Loading...
10102 243RD PL SW.pdf°st. 189v APPLICANT: CASE NO.: HEARING EXAMINER FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF EDMONDS rrr�r Mark E. Reiff V 97-69 U. < LOCATION: 10102 - 243rd Place SW (see Exhibit A, Attachment 1). T APPLICATION: A variance to reduce the required street setback (south property z line -- along 244th Street SW) from 25 feet to 7.5 feet to allow the ® construction of an approximately 1344 square foot detached garage W w for an existing single-family residence (see Exhibit A, Attachments 2 through 4). � vs: o F-11 REVIEW PROCESS: Variance: Hearing Examiner conducts public hearing and makes S 0 final decision. z MAJOR ISSUES: ui cn cs �� o r° a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) z Section 16.20.030 (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - Site Development Standards). b. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 20.85 (VARIANCES). SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION AND DECISION: Staff Recommendation: Hearing Examiner Decision: PUBLIC HEARING: Modified approval with conditions Modified approval with conditions After reviewing the official file which included the Planning Division Staff Advisory Report; and ® after visiting the site, the Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing on the application. The hearing on the application was opened at 10:08 am., June 19, 1997. in the Plaza Room, Edmonds Library, Edmonds, Washington, and closed at 10:27 am. Participants at the public hearing and the exhibits offered and entered are listed in this report. A verbatim recording of the hearing is available in the Planning Division. 0 Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan 0 HEADING TESTIMONY: The following is a summary of the testimony offered at the public hearing. From the City: Meg Gruwell, Project Planner, reviewed staff report and recommended modified approval, with conditions. She noted that the staff found that the proposal meets the criteria for approval of a variance, but staff felt a 15 foot rear yard setback should be required as a condition of approval instead of the 7.5 foot setback requested or the 25 foot setback required by code. ce U. <; From the Applicant: a 0 Mark Reiff, Applicant, said: r u�: ` z 1.- ! He purchased the property six years ago and that was before the property was z o' annexed to the City. At that time he understood the setback to be 5 feet. w w. ` • He referred to photos in the file of other housed in the neighborhood which did 00 not meet the setback requirements. w wl _ o He doesn't want to have to back onto the street and would like to have room in front of his garage for a turnaround for safety. Z w :s • He has no access to 240 which is a private road. o Z a The reason he wants a garage which is deeper than the standard garage is because it is not unusual to have a pickup truck which is 20'8" long and his boat/trailer/motor combination is over 25 feet long. • He wants a garage where he can store all of his stuff out of the weather. J ."' • He is willing to install all of the improvements recommended by staff. From the Community: ® No one from the general public spoke on this issue at the public hearing. CORRESPONDENCE: G The applicant submitted a petition signed by 29 neighbors who supported his request for a variance (See Exhibit B). DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The subject property fronts streets along both the north and south property lines, although the street to the south is a private road and the applicant has no access rights to it. The applicant would like to construct a large detached garage in his "rear" yard to house his boat, truck, camper, dirt bikes, car trailer, et cetera. 0 .. 1F r , tU .. 0 Hearing Examiner Decision Case No. V 97-69 Page 3 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS A. SITE DESCRIPTION z LUI 1. Site Development And Zoning: ¢ a" a. Facts: LU 1) Size: 7be subject property is 15,375 square feet in area prior to the LU recent lot line adjustment, and 16,875 square feet after the lot line -' adjustment (the preliminary decision to approve the lot line adjustment LO U. was made on May 29,1997, can be appealed until June 17, 1997). The Iot is rectangular in shape with 102.5-feet (112.5 feet after the lot line LL adjustment) of width along 243rd Place SW and 150-feet of lot depth cn o (see Exhibit A, Attachment 4). X, 2) Land Use: The subject property is developed with a single-family ZM � residence. z W W 3) Zoning: The zoning of the subject property is Single -Family M c; Residential (RS-8) (see Exhibit A, Attachment 1). Uq o f-� 4) Terrain and Vegetation: The subject site appears to have a high i 61 point in the front yard, where some mature fir trees are growing, surrounded by lawn. From there, the yard slopes down another three to U. zo; ;� four feet to the house to the south, and to rock walls along the U" driveway and 243rd Place SW. The rock wall is approximately 5 feet o r" tall near the house, and 3-4 feet tall near the road, except for where it Z narrows to 2 feet along the west property line. The driveway slopes j slightly down towards the carport. To the east, the adjacent house (10020 - 243rd Place SW) sits approximately 8 feet above the driveway, with a bank running north and south about 8 feet from the house. At the rear of the yard; the adjacent yard at 10020 - 243rd Place SW is still elevated approximately 8 feet above the subject property's �_- yard. The back yard is graveled in an area where the garage is proposed and is fairly level until it runs into the 3 foot rock wall about in the middle of the back yard. From here, the yard is landscaped, and ® rises gently up another foot (see Exhibit A, Attachment 4). 2. Neighboring Development And Zoning: a. Facts: 1) The properties to the north, east, and west are zoned Single" -Family ® Residential (RS-8) and are developed with single-family homes (see Exhibit A, Attachment 1). 2) The properties to the south are in King County and appear to be zoned L single-family residential. Immediately to the south of the subject parcel is 244th Street SW and across this street is a steep ravine, which appears to be an undevelopable lot and an unbuildable portion of lot 2 in Highland Park Estates, an 11 lot subdivision. Exhibit A, ., ,q E 17 Page 4 Attachment 6 shows a partial plan of the Highland Park Estates and shows where Mark Reiff s property is adjacent to it. B. HISTORY The owner states that he purchased the property intending to construct a garage in his rear yard, which he would have been able to do under Snohomish County zoning since, at that time the lot to the south only had a private driveway, so only a 5-foot setback was required. Since then the property to the south was developed into an 11-lot subdivision. Both the City of Edmonds and Snohomish County require larger setbacks to road providing access to this many lots. According to Dave Greisel, with Snohomish County Planning and Development Services, a 20- foot setback is required to a private road, unless it meets the exceptions for providing access to four or fewer lots. The subject parcel was annexed to the City of Edmonds in December 1995. C. