Featured Links

	RENOTICE OF 2402617
	AUGUST 22, 2005 DPD LUIB, #2402617
	AUGUST 22, 2005 DPD LUIB, #2403714
	DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
	LEXINGTON FINE HOMES AT BRIARCLIFF
	BRIARCLIFF REVIVAL HOME STYLE SURVEY
	SEATTLE MUNICIPAL CODE
	MAGNOLIA COMMUNITY CLUB

MOST RECENT INFORMATION: UPDATE AS OF APRIL 3, 2007

On February 28, 2007 Superior Court Judge Julie Spector denied Magnolia Action Group's (MAG) petition for reversal of the Seattle Hearing Examiner's approval of the Briarcliff CHPD. Judge Spector ruled that the CHPD was properly approved by the Hearing Examiner and that there were no grounds for reversal of that decision. Click here to read Judge Spector's February 28, 2007 Order on Land Use Petition.

On March 29, Judge Spector denied MAG's request for reconsideration of her ruling.

The Magnolia Action Group had sought review of the June 27, 2006 affirmation by the City Hearing Examiner of DPD's March 22, 2006 decision approving the Briarcliff proposal. To read the Hearing Examiner's decision that Judge Spector's order upholds, click here: June 27, 2006 Findings and Decision

Lexington Fine Homes is now preparing to go forward with soils testing and other preliminary plans for roads, sidewalks, utilities development, and landscaping. LFH is also seeking input on another survey regarding the type/style of homes they will build at Briarcliff. Please visit: LFH Home Design Survey

HISTORY PRIOR TO DECISION ON APPEAL:

Shortly after the DPD issued its conditional approval of the Clustered Housing Planned Development (CHPD)in March, 2006 (see "History Prior to Appeal," below), the Magnolia Action Group (MAG) filed an appeal. MAG challenged the CHPD on several grounds, including the failure to meet minimum yard size and setback requirements for a single-family 5000 zone.

On November 7, 2005, the Department of Planning and Development's (DPD) Hearing Examiner issued an order in favor of Lexington Fine Homes (LFH) regarding yard sizes. According to the order, lots in a CHPD do not have to meet single family yard size standards, but are governed instead by the more specific yard size requirements contained in the CHPD provisions. However, this means that some of the yard sizes that LFH had requested will not be granted because they are smaller than the CHPD rules require.

According to LFH, under the CHPD yards section, the standard setbacks are 5' for side yards, 20' for streets, and 25' for rear yards. For the houses that face onto Dravus, LFH had requested 15' instead of 20' setbacks. For two houses whose side yards face Dravus, LFH had requested 10' setbacks, and for one lot on the south side of the development they had requested a 15' instead of a 25' rear yard setback. As a result of the Order, the 11 lots on Dravus must have 20' setbacks, regardless of whether the yard off the street is a front yard or a side yard. And the one southern lot that was proposed to have a 15' rear setback must now have a 25' rear setback.

According to LFH, this ruling will not cause any reduction in the number of homes. It will just mean that the buildable area of the affected lots will be a bit smaller.

On August 22, 2005, DPD issued a "Determination of Non-Significance with Conditions" regarding Briarcliff, ruling that no environmental impact statement is required for the project. In addition, DPD conditionally approved the proposed Clustered Housing Planned Development in its entirety, adding what look like fairly minor conditions that the developer must meet for final approval. Click on "August 22, 2005 DPD Conditional Approval" above left to read entire DPD Analysis and Recommendation. Click on "Lexington Fine Homes at Briarcliff" under Featured Links below to see the latest plan. Bottom line: 39 lots are approved; 39th Ave. W. is recommended to remain closed to through-traffic.

HISTORY AND BACKGROUND

BRIARCLIFF SCHOOL SOLD TO LEXINGTON FINE HOMES

The school (shown above before demolition) sits on about 4.5 acres of asphalt school yard at the intersection of West Barrett Street and 39th Ave. W. The property has magnificent views to the west, not-so-magnificent views of the legs of the water tower to the north, and nice territorial views to the east and southeast.

The school was closed down for many years, occasionally used by the Seattle Police Department as a training site, and in 2003 was finally sold by the School District for $7.3M to Lexington Fine Homes. According to the Lexington Fine Homes website, the homes will be built by "Briarcliff LLC," and construction is expected to begin before the end of 2005. Click on links in left column under "Featured Links" to visit LFH site, see the style of homes they build, and add yourself to their Briarcliff mailing list if you wish. Lexington is also asking all interested folks to fill out a survey to indicate the style of home they think best complements the neighborhood, so if you want to weigh in, visit the Lexington site and click on the survey, which you can answer on-line.

