Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-23-2020 - Agenda PacketPage 3-4 �M MEDINA, WASHINGTON www.medina-wa.gov PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA Virtual/Teleconference Tuesday, June 23, 2020 2:00 PM With the passing of the City's Proclamation of Local Emergency and the Governor's Stay -at Home Proclamation, City Hall is closed to the public. Planning Commission participation in the special meeting will be by teleconference/online only. Members of the public may also participate by phone/online but please note that no contemporaneous public comment will be accepted. Join Zoom Meeting https://zoom. us/I/99433118743?pwd=Tl RveWVTemJ menJxW W lyd FVpLzhXQT09 Meeting ID: 994 3311 8743 Password: 754697 Or dial in at: +12532158782, 99433118743# US (Tacoma) AGENDA David Langworthy, Mark Nelson, Laurel Preston, Mike Raskin, Randy Reeves, Shawn Schubring and Jenny Smith Staff/Commissioners Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of May 26, 2020 Recommendation: Adopt. Staff Contact: Amber Kellison, Development Services Coordinator Page 1 of 25 Page Due to remote conferencing there will be no contemporaneous public comments at the Planning Commission meeting. If residents or the public have questions, concerns or comments of Planning Commission business or issues, or the following Planning Commission agenda, kindly submit comments via email or regular mail to akellisonC@rnedina-wa.gov by 1 PM on Tuesday, June 23, 2020 to be read aloud by the Development Services Coordinator. Previous email comments received in May have been included in the staff report packet and are listed below. 5-7 1. Email from David Langworthy, dated May 16, 2020 8-9 2. Email from Mike Raskin, dated May 26, 2020 10 3. Email from Laurel Preston, dated June 17, 2020 11 - 25 1. Subject: Mitigating Bulk Recommendation: Discussion item only. Staff Contact: Stephanie Keyser, AICP, Planning Manager Next special meeting: Waiting on confirmation from council that we will have our joint Meeting on July 21 st. Planning Commission meetings are held on the 4th Tuesday of the month at 6 PM. However, due to shifts in work and life that have resulted from COVID-19, the meetings have been temporarily changed to 2pm. UPCOMING MEETINGS July 21, 2020 Special Meeting (2pm) followed by Joint PC/CC Meeting (4pm) August 2020 No Meeting Tuesday, September 22, 2020 Special Meeting (2pm) Tuesday, October 27, 2020 Special Meeting (2pm) November 2020 Special Meeting TBD December 2020 Special Meeting TBD In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need a disability -related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Office at (425) 233-6410 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. Page 2 of 25 Draft AGENDA ITEM 3.1 MEDINA, WASHINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES ZOOM Tuesday, MAY 26, 2020 2:00 PM MINUTES The Planning Commission special meeting of May 26, 2020 was called to order at 2:15 p.m. by Chair Preston. Commissioners Present Commissioners Absent: Staff Present: None Langworthy, Nelson, Raskin, Reeves, Smith, Schubring and Preston None Keyser and Kellison Minutes from the February 25, 2020 regular meeting. ACTION: Motion Reeves second Nelson. Approved 5-0 None Subject: 2020 Work Plan and Meeting Calendar Keyser discussed the work plan and meeting calendar for the rest of the year. The conversation included a new temporary time, taking a month off during summer, a joint Planning Commission and City Council meeting in July, Commissioner emails regarding Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of May 26, 2020 Page 3 of 25 Draft AGENDA ITEM 3.1 their thoughts on bulk, the status of the tree canopy assessment, and the possibility of a parking study. The Commissioners provided input and asked questions. Staff responded. ACTION: Keyser will forward emails received from Commissioners regarding their thoughts on bulk to the rest of the group. Motion Nelson second Langworthy; the Commission adjourned the regular meeting at 3:14 p.m. Minutes taken by: Amber Kellison Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of May 26, 2020 Page 4 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 4.1 Stephanie Keyser From: David Langworthy <del@davidlangworthy.com> Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2020 10:17 AM To: Stephanie Keyser; laurelpr@seanet.com Subject: Medina History on Density Stephanie and Laurel, I would like to include the following as a public comment at the next meeting which includes "bulk" in the agenda. I found this article, which I have included below, interesting and it helped provide additional context around the bulk discussions the planning commission has been having as a group. https://www.historylink.org/File/11071 Medina was founded to provide housing in a natural setting and avoid the density of Seattle or Bellevue. For me, this places additional context around and increases the importance of the "bulk" discussions the planning commission has been having as a group. After visiting multiple proposals and spending a lot of time walking the neighborhood during our extended staycation, I now believe that addressing the bulk issue directly with a moderate Allowable Volume provision provides maximum design flexibility without opening the possibility of unintended consequences. Specifically: Allowable Volume = Buildable Area * Maximum Height * Volume Allowance Buildable Area = Lot Dimensions —Setbacks Maximum Height = 25' Volume Allowance = 0.75 The volume is defined to be the enclosed area of any structure. The area under an eve, above a balcony, or within a covered poarch would not count toward the volume. Almost all of the pre 