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) 1. Facts: Variances granted based on special circumstances are exempt from SEPA review (WAC 197-11-800(6)(b) and ECDC 20.15A.080). D. EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) COMPLIANCE 1. Critical Areas Compliance a. Facts: 1) This proposal is subject to review under ECDC Chapter 20.153 (Critical Areas Ordinance). 2) The applicant has submitted a Critical Areas Checklist (CA-96-200) and a waiver was granted to the critical areas study requirement. b. Conclusion: The applicant has complied with the requirements of the City's Critical Areas Ordinance. 2. Compliance with RS-6 Zoning Standards a. Fact: The fundamental site development standards pertaining to Residential development in the RS-8 zone are set forth in Chapter 16.20.030. These include the following for locating structures: 1) Street Setback: 25 feet 2) Rear Setback: 15 feet (5 feet for detached structures < 600 sq. ft.) 3) Side Setbacks: 7.5 feet 4) Maximum Height:25 feet 5) Lot Coverage: 35% b. Conclusion: The proposal complies with the requirements of the zoning ordinance except for the portion for which the variance is applied for. Hearing Examiner Decision Case No. V 97-69 Page 5 3. Compliance with Requirements for a Variance a. Facts: 1) Chapter 20.85 of the ECDC sets forth the mechanism whereby a f provision of the Code may be varied on a case -by -case basis if the application of the provision would result in an unusual and unreasonable hardship. The criteria are as follows: 19 is a) Snecial Circumstances: That because of special circumstances En o relating to the property such as size, shape, topography, g location or surroundings of the property, strict enforcement of a the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and � privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. Special circumstances should not be predicated Z I., upon any factor personal to the owner such as age or disability, z of extra expense which may be necessary to comply with the w u, zoning ordinance, the ability to secure a scenic view, the ability aY to make more profitable use of the property, not any factor o � resulting from the action of the owner or any past owner of the o same property. z cU b) Special Privilege. That the approval of the variance would not tom,. o, be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison ZI UJ with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with ; the same zoning. z c) Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance: That the approval of the variance will be consistent with the intent of the comprehensive plan, the zoning ordinance, and the zoning district in which the property is located. d) Not Detrimental: That the variance, as approved or conditionally approved, will not be significantly detrimental to ...i the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property 7„ or improvements in the vicinity and the same zone. e) Minimum Variance: That the approved variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner rights enjoyed by other 0 properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. 2. The applicant has submitted declarations with their submittal which address the decisional criteria as follows (see Exhibit A, Attachment 3): a) The applicant states that the lot has two elevations, an upper 0 and a lower level. The applicants also point out that they purchased the home because it had space available to build a garage to fit their needs, but with the development of the property behind them and the annexation into the City, they now had to maintain a street setback to the rear property line, even though they had no access to that street. Later, the applicant also mentions that with the construction of 244th Street SW, the elevation adjacent to his east property line was "� -- f ., ... s .. .. raised four feet, which has decreased the privacy in his back yard. a i r b) The applicant has provided pictures of a house and two outbuildings which currently have nonconforming setbacks. The house sits five feet from 244th Street SW and the two o' outbuildings are described as being directly on the property 0: line. jF c) The applicant points out that the comprehensive plan is dated LO U. June 20, 1995. As this property was not annexed until W C December 15,1995, it was not included in the comprehensive plan. A logical comprehensive plan designation for an area W developed in single-family residences, as this area is, would be s single-family residential. The proposed variance is for a use _,. accessory to a single-family residence. Z 1— d) The applicant points out that the proposal meets all standards in the zoning ordinance except for the setback adjacent to 244th LU 2 M'. Street SW, and this variance addresses that setback. U e) The applicant feels the proposed location would not be o �� detrimental since it is lower than the houses to the east and s Lul west. To the south is 244th Street SW and the applicant states that the area south of that is greenbelt (see also Exhibit A, `—` o; z� Attachment 6). The applicant is proposing a structure which will blend well with his house, and states that he intends to �- r} plant shrubs on his side of the fence. The 10-foot area between z } the applicant's fence and 244th Street SW is currently planted with shrubs and small trees. f) The applicant believes this is the minimum variance needed, as he intends to add on to his house where the carport is currently. The applicant has applied for a lot line adjustment in order to give himself more room to add on to the house and also approach the garage, but in order to be able to drive into the garage doors, he feels he needs the garage in the proposed location. He also states that because he has so many vehicles, ® tools and lawn equipment he needs a garage of the size proposed. 3) In the R-8400 zone, Snohomish County requires only 5-foot setbacks to other residentially zoned property, 50-feet setbacks from the centerline of roads less than 60 feet (243rd Place is 50 feet wide), and 20 feet from private roads or private access easements. Exemptions ® are available to the setback requirements to private roads if they serve four or fewer lots. 4) Jamal Mahmoud, Engineering inspector, has stated that a rule of thumb to determine if there is enough space to enter a garage is to allow 20 feet of clear area in front of the garage door. He also encouraged the arrangement of a garage so that it was possible to turn around on site, instead of backing into the street. 0 ®; � dl z }—, o � w w' a o; U-p rz U(D o� z 0 U case tvo. v 9i-fay Page 7 b. Conclusions• 1) The site has many unique circumstances. The higher areas of the yard would be more challenging to access from the street. The front yard also has mature fir trees which are an asset to the area. Because 243rd Place SW was developed when 244th Street SW did not exist, there is a virtual wall of 6-foot fences along the property lines adjacent to 244th Street SW. Driving along the road, the fences and structures constructed close to the lot line already visually provide a barrier along the street. The proposed garage would not look out of place in the streetscape. The developers of the subdivision to the south have run their access road along the north side of their subdivision, and buffered the road from the adjacent fences by planting shrubs and trees in an approximately 10 foot strip 'of land. Adjacent to the applicant's property to the south of 244th Street SW is what appears to be an undevelopable tract, and a portion of a lot which has setback restrictions, so it looks like no structures will be built to the south. The proposed garage location is also lower than 244th Street SW by approximately 4 feet, and lower than the yard to the east by approximately S feet. However, the lot is large, at over 15,000 square feet. 2) The houses along this street were developed when the property behind only had a private driveway, so the south side of the lots were treated as a rear yard. Therefore, approving a variance which treated the setback to the south property line as a rear setback would not constitute a special privilege. 