A 9,000-square-foot vacant grass field along Maple Avenue, which backs up against the Snoqualmie Depot, could be the site of a new three-story mixed use building.
The development, known as The Rails, was brought forward by private property owners and would construct a 35-foot-tall building in the Snoqualmie’s historic downtown district. The first floor would have street-facing retail and office space with backside parking. The second and third floors would hold 11 apartments, alongside a rooftop with amenities.
The open lot exists within Snoqualmie’s historic downtown district overlay, a zoning requirement in the city’s municipal code designed to protect and preserve downtown’s historic aesthetic. That code requires that the project’s design be approved by the city’s historic design review board before the city can issue construction permits.
The city’s planning commission, acting as such review board, approved the project’s design with minor changes at its Jan. 18 meeting. However, 10 residents — including at least six who live along Maple Avenue — filed an appeal of the project’s design.
Dane Stokes, a Snoqualmie resident who served as spokesperson for the appellants at the March 14 city council meeting, said the appellants and 15 additional neighborhood residents believe the designs violated the city’s municipal code.
“I live within sight of this lot and I am horrified to see that something of such poor design aesthetic and questionable zoning interpretations is planned for my neighborhood,” he said at the meeting.
In rebuttal, city staff said eight of the 10 appeals do not identify legal grounds for an appeal. The remaining two appeals, city staff said, fail to demonstrate that the historic design review board was “clearly erroneous” and should be denied.
Still, the city council voted unanimously on March 14 to table the decision on denying those appeals and approving the development’s design until more information could be provided from prior planning commission meetings.
One of the concerns raised by the council was a code objection contained in several of the appellants’ appeals regarding historical design review was not addressed by city staff in its rebuttal. That code requires the King County Office of Cultural Resources to be informed and given a report on all new structures built in the city’s historic district.
When asked for comment, the city’s community development director said he was unable to speak during the appeals process.
Under city law, the city council needs to make a decision on the appeal’s status within 70 days — by April 19 — and is expected to make a decision at its next meeting on March 28.