90's housing stock meets this criteria as do most custom homes built by their current occupants. Satisfying this provision can be easily met for new construction by what Mark described as "modulation". Pitched roofs, eaves, bays, patios, balconies, a covered poarch, even a carport will reduce the effective volume of a structure. This alternative encourages integrating new homes with the environment without restricting architectural style of the home. If the owner desires a highly linear style, it is still possible to achieve this although possibly at a smaller volume. That said, a quick informal survey of Le Corbusier residential architecture appears to meet the criteria without modification due his advanced use of modulation. Note that Medina Heights would effectively not be impacted by this provision as they have voluntarily reduced their maximum height from 25 to 20 feet effectively reducing the allowable volume. Regards, Dave 3212EPR Medina incorporates on August i9, 1955• • By Phil Dougherty Email from David Langworthy, dated May 16, 2020 Page 5 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 4.1 • 1 Posted 5/21 /20 15 • IHistoryl-ink.org Essay 1 1071 Share On August 19, 1955, the city of Medina in King County officially incorporates. The long and winding road to incorporation includes a political footrace with the larger city of Bellevue, which is seeking to annex the community. Medina is located along the eastern shore of Lake Washington northwest of Bellevue. Medina and the Three Points A village nearly named Flordeline, before taking the name of an Arabian Peninsula city (but with a different pronunciation: "Me-dye-na"), started out in the 1870s and 1880s as a tiny community known for its berry farms and orchards. By the 1910s Medina had come into its own, and its charms of spacious property lots and stellar lake views began attracting attention on the Seattle side of the lake. During the next several decades a more affluent crowd settled in Medina and built large, substantial homes there. Change came to Medina in mid-century. The entire Eastside (the Seattle metropolitan area east of Lake Washington) was growing fast. The residents of Medina and the neighboring Three Points (Evergreen, Hunts, and Yarrow points) just to the north had enjoyed county services over the years, but by the 1950s these were becoming less adequate to meet their needs. Local residents were also concerned because county zoning regulations allowed smaller lot sizes than what was the norm in the community. They feared smaller lots meant more building and more crowding. Yet they were ambivalent about doing much about it. Then, in 1953, Bellevue incorporated. Soon annexation petitions for land adjacent to the new city were flying right and left. It was obvious what was next. Community members formed the Medina Three Points Committee, and together with Edgar Horwood (who later taught Civil Engineering and Urban Planning at the University of Washington) put together a 60-page survey on the pluses and minuses of the available options. The committee's first recommendation was to annex to neighboring Clyde Hill, located between Medina and Bellevue, which had incorporated on the same day Bellevue did. The second recommendation was to incorporate either separately or in any combination with the Three Points. Joining Bellevue was third. Still, Medina residents hesitated. Shortly before Christmas 1954 area residents, including representatives from the Three Points, came together at a meeting of the Medina Improvement Club -- the community's heart and soul for the preceding four decades -- to discuss what to do. They voted overwhelmingly against annexing to either Clyde Hill or Bellevue. But they were divided over whether they wanted to remain part of the county or form a new city. A majority wanted to incorporate with the Three Points, but a substantial minority wanted to remain part of the county. The club decided to take another vote, this time of as many in the community as it could. In January straw ballots went out with a simple question: "Do you favor taking steps toward incorporation with the Three Points?" ("Incorporation Opposed..."). By mid -February the vote was in. The anti -incorporation vote won by a margin of 10 percent, though the Bellevue American pointed out that the club ascertained from the ballots that the "no" vote was much stronger east of 84th Avenue NE. West of 84th, residents favored incorporation by a comfortable margin. Now or Never Email from David Langworthy, dated May 16, 2020 Page 6 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 4.1 Bellevue city officials saw their chance and went for it. They scheduled a meeting with community members at the Medina Improvement Club to extol the virtues of annexation. (The club favored incorporation.) People saw it was now or never. Dueling petitions went out in the community, one favoring annexation to Bellevue, one favoring incorporation as the City of Medina. Evergreen Point was included in the incorporation petition, but not Hunts or Yarrow points, whose residents each filed separate incorporation petitions. The incorporation forces had an advantage. The Bellevue City Council had to approve the annexation petition before annexation supporters could take it to the county and request a hearing. The Medina supporters could go straight to the county with their petition once they had enough signatures. And they did, filing during the second week of May 1955, a week before the annexation supporters even got their petition in front of Bellevue's city council. In mid -June county commissioners held a hearing on the incorporation filing and set an election date of