3) Approval of the proposed variance would allow for the continued development of the site in a manner consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code and what the site would likely be designated in the Comprehensive Plan when it is included (see also Section F below). 4) Approval of the variance would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. The proposed garage location is lower than the adjacent property to the east, so the impact to that parcel is reduced. To the south is a landscape strip, road, and unbuildable area, so the impact to that area is minimal. Allowing the garage to be placed away from the house allows more space to turn around, so the location improves public safety in that respect. 5) The proposed garage is larger than most garages, but the subject parcel is also a large lot, so the garage is not out of scale. A garage of the dimensions proposed will not fit in the front yard, nor on either side yard. The only possible location for a structure of this size is in the rear yard. If the garage were built to meet the required street setback from 244th Street SW, the stalls would not be accessible from the 243rd Place SW side, due to the need for turning radii. If the garage doors were approached from the 244th Street SW side, they would not Ell Hearing Examiner Decision Case No. V 97-69 Page 8 be accessible without a great deal of jockeying, as no access is allowed from 244th Street SW. The elevations in Exhibit A, Attachment 4 show that the western side of the building will not have a garage door, — UJ and therefore will not need driveway access or a large turning radii. Given this proposed design, a 15-foot setback to 244th Street SW could be maintained, which would equal a standard rear -yard setback to a building of this size. Using the rule of thumb that 20 feet of clear s space is needed in order to make a garage door accessible, the 15-foot J r: vs U. setback would allow two-thirds of the front of the garage to be LU O accessible for vehicles. Alternatively, the applicant could reduce the depth of the western portion of the garage if he wants 20 foot clear LL < space for that portion of the garage, or he could reduce the overall depth of the garage and have 20 foot clear space access to the entire i length of the garage, while still maintaining a 15-foot setback to the a ~ ' south property line. Therefore it appears that a 15-foot setback to the P P Y PP �; 244th Street SW property line is the minimum variance necessary to Q allow the owner rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with c� us the same zoning. w u, E. TECHNICAL COMMITTEE zU. 1. Review by City Departments F LU a. Fact: The variance application has been reviewed and evaluated by the Fire Department, Public Works Division, Engineering Division, and the Z Parks and Recreation Division. The only comments received were from the Engineering Division, and those comments are included as Exhibit A, Attachment 5. b. Conclusion: The requirements of the Engineering Division should be met. I F. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (ECDC) 1. Comprehensive Plan Designation © a. Fact: The Comprehensive Plan was approved in June 1995, months before this area was annexed, so it does not include the subject parcel. The neighborhood consists of primarily single-family residences, so if it had been annexed sooner, it likely would have been given a single-family designation. 0 b. Conclusion: The proposed project is consistent with the existing single- family use of the area. DECISION Based upon the foregoing findings and conclusions, the request for a variance is approved, subject to the following conditions: 6T Hearing Examiner Decision Case No. V 97-69 Page 9 1. A 15-foot setback to the south property line must be maintained, and the reduced setback will be allowed between the eastern property line setback and the rockery wall shown in a _ the site plan (see Exhibit A, Attachment 4). The 15-foot setback is equivalent to a rear yard setback in the RS-8 zone, and is larger than the requested 7.5 foot setback. U 2. This application is subject to the applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds 0 Community Development Code. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure Lu; compliance with the various provisions contained in these ordinances. V) U.1 3. The applicant must obtain a building permit prior to any construction. w py n i 4. The applicant will need to comply with all the terms of any future permits. This will g include the requirement to detain stormwater if the 2000 feet of impervious surface LL a1 threshold is met. A condition of the building permit will be to pave the driveway and � construct a vehicle turnaround on the site. _ z 5. The permit is transferable. r� z ww Entered this 30th day of June, 1997, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearings Examiner o52 under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of -Edmonds. t=i LL_ LB U) U =. I-- I—,; Ron McConnell z Hearing Examiner RECONSIDERATIONS AND APPEALS 1 The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing reconsideration's and appeals. Any person wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should contact the Planning Department for further procedural information. © REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Section 20.100.010.G allows for the Hearing Examiner to reconsider his decision or recommendation if a written request is filed within ten (10) working days of the date of the initial decision by any person who attends the public hearing and signs the attendance register and/or presents testimony or by any person holding an ownership interest in a tract of land which is the subject of such decision or recommendation. The reconsideration request must ® cite specific references to the findings and/or the criteria contained in the ordinances governing the type of application being reviewed. APPEALS Section 20.105.020.A & B describe how appeals of a Hearing Examiner decision or recommendation shall be made. The appeal shall be made in writing, and shall include the decision being appealed along with the name of the project and the date of the decision, the name of the individual or group appealing the decision, their interest in the matter, and 0 P W a 0 a W x U. 0 h 0 z 0 reasons why the appellant believes the decision to be wrong. The appeal must be filed with the Community Development Director within ten (10) working days after the date of the decision being appealed. LAPSE OF