteria for approval of the SSD/CUP p. 8 Findings, Conclusions and Decision (PA0708548.DOC;1/13009.900000/) i shoreline master program conditional use permits. The criteria, which are not I numerically codified,provide as follows: 2 That the proposed use will be consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58 and the 3 policies of the shoreline master program; 4 19. The proposal is consistent with Mason County's shoreline master program for the reasons discussed above. It is consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58 5 because it enhances visual and physical access to the shoreline while not interfering 6 with navigation or public access and not creating any significant impacts to the shoreline environment. 7 That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of the shoreline; 8 20. As previously noted the project is set back 50 feet from the shoreline and 9 provides for physical and visual access to the shoreline. The criterion is satisfied. 10 That the proposed use of the site and design of the project will be compatible with 11 other permitted uses within the area; 12 21. As discussed on several prior occasions, the project is compatible with adjoining uses because it is surrounded with commercial development and doesn't 13 create any significant adverse impacts that impact other uses. 14 That the proposed use will cause no unreasonable adverse effects to the shoreline 15 environment in which it is to be located; 16 22. The staff report concludes that the 50 foot setback and native vegetation plantings are sufficient to protect the shoreline environment and there is no evidence 17 to the contrary. The criterion is satisfied. 18 That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. 19 23. As discussed in the findings of fact and other parts of this decision, there 20 are no recognizable significant adverse impacts created by this project, therefore the 21 public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. 22 24. Cumulative Impacts. MCC 17.50.080 requires consideration of cumulative impacts in the granting of a conditional use permit. The proposal is in a 23 limited area of Mason County's shorelines that authorizes non-water dependent commercial development and doesn't have any significant adverse impacts. 24 Consequently, cumulative impacts are minimal. 25 DECISION SSD/CUP P. 9 Findings, Conclusions and Decision {PA0708548.DOC;1/13009.900000/} The Examiner approves the shoreline substantial development permit application and I conditional use permit subject to the conditions identified in the staff report as well as 2 the following: 3 1. The Applicant shall comply with the parking proposed in the May 2, 2011 letter from Richard Phillips. In addition, staff shall verify that the project complies with 4 the RV parking requirements of MCC 17.14.050(2)(i) and similarly require RV 5 parking if not already satisfied by project design. 6 2. Staff shall verify that parking that hasn't yet been constructed complies with MCC 17.50.060 Commercial Use Regulation No. 3 and condition the project 7 accordingly. Note that the staff report does not contain the current version of MCC 17.50.060 Commercial Use Regulation No. 3. 8 3. If any portion of the project encroaches upon the right of way of SR 3 and 9 materially interferes with pedestrian access along SR 3, staff shall require the 10 applicant to mitigate the impact with temporary pedestrian access across the subject property's street frontage. 11 12 4. Staff shall verify whether the proposal is located within a seismic hazard area. If 13 it is located within such an area staff require compliance with the Mason County's Resource Ordinance. 14 15 5. Water supply and waste facilities shall comply with the strictest established 16 guidelines, standards and regulations. 17 Dated this 18th day of May,2011. 18 19 Phil A. Olbrechts 20 Mason County Hearing Examiner 21 Appeal Right and Valuation Notices 22 This land use decision is final and subject to appeal to the Shoreline Hearings Board as 23 governed by Chapter 90.58 RCW. 24 Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. 25 SSD/CUP P. 10 Findings, Conclusions and Decision {PA0708548.DOC;1/13009.900000/} SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SHR2011-00006 Conclusions. As designed,this proposal is consistent with the Shoreline Management Act and with Mason County Shoreline Master Program Chapter 7.16.040(Commercial Development) and Chapter 7.24.010(Conditional Uses) standards, subject to the following conditions: 1) The proposed project shall be consistent with all policies and provisions of the Shoreline Management Act, its rules, and the standards of the Mason County Shoreline Master Program. 2) The applicant shall meet the standards of the Conditional Use Permit review, including proper standards under the Allyn Urban Growth Area Village Commercial Zone(MCC 17.12.100)for setbacks, height, site coverage, and parking needs for the land uses proposed. 3) The applicant shall implement the proposed native plant landscaping plan in order to provide a re-established vegetation buffer along the saltwater frontage of Case Inlet and meet the intent of the Mason County Resource Ordinance fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas development standards. 4) The applicant shall provide proper ingress and egress for the proposed land use and secure the proper road traffic access permits from Washington Department of Transportation and Mason County Department of Public Works. 5) The applicant shall secure the review and approval by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Department of Ecology of proposed vegetation removal of shoreline and/or wetland plants that will be done during site preparation and eventual replanting in the vegetation buffer. 6) The applicant shall meet the fire protection standards of Mason County in the construction and operation of a motel land use in the Allyn Urban Growth Area. 7) The applicant shall use best management practices to prevent debris and runoff from entering the waters of the State,both during and following construction. 8) The applicant shall submit to Mason County a stormwater plan designed to 2009 State stormwater management technical standards;that plan shall be stamped by an engineer and shall meet approval of the Mason County Department of Public Works. SHORELINE PERMIT SPECIAL USE SHR2011-00006 DDR2011-00020.doc 1 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR MASON COUNTY 2 Phil Olbrechts,Hearing Examiner 3 4 RE: Richard and Bonnie Knight FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS 5 OF LAW AND FINAL DECISION Special Use Permit 6 #DDR2011-000020 7 INTRODUCTION 8 The applicant seeks a special use permit (SUP) for a 17,975 square foot hotel 9 building. The Examiner approves the application with conditions. 10 11 ORAL TESTIMONY 12 See testimony of decision on corresponding shoreline permits, SHR2011-00006, incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. 13 14 EXHIBITS 15 See "Exhibits" of decision on corresponding shoreline permits, SHR2011-00006, incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. 16 17 FINDINGS OF FACT 18 Procedural: 19 1. Applicant. The applicants are Richard and Bonnie Knight. 20 2. Hearin. The Hearing Examiner conducted a hearing on the subject 21 application on April 26, 2011 at 1:00 p.m., in the Mason County Commissioners Meeting Chambers. The Examiner left the record open until May 3, 2011 for the 22 Applicants and staff to submit a proposal to address a deficit in parking. The hearing was a consolidation of the two shoreline permits addressed in SHR2011-00006 and 23 the subject special use permit. 24 Substantive: 25 3. Findings of Fact No. 3-5 of the shoreline permits of this proposal, SHR2011- 00006, are adopted and incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full. SUP P. 1 Findings, Conclusions and Decision {PA0810117.DOC;1\13009.900000\} I CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 2 Procedural: 3 1. Authority of Hearing Examiner. MCC 15.03.050(10) and 17.05.42 4 provide the Examiner with the authority to review and act upon Special Use Permits. 5 Substantive: 6 2. Zoning. The area is zoned as Allyn Urban Growth Area Village Commercial. 7 8 3. Review Criteria and Application. MCC Figure 17.03.032 provides that buildings between 10,000 and 20,000 square feet in the Allyn Urban Growth Area are 9 authorized by a special use permit. The Applicants' proposed 17,975 square foot hotel requires a special use permit. The review criteria for the Special Use Permit 10 application are governed by MCC 17.05.044. These criteria, in addition to 11 miscellaneous criteria for all Hearing Examiner decisions, are quoted and addressed below. 12 MCC 17.05.044 SPECIAL USE REVIEW CRITERIA: 13 (1) That the proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and 14 welfare. 15 4. As identified in Finding of Fact No. 5, there are no adverse impacts 16 associated with the proposal when conditioned as required for the shoreline permits. Consequently, the proposal will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and 17 welfare. 