SURVEY OF PROPERTY

As many of you are probably aware, LFH conducted a property survey in January, 2004. The survey shows that the school's property line is not in all places located on the schoolyard's chain-link fence. At several homes, the property line is located anywhere from a few to about 12 feet over the fenceline.

On May 14, 2004, LFH notified all neighbors who live adjacent to Briarcliff of this issue. LFH has offered to help any homeowner who has encroached onto what was formerly school property relocate anything that may be on the land. Then LFH plans to build a new fence on the property line.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ABATEMENT AND DEMOLITION

Pursuant to conditions of sale, LFH had financial incentives to complete demolition of the school buildings by December, 2004, which it did. In July, 2004 the the buildings were demolished, the site was leveled, and grass was planted on the sandy site in order to prevent the dust from swirling around until construction starts. For the same reason, LFH says it is leaving all remaining asphalt in place until construction begins. A fence has been installed all around the perimeter of the property, and there is now no access through the property from 39th Ave. W. (although someone keeps ripping that gate open and people do go through the property from time to time).

Before demolition, LFH had the building thoroughly inspected for rat infestation, and its exterminator reported that there was no evidence of vermin problems.

Flagpole: LFH is donating the flagpole from the school to Magnolia Village. A group formed of members of the Magnolia Chamber of Commerce, the Magnolia Community Club, and other Magnolians has plans in place to refurbish the flagpole and install it in a prominent location yet to be announced.

CONSTRUCTION

In June, 2004, LFH filed with DPD a plot plan that included 39 homes on lots ranging from 3600 to 10,000 square feet.

In March, 2005, LFH resubmitted their original proposal to DPD, responding to DPD's request for changes in the plans. DPD had requested that alleys and roads be dedicated, they wanted LFH to include turnaround spots in the alleys, and they had various other technical changes they wanted LFH to make. LFH's resubmitted proposal still contains 39 homes, but the size of all the lots abutting alleys has been reduced now that the alleys are dedicated and not included in easements. The resubmitted plan still shows 39th Ave. W. closed to through traffic, and LFH has now proposed to put two play courts on the closed area of 39th Ave. W.

In March, 2005, people who had signed up to receive emails from LFH received the following Update:

Briarcliff Revival: An Update

On March 2, 2005, we resubmitted the following plat to The City of Seattle in response to their correction notice. Generally, the size and location of the 39 homes will remain the same as in our earlier submittal.

We have made the following changes to improve the community:

The alleys on the east and west will no longer dead end, but rather will return into the internal street system, improving traffic circulation.

39th Avenue West will be dedicated as public right of way. The traffic study prepared for the City concluded that 39th Avenue West should remain closed. The City would have the opportunity to open the road in the future if they believe it would be beneficial.

Park and recreation amenities will be added to the closed portion of 39th Avenue West. Although not finalized, we would anticipate this would include a children’s big toy, benches and plantings. The area would still remain as an emergency access for police and fire.

On-street parking, landscaping and traffic calming bulbs within the community will make Briarcliff more pedestrian and family friendly.

We have had very preliminary conversations with the City about creating a community park within the water tower property located to the north across West Dravus Street. Hopefully a basketball court and park benches could be located there. If we are able to make this contribution to the community, a separate process will occur that will include public involvement.

We appreciate all those who have given us feedback regarding the different architectural exterior home designs. If you haven’t given feedback and would like to, the web address is www.lexingtonfinehomes.com/design.htm

If you visit LFH's site (click on LFH at Briarcliff in left column) you can see the March, 2005 plot plan as well as a preliminary streetscape elevation, or drawing, of a proposed housing style suggested for the development. The elevation is a view from the water tower, facing south, looking at the streetscape that faces onto Dravus. This drawing shows that garages will be faced in toward the development, not out toward Dravus. The development will have sidewalks and alley access to houses on the east and west as well as for the double row of houses that are closest to Dravus.

LFH reports on its site that construction is projected to begin in 2005.

CLUSTER HOUSING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT

Washington's Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A) contains guidelines for what cities and counties are now expected to do to plan for and control growth in our region. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.020, some of the salient goals of the GMA are to:

• "Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner,"
• Control sprawl by "reducing the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development," and
• Encourage "the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population of this state, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock."

One way cities work to achieve these goals is by allowing for Cluster Housing Planned Developments (CHPDs). Information about CHPDs can be found in the Seattle Municipal Code (SMC) Section 23.44.024. I am told that a cluster housing plan is used to allow smaller setbacks off the property line so that more house can be put on a piece of land, and it allows for lot sizes smaller than the size for which an area may be zoned. The Briarcliff property is zoned Single Family 5000, but pursuant to the March 2005 resubmitted proposal, most of the lots in the development will be under that amount, and many will be less than 3600 square feet.