July 26. The area sought to be incorporated was west of a line that more or less followed 84th Avenue NE from Groat Point north to the middle of Fairweather Bay. Bellevue officials doggedly proceeded with an annexation hearing, which took place in early July. An annexation election date was duly set for August 19, contingent upon the outcome of the incorporation elections (elections in Hunts and Yarrow points also were set for July 26). The drama continued right up to Election Day. Shortly before the vote the Bellevue American editorialized against the proposed incorporation of all three communities, arguing that the creation of more local municipalities would be confusing and a waste of money. The paper suggested that a consolidated, single government could do the job better. Incorporation In the end, it wasn't even close. Incorporation of Medina passed by a margin of more than 25 percent, 244- 135. The incorporation became official on August 19, 1955. Hunts Point residents likewise voted to incorporate, but Yarrow Point narrowly rejected incorporation. (It subsequently incorporated in 1959.) Medina incorporated as a third-class city with an estimated population of 1,940. It operated under the council- manager system of city government, with the council electing one of its members to serve as mayor. William Park was the first mayor, and the first council members were Mary Barbee, Robert Behnke, Charles F. Dally, Carey Donsworth, William Hagen, and Frederic Templeton. One of the first things the new city officials did was tackle the zoning issue, and Medina's first zoning ordinance established spacious lot sizes of between 16,000 and 30,000 square feet. Email from David Langworthy, dated May 16, 2020 Page 7 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 4.2 Stephanie Keyser From: Mike Raskin <Mike@mjrdevelopment.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 8:47 AM To: Stephanie Keyser Cc: Mike Raskin Subject: RE: Today's PC Meeting - talking points Thanks Stephanie I wanted to get your advice. I think we are really going down the wrong road on bulk. I checked the zoning codes for cities around us and this is what I found: Bellevue - 30' height for flat roofs - 35' for pitched roofs - 40' limit for the face of any elevation Seattle - 30' for flat roof - 35' for pitched roof Kirkland - 30' either way This means that both Bellevue and Seattle offer a bonus of 5' over the flat roof for going with a pitched roof vs a flat roof. If we stay with the 25' height for either flat or pitched roofs we will force the architectural styles go forward in Medina to be boxy like most of the designs we are now seeing. I think reducing bulk is not just about heights but more about getting less boxy designs. After our last meeting I reached out to a number of the design professionals in the area and had a couple of them ready to come to the next meeting to talk about this in the comment period but of course the meeting was canceled. I would like to bring this up during the meeting and was wondering if there is time to do so. You could certainly feel free to forward this to the gang as well. thanks Mike From: Stephanie Keyser <skeyser@medina-wa.gov> Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2020 8:19 AM To: laurelpr@seanet.com; Schubring's <schubrings@aol.com>; Mark Nelson <mark@nelsonarchitecture.net>; Randy Reeves <rreeves@windermere.com>; Mike Raskin <Mike@mjrdevelopment.com>; Jenny Smith <jennyjunsmith@hotmail.com>; David Langworthy <dlangworthy@medina-wa.gov> Subject: Today's PC Meeting - talking points Good Morning, Email from Mike Raskin, dated May 26, 2020 Page 8 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 4.2 Just a reminder that our meeting will start at 2pm today. If everyone could log on a couple of minutes early, that would be helpful. Also, I realized that I should have been a little more concrete regarding our discussion topic today. These are the things I will be asking for feedback on: Meeting Calendar New temporary time? - Tentative joint PC/CC meeting week of July 20-24t" to discuss work plan — suggestion to have our regular meeting before joint meeting Summer schedules/taking off a month? - Joint Meeting in September re: bulk? 2020 Work Plan Tree canopy assessment — appropriate timing - New ADU legislation — parking study? As a reminder, please do not reply all to avoid OPMA violations. See you this afternoon! Stephanie Email from Mike Raskin, dated May 26, 2020 Page 9 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 4.3 Stephanie Keyser From: laurelpr@seanet.com Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2020 11:38 AM To: Stephanie Keyser Subject: Perception of bulk: R-16 Dear Stephanie, With respect to Planning Commission's consideration of the perception of bulk, I would like to reconsider our monolithic approach to the R-16 zone. After you presented us with data on recent years of remodels and new construction, I realized how much larger than 16k square feet some of the lots in the R-16 zone are. There are consequences to treating these large lots identically to the smaller R-16 lots. First, in cases where current and proposed restrictions apply uniformly across the entire R-16 zone AND are less restrictive than the limits for R-20 and R-30 (for example, percentage lot coverage), the result is that larger structures are permitted on R-16 lots compared to R-20 or R-30 lots of the same size. This is an inequity that is independent of the question of perception of bulk. Second, regarding bulk: when a home is built to maximum allowable dimensions on a large R- 16 lot, that large home will appear bulkier than if the same home were built in an R-20 or R-30 