18 (2) That the proposed use is consistent and compatible with the intent of the 19 Comprehensive Plan. 20 5. The vision statement for the Allyn subarea in the Mason County Comprehensive Plan provides for the protection of natural resources, adequate infrastructure and the 21 encouragement of facilities that will attract tourists. Goal 3, Objective 3 of the Allyn subarea section of the Plan states "provide commercial lodging for visitors coming to 22 the area for recreation". The proposal is conditioned and designed to protect 23 environmental resources and as discussed in this decision is served by adequate infrastructure. Of course, the proposal directly addresses the objective of providing 24 for commercial lodging. The proposal is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. 25 (3) That the proposed use will not introduce hazardous conditions at the site that cannot be mitigated through appropriate measures to protect adjacent properties and the community at large. SUP p. 2 Findings, Conclusions and Decision {PA0810117.DOC;1\13009.900000\} 1 6. No hazardous conditions are expected, nor have any been identified as a 2 result of the proposal. No adjacent properties, nor the community at large, will be impacted by the introduction of hazardous conditions from the proposal. 3 (4) That the proposed use is served by adequate public facilities which are in place, 4 or planned as a condition of approval or as an identified item in the County's Capital Facilities Plan. 5 6 7. According to the staff report, adequate public facilities are available for the proposal. Sewer service and electricity are available along State Route 3. Water 7 service will provided by the Port of Allyn water system. Fire protection for the hotel development build-out is a condition of the construction permit, previously calculated 8 when the project was approved by a 2002 shoreline development and special use 9 permit. 10 (5) That the proposed use will not have a significant impact upon existing uses on adjacent lands. 11 8. As noted in the findings of fact, the proposal will not create any significant 12 adverse impacts. 13 (6) If located outside an Urban Growth Area, that the proposed use will not result in 14 the need to extend urban services. 15 9. The proposal is within an urban growth area. 16 MISCELLANEOUS CRITERIA FOR ALL HEARING EXAMINER REVIEW: 17 MCC 15.09.055(C): Required Review: The Hearing Examiner shall review 18 proposed development according to the following criteria: 19 1. The development does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the requirements and intent of the Mason County Code, especially Title 6, 8, and 16. 20 21 2. Development does not impact the public health, safety and welfare and is in the public interest. 22 3. Development does not lower the level of service of transportation and/or 23 neighborhood park facilities below the minimum standards established within the Comprehensive Plan. 24 25 10. As previously discussed, the proposal is consistent with the Mason County Comprehensive Plan. The proposal will connect to public sewer, has complied with SEPA through the issuance of a DNS and does not involve any division of land, thereby complying with Titles 6, 8 and 16. There is nothing in the record to suggest SUP p. 3 Findings, Conclusions and Decision {PA0810117.DOC;1\13009.900000\} any compliance issues with any other Mason County regulation and compliance with 1 building permit requirement will ensure compliance with building code standards. 2 Since the staff report does not address level of service for transportation, the project will be conditioned on meeting level of service standards. Since the project as 3 conditioned will not create any significant adverse impacts and promotes economic development it is does not impact the public health, safety and welfare and is in the 4 public interest. 5 DECISION 6 The proposal is approved subject to the conditions identified in the staff report as well 7 as those that apply to the shoreline permits, SHR2011-000006. In addition, staff shall ensure that the proposal will not lower level of service standards for park and 8 transportation facilities as required by MCC 15.09.055(C)(3). 9 Dated this 19th day of May, 2011. 10 Phil�Olbrec�hts 12 Hearing Examiner 13 Mason County 14 APPEAL 15 The decision of the Hearing Examiner is final and may be appealed to superior court 16 as outlined by the Washington State Land Use Petition Act, Chapter 36.70C RCW. 17 CHANGE IN VALUATION 18 Notice is given pursuant to RCW 36.70B.130 that property owners who are affected 19 by this decision may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. 20 21 22 23 24 25 SUP p. 4 Findings, Conclusions and Decision {PA0810117.DOC;1\13009.900000\} SPECIAL USE PERMIT DDR2011-00020 Conclusions. For the proposal to be in compliance with MCC Sec. 17.01 Mason County Development Regulations, a Special Use Permit is required due to review a building whose square footage(17,975 sq. ft.) exceeds the maximum building size for Allyn(10,000 sq. ft.), in accordance with Development Regulations Section 17.03.032 Dimensional Requirements. The applicant has shown that efforts have been made to be in compliance with this ordinance and to minimize potential impacts of the proposed hotel on the subject property and adjacent areas and meet the review criteria of the Development Regulations for Special Use Permit consideration. Staff finds consistency with Mason County Development Regulations Special Use Permit standards, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall meet the standards of the Special Use Permit review, including proper setbacks, height standards, site coverage, and parking needs for the land uses proposed. 2. The applicant shall provide proper ingress and egress for the proposed land use and secure the proper road traffic access permits from Washington Department of Transportation and Mason County Department of Public Works. 3. The applicant shall meet the fire protection standards of Mason County in the construction and operation of a motel land use in the Allyn Urban Growth Area. 4. The applicant shall use best management practices to prevent debris and runoff from entering the waters of the State, both during and following construction. 5. The applicant shall submit to Mason County a stormwater plan designed to 2009 state stormwater management technical standards; that plan shall be stamped by an engineer and shall meet approval of the Mason County Department of Public Works. SHORELINE PERMIT SPECIAL USE SHR2011-00006 DDR2011-00020.doc MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning Division P.O. Box 279, Shelton,WA 98584 (360) 427-9670 SHR2011-00006 NOTICE OF SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT and DDR2011-00020 SPECIAL USE PERMIT. Notice is hereby given that Richard and Bonnie Knight who are owners of the described property below,have filed an application for a Substantial Development/Conditional Use Permit for the development of: Shoreline Conditional Use Permit to construct 38 room hotel composed of a 17,975 sq. ft. two story building(21 rooms with 1,230 sq. ft. retail area),and a 9,729 sq. ft. two story building(16 rooms). Public access boardwalk from hotel to shore. Native plant restoration of shoreline vegetation. Parking for 38 vehicles provided on site adjacent to State Route 3 in Allyn,WA. In addition,The Knights have filed an application for a Special Use Permit for the proposal to construct a building greater that 10,000 sq. ft. in area within the Allyn Urban Growth Area. Parcel Number: 12220-50-05001. Site Address: 18350 E State Route 3, Allyn WA. Project Location: along North Bay Case Inlet and State Route 3 at Lakeland Dr.; within the northeast '/4 of Section 20,Township 22 N., Range 1 W. in Mason County Washington. Said proposed development is subject to shoreline management permit review(M.C.C. 17.50) and Mason County Development Regulations standards. Any person desiring to express their view or to be notified of the action taken on the application should notify in writing of their interest to: MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PO BOX 279 SHELTON,WA 98584 The comment period is at least 30 days from the final date of publication given pursuant to WAC 173- 14-020. The final date of publication,posting or mailing of notice is March 17, 2011. Written comments will be accepted u to the date of the Hearings Examiner public hearing Tuesday p P g p g Y April 26, 2011; 1:00 PM. Contact this office at(360)427-9670, ext. 365 for further information. This request is subject to State Environmental Policy Act environmental review and comments on the submitted checklist will be due on April 4,2011. c I O E ` J <2 OR H BA RD C� Kits4 County ys � R�q/L HILL RD fi J ` k w Q J a W w E STERLING DR OFRBERG RD JAY R O 0 V� Q IC C � � I NAHUM Nr w vo W R ON CRC` T22NR1 ► I z RY 0 C ce G a t �� w w 0 P, ice County i' K y� E VI TOR DGE RD f; CREEK RD �00 GµAQEVIF, j. . 1 r O 11 5 ` I N LSON RD '\ 1 inch = 2,000 feet W E J 1�l elline peviw" 1 inch = 0.38 miles C, ,r S } 122205060001 — j� t 122205007003 122201380746 122205059001 t7 I�n/74 122205006003 122205006903 122205070009 122205007001 1 " 122205006001 r ®r., 122205006901 122201380745 r 122205071008 'x` / 122205004008 +'• y �� y, �f .. ".,.: a ,r �� -.1f. a. Y 122205 070004 � '��= �""�.