APPROVAL Section 20.05.020.0 states 'Unless the owner obtains a building permit, or if no building is required, substantially commences the use allowed within one year from the date of approval, the conditional use permit shall expire and be null and void, unless the owner files an application for an extension of the time before the expiration date.' NOTICE TO COUNTY ASSESSOR The property owner may as a result of the decision rendered by the Hearing Examiner request a change in the valuation of the property by the Snohomish County Assessors Office. EXHIBITS: The following exhibits were offered and entered into the record. A. Planning Division Advisory Report, with attachments B. Petition of support, signed by 29 neighbors. PARTIES of RECORD; Mark E. Reiff 10102 - 243rd Pl. SW Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds Planning Division Edmonds Public Works Division Edmonds Engineering Division Edmonds Parks & Recreation Division Edmonds Fire Department I, Mark Reiff, am the owner of property tax ID# 5549-000-002-0005 located at 10102 243rd PL SW, Edmonds. I am applying for a rear set back variance for my property so that I may build a garage with the LUI following dimensions: 32L x 42W x 14.5I3. The variance I am seeking is a 7.5' rear set back from my property line to build this. Please sign ca, below if you feel this is non -detrimental to the surrounding Uj neighborhood. Thank- you! 0 1 Name Address Signature n U -7�9; n �!-?U- --�-�'="�-`--- 1 s i Q' Mi 0 Aft i. JUNE 19 '1997 PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND ZIP CODE BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM j V-97-69 !NARK REIFF U ; U3 Luj � �o " 014 W Lu o; Ud W U. f �k� s�syten t p '+' i rd': �,..¢a+ u 0 C. FILE NO. SM-97-48 Application by Michael George, Architecton behalf of Robert Cole and Jeri Merritt for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit to undertake site grading (approximately 700 cubic yards of cut and 1,000 cubic yards of fill) for the construction of a new single-family residence. The subject property is located at 16006 75th Place West and is zoned RS-12. d. FILE NO. SM-97-66 Application by BERGERIABAM Engineers, Inc. on behalf of Washington State Ferries for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit to allow the installation of new. steel pile dolphins to replace the existing north outer floating dolphin, north inner timber cluster pile dolphins and the installation of new intermediate steel pile dolphins to accommodate an upgrade to the terminal facility for a broader range of existing vessels. The subject property is located at 71 West Main Street. 3. Administrative Reports - No Reports. 4. Adjournment E j �Y �, 4 s t s .. ..... �."r.%a. �, �. _ a .. .. A� _ . CITE' OF EDMONDS 250 STH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 95020 PLANNING DIVISION ADVISORY REPORT FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS To: Ron McConnell, Hearing Examiner From: A4xg`_'�-� M.E. NQ GruWell Project Planner Date: JUNE 12,1997 File: V-97-69 MARK E. REIFF Hearing Date, Time, And Place: July 3,1997, At 9:00 AM, Plaza Room Edmonds Library 650 Main Street TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I. INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................2 A. APPLICATION..............................„.............................................................................................................2 B. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL......................................................................................................................2 C. RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................................................2 H. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS......................................................................3 A. SITE DESCRIPTION.....................................................................................................................................3 B. HISTORY.....................................................................................................................................................3 C. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA).......................................................................................4 D. EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) COMPLIANCE..................................................4 E. TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ..........................................................................................................................7 F. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (ECDC)............................................................................................................... 7 III. RECONSIDERATION'S AND APPEALS..................„.......................................................7 A. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION............................................................................................................7 D. APPEALS.....................................................................................................................................................8 IV. LAPSE OF APPROVAL........................................................................................................8 V. NOTICE TO THE COUNTY ASSESSOR.............................................................................8 VI. APPENDICES..........................................................................................................................8 VII. PARTIES OF RECORD.......................................................................................................8 V-97-69.DOC / June 12, I997/Stall Report z LU J 0. to w 7C -J w O; z E— ro z UJ W p h1 zL) t— h LLp +z U 2 o z 0 0 I. INTRODUCTION A. Application 1. Applicant: Mark E. Reiff (see Attachment 2). 2. Site Location: 10102 - 243rd Place SW (see Attachment 1). 3. Request: A variance to reduce the required street setback (south property line -- along 244th Street SW) from 25 feet to 7.5 feet to allow the construction , of an approximately 1344 square foot detached garage for an existing single-family residence (see Attachments 2 through 4). 4. Review Process: Variance: Hearing Examiner conducts public hearing and makes final decision. 5. Malor Issues: a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 16.20.030 (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - Site Development Standards). b. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 20.85 (VARIANCES). B. Description of Proposal The subject property fronts streets along both the north and south property lines, although the street to the south is a private road and the applicant has no access rights to it. The applicant would like to construct a large detached garage in his "rear' yard to house his boat, truck, camper, dirt bikes, car trailer, et cetera. C. Recommendations Based on statements of Fact, Conclusions, and Attachments in this report we recommend MODIFIED APPROVAL of this application subject to the following conditions: 1. A 15-foot setback to the south property line must be maintained, and the reduced setback will be allowed between the eastern property line setback and the rockery wall shown in the site plan (see Attachment 4). The 15-foot setback Is equivalent to a rear yard setback In the RS-8 zone, and is larger than the requested 7.5 foot setback, 2. This application is subject to the applicable requirements contained in the Edmonds Community Development Code. It is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure compliance with the various provisions contained in these ordinances. 