setting. This is especially true if the home is in the immediate vicinity of smaller R-16 lots and consequently smaller homes. So I'm suggesting that we consider lot size when we evaluate the impact of proposed code changes rather than simply focusing on treating R-16 as a single unit. Best regards, Laurel Preston Email from Laurel Preston, dated June 17, 2020 Page 10 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 6.1 A4CITY OF MEDINA 501 EVERGREEN POINT ROAD I PO BOX 144 1 MEDINA WA 98039-0144 TELEPHONE 425-233-6400 1 www.medina-wa.gov MEMORANDUM DATE: June 23, 2020 TO: Medina Planning Commission FROM: Stephanie Keyser, AICP, Planning Manager RE: Mitigating bulk In our previous discussions, focus was placed on substandard lots in the R-16 zoning district, which are those lots that are smaller than 16,000 square feet. A thorough analysis of the larger lots that encompass the other side of the spectrum had not been done. Prior to our mandatory break, it was requested that staff provide an examination of these lots and bring the information back for review. In the R-16 zoning district, there are 720 lots, not including the post office, green store, and PSE power stations. Of those, 318 are larger than 16,000 square feet. In Attachment 1, these parcels are highlighted in blue-green. When viewed as one group, the impacts of redevelopment do not appear to be that substantial because many of these lots are clustered together. However, as we filter out these parcels', what we discover is that these lot sizes vary from 16,001 to 52,707 square feet, which is a significant gap in range. In Attachment 2, the parcel ranges are broken out into different colors: pink is 16,001-16,999, red is 17,000-17,999, blue is 18,000-18,999, green is 19,000-19,999, yellow is 20,000-29,999, and purple is anything 30,000 and above. What we now see is a patchwork of discrepancy within blocks and neighborhoods that is unified by one metric in the code: all of these lots are granted the same 25% maximum structural coverage. When we look at similar lots in R-20 and R-30, what we find is that as the lot sizes increase, the allowable structural coverage decreases. It is staff s belief that it was not the original intention of the code to grant these larger R-16 lots more structural coverage than their counterparts in R-20 and R-30. It likely wasn't a consideration, similar to how relief for substandard lots didn't occur until 2008. It seems reasonable that rebalancing the structural coverage based on lot size is a first concrete step toward mitigating bulk, with perhaps this being the baseline upon which additional concepts may be added. As this is the first discussion with this information, the suggested language mimics what is already in the code. However, if it is determined that this needs to be a holistic analysis of all lots in Medina and that maybe a different metric should be used altogether, that is something staff can bring back at a future meeting. Also included for today's discussion are the previous code amendment options: requiring different roof -forms based on height (Option 2) and allowing additional height if a pitched roof is used and there is a second -floor reduction (Option 3). Finally, incentives are being revisited in Option 4, which may or may not be feasible. ' Parcel data may be viewed in Attachment 3 Subject: Mitigating Bulk Page 11 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 6.1 Option 1: Structural Coverage Adjustment Summary: This option would adjust the structural coverage allowed on lots that exceed 16,000 square feet to match those of similar sized lots in the R-20 and R-30 zoning districts In R-16, for lots larger than 16,000 square feet, the structural coverage maxes out at 25%. In the R-20 and R-30 zoning districts, beginning with lots that are 16,001 square feet, the maximum structural coverage decreases as the lot size increases. If the same sized lot (larger than 16,000 square feet) was located in R-20 or R-30, it would produce a smaller house, as shown in the examples below: 7640 NE 8th ST Lot size: 25,912 Zoning: R-16 25% structural coverage permitted: 6,478 sq. ft. (max potential of 12,956 sq. ft. above ground) If this lot was zoned R-20 21% structural coverage permitted: 5,441.52 sq. ft. (max potential of 10,883 sq. ft. above ground) 1011 80th PL NE Lot size: 20,280 Zoning: R-16 25% structural coverage permitted: 5,070 sq ft. (max potential 10,140 sq. ft. above ground) If this lot was zoned R-20 21% structural coverage permitted: 4,258.8 sq. ft. (max potential 8,517.6 sq. ft. above ground) On comparable lots, strictly looking at structural coverage, the building power clearly seems to be in R-16. A question would then be: should there just be one coverage that is based on lot size and not the zoning district? Staff did not have time to analyze the lots in the R-20 and R-30 zoning district, however if this is something the commission would like to pursue, that information can be brought back at the next meeting. Strictly looking at R-16, Option 1 would impact 318 lots, broken down below: 16,001 to 16,500 = 103 lots 16,501 to 17,000 = 19 lots 17,001 to 17,500 = 16 lots 17,501 to 18,000 = 16 lots 18,001 to 18,500 = 16 lots 18,501 to 19,000 = 13 lots 19,001 — 19,500 = 14 lots 19, 501 — 29,000 = 111 lots 30,000 and over = 10 lots Subject: Mitigating Bulk Page 12 of 25 Proposed change: Table 20.23.020(A): AGENDA ITEM 6.1 R-16 Zone Total Structural Coverage and Impervious Surface Standards Square Footage of the Lot Area Maximum Structural Coverage Maximum Impervious Surface 10,000 or less 30 percent 55 percent 10,001 to 10,500 29.58 percent 55 percent 10,501 to 11,000 29.17 percent 55 percent 