�` - / ;', � `' -�.. ` 1 22205 00 5008 12 122205005009 122205071Y 005 122201480730 fl ' `�" I 122205071004k ` f x 122205070001 � A 'r ,• 41 122205071001 122205005001 . '`arm... ''s •'"�. NR1W 122200060000 w ° 1 122200060010 , • . �. EFV , 1222050730064%1141,b, SANS ST `(yam ` 122200060010� ! l� •, � 122204280740 122205072009 122208888888 .4 r 22205003907, 122201480090 �M122205003005 122205072003 122204280747 122205003004 122205072004 f r t " 122205003002 122205072001 r �'- 122204180100 jW. 122204280744 122205003001 N � li ��r�21 ill 1 inch = 100 feet W E 5i f P- a par-ce 1 inch = 0.02 miles S 1 ZZ2-© so OaOO I �N 3fIM1 JFDC 1311f.15 N m o l � NVId 311S 3NLr3MOHS 4NDWd NA-^1-1V lMOM3WWOO Q / SNLLSDC3] — — L 9NrAHVd NI MH H.UM 1IV13H ONLLSDC3 — — — — — — — - '— — — o . 02J 31d1S L=A08V WOOM STS&SMM /M '- �mauedowo� _ .9,OE 9NI9O01) NWM313MONW &.OZ Z ra 3S WS lrvnH 3svn�is tuTW AL II 9rusm •aueu s - ZONDWd o l l s SNUSDC3] I a 9 a Y- 101 JNDRidd 1N LLSIX3 I II Z I �i W 39=3 II Cn m �°• 0 r— e L—J c` m I L® - - II I jl I a 319NIS 9NUMS �, 19MKNLMI� vin®IpL91 / 01 IIMOHS OM3WW03,09 0L rAm I 89g\\—01 5 SS3OOV )10 l- Wr LVO M31VM HOW ` 9NllSD(3J Epp ne -- — .o-Ae 135VO )ovens _ 9 .0-AZ PF 'WA �� mans ;�'�i,t;�1 .,. _ S'?i�.t`e :a'!ii'?it'�1 .�j�;.•;�tCti yrt"�tlt'ti�t��`�i'r�?�>�i�;��`�c�x�� ��vik'�-� �. AN :. WINDOW BAYS BLDG B �rErQ� • 4 v ,. 156 � R r�' � 1�1 irrrr■/�-�^rrrl �.Il I I I.� '�.11 R�U� �"/I��+F.� ��1'� r_�uu•I'�,urn slyl �fi, h3U�.c� �.- ,+'. .r�� ' r�i 7■'f7• �Irrrr r'0.,:,i�I In�A/ � {!':•., y `�y�,j��.� .c��► c� /=rrn7mp%_ �:• iy� rl■O•�.�;.•a�rl�' .ir:a1/ �•/rt'f_1_�i�ir.��iGi��� _ ).- s..y.•�';ie� 1/ i '. ss�w �'ra"LM„ •,Sil 2r� •�•�i r�,��+�_• ■\�I� •z ga go- G�N i�r,� lsf >>$,�L' � i'a'• ` r'`�a h j��r'�1 =i��ir •ah•-�a��;"/d ��;.ui, d'•:"•�i�E°'df:n�n 3�•:s�1w�.^ec_ -�%�rcurs,=il ri. 2�n. lll;v �r rr i �i��r y- ■ � r1 � -- —��=— �� I try "nc? �!�=�0__!��Gr►!�r il� r ri;' ri 'ura n% %_ r'�'r z' �are jpq RETAIL 'WI 591 SF(I LOGGIA 6 A BOOM ABOVE) r v'Jn %���G jp..ys,(/l,/r ;•, /` � ��. � / \�•� ?'ry`Ilr�ti<���f�C-�.�n"_'-i��.l��t^L�h�IJ���-�-"•❑'-t����wi<�I ' --� a�J��'a9-�'�� �� � CASE INDEX Allyn Hotel Substantial Development and Conditional Use Permit Allyn Hotel Special Use Permit SHR2011-000006 DDR2011-000020 Exhibit# Date Description 1 Aril 14, 2011 SHR2011-00006 Staff Report 2 February 10, 2011 SHR2011-00006 Shoreline Permit and Conditional Use Application, and Supplemental Information 3 Aril 14, 2011 DDR2011-00020 Staff Report 4 February 22, 2011 DDR2011-00020 Special Use Application and Su lementalInformation 5 March, 2011 Project Vicinity Ma 6 March, 2011 Project Aerial Photo (May 2009 image) 7 February 22, 2011 Project Site Plan 8 February 22, 2011 Project Site Landscaping Plan 9 March 10, 2011 Notice of Application 10 Aril 14, 2011 Affidavit of Posting Allyn Hotel SHR and SUP case index rN,1/1 L Mason County Department of Community Development Building I * 411 N. 51h Street * P.O. Box 279 Shelton,Washington 98584 * (360) 427-9670 April 14, 2011 TO: Mason County Hearings Examiner FROM: Planning Staff—Allan Borden; 360.427.9670 ext. 363; ahb@co.mason.wa.us RE: Shoreline Substantial Development/Conditional Use Shoreline Permit request from Richard and Bonnie Knight for the Allyn Hotel (SHR2011-00006) STAFF REPORT I. Introduction. This report evaluates a request for a Substantial Development and Conditional Use Permit for a proposed hotel in the Allyn Urban Growth Area along North Bay Case Inlet using Mason County Code (MCC) Chapter 17.50 Shoreline Master Program Commercial Development review standards. Staff finds the proposal is consistent with Mason County Shoreline Master Program Substantial Development and Conditional Use Permit standards and a decision should include eight review conditions. II. Applicants. Richard and Bonnie Knight. III. Property Location.At 18350 E State Route 3,Allyn, WA.;tax parcel 12220-50- 05001; in R 1 W, T 22 N, Section 20,NE1/4. IV. Project Description. Shoreline Substantial Development and Conditional Use Permit(Exhibit 2)to construct 38 room hotel composed of a 17,975 sq. ft. two story building(21 rooms with 1,230 sq. ft. retail area), and a 9,729 sq. ft. two story building(16 rooms). Public access boardwalk from hotel to shore and shoreline buffer revegetation is provided. Parking for 38 vehicles is proposed on site adjacent to State Route 3 in Allyn, WA. Site plan is shown on Exhibit 7. V. EVALUATION. A. Characteristics of the site. The site is a fairly flat upland area that drops 6 to 8 feet from the State Route 3 area to the Ordinary High Water Mark at the shoreline. Past grading and temporary land uses have left the property largely unvegetated or in commercial parking use (Exhibit 6). A 1,498 sq. ft. two story building (lodging above, 591 sq. ft. retail below) and some of the foundation walls have been constructed since an original three-building proposal was approved in October 2002 by Mason County shoreline permit SHR2002-00016. That permit lapsed and the current permit is a resubmittal for permit consideration in 2011. The property is served by the Port of Allyn SHR20 1 1-00006 Staff report to County Hearing Examiner water system and is connected for the hotel land use to the North Bay Sewer system. B. Characteristics of the area. The subject property is within an immediate existing area of commercial development(Exhibit 6), with a restaurant and few retail buildings to the south,a real estate office to the north, and small retail businesses, fire station, and convenience store to the west across State Route 3. There are residences that are upland of bulkheads to the farther north and south beyond the commercial development along the shoreline of North Bay. C. Shoreline Designation. The shoreline designation of the site is Urban Commercial Shoreline Environment. Area Village Commercial D. Zoning. zoning is All Urban Growth g g yng designation. E. SEPA Compliance and other public notice requirements. A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on March 28, 2011. Comments were received from the Department of Ecology regarding the fill of soils, debris and clearing sites, sediment and erosion control, and construction stormwater permitting for the project. The comments can be addressed through permit conditions. The Shoreline Management Permit application (SHR2011-00006) is attached(Exhibit 2). The Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit is attached(Exhibit 9). The Affidavit of Publication of Shoreline Management Permit is attached(Exhibit 10). F. Other Permits. In addition to this Mason County Shoreline Master Program Substantial Development and Conditional Use Permit,this proposal will require a Special Use Permit and Mason County building permits; connection to the North Bay Case Inlet sewer system; connection to adequate community water; and a current Individual 401 Certification from the Washington Department of Ecology for the commercial land use. VI. ANALYSIS. This proposal requires a Substantial Development Permit, as the proposed construction is valued at$5,800 fair market value, and a Conditional Use Permit, as the proposal is a non-water dependent commercial land use. Mason County Shoreline Master Program Chapter 7.16.040(Commercial Development) and Chapter 7.28.010 (Conditional Uses) guides review of this proposal. Applicable Commercial Development Policies are: 1. Commercial development on shorelines should be encouraged to provide physical and/or visual access to the shoreline, and other opportunities for the public to enjoy the shoreline. SHR20 1 1-00006 Staff report to County Hearing Examiner 2 The proposed hotel and retail area buildings, and access boardwalk, are setback at least 50 feet from the shoreline and provide a multiple use of the property so that a physical as well as visual access to the shoreline is still allowed. 2. Multiple use concepts which include open space and recreation should be encouraged in commercial development. The proposal includes the hotel and boardwalk access to the beach and vegetation buffer of native plantings adjacent to the saltwater shoreline, and the continuation of the water- dependent recreation in the existing retail building. 3. Commercial development should be aesthetically compatible with the surrounding area. Structures should not significantly impact views from the upland properties,public roadways, or the water. Due to the site development proposed and the existing footprint established from the 2002 shoreline permit, some view obstruction to the upland properties and from public roads will occur compared to the present mostly open perspective of the property. The 25 foot height limit in this area of Allyn will protect some view from upland properties. 4. The location of commercial developments along shorelines should ensure the protection of natural areas or systems identified as having geological,ecological,biological,or cultural significance. The setback of the proposed buildings from the shoreline high water mark will be replanted with native vegetation as a condition of review. 5. Commercial developments should be encouraged to locate inland from the shoreline area, unless they are dependent on a shoreline location. Commercial developments should be discouraged over water or in marshes,bogs, swamps,and wetlands. The proposal includes the 50 foot hotel setback from the shoreline high water mark and the boardwalk access to the beach and vegetation buffer of native plantings. 