3. The applicant must obtain a building permit prior to any construction. 4. The applicant will need to comply with all the terms of any future permits. This will include the requirement to detain stormwater if the 2000 feet of impervious surface threshold is met. A condition of the building permit will be to pave the driveway and construct a vehicle turnaround on the site. 5. The permit should be transferable. // Mark E. Rtiff 1. 1 File No. V-97-69 Page 3 of 8 II. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS A. Site Description 1. Site Development And Zoning: z za) Facts: Z (1) Size: The subject property is 15,375 square feet in area prior to the recent lot 4 line adjustment, and 16,875 square feet after the lot line adjustment (the J 0 preliminary decision to approve the lot line adjustment was made on May 29, N C3 1997, can be appealed until June 17,1997). The lot is rectangular in shape with UJ w 3 102.5-feet (112.5 feet after the lot line adjustment) of width along 243rd Place —' H V) U— SW and 150-feet of lot depth (see Attachment 4). w 0 ! (2) Land Use: The subject property is developed with a single-family residence. 3 Zonin : The zoning of the subject property is Single -Family Residential RS-8 u- = (see Attachment 1). 1J' (4) Terrain and Vegetation: The subject site appears to have a high point in the �� front yard, where some mature fir trees are growing, surrounded by lawn. � From there, the yard slopes down another three to four feet to the house to the Z south, and to rock walls along the driveway and 243rd Place SW. The rock wall w UJ is approximately 5 feet tall near the house, and 3-4 feet tall near the road, except for where it narrows to 2 feet along the west property line. The driveway C) slopes slightly down towards the carport. To the east, the adjacent house a tfi. (10020 - 243rd Place SW) sits approximately 8 feet above the driveway, with a _Uj 0f bank running north and south about 8 feet from the house. At the rear of the r, yard, the adjacent yard at 10020 - 243rd Place SW is still elevated — Z . approximately 8 feet above the subject property's yard. The back yard is W to graveled in an area where the garage is proposed and is fairly level until it runs v =' into the 3 foot rock wail about in the middle of the back yard. From here, the p yard is landscaped, and rises gently up another foot (see Attachment 4). Z 2. Neighboring Development And Zoning: a) Facts: (1) The properties to the north, east, and west are zoned Single -Family Residential i (RS-8) and are developed with single-family homes (see Attachment 1). (2) The properties to the south are in King County and appear to be zoned single- family residential. Immediately to the south of the subject parcel is 244th Street SW and across this street is a steep ravine, which appears to be an undevelopable lot and an unbuildable portion of lot 2 in Highland Park Estates, © an 11 lot subdivision. Attachment 6 shows a partial plan of the Highland Park Estates and shows where Mark Reiff's property is adjacent to it. B. History The owner states that he purchased the property intending to construct a garage in his rear yard, which he would have been able to do under Snohomish County zoning since, at that p time the lot to the south only had a private driveway, so only a 5-foot setback was required. Since then the property to the south was developed into an I1-lot subdivision. Both the City of Edmonds and Snohomish County require larger setbacks to road providing access to this many lots. According to Dave Greisel, with Snohomish County Planning and Development Services, a 20-foot setback is required to a private road, unless it meets the exceptions for V-97-69-DOC / June 12,1997 / Staff Report s t-- O Z Vo. cap; O a�n 1i Q _Z U= O~ Z ❑s 1] E Mark E. Reiff File Na V-97-69 Page 4 of ll providing access to four or fewer tots. The subject parcel was annexed to the City of Edmonds in December 1995. C. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) 1. Facts: Variances granted based on special circumstances are exempt from SEPA review (WAC 197-11-800(6)(b) and ECDC 20.15A.080). D. Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Compliance 1. Critical Areas Compliance a) Facts: (1) This proposal is subject to review under ECDC Chapter 20.15.E (Critical Areas Ordinance). (2) The applicant has submitted a Critical Areas Checklist (CA-96-200) and a waiver was granted to the critical areas study requirement. b) Conclusion: The applicant has complied with the requirements of the City's Critical Areas Ordinance. 2. Compliance with RS-6 Zoning Standards a) Fact: The fundamental site development standards pertaining to Residential development in the RS-8 zone are set forth in Chapter 16.20.030. These include the following for locating structures: (1) Street Setback: 25 feet (2) Rear Setback: 15 feet (5 feet for detached structures < 600 sq. ft.) (3) Side Setbacks: 7.5 feet (4) Maximum Height: 25 feet (5) Lot Coverage: 35% b) Conclusion: The proposal complies with the requirements of the zoning ordinance except for the portion for which the variance is applied for. 3. Compliance with Requirements for a Variance a) Facts: (1) Chapter 20.85 of the ECDC sets forth the mechanism whereby a provision of the Code may be varied on a case -by -case basis if the application of the provision would result in an unusual and unreasonable hardship. The criteria are as follows: (a) Special Circumstances: That because of special circumstances relating to the property such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings of the property, strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner of use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. Special circumstances should not be predicated upon any factor personal to the owner such as age or disability, extra expense which may be necessary to comply with the zoning ordinance, the ability to; secure a scenic view, the ability to make more profitable use of the W V-97-69-DOC/June 12,' 1997YStaff Report , 4 r 0 Mark E. Reiff Fite No. V-97-69 Page 5 off! property, not any factor resulting from the action of the owner or any past owner of the same property, (b) Special Privilege: That the approval of the variance would not be a grant of special privilege to the property in comparison with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. (c) Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance: That the approval of the variance will be consistent with the intent of the comprehensive plan, the zoning ordinance, and the zoning district in which the property is located. (d) Not Detrimental- That the variance, as approved or conditionally approved, will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and the same zone. (e) Minimum Variance: That the approved variance is the minimum necessary to allow the owner rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. (2) The