Although this density may seem like more than the norm for the neighborhood, I am told by LFH that they did a survey of the lots north, west, and east of the development (not south, because those lots are zoned SF 7,200) and found that of 63 lots, 25 were less than 5,000 square feet, the smallest being 2,417. So they felt there was precedent in the neighborhood for lots smaller than 5,000 square feet. DPD has told me in the past that it calculates that a CHPD allows only 8 more houses on the site than would be allowed under a conventional subdivision plan using easements for roadways.

LFH also states that using the CHPD approach allows them to build houses of a type and with setbacks and yard areas that promote something called "neo-traditional development," a new trend in urban development that makes housing more accessible, more community-oriented, more street-friendly, and more interactive. Thus, the setback rules and design style requirements would allow for front porches on houses facing the street, so neighbors have a greater tendency to be outside in their communities, chatting with neighbors, etc.; garages are located on alleys so that the streetscape is a more pleasing place for pedestrians.

The basic intentions promoted by CHPDs are to: "enhance and preserve natural features, encourage the construction of affordable housing, allow for development and design flexibility, and protect and prevent harm in environmentally critical areas." SMC 23.44.024. These are not elements that a developer must meet, but just a listing of some of the rationales that DPD keeps in mind as it evaluates a CHPD application. LFH has stated that the main intent Briarcliff meets is to provide "development and design flexibility." LFH has also stated that the term "affordable" can be defined in relative terms, so while the houses in Briarcliff are not going to be "affordable" in the way most of us might interpret that word, many of them will be substantially less than the million ++ dollars that many Magnolia homes are selling for these days. The CHPD approach thus helps to promote at least some level of diversity in housing prices within a neighborhood. This would seem to be in line with the Growth Management Act's policy of encouraging the availability of "affordable housing to all economic segments of the population" while also promoting "a variety of residential densities and housing types." RCW 36.70A.020.

LFH has also explained that one of the driving forces for the CHPD permitting process was to address the issue of parcels of land like Briarcliff: a large site, zoned single family, that suddenly becomes available for redevelopment in the midst of an already-established neighborhood. According to LFH, the City created the special review process (CHPD) in part to allow flexibility in code standards, recognizing that such sites are unusual and may be deserving of something other than "rote zoning standards."

Some neighbors have expressed concern about the alleys that are planned to run on the east and west sides of the development. I believe the reason these alleys are in this plan is because, according to SMC 23.44.024(E)(3), "[n]o dwelling unit in a CHPD shall be closer than twenty-five (25) feet to a rear lot line of an abutting single-family zoned lot." So although it might be somewhat annoying to have an alley running right by your property if you are on the east or west side of the development, maybe it's better than a house sitting on the same spot.

HOW DID LFH DECIDE ON 39 HOMES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT?

LFH reports that per SMC 23.44.024.C.1, the gross acreage of the property is divided by 5,000 square feet (current zoning for the area) to arrive at the number of dwelling units permitted. On this basis, 40 lots would be allowed, but they have proposed 39. They could have put 7 lots on the east property line but chose to do 6 in order to match up with the number of lots they back up onto on 38th Ave. W. SMC 23.44.024.D specifically allows lots less than the minimum lot size of 5000 sf, and there is no minimum specified for the resulting lots, although there is a maximum number of lots allowed.

JULY 29, 2004 PUBLIC HEARING

A public hearing was held at Catharine Blaine School on Thursday, July 29, 2004 from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m.

DPD Planner Lucas DeHerrera ran the meeting. He explained that the purpose of the meeting was to gather further public comment that may not have been made in letter or email form. He said that further comment will be accepted up until the decision on the applications (for CHPD and for subdivision) are published.

APPLICATION PROCESS: DeHerrera explained that there is no Environmentally Critical Area (ECA) at Briarcliff, so the more stringent requirements of doing an ECA CHPD are not applicable. This is a straight CHPD which has to meet the "Site Requirements" set forth in SMC 23.44.024 A-E. He explained that the opening paragraph of SMC 23.44.024, which sets forth several intents of the CHPD law is not a list of elements that a developer must meet. He said that as long as just one of the intents is met, a CHPD application can be granted. DeHerrera said that he will be analyzing the application for adherence to the code requirements of SMC 23.44.024 A-E and that no other consideration goes into the analysis. Although DeHerrera acknowledged that the land use code does generally promote the goal of in-city density, he said that his job is to see that the CHPD application either meets or doesn't meet these requirements and that's it. He said he will work with LFH if something they've suggested does not meet code requirements, and they will have a chance to come into compliance. After DeHerrera makes his decision, he will send his CHPD application recommendation to a hearing examiner. [DeHerrera subsequently explained that that there will be a public hearing before the hearing examiner, which all parties of record and everyone living within 300' of the development will be notified of by mail. The hearing date will also be posted at the site. This is another opportunity for public comment.] The hearing examiner determines whether to approve the recommendation and a decision is then published. Notice of the decision will be made publicly as well as individually to everyone who has sent in comments on this application, and the decision may then be appealed by anyone who wishes to appeal it. The actual subdivision application must eventually be submitted to City Council for approval.