6. New commercial development in shoreline areas should be encouraged to locate in those areas with existing commercial uses in a manner that will minimize sprawl and inefficient use of shoreline areas. The site is within an area of existing commercial land uses in the center of the Allyn Urban Growth Area Village Commercial zone. 7. Parking facilities should be placed inland,away from the immediate water's edge and recreational beaches. Parking areas are proposed on the highway and county road side of the property, over 100 feet from the saltwater shoreline. 8. Commercial development should be designed and located to minimize impacts of noise and/or light generated by the development upon adjacent properties. Commercial developments which generate significant noise impacts should be discouraged. The proposed hotel and retail uses are in the same scale as the existing restaurant and retail land uses on adjacent properties; the development is screened from nearby residential land uses. SHR20 1 1-00006 Staff report to County Hearing Examiner 3 Applicable Commercial Development Use Regulations are: 2. Commercial development may be permitted in the shoreline area in the following descending order of priority: water-dependent,water-related, and water-oriented. The existing building on the property contains a water-dependent recreation commercial land use, and the proposed hotel use will be water-oriented with provided boardwalk access to the saltwater. 3.Parking and loading areas shall be located well away from the immediate water's edge and beaches, unless there is no other practical location for parking. Parking and landscaping plans shall be reviewed for compliance with all applicable county ordinances. Parking will be on-site towards the state highway and along the county road; some additional parking stalls may need to be provided nearby to the subject property. 5. Water supply and waste facilities shall comply with the strictest established guidelines, standards,and regulations. Community water and sewer systems are already connected on the property. 6.New commercial development shall be located adjacent to existing commercial developments whenever possible. Existing real estate, retail, and restaurant land uses are on properties in the Village Commercial zone adjacent to the subject property. 7.New or expanded structures shall not extend more than 35 feet in height above average grade level. Structure height is restricted to 25 feet in the site vicinity per the Allyn UGA zoning code (Sec. 17.12.150). 9. Commercial developments shall be located and designed to minimize noise impacts to adjacent properties. The site plan proposes buffering of adjacent residential properties, general landscaping through the development, and native plantings along the shoreline. CONDITIONAL USE EVALUATION As part of the standards of Chapter 7.28.010,uses which are classified or set forth in the Master Program as conditional uses may be authorized provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the following: 1. "The proposed use will be consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58 and the policies of the Master Program." The policies of the Shoreline Management Act RCW 90.58 emphasize that coordinated land use planning is necessary in order to protect the public interest associated with the shorelines of the state while, at the same time, recognizing and protecting the rights of private property consistent with the public interest. The applicant has proposed a lodging and retail land use that is suitable for the Urban Growth Area Village Commercial zoning designation, and is consistent with these shoreline policies and the anticipated needs of the Town of Allyn commercial area. SBMOI I-00006 Staff report to County Hearing Examiner 4 2. "The proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of the shoreline." With the 50-foot setback and appropriate side and road setbacks, the proposed hotel use will not interfere with the public use of the shoreline and the boardwalk accommodates access to the shore through the hotel and around the proposed buildings. 3. "The proposed use of the site and design of the project will be compatible with other permitted uses in the area." The hotel is compatible with the existing restaurant use to the south, commercial office to the north, and retail uses on the west side of State Route 3. The proposed hotel and retail complements the existing port community pier and waterfront park located 400 feet to the north of the subject property. 4. "The proposed use will cause no unreasonable adverse effects to the shoreline environment in which it is located." With the proposed 50 foot setback and landscaping with native vegetation plantings in the buffer, no adverse impacts to the shoreline are anticipated. As proposed, access to the saltwater shoreline will continue and the vegetation buffer will be enhanced by the planned native plantings between the buildings and beach and saltwater areas. 5. "That the Public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect." With the setback from the ordinary high water mark and proposed native plantings, the public interest in the shoreline suffers no detrimental effect as shoreline access and shoreline views are included as part of the hotel and retail proposed land use. VII. Evaluations. The applicant has proposed a 38 room hotel and 1,230 sq. ft. retail land use that is suitable for an Urban Growth Area and consistent with the needs of the Town of Allyn. With the proposed 50-foot setback and landscaping in the buffer replaced with native vegetation,the proposed use will not interfere with the public use of the shoreline and the boardwalk provides access to the shore through the hotel. The hotel is compatible with existing land uses along State Route 3. The proposed hotel and retail is compatible with the existing port pier and waterfront park north of the subject property. No adverse impacts to the shoreline are anticipated. The public interest in the shoreline suffers no detrimental effect as shoreline access and shoreline views are part of the hotel and retail proposed land use. Staff finds the proposal is consistent with Mason County Shoreline Master Program Substantial Development and Conditional Use Permit standards and a decision should include eight review conditions. VIII. Conclusions. As designed, this proposal is consistent with the Shoreline Management Act and with Mason County Shoreline Master Program Chapter 7.16.040 (Commercial Development) and Chapter 7.24.010 (Conditional Uses) standards, subject to the following conditions: 1) The proposed project shall be consistent with all policies and provisions of the Shoreline Management Act, its rules, and the standards of the Mason County Shoreline Master Program. SHR2011-00006 Staff report to County Hearing Examiner 5 2) The applicant shall meet the standards of the Conditional Use Permit review, including proper standards under the Allyn Urban Growth Area Village Commercial Zone(MCC 17.12.100)for setbacks,height, site coverage, and parking needs for the land uses proposed. 3) The applicant shall implement the proposed native plant landscaping plan in order to provide a re-established vegetation buffer along the saltwater frontage of Case Inlet and meet the intent of the Mason County Resource Ordinance fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas development standards. 4) The applicant shall provide proper ingress and egress for the proposed land use and secure the proper road traffic access permits from Washington Department of Transportation and Mason County Department of Public Works. 5) The applicant shall secure the review and approval by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Department of Ecology of proposed vegetation removal of shoreline and/or wetland plants that will be done during site preparation and eventual replanting in the vegetation buffer. 6) The applicant shall meet the fire protection standards of Mason County in the construction and operation of a motel land use in the All Urban Growth Area. p Allyn 7) The applicant shall use best management practices to prevent debris and runoff from entering the waters of the State,both during and following construction. 8) The applicant shall submit to Mason County a stormwater plan designed to 2009 State stormwater management technical standards; that plan shall be stamped by an engineer and shall meet approval of the Mason County Department of Public Works. IX. Choice of Actions 1. Approval of the permit request. 2. Denial of the permit request. 3. Conditional approval of the permit request. 