11,001 to 11,500 28.75 percent 55 percent 11,501 to 12,000 28.33 percent 55 percent 12,001 to 12,500 27.92 percent 55 percent 12,501 to 13,000 27.5 percent 55 percent 13,001 to 13,500 27.08 percent 55 percent 13,501 to 14,000 26.67 percent 55 percent 14,001 to 14,500 26.25 percent 55 percent 14,501 to 15,000 25.83 percent 55 percent 15,001 to 15,500 25.42 percent 55 percent 15,501 to 15,999 25.21 percent 55 percent 16,000 or greater 25 percent 55 percent 16,001 to 16,500 24.5 percent 55 percent 16,501 to 17,000 24 percent 55 percent 17,001 to 17,500 23.5 percent 55 percent 17,501 to 18,000 23 percent 55 percent 18,001 to 18,500 22.5 percent 55 percent 18,501 to 19,000 22 percent 55 percent 19,001 to 19,500 21.5 percent 55 percent 19,501 to 29,999 21 percent 55 percent 30,000 and greater 21 percent 55 percent Subject: Mitigating Bulk Page 13 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 6.1 Option 2: Pitched Roof — Different Height Requirements Summary: This option would impose different height restrictions depending on the roof -type used: 20 feet for a flat -roof and 25 feet for a pitched roof Proposed change: Table 20.23.050(A): Maximum Height Standards Zoning/Height Overlay Maximum Height Measurement Points R-20/R- Medina R-16 30 SR-30 N-A Public Hei hts g High N/A* N/A* N/A* Point 20 ft. for flat roof- 25 ft. Original Grade for pitched None None Low 25 feet 25 feet 20 feet Point High N/A* N/A* N/A* Point 23 ft. for flat roof- 28 ft. Finished Grade for pitched 30 feet 35 feet Low 28 feet 28 feet 23 feet Point No I Yes I Yes I No I No No *Not applicable. Option 3: Pitched Roof — Additional Height Bonus Summary: This option would grant an additional five feet on top of the maximum zoning height (25 ft./28 ft). if a pitched roof is used and the second floor structural coverage is reduced to 80% of the first floor In the Medina Municipal Code (MMC), lots in the R-20 and R-30 zoning district are eligible for an additional height bonus of 30 feet from the high point of original grade or 36 feet from the low point of original grade if the structural coverage is reduced to 13% of the lot. Typically with development regulation incentives, there's a tradeoff as demonstrated by the above example. When we talk about the possibility of granting an additional five feet, yes that might encourage more pitched roofs, however it will also negatively contribute to both the perception and actual bulk of new construction, which is something Council wants to avoid. In order to maximize the building envelope, it is often the case that one floor is placed directly on top of another floor, thereby creating a sense of volume and bulk that too often overwhelms adjacent structures. To offset an increase in additional height but not perpetuate more boxes, it is proposed that the second floor be reduced to 80% of the first floor. Requiring different coverages based upon the style of house (single -story vs. two-story) as well as smaller coverages above a Subject: Mitigating Bulk Page 14 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 6.1 first floor is something that some cities have done to mitigate the oppressive feeling large box - style houses can have on a neighborhood. Option 4: Incentives (TBD) Summary: This could be a layered approach. Perhaps if Option I is pursued and the structural coverage for all lots are reduced, Options 2, 3 and the ones below could be written as incentives to recapture some of that lost coverage It's been difficult to come up with ways to incentivize development (e.g. pitched roofs) because many of the traditional methods are just not applicable. Things like expedited permit processing, affordable housing density bonuses, or reduced permit fees are just not realistic to offer in this moment. Additional height is contentious and granting more coverage under the current code doesn't make a lot of sense. A reduction in building capacity is one tool cities are utilizing to combat excessively large, out of scale houses. If it is determined that the entire structural coverage needs to be reevaluated and reduced, one way to allow homeowners to recapture some of that lost square footage (amount to be determined) could be by requiring a few of the following options, some of which were discussed briefly last year: Daylight Plane Vertically extending to a point (12' or 15' above grade), then an inward sloping line at 45 degrees THE DAYUGHTPLME CROSS SECTION OF THE DAYLIGHT PLANE SIDE PROPERTY LINE 2 This is seen in many cities in California. However, as of the writing of this, staff had not done a country -wide search to determine if other states are following this trend. Subject: Mitigating Bulk Page 15 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 6.1 Plane Break All portions of a building that have a side wall exceeding 14 ft. in height and a continuous length greater than 45 feet shall have an offset/plan break that is a minimum depth of five feet beyond the required side yard setback and a minimum length of 10 ft. Second -Story Reduction Similar to Option 3 but without the bonus of height, this would require reduction coverage in any floor above the first. Planting Area At least 50% of the side yard and rear setback shall have a planting area with a minimum width of 5 feet adjoining the side and rear parcel lines. Subject: Mitigating Bulk Page 16 of 25 I Evergreen Point y s✓ Lake s �� Washington _ ID g �, gge ,„, '� gym• 520 II' ffi �s,ok SR520 Maintenan®oe Faoaay Fairweather Nature Preserve / Park Town of Hunts Point Bellevue Christian School .. PSE >e, t «" «,° '"' '• "'° �"' „,° ; ,.„ Wells Medina Nursery . 21 Overtake Golf & Country Club St. Thomas Church/Scholl Medina Park 'City Shop e.s ' .,. ,°„ ,«. 