applicant has submitted declarations with their submittal which address the decisional criteria as follows (see Attachment 3): (a) The applicant states that the lot has two elevations, an upper and a lower level. The applicants also point out that they purchased the home because it had space available to build a garage to fit their needs, but with the development of the property behind them and the annexation into the City, they now had to maintain a street setback to the rear property line, even though they had no access to that street. Later, the applicant also mentions that with the construction of 244th Street SW, the elevation adjacent to his east property line was raised four feet, which has decreased the privacy in his back yard. (b) The applicant has provided pictures of a house and two outbuildings which currently have nonconforming setbacks. The house sits five feet from 244th Street SW and the two outbuildings are described as being directly on the property line. (c) The applicant points out that the comprehensive plan is dated June 20, 1995. As this property was not annexed until December 15,1995, it was not included in the comprehensive plan. A logical comprehensive plan designation for an area developed in single-family residences, as this area is, would be single-family residential. The proposed varlarce is for a use accessory to a single-family residence. (d) The applicant points out that the proposal meets all standards in the zoning ordinance except for the setback adjacent to 244th Street SW, and this variance addresses that setback. (e) The applicant feels the proposed location would not be detrimental since it is lower than the houses to the east and west. To the south is 244th Street SW and the applicant states that the area south of that is greenbelt (see also Attachment 6). The applicant is proposing a structure which will blend well with his house, and states that he intends to plant shrubs on his side of the fence. The 10-foot area between the applicant's fence and 2441h Street SW is currently planted with shrubs and small trees. t Mark E. Reiff t File No. V-99-69 Page 6 of il (f) The applicant believes this is the minimum variance needed, as he intends to add on to his house where the carport is currently. The applicant has applied for a lot line adjustment in order to give himself more room to add on to the house and also approach the garage, but in order to be able to drive into the garage doors, he feels he needs the Q �L garage in the proposed location. He also states that because he has so z many vehicles, toots and lawn equipment he needs a garage of the size x g' proposed. w� U J Na (3) In the R-8400 zone, Snohomish County requires only 5-foot setbacks to other V) U) residentially zoned property, 50-feet setbacks from the centerline of roads less -i tom- than 60 feet (243rd Place is 50 feet wide), and 20 feet from private roads or w QI private access easements. Exemptions are available to the setback requirements to private roads if they serve four or fewer lots. =1 1 i (4) Jamal Mahmoud, Engineering Inspector, has stated that a rule of thumb to u < (n 31 determine if there is enough space to enter a garage is to allow 20 feet of clear C; area in front of the garage door. He also encouraged the arrangement of a t— z' garage so that it was possible to turn around on site, instead of backing into the z street. Q � b) Conclusions: LU ap (1) The site has many unique circumstances. The higher areas of the yard would be Oto more challenging to access from the street. The front yard also has mature fir q F-�• trees which are an asset to the area. Because 243rd Place SW was developed = wj when 244th Street SW did not exist, there is a virtual wall of 6-foot fences along I- _ the property lines adjacent to 244th Street SW. (Driving along the road, the �±- p' fences and structures constructed close to the lot line already visually provide a z' barrier along the street. The proposed garage would not look out of place in the U too) streetscape. The developers of the subdivision to the south have run their access �_- road along the north side of their subdivision, and buffered the road from the Zadjacent fences by planting shrubs and trees in an approximately 10 foot strip of land. Adjacent to the applicant's property to the south of 244th Street SW is what appears to be an undevelopable tract, and a portion of a lot which has setback restrictions, so it looks like no structures will be built to the south. The proposed garage location is also lower than 244th Street SW by approximately 4 feet, and lower than the yard to the east by approximately 8 feet. However, the lot is large, at over 15,000 square feet. _,-- (2) The houses along this street were developed when the property behind only had a private driveway, so the south side of the lots were treated as a rear yard. Therefore, approving a variance which treated the setback to the south property line as a rear setback would not constitute a special privilege. (3) Approval of the proposed variance would allow for the continued development of the site in a manner consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code and what the site would likely be designated in the Comprehensive Plan when it is included (see also Section F below). (4) Approval of the variance would not be detrimental to the public health, safety ® or welfare. The proposed garage location is lower than the adjacent property to the east, so the impact to that parcel is reduced. To the south is a landscape strip, road, and unbuildable area, so the impact to that area is minimal. Allowing the garage to be placed away from the house allows more space to turn around, so the location improves public safety in that respect. V 97-69.DOC J June 12,19971 StaffReport Mark E. Reiff - File No. v-97.69 Page 7 off! (5) The proposed garage is larger than most garages, but the subject parcel is also a large lot, so the garage is not out of scale. A garage of the dimensions proposed will not fit in the front yard, nor on either side yard. The only possible location for a structure of this size is in the rear yard. If the garage were built to meet the required street setback from 244th Street SW, the stalls would not be z 4 accessible from the 243rd Place SW side, due to the need for turning radii. If s w the garage doors were approached from the 244th Street SW side, they would not be accessible without a great deal of jockeying, as no access is allowed from a 244th Street SW. The elevations in Attachment 4 show that the western side of p the building will not have a garage door, and therefore will not need driveway n O access or a large turning radii. Given this proposed design, a 15-foot setback to LU -u H 244th Street SW could be maintained, which would equal a standard rear yard va u- setback to a building of this size. Using the rule of thumb that 20 feet of clear w O' 5 { space is needed in order to make a garage door accessible, the I5-foot setback would allow two-thirds of the front the to be 9 ni of garage accessible for vehicles. Alternatively, the applicant could reduce the depth of the garage to 22 feet, LL ai `n which is a fairly usual depth for a garage, and have access to the entire length of d the garage, while still maintaining