4. Postpone for further information. SBM011-00006 Staff report to County Hearing Examiner 6 cl��lor ' Z RECEIVED DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Building III—426west Cedar Street .MASON COUNT�( P.O.Box 186,Shelton,WA 98584 (360)427-9670-Ext352 SHORELINE PERMIT APPLICATION PERMIT NO.ShQ 20l I-OXO(p SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHORELINE VARIANCE DATE RECEIVED I y I ZZL)I SHORELINE CONDITIONAL USE X _ 1 SHORELINE EXEMPTION The Washington State Shoreline Management Act RCW 90.58 requires that substantial developments within ( ) P designated shorelines of the state comply with its administrative procedures(WAC 173-14)and the provisions of the Mason County Shoreline Management Master Program.The purpose of this Act and local program is to protect the state's shoreline resources.The program requires that substantial development(any development of which the total cost or fair market value exceeds$5,000.00 or materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the State be reviewed with the goals,polices,and performance standards established in the Master Program. Answer all questions completely.Attach any additional information that my further describe the proposed development.Incomplete applications will be returned. APPLICANT: Richard A.and Bonnie J.Knight ADDRESS: 18350 E.Hwy 3 P.O.Box 84 Allyn,WA 98524 TELEPHONE: 360-275-6305 360-340-5796 (home) (business) AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE: Richard A.Knight ADDRESS: P.O.Box 84 Allyn,WA 98524 TELEPHONE:360-275-6305 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: General location(include property address,water body and associated wetlands—identify the name of the shoreline): 18350 E.Hwy 3,Allyn,WA 98524,West shore upland on North Bay of Case Inlet at intersection of Hwy3 and Evans St., Legal description(include section,township,and range to the nearest quarter,quarter section or latitude and longitude to the nearest minute.Projects located in open water areas away from land shall provide a longitude location)—include all parcel numbers: Parcel Number 12220-50-05001 Allyn blocks 4,lots I-8ex;Block 5 lots 1-7&so 20 ft of 8&tax A-B&Vac Bennett R I W,T 22N,Sec 20,nE 1/4. OWNERSHIP:Applicant x Owner Lessee Purchaser (Identify Other Owner: Richard A.Knight and Bonnie J.Knight,P.O. Box 84,Allyn,WA 98524 DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION Development(identify and describe the proposed project,including the type of materials to be used,construction methods,principle dimensions,and other pertinent information): This development is for the purpose to complete construction of a water front hotel with 38 rooms total on complete build out on the waterfront in Allyn. The kayak business which we are presently operating on the waterfront of this property will be continued as an adjunct operation out of the hotel in order to provide recreational opportunity for the hotel guests and others. This will include kayak rentals,instructions and tours and kayak supplies. This will allow the completion of Building A and Building B,wood frame construction,presently under construction under building permits:2002-00072-Building A and 2002-00088-Building B. (Permit 2002-00089-Building C is complete) This development is in compliance with the Allyn UGA plan in a Commercial Zone and has been identified as a highly desirable amenity for Allyn. As previously permitted,construction is under way with a 50 foot setback. With final grading and landscaping in this buffer with native vegetation,the use will not interfere with the public use of the shore line. Access to the shore is also provided by a patio/boardwalk through the hotel. This hotel is compatible with existing land uses along State Route 3. Existing adjacent uses are primarily retail and retail/restaurant. USE(identify current use of property with existing improvements: Substantial work has been completed toward the construction of a three building 38 room hotel under Shoreline Permit SHR2002-00016. Building C(Permit 2002-00089)is complete. It is a 1,498 sq.ft.two story building with 591 sq.ft.o retail. The retail down is presently being operated as and ice cream store and kayak rental and supplies. This kayak rental business has been in operation now since 2005.The upstairs is being rented as a vacation rental suite. Building B—(Permit 2002-00088)is a 9,729 sq.ft.two story building with 16 rooms. The Footings and a large portion of stem walls are in and the footing drains are in. Building A -(Permit 2002-00072)is a 17,975 sq.ft.two story building with 21 rooms,a conference room and 1,230 sq.ft.of retail area. The lobby foundation is in complete including the slab. A large section of the footings for this building are in. Preliminary site grading has been accomplished including topsoil fill along the waterfront 50 foot set back area and grass turf has been installed to stabilize the fill until final grading,bio swales and native vegetation is installed. This provides a containment for construction water and storm water runoff. . The high capacity explosion proof sewer grinder pump(as required by the County)has been installed. This pump is sized and installed to serve the 38 room three building project. The sewer hook up fees were paid in full at the time the above building permits were paid for. The two fire hydrants required for this building complex have been installed. The installation of the second of these two hydrants was paid for by us. REASON FOR REQUSTING DEVELOPMENT: We are requesting this Shoreline Permit in order to complete construction in accordance with the existing plans and permits. The economic turn down of the last few years has delayed progress on this project. We are not proposing any additional development beyond that which has been previously proposed and permits issued as described above. All work would be continued and completed within the existing footprint. ACKOWLEDGEMENT I hereby declare to the best of m w dge andj2djef,the forgoing informaiF taphed information is true and c i ap cant or authotr d representative) TO BE COMPLETED BY LOCAL OFFICIAL Identify and describe existing features of the site and surrounding area: If proposed structures will exceed a height of 35 feet above the existing grade level,indicate the location of any residential units that will have an obstructive view: If a Conditional Use or Variance is requested,make reference to the appropriate section in the Master Program: MASON CO. FIRE DIST. NO. 5 1 J CORPORATION P.O. BOX 127 P.O. BOX 749 ALLYN WA 98524 ALLYN WA 98524 DELBERT& BARBARA STORMO ALLYNVIEW PARTNERS P.O. BOX 73 A WASHINGTON LLC CORP. ALLYN WA 98524 P.O. BOX 345 ALLYN WA 98524 DANIEL BUNTING JULIA MORRELL P.O. BOX 152 2639 NO. HARRISON AVE. ALLYN WA 98524 FRESNO CA 93704 RICHARD & GWENDA TUTTLE HEGGE LIMITED LIABILITY COMP. 806 VINEST. 101 A HILLTOP DR. MILTON WA 98354 SEQUIM WA 98382 JOSEPH & PAMELA BONINO TRS. HUGH MIDDLETON C/O PATRICIA SHROUT 13205 BRACKEN FERN DR. NW 900 ISLAND DR. STE 401 GIG HARBOR WA 98332 RANCHO MIRAGE CA 92270-3124 PROGRESSIVE MANAGEMENT INC. WA STATE DEPT. OF FISH &WILDLIFE A NEVADA CORPORATION 600 CAPITOL WAY NO. P.O. BOX 222 OLYMPIA WA 98501-1076 BREMERTON WA 98337-0048 ROBERT & MARILYN ANDERSON NIGH REVOCABLE LVG TRUST P.O. BOX 108 P.O. BOX 1066 ALLYN WA 98524 ALLYN WA 98524 DANNY & KAREN EWART ALLYN PROPERTIES P.O. BOX 167 P.O. BOX 856 ALLYN WA 98524 ALLYN WA 98524 MARTIN &AMANDA REYNOLDS GARY & MARIA TERESA LAWRENCE P.O. BOX 80 P.O. BOX 1434 ALLYN WA 98524 ALLYN WA 98524 VENTURE PROPERTY MGMT LUCILLE AMACHER P.O. BOX 556 P.O. BOX 46 ALLYN WA 98524 ALLYN WA 98524 ALLYN COMMUNITY CHURCH ERNEST& SHIRLEY MCGIBBON P.O. BOX 1245 P.O. BOX 902 ALLYN WA 98524 ALLYN WA 98524 PORT OF ALLYN NICKOLAS BISKEBORN P.O. BOX 1 P.O. BOX 21 ALLYN WA 98524 ALLYN WA 98524 BARBARA & STANLEY SMELCER BONNIE & RICHARD KNIGHT P.O. BOX 202 P.O. BOX 84 BRINNON WA 98320-0202 ALLYN WA 98524 JEFF AND DEBI CAREY RICHARD G. PHILLIPS P.O. BOX 66 OWENS DAVIES FRISTOE TAYLOR & SCHULTZ ALLYN WA 98524 1115 WEST BAY DR. NW SUITE 302 OLYMPIA WA 98502-4668 Mason County Department of Community Development Building I * 411 N. 5th Street * P.O. Box 279 Shelton,Washington 98584 * (360) 427-9670 April 14, 2011 TO: Mason County Hearings Examiner FROM: Planning Staff—Allan Borden; 360.427.9670 ext. 363; ahbkco.mason.wa.us RE: Special Use Permit request from Richard and Bonnie Knight for the Allyn Hotel (DDR2011-00020) STAFF REPORT I. Introduction. This report evaluates a request for a Special Use Permit for a proposed hotel in the Allyn Urban Growth Area along North Bay Case Inlet using Mason County Code (MCC)Chapter 17.05.040 Special use Permit review standards. Staff finds the proposal is consistent with these Mason County Development Regulations standards to review a larger dimensioned building and a decision should include review conditions. II. Applicants. Richard and Bonnie Knight. ght. III. Property Location.At 18350 E State Route 3, Allyn, WA.; tax parcel 12220-50-05001; in R 1 W, T 22 N, Section 20,NE 1/4. IV. Project Description. A hotel building of 17,975 sq. ft. in area is proposed within Allyn (Exhibit 7). The Mason County Development Regulations Section 1.03.032 Dimensional Requirements state that within Allyn Urban Growth Area the maximum building size is 10, 000 sq. ft. and that building size may be increased to 20,000 sq. ft. with a Special Use Permit. This report evaluates the request to construct the proposed building exceeding the maximum building size. V. Evaluations. A. Characteristics of the site. The site is a fairly flat upland area that drops 6 to 8 feet from the State Route 3 area to the Ordinary High Water Mark at the shoreline. Past grading and temporary land uses have left the property largely unvegetated or in commercial parking use (Exhibit 6). A 1,498 sq. ft. two story building(lodging above, 591 sq. ft. retail below)and some of the foundation walls have been constructed since an original three-building proposal was approved in October 2002 by Mason County shoreline permit SHR2002-00016. That permit lapsed and the current permit is a resubmittal for permit consideration in 