5 $ ➢ "s ii ``eg PSE o Mero„ Medina Elementary = ao ' ,,, f*j,'°«,,.i t m e �@ i ✓ a I� Medina Beach Park City Hall Dabney Point ,,. Viewpoint Park Lake Washington Public Dock o, �W o� Groat Point v N V Legend QShoreline E= State Route 520 Lake Washington _ Docks F-11%0 /_[«]:hTi1=1►III i1 Town of Yarrow Point City of Clyde Hill Official Zoning Districts NA (Neighborhood Auto Servicing) _ Public (Parks and Public Spaces) _ R-16 (Single Family Residence) _ R-20 (Single Family Residence) R-30 (Single Family Residence) 0 SR-30 (Suburban Gardening Residential) Zoning Overlay Districts ® NCPD (Neighborhood Character Preservation District) ® PLUD (Planned Landuse Development) Locator Map NW24 tNE24 SW24 SE 24 A-WII.EII ;1111 r N City of Bellevue "rI \ �y a� �y � Address &Zoning Official Zoning Map �f Ordinance No. 907 �IEDINA Designations g • Passed ce City Council, 5.12.2014 w s x I N G T o a&,e=e° eva ra°yae °'� a 2e= a y°=;.; ° 9 • Amended by Ordinance No. 961 mea " n_.I'ne"°mpe"y`"' p'.-t • Effective Date: 7.9.2018 1" = 400' Geographic Information Systems Source'. King County Open Dada GIS onelml Plot spe is zr.<o.• t�aoa swell aot eoaalls Pnm:aee. File:..\Medlnffi31SData\MapDomments\Medina_Zoning_Address_2019_0102_27x40.mxd Plot Date: 1.2.19 Subject: Mitigating Bulk Page 17 of 25 I Evergreen Point x Lake Washington _ ID ®, qn q•° 520 SR-520 Maintennce Faulity a Fairweather Nature Preserve / Park Town of Hunts Point Bellevue Christian School „.> a Legend Shoreline T . State Route 520 Wells Medina Lake Washington ■c ° -M so Nursery • _Docks F-11%0 /_[«]:hyil=1►111810A Town of Yarrow Point City of Clyde Hill r Official Zoning Districts R-16 Zoning Breakdown 16,001-16,999 NA (Neighborhood Auto Servicing) _ Public (Parks and Public Spaces) - 17,000-17,999 „ _ , i R-16 (Single Family Residence) 18,000-18,999 NN R-20 (Single Family Residence) 19,000-19,999 R-30 (Single Family Residence) 20,000-29,999 SR-30 (Suburban Gardening Residential) 30,000 and greater Zoning Overlay Districts „ ® NCPD (Neighborhood Character Preservation District) Overtake Golf & Country Club ® PLUD (Planned Landuse Development) ,Ar. - Locator Map P $ € € € € € € Thomas Church/School rch/Scholl k Medina Park `City Shop MIL .� ■€ ° ; to ° `- a ,r a � Metro „ $'€ € € € 3;i ; I € 3 ` AMP c Medina Elementary Medina Beach Park, City Hal 4 51 Dabney Point Viewpoint Park ^� _ � �� .> >• Lake Washington Public Dock Groat Point NW24 NE24 SW24 SE24 NW25 NE25 r SE25 SW30 NE36 NW31 r LNAERM City of Bellevue ey a� �b �y � Address &Zoning Official Zoning Map Ordinance No. 907 ��VIEDINA Designationssnot • Passed ce City Council, 5.12.2014 D Z wA s x I rr G T o r1 a�presamaameyaccare�e'dara Nowaranties.Ifanywn.incNtlin9 •Amended by Ordinance No. 961 p wp urecy.nneee.ormercaan, lityaccompany Nls pro0ucl. • Effective Date: 7.9.2018 1" = 400' Geographic Information Systems Sourm: zing county open Data GIs oneinal plot dza is zr.<o.• t�aoa swain mtao— atsmaller pnrn:aa;. File:..\MedinaGISDala\MapDocuments\Medina_ZoningAddress_2019_0102_27x40.mxd Plot Date: 1.2.19 Subject: Mitigating Bulk Page 18 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 6.1 ATTACHMENT 3 Parcel Data - Lots greater than 16,000 sq. ft. Parcel No. Zoning Sq. Ft. House No. Street 2525049084 R16 16,001 7844 NE 10TH ST 2525049271 R16 16,001 836 82ND AVE NE 5425700075 R16 16,001 2628 82ND AVE NE 5425700005 R16 16,002 2402 82ND AVE NE 2525049264 R16 16,002 7644 NE 8TH ST 2525049265 R16 16,002 7648 NE 8TH ST 3262300122 R16 16,002 2434 EVERGREEN POINT RD 2018700046 R16 16,004 8208 OVERLAKE DR 3025300186 R16 16,006 7675 NE 14TH ST 5425700045 R16 16,007 8265 NE 26TH ST 2525049120 R16 16,010 7851 NE 10TH ST 3262300605 R16 16,019 2459 78TH AVE NE 3262300120 R16 16,019 2432 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3262300745 R16 16,020 2603 78TH AVE NE 3262300125 R16 16,020 2410 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3262300123 R16 16,020 2420 EVERGREEN POINT RD 5425700170 R16 16,023 2415 82ND AVE NE 5424700136 R16 16,023 Behind 8424 NE 6th ST 3625049108 R16 16,034 7742 OVERLAKE DR 5425700025 R16 16,035 8255 NE 26TH ST 2540700166 R16 16,037 8606 NE 10TH ST 3262300750 R16 16,045 2601 78TH AVE NE 3262300015 R16 16,050 2710 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3262300005 R16 16,050 2790 EVERGREEN POINT RD 2525049125 R16 16,051 7650 NE 10TH ST 3625049096 R16 16,054 8215 NE 8TH ST 2540700255 R16 16,058 8424 NE 10TH ST 2540700165 R16 16,064 8604 NE 10TH ST 2525049233 R16 16,065 7815 NE 12TH ST 2525049235 R16 16,065 7821 NE 12TH ST 2525049088 R16 16,065 7827 NE 12TH ST 3738000090 R16 16,065 924 88TH AVE NE 5425700026 R16 16,071 8240 NE 25TH ST 3262301015 R16 16,071 2254 78TH AVE NE 5425700030 R16 16,074 8245 NE 26TH ST 3262300020 R16 16,074 2740 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3262300010 R16 16,074 2770 EVERGREEN POINT RD 2210500150 R16 16,078 8809 NE 10TH ST 2540700150 R16 16,080 8607 NE 12TH ST 2525049238 R16 16,082 7807 NE 12TH ST 4000500035 R16 16,083 7329 NE 18TH ST 3262300058 R16 16,085 2618 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3625049101 R16 16,087 8235 NE 8TH ST 3262300057 R16 16,087 2616 EVERGREEN POINT RD Subject: Mitigating Bulk Page 19 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 6.1 ATTACHMENT 3 2525049027 R16 16,091 7630 NE 10TH ST 3262300042 R16 16,093 2610 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3262300205 R16 16,104 2254 EVERGREEN POINT RD 2525049197 R16 16,116 7848 NE 10TH ST 3025300127 R16 16,126 7632 NE 12TH ST 3262300045 R16 16,152 2614 EVERGREEN POINT RD 2525049249 R16 16,154 7648 NE 10TH ST 3025300121 R16 16,164 7626 NE 12TH ST 2540700026 R16 16,200 8421 NE 