INTENT OF CHPD LAW THAT LFH IS RELYING ON. LFH representative Melody McCutcheon explained that the intent LFH is relying on is the one that allows for "development and design flexibility." She described how the City Council in 1986, in enacting the CHPD law, determined that it wanted to allow some type of design flexibility in cases where unusually large sites became available for development in the city.

Greg Hackworth of Hackworth Design Group, the architectural and design firm that is designing the homes, explained that LFH meets this intent by using easement roads, alleys for access to the back sides of homes so that garages can be placed out of view, shorter setbacks from the front line of lots to give a better streetscape on Dravus, and larger setbacks from the back line of the south lots to give greater buffers to those houses from established homes on the south.

NUMBER OF LOTS. The CHPD application under consideration contains a proposal for 39 lots. Ms. McCutcheon explained that if standard subdivision platting were used there could be 37 lots. Using easements instead of dedicated roads is what allows this larger number of lots. If all the roads in the development were dedicated instead, the number of lots would be reduced, but DeHerrera did not say how many this would be. [LFH subsequently told me that this number would be 31.] He explained that there is no functional difference in the roadway itself between dedicated roads and easements, so it is really just a matter of who owns the roads and maintains them after they are built. The city maintains dedicated roads; a homeowners' association in the development maintains easement roads. DeHerrera commented that his only job is to evaluate the application before him, not to suggest ways the application could be done differently in order to reduce the number of homes.

PARKING, SIDEWALKS, AND TRAFFIC. Mr. Hackworth explained that every house will have 4 spaces of off-street parking: a 2-car garage plus space in front of each garage for 2 more cars. John Cochenour, of LFH, said that LFH has proposed that parking be allowed on both sides of the street in the development, but that the Fire Department has said this is unworkable. Parking may thus be allowed only on one side. Sidewalks are proposed for only one side of the street in the development. At this time, all traffic concerns and comments have been noted, DeHerrera said, and will be considered in deciding on the CHPD application. Official traffic review has evidently not been done yet, but will be. DeHerrera did not know when the decision would be made on whether 39th Ave. W. would be opened up, but noted that SDOT has recommended that it be platted for street use.

HOME PRICES; SQUARE FOOTAGE; YARDS; OPEN SPACE. Cochenour said that he does not have figures yet on what the exact square footage of the homes will be, but anticipates plans ranging from 2600 to 3500 sf. He estimated garages plus basement areas at 30' x 20', but said that all of these items will have to be determined once they know how many lots they will be allowed. The south lots will have back yards, and most of the other homes will have much smaller areas of patio or decks or open space. The target price of the homes has not yet been determined, Cochenour said, again commenting that they'll have a better idea of this when they know how many houses they'll be building. There is no provision for common open space or a neighborhood park in the development.

HOME DESIGN. LFH did a neighborhood survey on home designs/styles and got about 100 responses generally showing that people preferred traditional home designs, no visible driveways on the fronts of the homes, a mix of design style from house to house, no "East side development" look. This all boiled down for LFH and Hackworth Design Group to something now called "neotraditional design," with houses that look traditional and fit in with the neighborhood and garages that do not face out onto the street, but are "hidden" in alleys. LFH brought a couple of streetscape renderings, showing a grouping of 3 houses facing onto Dravus. One of the drawings was the one that is on the LFH website. The others were similar to that drawing. Click on LFH at Briarcliff in the left column to see an example of what they are proposing at this time. Hackworth emphasized that these drawings are just "a starting point."

PUBLIC COMMENT. Comments on the CHPD and related subdivision should be sent to DeHerrera by August 13, 2004, although he said he would accept comments up until publication of the decision. Send comments to: lucas.deherrera@seattle.gov. You can also mail comments to DeHerrera at DPD, 700 Fifth Ave., Ste. 2000, P.O. Box 34019, Seattle, Wa. 98124-4019. His phone: (206)615-0724. The Master Use Permit file is a matter of public record and can be viewed at DPD's Public Resource Center, 700 5th Ave., Ste. 2000. The Resource Center is open 8-5 M, W, Th., and F, and from 10:00 to 5:00 on Tuesdays.

Visit the website for the Department of Planning and Development (click on link in left column) and enter the project number(s) for the project. This project has two numbers. #2403714 is for the actual subdivision, and #2402617 is for the cluster housing planned development review.

If you want to comment on anything regarding this project, it is probably a good idea to send your comment in under both project numbers.