2011. The property is served by the Washington Water system and is connected for the hotel land use to the North Bay Sewer system. B. Characteristics of the area. The subject property is within an existing area of commercial DDR20 1 1-00020 Special Use Permit staff report to the County Hearing Examiner 1 development(Exhibit 6),with a restaurant and few retail buildings to the south, a real estate office to the north, and small retail businesses, fire station, and convenience store to the west across State Route 3. There are residences that are upland of bulkheads to the north and south beyond the commercial development along the shoreline of North Bay. C. Shoreline Designation. The shoreline designation of the site is Urban Commercial Shoreline Environment. D. Zoning. The zoning is Allyn Urban Growth Area Village Commercial designation. Building height limit of 25 feet is being reviewed as part of this proposal. Maximum building size of 10,000 sq. ft. in Allyn is exceeded by proposed 17,975 sq. ft building and is subject to this Special Use Permit review by the County Hearing Examiner. VII. SEPA Compliance and other public notice requirements. A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on March 28, 2011. Comments were received from the Department of Ecology regarding contaminated soils,debris and clearing sites, sediment and erosion control, and construction stormwater permitting for the project. The comments can be addressed through permit conditions. The Special Use Permit application(DDR20 1 1-00020) is attached(Exhibit 4). The Notice of Application for Special Use Permit is attached(Exhibit 9). The Affidavit of Publication of Shoreline Management Permit is attached(Exhibit 10). VIII. Other Permits. In addition to this Special Use Permit, this proposal will require a Mason County Shoreline Master Program Substantial Development and Conditional Use Permit and Mason County building permits; connection to the North Bay Case Inlet sewer system and connection to adequate community water. VIII. Analysis. This permit requires a Special Use Permit under MCC Sec. 17.01 Mason County Development Regulations. Development Regulations Section 17.03.032 Dimensional Requirements state that within the Allyn Urban Growth Area the maximum building size dimension of 10, 000 sq. ft. is allowed and that building size may be increased to 20,000 sq. ft. with a Special Use Permit public review. Compliance with Mason County Comprehensive Plan Development RegWations This proposal requires a Special Use Permit because the proposed building dimensions exceed standards and the proposal possesses unique characteristics due to size,nature, intensity of use, technological processes, demands upon public services,relationship to surrounding lands, or other factors, as noted in Section 17.05.040 in the Mason County Development Regulations. This Section provides six criteria for review(applicant's responses are in italics). A That the proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare; The proposed hotel use on this site is not detrimental to public health, safety or welfare, as water is supplied by the Port of Allyn water system and the property is connected for hotel use to the North Bay sewer system. Existing water-related recreation will continue with the proposed hotel land use build-out in the Allyn UGA Village Commercial zone. DDR20 1 1-00020 Special Use Permit staff report to the County Hearing Examiner 2 i B. That the proposed use is consistent and compatible with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan; The proposed hotel use is consistent with the intent of the Mason County Comprehensive Plan and consistent with the Village Commercial zone designation in the Allyn Urban Growth Area. The layout and design of the development will comply with the standards of the Allyn UGA zoning code. C. That the proposed use will not introduce hazardous conditions at the site that cannot be mitigated through appropriate measures to protect adjacent properties and the community at large; No hazardous conditions will be created at the site as a result of site preparation and grading for the development, and the proposed hotel building dimension being one building of 17,975 square feet in size in lieu of two separate buildings each being less than 10,000 square feet in size. Sewage disposal for the site land uses will be provided by the North Bay sewer system. D That the proposed use is served by adequate public facilities which are in place, or planned as a condition of approval or as an identified item in the County's Capital Facilities Plan; The proposed project is served adequately by public facilities. Sewer service and electricity are available along State Route 3. Water service will be provided by the Port of Allyn water system. Fire protection for the hotel development build-out is a condition of the construction permit,previously calculated when the project was approved by a 2002 shoreline development and special use permit. E. That the proposed use will not have a significant impact upon existing uses on adjacent lands; The proposal will be screened from shoreline residential land uses to the north and native plantings within the 50 foot setback will be established along the saltwater shoreline. With a 25 foot building height limit, the development will have a positive economic impact on the Town of Allyn by providing visitors to the region a place to stay close to the Allyn retail and restaurants and saltwater shoreline. F If located outside an Urban Growth Area,that the proposed use will not result in the need to extend urban services. Not applicable, as the proposal is within the Allyn Urban Growth Area. The applicant has presented project details, especially in their site plan and responses to Special Use Permit criteria,to adequately review the proposed building and its square footage. These plans show that the 25-foot height limit in Allyn, a Development Regulations standard, is integrated into the proposal. The building separates the lodging areas from the retail areas, and provides a connection of safe access to and from each area. The lodging areas face the shoreline for views and the retail area are situated to fit in with existing retail to the south and west. The applicant has stated that all necessary services will be provided for this development project: DDR20 1 1-00020 Special Use Permit staff report to the County Hearing Examiner 3 sewer and electricity are available along the state highway; water is available from an established system; access to the county right-of-way and state highway will be properly obtained; parking on the subject property is set forth in the site plan. The applicant has proposed a 38 room hotel and 1,821 sq. ft. retail land use that is suitable for an Urban Growth Area and consistent with the needs of the Town of Allyn. A Special Use Permit is required to review a building whose square footage(17,975 sq. ft.)exceeds the maximum building size for Allyn(10,000 sq. ft.), in accordance with Development Regulations Section 17.03.032 Dimensional Requirements. The proposed 25-foot high building will not interfere with the public use of the shoreline or access to the shore through or around the hotel building. The hotel and retail are compatible with existing land uses along State Route 3. The proposed hotel and retail complements the existing port pier and waterfront park north of the subject property. No adverse impacts to the shoreline are anticipated IX. Conclusions. For the proposal to be in compliance with MCC Sec. 17.01 Mason County Development Regulations,a Special Use Permit is required due to review a building whose square footage(17,975 sq. ft.)exceeds the maximum building size for Allyn(10,000 sq. ft.), in accordance with Development Regulations Section 17.03.032 Dimensional Requirements. The applicant has shown that efforts have been made to be in compliance with this ordinance and to minimize potential impacts of the proposed hotel on the subject property and adjacent areas and meet the review criteria of the Development Regulations for Special Use Permit consideration. Staff finds consistency with Mason County Development Regulations Special Use Permit standards, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall meet the standards of the Special Use Permit review, including proper setbacks,height standards, site coverage,and parking needs for the land uses proposed. 2. The applicant shall provide proper ingress and egress for the proposed land use and secure the proper road traffic access permits from Washington Department of Transportation and Mason County Department of Public Works. 3. The applicant shall meet the fire protection standards of Mason County in the construction and operation of a motel land use in the Allyn Urban Growth Area. 4. The applicant shall use best management practices to prevent debris and runoff from entering the waters of the State, both during and following construction. 5. The applicant shall submit to Mason County a stormwater plan designed to 2009 state stormwater management technical standards;that plan shall be stamped by an engineer and shall meet approval of the Mason County Department of Public Works. X. Choice of Actions. 1. Approval of the special use permit request. 2. Denial of the special use permit request. 