12TH ST 5424700220 R16 16,200 443 86TH AVE NE 3025300129 R16 16,200 1312 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3625049059 R16 16,212 631 84TH AVE NE 3625049065 R16 16,215 7606 OVERLAKE DR 3625049063 R16 16,215 7702 OVERLAKE DR 2018700065 R16 16,218 601 84TH AVE NE 2525049199 R16 16,220 817 82ND AVE NE 3262300420 R16 16,236 2030 77TH AVE NE 3262300410 R16 16,236 2042 77TH AVE NE 3262300645 R16 16,238 7700 NE 24TH ST 3262300505 R16 16,238 7719 NE 24TH ST 3262300655 R16 16,238 7720 NE 24TH ST 3262300595 R16 16,238 7721 NE 24TH ST 3262300955 R16 16,238 7800 NE 24TH ST 3262300275 R16 16,238 2233 77TH AVE NE 3262300285 R16 16,238 2243 77TH AVE NE 3262300515 R16 16,238 2244 77TH AVE NE 3262300635 R16 16,238 2420 77TH AVE NE 3262300665 R16 16,238 2415 78TH AVE NE 3262300615 R16 16,238 2461 78TH AVE NE 3262300625 R16 16,238 2463 78TH AVE NE 3262301085 R16 16,238 2233 79TH AVE NE 3262301105 R16 16,238 2255 79TH AVE NE 3262300235 R16 16,238 2222 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3262300225 R16 16,238 2230 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3262300215 R16 16,238 2240 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3262300105 R16 16,239 2450 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3262300180 R16 16,239 2460 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3262300725 R16 16,240 2637 77TH AVE NE 3262300740 R16 16,240 2615 78TH AVE NE 3262300777 R16 16,240 2633 78TH AVE NE 3262301520 R16 16,240 2608 79TH AVE NE 3262301518 R16 16,240 2612 79TH AVE NE 3262301517 R16 16,240 2616 79TH AVE NE 3262301515 R16 16,240 2650 79TH AVE NE 3262300305 R16 16,287 2054 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3262300245 R16 16,289 2206 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3262300396 R16 16,303 7619 NE 22ND ST 2540700168 R16 16,306 8608 NE 10TH ST 2540700170 R16 16,334 8612 NE 10TH ST Subject: Mitigating Bulk Page 20 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 6.1 ATTACHMENT 3 5425700210 R16 16,355 2625 82ND AVE NE 3262301115 R16 16,362 2058 78TH AVE NE 3025300128 R16 16,368 1306 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3025300050 R16 16,375 7845 NE 14TH ST 3262301205 R16 16,378 2055 79TH AVE NE 3025300122 R16 16,392 In front of 7626 NE 12th ST 3262301025 R16 16,406 2240 78TH AVE NE 5426300050 R16 16,422 2402 80TH AVE NE 6447300185 R16 16,432 309 UPLAND RD 2540700257 R16 16,476 8428 NE 10TH ST 5425700215 R16 16,505 2635 82ND AVE NE 5425700051 R16 16,513 8240 NE 26TH ST 5424700080 R16 16,534 8650 NE 7TH ST 2525049087 R16 16,538 7805 NE 12TH ST 6447300265 R16 16,573 515 UPLAND RD 2018700030 R16 16,574 624 81STAVE NE 2540700015 R16 16,586 1036 84TH AVE NE 5424700230 R16 16,621 8405 NE 7TH ST 2525049085 R16 16,641 838 EVERGREEN POINT RD 2210500228 R16 16,675 8660 NE 10TH ST 3262300155 R16 16,675 7620 NE 24TH ST 2210500201 R16 16,900 8670 NE 10TH ST 2525049166 R16 16,900 1051 80TH AVE NE 2525049261 R16 16,900 826 EVERGREEN POINT RD 2540700256 R16 16,934 8426 NE 10TH ST 5425700205 R16 16,953 2605 82ND AVE NE 5424700020 R16 16,962 8424 NE 7TH ST 3262300060 R16 16,963 2750 EVERGREEN POINT RD 5425700180 R16 16,990 2501 82ND AVE NE 3025300304 R16 17,005 1428 EVERGREEN POINT RD 2525049094 R16 17,010 7629 NE 12TH ST 626900051 R16 17,030 911 87TH AVE NE 5424700150 R16 17,036 607 86TH AVE NE 2525049226 R16 17,058 7831 NE 10TH ST 6447300100 R16 17,067 8467 MIDLAND 6447300320 R16 17,094 8715 MIDLAND 3625049100 R16 17,132 8245 NE 8TH ST 3025300271 R16 17,160 7630 NE 14TH ST 3835502230 R16 17,160 518 UPLAND RD 2525049248 R16 17,199 7642 NE 10TH ST 2525049241 R16 17,200 7800 NE 10TH ST 4000500025 R16 17,210 1810 73RD AVE NE 2525049026 R16 17,273 7802 NE 10TH ST 3999900055 R16 17,286 1634 RAMBLING LN 2525049115 R16 17,363 7834 NE 10TH ST 4000500040 R16 17,559 7319 NE 18TH ST 2525049031 R16 17,574 7728 NE 8TH ST 3625049070 R16 17,600 7739 NE 8TH ST 3999900110 R16 17,600 7409 RAMBLING LN Subject: Mitigating Bulk Page 21 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 6.1 ATTACHMENT 3 6447300130 R16 17,633 8411 MIDLAND 5424700215 R16 17,680 433 86TH AVE NE 2018700045 R16 17,701 8210 OVERLAKE DR 3025300250 R16 17,709 7664 NE 14TH ST 3835502544 R16 17,824 329 OVERLAKE DR 2525049242 R16 17,825 7801 NE 12TH ST 2210500016 R16 17,889 830 84TH AVE NE 2525049239 R16 17,902 8048 NE 8TH ST 2525049247 R16 17,904 850 80TH AVE NE 6447300225 R16 17,919 8404 MIDLAND 3025300126 R16 17,940 1302 EVERGREEN POINT RD 2540700027 R16 18,000 8425 NE 12TH ST 2525049102 R16 18,021 7812 NE 8TH ST 3625049069 R16 18,049 7720 OVERLAKE DR 2525049270 R16 18,069 7724 NE 8TH ST 2525049086 R16 18,115 8234 NE 8TH ST 2525049237 R16 18,118 7803 NE 12TH ST 6447300300 R16 18,126 8710 OVERLAKE DR 2540700075 R16 18,141 1034 84TH AVE NE 2525049126 R16 18,155 836 82ND AVE NE 2525049236 R16 18,186 7861 NE 10TH ST 2210500005 R16 18,300 8411 NE 10TH ST 2210500006 R16 18,300 842 84TH AVE NE 2525049081 R16 18,316 8040 NE 8TH ST 2525049127 R16 18,410 840 80TH AVE NE 2525049072 R16 18,430 8032 NE 8TH ST 5424700084 R16 18,434 8645 NE 7TH ST 2018700050 R16 18,498 8206 OVERLAKE DR 2540700110 R16 18,564 8627 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD 5424700115 R16 18,569 8457 NE 7TH ST 3835502628 R16 18,580 8740 NE 2ND PL 5424700085 R16 18,590 8641 NE 7TH ST 3835502260 R16 18,615 N of 442 87th Ave NE 2525049113 R16 18,713 7715 NE 12TH ST 2525049165 R16 18,720 1034 EVERGREEN POINT RD 5424700250 R16 18,722 8401 NE 7TH ST 3625049068 R16 18,725 610 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3999900090 R16 18,732 1625 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3625049105 R16 18,831 7620 OVERLAKE DR 2525049205 R16 18,885 7887 NE 10TH ST 5425700230 R16 18,928 