a 15-foot setback to the south property line. Therefore it appears that a 15-foot setback to the 244th Street SW property line Z i— is the minimum variance necessary to allow the owner rights enjoyed by other Z O properties in the vicinity with the same zoning. W W n E. Technical Committee a -1 1. Review by City Departments i UI a) Fact: The variance application has been reviewed and evaluated by the Fire f" I= Department, Public Works Division, Engineering Division, and the Parks and ZRecreation Division. The only comments received were from the Engineering LU con) ; U = Division, and those comments are included as Attachment 5. i— b) Conclusion: The requirements of the Engineering Division should be met. Z F. Comprehensive Plan (ECDC) 1. Comprehensive Plan Designation a) Fact: The Comprehensive Plan was approved in June 1995, months before this area was annexed, so it does not include the subject parcel. The neighborhood consists of primarily single-family residences, so if it had been annexed sooner, it likely would have been given a single-family designation. b) Conclusion: The proposed project is consistent with the existing single-family use of the area. III. RECONSIDERA.TION'S AND APPEALS The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing reconsideration's and appeals. Any person wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should contact the Planning Department for further procedural information. +� A. Request for Reconsideration Section 20.100.010.G allows for the Hearing Examiner to reconsider his decision or recommendation if a written request is filed within ten (10) working days of the date of the initial decision by any person who attends the public hearing and signs the attendance register and/or presents testimony or by any person holding an ownership interest in a tract V 97-69.DQC/June 12,1997/Staff Report of land which is the subject of such decision or recommendation. The reconsideration request most cite specific references to the findings and/or the criteria contained in the ordinances governing the type of application being reviewed. B. Appeals Section 20.105.020.A & B describe how appeals of a Hearing Examiner decision or recommendation shall be made. The appeal shalt be made in writing, and shall include the decision being appealed along with the name of the project and the date of the decision, the name of the individual or group appealing the decision, their interest In the matter, and reasons why the appellant believes the decision to be wrong. The appeal must be filed with j the Community Development Director within ten (10) working days after the date of the decision being appealed. t IV. LAPSE OF APPROVAL Section 20.85.020.0 states "The approved variance must be acted on by the owner within one year from the date of approval or the variance shall expire and be null and void, unless the owner files an application for an extension of the time before the expiration and the city approves the application:" V. NOTICE TO THE COUNTY ASSESSOR The property owner may as a result of the decision rendered by the Hearing Examiner request a change in the valuation of the property by the Snohomish County Assessors Office. VI. APPENDICES Attachments 1 through 6 are attached. j 1. Vicinity / Zoning Map 2. Application 3. Declarations of the Applicant 4. Site Plan & Elevations 5. Memorandum from Gordy Hyde, dated May 20,1997 6. Map of Highland Park Estates from File #ZE-97-11 VII. PARTIES OF RECORD Mark E. Reiff Engineering Division 10102 - 243rd Pl. SW Edmonds, WA 98020 f NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN NOTICE IT iS DUE TO 3 hik QUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT. Elm P\, N �co -il I z _ 101ST AVE W + 101ST AVE W L M3�d ysvo4E city of ec.(.�onds RECE1r E. land use application MAY - 7 1997 ❑ ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD ❑ COMP PLAN AMENDMENT r�, ❑ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FILE # V C1 ZONE UJ; ❑ HOME OCCUPATION ❑ FORMAL SUBDIVISION DATE REC'D BY IUK L ❑ SHORT SUBDIVISION r�, FEE 1 7�". """' RECEIPT#'�� np, ❑ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT n w ❑ PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT HEARING DATE ❑ OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT / & STREET VACATION HE ❑ STAFF ❑ PB ElADB ❑ CC E �i ❑ REZONE 1 :3 ❑ SHORELINE PERMIT Of ACTION TAKEN: ,,,_ ¢ {i VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE Lo EXCEPTION ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ APPEALED = w° ❑ HER z w . APPEAL# �_o z w to Applicant Phone fc)o- I5? 9 o Ln Address JCi JQ !' P) a ,-3 CI w o t1J i t,JO. ,: Property Address or Location '�Ct in1Q o� _ L1 U_ _z Property Owner :S l rvti E> Phone ui (n Address S(I U — o F-1 Agent Phone --- z t Address Tax Acc # `7`'), yt1 -LflGG •-�Q Z — L� OE3`� Sec. Twp. Rng. Legal Description LO Y�) 'ez �- the 'WQ-.5.+ 10 r-ge f 7h e,- QQ4. `�ictt tab^ 1. i+k •i-kq U.;es+ hcdE UJ = +z,!q?N'�C_ryp, j�. �aA� C, i Details of Project or Proposed Use I? P u t 5 idby o k Va r i o vw- e. The undersigned applicant, and his/ her/ its heirs, and assigns, in consideration of the processing of ® application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and damages, including reasonable attorney's fees,, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or in part ul false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/ her/ its agents employees. Attachment 2 The undersigned applicant grants his/ her/ its permission for public officials and the staff c File #V-97-69 enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attendant to this appliuduun. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/ OWNER/ AGENT r #1. Special Circumstance Criteria The special circumstances for address 10102 243rd PL SW, Edmonds WA are: even though the lot size will be 16,800 sq. ft. after the lot line adjustment, there are basically 2 elevations to the lot. There is an upper elevation, where the house, grass and flowerbed area are. And a lower elevation, where the proposed garage will be. The upper elevation sits 4' higher than the lower. The lower elevation is the only feasible area to build a garage on my lot. Also, when I purchased the property 6 years ago Snohomish County had a rear set back of 5 feet because the small road behind me was L a classified a Private Driveway, of which I could not use to access my backyard. With the annexation of my property last year and the �j p: small development to the southwest (5 lots of which only 2 homes w w! have been built to date), there has been an enlargement and a; elevation change (raised 3-4 feet) of 244th PL SW, and due to this my or rear set back has changed from 5 ' to 25 ' and I still do not have access s W of my back yard from 244th PL SW. z My main purpose for purchasing this home was to have space available to build a garage to meet the specifications I need and O desire. z IRECE€tt'E0 M MAY - 7 jQQ7 Attachment 3 File #V-97-69 #2. Not a Grant of Special Privilege The reasons I believe this is not a grant of special privilege are: Picture A: Two houses to the east of my property is a house that has been built 5 ' from the property line. The address to this house is: 24324100th Ave W, Edmonds WA. Picture B: @We house to Ine eaINT y prape y iWaous e that has an outbuilding directly on the property line. The address to this house is: 24310101st Ave W, Edmonds WA. Picture C: Two houses to the west of my property is a house that has an outbuilding directly on the property line. The address to this house is 10114101st Ave W, Edmonds WA. t ya 5 '. s n-., r'}7 � cJ.s :sa w.x � c �f� `'rt';'�'L.