3. Conditional approval of the special use permit request. 4. Postpone for further information. DDR2011-00020 Special Use Permit staff report to the County Hearing Examiner 4 Special Use Pe $1,135 Mason County Permit Center Use: Plus Hearings Ex 2,005 or $670 for ADU's ��11 DDR�I - �ot 6 Date Rcvd Z-22 l MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 426 W Cedar Street/P.O.Box 186,Shelton,WA 98584 APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL USE A Special Use is one that possesses unique characteristics due to size, nature, intensity of use, technological processes involved, demands upon public services, relationship to surrounding lands, or other factors. The purpose of this application is to provide for adequate oversight and review of such development proposals, in order to assure that such uses are developed in harmony with surrounding land uses, and in a manner consistent with the intent of the Development Regulations for Mason County; Ordinance No. 82-96. Acceptance of this application by Mason County does not guarantee approval of request. Type of Special Use Permit: ❑ Communications Tower ❑ Accessory Dwelling Unit Oversize Construction ❑ Other: V,__4VCLe, Applicant Name l�/ c-&Ar ED �. Telephone# Mailing Address �" L,�,�-� (� t"'s Site Address . Ao Tax Parcel # /'Z -1- 0 .-F-b � Legal Description f-Oc-K �-r-� Gt-.y Ott Property Owner Names R(c,"-pk(20 4- . JAr, &lt24cc" '- Project Description 601'- Pkp(­1 1 T (f-e-) Please provide a site plan that includes the following: 1) Indicate Scale and North Arrow. 2) Property line dimensions,easements,and right-of-ways. 3) The location of all existing and proposed structures. Include square footage of existing and proposed structures. 4) Setback distance, in feet from all property lines and structures. 5) Existing and proposed road access to and from the site. �CED 6) Parking spaces. FEB 2 2 2011 7) Location of on-site sewage tanks and drainfields. 426 W. CEDAR ST. IACommunity DevelopmenAPAC\SPECIAL USE Page 1 of 3 Updated 6/17/2010 8) Location of drinking water supply. Include location on the proposed site and surrounding parcels. 9) Steep bluffs,wetlands, streams,and bodies of water 10) Location of fire hydrants and emergency vehicle access roads, including grade. 11) Surface and storm water run-off routes. On a separate piece of paper,state your reasons for requesting a Special Use Permit and be sure to address the following six criteria. Your request will be evaluated based on these criteria. 1) Will the proposed use be detrimental to public health, safety,and welfare? 2) Will the proposed use be consistent and compatible with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan? 3) Will the proposed use introduce hazardous conditions,at the site,that cannot be mitigated through appropriate measures to protect adjacent properties and the community at large? 4) Is the proposed use served by adequate public facilities,which are in place,planned as a condition of approval or as an identified item in the County's Capital Facilities Plan? 5) Will the proposed use have a significant impact upon existing uses on adjacent lands? 6) If located outside of an Urban Growth Area,will the proposal result in the need to extend urban services? #of Pages Attached: __LXA&k Applicant(s) Signature Date 2 / ..................._.._..........._......................_........................................................................................................._........................................................._.............._......................._.................................................................... Publication Cost Agreement Publication cost is the responsibility of the applicant.Final permit processing will not occur until advertising fees have been paid to the newspaper by the applicant.The Shelton-Mason County Journal will bill the applicant directly. I/WE understand that I/WE must sign and date the attached acknowledgment indicating and that I/WE understand that is MY/OUR responsibility. I/WE must submit the signed page as part of application in order for it to be considered as complete. L� Si6newfe­of Property Ow r Date Print Name OR Signature of Applicant Date Print Name RECEIVED FEB 2 2 2011 IACommunity DevelopmentTAOSPECIAL USE Page 2 of 3 U dated 6/17/2010 426 W. CEDAR �T. 1) This proposed use will not be detrimental to public health,safety and welfare. Water is being supplied by a Class A public water system operated by the Port of Allyn.The project is designed with ingress and egress which will allow for safe traffic to and from the property. The property is supplied water by a Class a water system operated by the Port of Allyn. All buildings will be hooked up to the North Bay Water Reclamation System which is operated by Mason County. The property provides healthy recreational opportunities most particularly by the North Bay Kayak rental and supplies operation which has been operating on this property and will continue to be operated in conjunction with this water front hotel. This development is for the purpose to complete construction of a water front hotel with 38 rooms total on complete build out on the waterfront in Allyn on North Bay of Case Inlet. The kayak business which we are presently operating on the waterfront of this property will be continued as an adjunct operation out of the hotel in order to provide recreational opportunity for the hotel guests and others. This will include kayak rentals,instructions and tours and kayak supplies. 2) This development is in compliance with the Allyn UGA plan in a Commercial Zone and has been identified as a highly desirable amenity for Allyn. As previously permitted,construction is under way with a 50 foot setback from the high water line of North Bay. With final grading and landscaping in this 50 foot buffer using native vegetation,the use will not interfere with the public use of the shore line. Access to the shore is also provided by a patio/boardwalk through the hotel. This hotel is compatible with existing land uses along State Route 3. Existing adjacent uses are primarily retail and retail/restaurant. 3) No hazardous conditions will be introduced. Preliminary site grading has been accomplished. Topsoil fill along the waterfront 50 foot set back area has been put in place and grass turf has been installed to stabilize the fill until final grading,bio swales and native vegetation is installed. This provides containment for construction water and storm water runoff. 4) This project is served by adequate public facilities. This property fronts on State Highway 3. Class A water is supplied by the Port of Allyn water system. The two fire hydrants required for this building complex have been installed. The installation of the second of these two hydrants was paid for by us. PUD 3 supplies electricity,there is telephone,internet fiber,satellite and cable service. Sewer service is supplied by the North Bay Water Reclamation System which is operated by Mason County.The high capacity explosion proof sewer grinder pump(as required by the County)has been installed. This pump is sized and installed to serve the 38 room three building project. The sewer hook up fees were prepaid at the time the above building permits were paid for. Fire protection is supplied by Fire Protection District 5t Mason County. And police protection by the Mason County Sheriffs office. 5) No significant impact to adjacent lands will be created. The real estate office and the single residential property to the north will continue to share an access easement. The residential property on the north on the waterfront will be screened by a suitable fence and by selective plantings of the native vegetation.Building A -(Permit 2002-00072)which is a 17,975 sq.ft.two story building will not exceed the height limitation of the Allyn UGA Plan as it will be limited to 25 feet in height. 6) This property is located within the Allyn UGA. Substantial work has been completed toward the construction of a three building 38 room hotel under Shoreline Permit SHR2002-00016. Building C(Permit 2002-00089)is complete. It is a 1,498 sq.ft.two story building with 591 sq.ft. o retail. The retail down is presently being operated as and ice cream store and kayak rental and supplies. This kayak rental business has been in operation now since 2005.The upstairs is being rented as a vacation rental suite. Building B—(Permit 2002-00088)is a 9,729 sq.ft.two story building with 16 rooms. The Footings and a large portion of stem walls are in and the footing drains are in. Building A -(Permit 2002-00072)is a 17,975 sq.ft.two story building with 21 rooms,a conference room and 1,230 sq.ft.of retail area. The lobby foundation is in and complete including the slab. A large section of additional footings for this building are in. REcawD FEB 11 2011 426 W CEPAR ST. HUGH MIDDLETON BONNIE& RICHARD KNIGHT 13205 BRACKEN FERN DR. NW P.O. BOX 84 GIG HARBOR WA 98332 ALLYN WA 98524 JEFF AND DEBI CAREY RICHARD G. PHILLIPS P.O. BOX 66 OWENS DAVIES FRISTOE TAYLOR&SCHULTZ ALLYN WA 98524 1115 WEST BAY DR. NW SUITE 302 OLYMPIA WA 98502-4668 MARTIN &AMANDA REYNOLDS DANIEL BUNTING P.O. BOX 80 P.O. BOX 152 ALLYN WA 98524 ALLYN WA 98524 VENTURE PROPERTY MGMT RICHARD & GWENDA TUTTLE P.O. BOX 556 807 VINE ST. ALLYN WA 98524 MILTON WA 98354 MASON CO. FIRE DIST. NO. 5 PORT OF ALLYN