2639 82ND AVE NE 2525049128 R16 19,002 7655 NE 10TH ST 2210500012 R16 19,078 836 84TH AVE NE 6447300285 R16 19,120 425 86TH AVE NE 3625049113 R16 19,120 7736 OVERLAKE DR 2525049029 R16 19,197 848 EVERGREEN POINT RD 6447300325 R16 19,220 227 UPLAND RD 2525049130 R16 19,240 841 82ND AVE NE 2525049112 R16 19,247 7641 NE 12TH ST Subject: Mitigating Bulk Page 22 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 6.1 ATTACHMENT 3 6447300366 R16 19,250 101 OVERLAKE DR 2525049257 R16 19,329 7813 NE 10TH ST 2018700010 R16 19,337 8212 OVERLAKE DR 2018700015 R16 19,338 8216 OVERLAKE DR 3835502510 R16 19,430 8723 NE 4TH ST 2525049137 R16 19,434 7806 NE 10TH ST 2525049092 R16 19,602 7626 NE 10TH ST 3025300301 R16 19,652 1420 EVERGREEN POINT RD 2018700115 R16 19,695 8222 OVERLAKE DR 2210500007 R16 19,700 816 84TH AVE NE 2540700200 R16 19,800 8632 NE 10TH ST 2525049254 R16 19,816 7816 NE 8TH ST 3025300242 R16 19,827 7814 NE 14TH ST 3025300100 R16 19,844 7634 NE 12TH ST 3025300095 R16 19,844 7640 NE 12TH ST 3025300155 R16 19,845 7631 NE 14TH ST 3025300160 R16 19,848 7633 NE 14TH ST 3025300090 R16 19,850 7648 NE 12TH ST 3025300165 R16 19,850 7649 NE 14TH ST 3025300085 R16 19,852 7652 NE 12TH ST 3025300170 R16 19,852 7657 NE 14TH ST 3025300080 R16 19,854 7658 NE 12TH ST 3025300175 R16 19,854 7661 NE 14TH ST 3025300075 R16 19,855 7804 NE 12TH ST 3025300180 R16 19,855 7665 NE 14TH ST 3025300070 R16 19,857 7808 NE 12TH ST 3025300245 R16 19,857 7804 NE 14TH ST 3025300065 R16 19,859 7816 NE 12TH ST 3025300060 R16 19,862 7826 NE 12TH ST 3025300235 R16 19,862 7822 NE 14TH ST 3025300195 R16 19,862 7823 NE 14TH ST 3025300055 R16 19,864 7830 NE 12TH ST 3025300200 R16 19,864 7829 NE 14TH ST 3025300226 R16 19,865 7838 NE 14TH ST 3025300225 R16 19,865 7836 NE 14TH ST 3025300220 R16 19,868 7842 NE 14TH ST 5424700135 R16 19,879 8424 NE 6TH ST 3025300255 R16 19,897 7668 NE 14TH ST 3625049042 R16 19,897 7728 OVERLAKE DR 2525049110 R16 19,905 801 80TH AVE NE 3025300260 R16 20,020 7658 NE 14TH ST 2210500050 R16 20,049 8623 NE 10TH ST 3835502509 R16 20,150 8725 NE 4TH ST 3835502395 R16 20,190 438 UPLAND RD 2525049201 R16 20,280 1011 80TH AVE NE 2525049148 R16 20,412 7635 NE 12TH ST 3025300145 R16 20,412 7623 NE 14TH ST 2540700025 R16 20,430 8417 NE 12TH ST 3025300281 R16 20,457 1400 EVERGREEN POINT RD Subject: Mitigating Bulk Page 23 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 6.1 ATTACHMENT 3 3835501951 R16 20,532 707 OVERLAKE DR 3835502385 R16 20,700 442 87TH AVE NE 3262300540 R16 20,946 2216 77TH AVE NE 3835502680 R16 20,990 223 OVERLAKE DR 3999900085 R16 21,080 1633 EVERGREEN POINT RD 2525049255 R16 21,152 7846 NE 10TH ST 2525049250 R16 21,152 1081 80TH AVE NE 3625049085 R16 21,340 7749 NE 8TH ST 3835502165 R16 21,378 8659 NE 7TH ST 4000500095 R16 21,400 1617 73RD AVE NE 2018700276 R16 21,567 247 84TH AVE NE 2525049178 R16 21,587 854 EVERGREEN POINT RD 2540700280 R16 21,600 8430 NE 10TH ST 2018700060 R16 21,625 619 84TH AVE NE 2018700005 R16 21,625 625 84TH AVE NE 4000500075 R16 21,720 1651 73RD AVE NE 3025300265 R16 21,810 7660 NE 14TH ST 2525049057 R16 21,866 8050 NE 8TH ST 2540700085 R16 21,870 1032 84TH AVE NE 2525049040 R16 21,875 816 EVERGRI Post Office 3025300106 R16 21,922 7620 NE 12TH ST 2525049269 R16 21,932 7833 NE 12TH ST 2525049256 R16 21,954 7808 NE 10TH ST 3738000050 R16 22,050 915 88TH AVE NE 3835502430 R16 22,240 414 87TH AVE NE 3835502720 R16 22,317 8826 NE 2ND PL 3025300270 R16 22,440 7632 NE 14TH ST 6447300135 R16 22,454 322 84TH AVE NE 2210500225 R16 22,525 8649 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD 2525049098 R16 22,881 8024 NE 8TH ST 3835502250 R16 22,935 508 UPLAND RD 2525049119 R16 23,078 7899 NE 10TH ST 2210500010 R16 23,115 834 84TH AVE NE 3999900060 R16 23,248 1631 RAMBLING LN 2525049078 R16 23,262 7653 NE 10TH ST 2018700095 R16 23,384 8106 OVERLAKE DR 3025300185 R16 23,710 7677 NE 14TH ST 2525049043 R16 23,735 7627 NE 10TH ST 5424700015 R16 23,784 8400 NE 7TH ST 2525049159 R16 23,808 7841 NE 10TH ST 3625049014 R16 23,885 8115 NE 8TH ST 2525049056 R16 24,000 7621 NE 10TH ST 2540700100 R16 24,000 8615 NE 12TH ST 2525049028 R16 24,047 7600 NE 10TH ST 2525049032 R16 24,095 7811 NE 10TH ST 2525049023 R16 24,291 7831 NE 12TH ST 2210500226 R16 24,331 8650 NE 10TH ST 2525049117 R16 24,355 7657 NE 10TH ST 2018700026 R16 24,381 8120 OVERLAKE DR Subject: Mitigating Bulk Page 24 of 25 AGENDA ITEM 6.1 ATTACHMENT 3 2525049162 R16 24,501 853 83RD AVE NE 3835501955 R16 24,550 8658 NE 7TH ST 2525049144 R16 24,927 7720 NE 8TH ST 6447300270 R16 25,632 8400 NE 4TH ST 3835501952 R16 25,840 777 OVERLAKE DR 5424700240 R16 25,912 600 84TH AVE NE 2525049030 R16 25,912 7640 NE 8TH ST 2525049044 R16 26,255 1040 EVERGREEN POINT RD 3999900075 R16 26,540 1641 EVERGREEN POINT RD 4000500045 R16 26,775 1636 73RD AVE NE 5424700225 R16 26,794 8443 NE 6TH ST 6447300240 R16 26,946 439 UPLAND RD 2525049100 R16 27,357 7842 NE 8TH ST 6447300239 R16 27,822 435 UPLAND RD 3625049064 R16 28,000 7701 NE 8TH ST 3625049071 R16 28,112 7725 NE 8TH ST 2540700095 R16 28,800 8601 NE 12TH ST 2525049022 R16 29,080 7857 NE 12TH ST 5424700175 R16 29,251 8626 NE 6TH ST 2525049025 R16 29,369 7820 NE 10TH ST 2210500152 R16 30,510 851 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD 2540700120 R16 30,694 8633 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD 3835502406 R16 31,880 426 87TH AVE NE 2540700180 R16 32,400 8622 NE 10TH ST 3262300580 R16 32,485 2231 78TH AVE NE 3262300170 R16 32,692 2432 77TH AVE NE 3835502440 R16 35,640 402 UPLAND RD 6447300290 R16 36,537 423 86TH AVE NE 2525049151 R16 36,592 820 83RD AVE NE 626900090 R16 42,818 804 86TH AVE NE 3999900129 R16 52,707 1625 RAMBLING LN Subject: Mitigating Bulk Page 25 of 25