P.O. BOX 127 P.O. BOX 1 ALLYN WA 98524 ALLYN WA 98524 ALLYN COMMUNITY CHURCH ERNEST & SHIRLEY MCGIBBON P.O. BOX 1245 P.O. BOX 902 ALLYN WA 98524 ALLYN WA 98524 t PUBLIC NOTICE MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOP- MENT Planning Division P.O. Box 279,Shelton,WA 98584 (360)427-9670 Affidavit of Publication SHR2011-00006 NOTICE OF SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT and DDR2011-00020 SPECIAL USE PERMIT. STATE OF WASHINGTON I SS. Notice is hereby given that Richard and Bon- COUNTY OF MASON nie Knight who are owners of the described prop- erty below, have filed an application for a Substan tial Development / Conditional Use Permit for the Koleen Wood being first duly sworn development of: Shoreline Conditional Use Permit to con- on oath deposes and says that she is the clerk struct 38 room hotel composed of a 17,975 sq. of the SHELTON-MASON COUNTY JOURNAL, a weekly newspaper. That ft.two story building(21 rooms with 1,230 sq.ft. laid newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been for more than six retail area),and a 9,729 sq.ft.two story building months prior to the date of the publication hereinafter referred to,published in (16 rooms).Public access boardwalk from hotel the English language continuously as a weekly newspaper in SHELTON,Mason to shore. Native plant restoration of shoreline County,Washington,and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an vegetation. Parking for 38 vehicles provided on office maintained at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper. That site adjacent to State Route 3 in Allyn,WA. the said SHELTON-MASON COUNTY JOURNAL was on the 9th day of In addition. The Knights have filed an applica- August, 1941, approved as a legal newspaper by the Superior Court of said tion for a Special Use Permit for the proposal to Mason County. construct a building greater that 10,000 sq. ft. in area within the Allyn Urban Growth Area That the annexed is a true copy of a Notice of Shoreline Permit Parcel Number: 12220-50-05001. Site Address: 18350 E State Route 3, Allyn WA. SHR2011-00006 and Special Use Permit DDR2011-00020-Richard kni,ht Project Location: along North Bay Case Inlet and State Route 3 at Lakeland Dr.;within the north- 4050-Richard/Bonnie Knit_yht east 1/4 of Section 20,Township 22 N., Range 1 W. as it was published in regular issues and not in supplement form of said in Mason County,Washington. Said proposed development is subject to shore- newspaper once each week for a period of two line management permit review(M.C.C. 17.50)and consecutive weeks,commencing on the Mason County Development Regulations stan- dards.Any person desiring to express their view or 10th day of March 2011 ,and ending on the to be notified of the action taken on the application should notify in writing of their interest to: 17th day of March 2011 both dates inclusive, MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COM- MUNITY DEVELOPMENT and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of PO BOX 279 the said period.That the full amount of the fee charged for the SHELTON,WA 98584 The comment period is at least 30 days from foregoing publication is the sum of$ 351 the final date ofpublication given pursuant to WAC 173.14-020.The final date ofpublication, posting or mailing of notice is March 17,2011. Written comments will be accepted up to the Subscribed and sworn to before me this 7 day of date of the Hearings Examiner public hearing Tues- day April 26, 2011; 1:00 PM. Contact this office at (360) 427-9670, ext.365 for further information. This request is subject to State Environmental Policy Act environmental review and comments on Nota blic in Ynd for the State of Washington the submitted checklist will be due on April 4,2011. Residing at Shelton,Washington 4050 3/10-17 2t My commission expires ,20,,�4 _. 'PO E cxh bt �v 2 OR H BA RD Kitsa County NIL HILL RD � I �------Pepe z F I -i Q -� C W a w /1 E STERLING DR BFjkG RD JAY R O 0 O V Q IC U 2 � NAHUM N > �P � / w O v W O i E ON CR T22NR1 A M i`i TVI� NY 0 a G o CCtf7 L C o k pN o Sty u, P" ce County o� E g� E VI TOR DGE RD ' K O CREEK RD 00 GRAQEV IF� 0 I v I c ' ff I N LSON RD ` N S�fR2D( I r 00006 c ep Ut t e o00 2( Al( n H-0 ftp.L/ 1 inch = 2,000 feet W E 5kofe11*e pq4flf, 1 inch = 0.38 miles Vic S V'Clnt4 122205060001';` iy 122205007003 0� 122201380746 122205059001 4 ! IA � � 122205070009 - ~122265007001 lA PVAd1i 122205006001. r,f '' r122205006901 122201380745 122205004008 c� 122205070004 / .f"\� � WV122205005008 ' 12220507100 1 `• ' . � �• �� •r,��. � +� 122205005009 r w- 122205071005 . 122201480730 122205071004% ♦ i 122205070001 �. 1222050710014' 122205005001 � ANRIW r _ 122200060000 cj 122200060010 122205073006 1111� FFVgiys$T I 122200060010�' f 1 rd� 12220428074u 122205072009 122208888888 t 122205003907 122205003005 122201480090 122205072003 122204280747 122205072004 122205003004 i e 122205072001 122205003002 122204180100 122205003001 122204280744 N � � 2oc � oaaob ��,p �vtl . 000z1 ill [_6, 1 inch = 100 feet W E 1 inch = 0.02 miles 511� pal Pa rce S ( Z2 2.o so osvo I SETBACK _ CASE I — o-0• — — ao-(. \ —�— BU EXI %6a 5 CK ACCESS EA EXISTING MEAN HIGH WATER DATUM 5 ]p---- - 6.68= 6.68 S / ALIGN 50'COMMERG SHORLIN 70 EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY / \ PE7 ■ Z � I II II �-per b i EXISTING _ COMMERCIAL � — — Z II EXISTING PARKING LOT � I RESTAURANT 6' I II i / 1 nn A II / • V_ U I I L EXISTIN HEAD-It N PARKIN s r�x'rr� ao I FJ(ISTING ALLYN SIGNAGE2 10 RETAIL 591 SF as 2 CONCRETE WALK (LODGING �� _ 6_ e,±-Li._6. WI TREEWELLS ROOM ABOVE) r 4 STATE RO - - EXISTING RETAIL WITH HEAD-IN PARKING/7 / -- — -- — — — - — — — — - — — [zEXISTIN 1 1 0 COMME ALON HOTEL//��'"�EL PARKIN( SHORELINE SITE PLAN 1 N SCALE iAUE N Mll 'IT ro o �7 MON VA i NO 411la ��1,� ' �j�t'�'�i't}�}�'i�'J!~ �'1Jtii�i'U����±r.��+it����`".fli`i1'lii� �v-��•ti v v t'i d.� `''�:.t t7;t�.s � , � � ALIGN TREES BETWEEN ALIGN TREES BETWEEN AUM TREE BETWEEN wwom BAYS w'Nom BAYS ►��Q� 101, 5j /I kL --- � * Ir iit■■■n■■■u■■■ All RE ON On ■I J. J•.6. �O..qn���■ p���. r �4—� ��■�Ll i/-�/'"�' _ '%'fib 7J?�hcr^'n� 1'" y. '``�.y��� �,. \ ■A - °r I/llr/ ,,,eee��� r`"��,■r ��i.���.�i/ a�Y. �'wa a[ D i�_!/ �'v....-ua1�■/��� }ram".::./-� 1. �sf♦ '�'- - A ir�0\�_� i iir�il /i�1�ly r�i•� rQ ■ ■ Q��lY �2.,, � L.���/�►�� � ��,i ' � ��d�ll���Lj�^Iti,� ��l=��i■■ii��u�■ .ah-v-v�+ � y��,��� -�1i.ur,..a,.�i,�B!�u` n�..:s Jw� ,a�hrri..�,i6/. zen i �V,! �:: �i�����■ ■0: � \�o On '. it�I ■ , Flow • ��'-s9��,i r+. 'p•�� ea� / ,�a'��i ME EE MIN 041+ MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning Division P.O. Box 279, Shelton,WA 98584 (360)427-9670 SHR2011-00006 NOTICE OF SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT and DDR2011-00020 SPECIAL USE PERMIT. Notice is hereby given that Richard and Bonnie Knight who are owners of the described property below,have filed an application for a Substantial Development/Conditional Use Permit for the development of: Shoreline Conditional Use Permit to construct 38 room hotel composed of a 17,975 sq. ft. two story building(21 rooms with 1,230 sq. ft. retail area),and a 9,729 sq. ft. two story building(16 rooms). Public access boardwalk from hotel to shore. Native plant restoration of shoreline vegetation. Parking for 38 vehicles provided on site adjacent to State Route 3 in Allyn,WA. In addition,The Knights have filed an application for a Special Use Permit for the proposal to construct a building greater that 10,000 sq. ft. in area within the Allyn Urban Growth Area. Parcel Number: 12220-50-05001. Site Address: 18350 E State Route 3, Allyn WA. Project Location: along North Bay Case Inlet and State Route 3 at Lakeland Dr.; within the northeast 1/4 of Section 20, Township 22 N., Range 1 W. in Mason County Washington. Said proposed development is subject to shoreline management permit review(M.C.C. 17.50)and Mason County Development Regulations standards. Any person desiring to express their view or to be notified of the action taken on the application should notify in writing of their interest to: MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PO BOX 279 SHELTON,WA 98584 The comment period is at least 30 days from the final date of publication given pursuant to WAC 173- 14-020. The final date of publication,posting or mailing of notice is March 17, 2011. Written comments will be accepted up to the date of the Hearings Examiner public hearing Tuesday April 26, 2011; 1:00 PM. Contact this office at(360)427-9670, ext. 365 for further information. This request is subject to State Environmental Policy Act environmental review and comments on the submitted checklist will be due on April 4, 2011. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE STATE OF.WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF MASON ) do hereby certify that I posted copiesof the attached on day of 20 (C in places laces as follows: � N one at one at ft-�A kpe� 5�- one at S?,t4A wxq- � S K,J ov, a+ Atd,�-" /Uat 44�WUA!�Z�-, In witness whereof, the party has signed this Affidavit of Posting Notice this (-` day of 20 C . By: Address: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF MASON ) Subscribed and sworn to me this .� day of 4jv , 20i ,,,.�JSPN• E<<� ��''�.,�� Notary Public fVrA ate of` ashington �,: �oTAk�,•��' Residing at • 'z'- Commission Expires COAPR 30, 20 1 • e 0-0 AS