-�ry�Fk� �c.. '.'h '�r,4�F :v' y�'a�• !r •t �Mj TF.4+�';t� +3u�,�'����F +�x�F4j s tt°•}f'S rw �3y5 �t�. s .: �. , .� $t ,y` x �e � t ty^2., 3FT�w a .: � ! Yr54i� • ? ��I� i'1% .. �?r}�} �'�,,� i�, �.,sF's•Y�}i �,r�..?„i �}' ltr'",�t: ss.t�� y _ � k rr '`�'".t ts`� 4 � -� " x .T a i s.; a} k' �;, N{1 .t rot '�;it�k+�v i�"i,*Y�. � j ;+�?4 F ���7R. � t�s'��?33. ���tiyHs'.a,,l,r•� rr'�-t Ss - � � ^�� �v`}'°. �5"'a ,�:+ �} t. �'!{ r'�(u��Ft� 1 !,, N"fr,�s� '•F.,`fm�..�n+a.'.,"'4�o vt �� ? ''u" ,'FRr :4 rt �'+t..—,�'�?k.4� r+^ +L�Z y #3. 'Comprehensive PIan A copy of the Comprehensive Plan was not available to me. My a property was annexed into Edmonds less than 1 year ago. Your Iasi Comprehensive Plan was done on June 20,1995. It is a single family residence and will remain so. L x} — uj U. 01 z01 LU 5 d F- s' u. p 0. KAY h O L f PERMIT�DUN7�� . � 7A► .. ., .. s .e , .. r ..,... .z 3. .. ,.L..rt•L+_. , ' �..... _, i;: v :�'.J,r t .d� :�a: rV'4fi' ,tSJ'i.?' .fit '' ,.. _rc:,E �in£ia`i7-,1�r�r�. iffnl�i�»ii;�F I 01 a UJ: MI � OR VI E The Zoning Ordinance for my property is RS-8. The standards are: A. Minimum Lot Sq. Ft. = 8,000 sq ft My property is 15,200 sq ft, it will be 16,800 after the lot line adjustment. B . Minimum Lot Width = 70 ft My property is 102 ft, and will be 112 ft after the lot line adjustment. C. Minimum Street Set Back = 25 ft My Property in front is So ft. In the rear is the reason for the variance. D. Minimum Side Set Back = 7.5 ft My property is 7,5 ft. E. Minimum Rear Set Back = 15 ft My property has 2 street set backs F. Maximum Height for House = 25 ft My property is 15 ft. G. Maximum Coverage = 35 % My property is 16,800 sq ft total. The house is 1400 sq ft = 8.3% The proposed garage is 1344 sq ft = 8% For a total coverage % of 16.3% H. Maximum Height for Outbuilding =15 ft Proposed Outbuilding will be 143 ft. The proposed garage meets all the criteria for RS-8 zoning, except for the rear set back (the reason for the variance). garage will be a wood structure with 8 beveled siding, Also, the proposed entry doors, a ding, raised panel 4-12 pitch roof with composition, and a roof With 16" overhangs. it will be a very nice structure. This will NOT be a pole buildingthat looks like a square box. It will be painted to match the house andbef?C'nZI VF,- very aesthetic looking. MAY - 7 P'R"T CO3UAi7FpI #5. Non Detrimental The proposal for which I seek a variance will be non detrimental to others because of the topography of my lot and others surrounding it. The area where the proposed garage will be located is the lower elevation of any lot. The surrounding neighbors are all elevated above my lot. To the south of my property there are no houses. It is r�oa all greenbelt. Therefore, there will be no views obstructed. Property w� values will not decrease for the surrounding neighbors because the proposed structure will blend well with the surrounding of neighborhood. There is one situation I would like you to bear in mind. A year and v, half ago when the developer repaved and widened 244th PL SW, (the z �- street in the back of the property where I need the variance), he o; raised the road 4 ft on the east end of my property and I lost all z �{ Z� privacy in my backyard. Anyone walking or driving down 244th PL SW can now look right into my back yard. At that time a;: no-one was concerned about my privacy or what my feelings were W about the loss of it. So, by approving this variance, I will re -gain the privacy lost with the new development in the rear. Z! 244th PL SW, Edmonds, is a private road with no outlet (dead end). z It services 13 homes, 3 of which there are just lots (no homes built yet). It is a very low usage road with a speed limit of 25 mph. On my side of the road there is a 6" curb which is supposed to be a 35 mph barrier. There is also a 10 foot area between the road and my property line which has shrubs and small trees planted. I am going to purchase more plants and shrubs to be planted in that area (on my ,,:.. side of the fence) for privacy and to help restrict the view of the proposed garage frown. 244th PL SW. If this variance is allowed it will not be injurious or harmful to any person on my property or the ® surrounding properties. [I 0 0 IV y 7 1997 t:t c .t 1 \i FP}xi{{e; cUx ai a y rq. j+} V. r{, tvi54<�sha f¢t?*d �nb4 f�i y' i :t '`.J -� 1`iNS � �.S J y ,� � J t t S ♦< u '� C h s: �1i ♦ y._ � dp d { 4 s � t i 4 _,.,.,.arxn�.riuzxa::vaye....�...>;�....:': .`- ,r v. � T:� s�,,,iS..,�,�;•= '.-...._..._._.. _.... __.... ' �: rd F'f . � .yp• ,,•ion/ h O Cn rzw ul ICY Zap 40 t2— w tu; U. O` Z ui tro5s U a� Z; Cie" po ¢� Perinf,rd Clawgi 8t` • 4Z` rep s �. _� O� s �. p� off. �� • Q c7 C> o Q C3 4 O O o O v cb OQ Q Q O ca M n ,tj I 'I Ii Li of 1V11o+e Rood Stdawclk Attachment 4 File #V 97-69 E I LU 0 LL Iii U 9 z AMMORANDUM Date: May 20,1997 To: Planning Division From: Gordy Hyde, Engineering Coordinatore?'*- Subject: Variance for Reiff (10102 (V-97-69) The application has been reviewed by the Engineering Division. The Engineering Division has no requirements to impose at this time. The applicant should be aware that if over 2000 square feet of impervious surface is created, storm water detention will be required. A condition- of the building permit will be to pave the driveway and construct a vehicle turnaround on the site. The applicant will need to comply with all the terms of any future permits. The application is considered complete at this time. CM OF EDMONN ENGDMMGDIMON Attachment 5 V97069.DOC File #V-97-69 7-:n;i 7 2: J 0 i-71 "T NOTICE: IF THE DOCUMENT IN THIS FRAME IS LESS CLEAR THAN T14lq tinTICE IT IS DUE TO THEDUALITY OF THE DOCUMENT.F_ NW 1/4 SECTION 1, � rs F 1 ti �cl'A' W b 7Y for pw Im fad pwPose nadQ Mark Reltt II Theodore Esslrnan/ D.,Handorsan t+� i at�r •arr M t F.% ... dxdL! \ \tea Gil fi ; �,�ay""' ,a•''' / ,!Y ^ � :_may' �•��; ti .. \� �`� \ . a`�t�.� '`_."..�.c. . � a' . .n . y AVA Ile --'Lynn Odeldric Lawrence Stake � IPaaick O'Com ' I m o '. WSM Notice of Development Application & ADB Public Hearing Date of Notice: June 5, 1997 File # V-97-69 Applicant Information Nameof Applicant :................. Mark Reiff Date of Application:__ ............. May 8, 1997 Date Application Complete,........ May 27,1997 Project Location: 10102 243ni PI. SW, Edmonds Project Description: ................. Variance to reduce the required street setback adjacent to 244th Pl. SW from 25- feet to 7.5-feet to allow the construction of an approx. 1,344 square foot detached garage for an existing single-family residence. The property is zoned RS-8. Public Comments due by:....... June 19, 1997 City Contact for project: Meg Gruen Permit Information Requested Permits Variance and Approvals: ............. �. '.. Other Required Unknown Permits not yet appliedt..✓r for (if known): ............... Required Studies Unknown related to the project:... _ Related Environmental Critical Areas Checklist Documents: ............. . .. Public Hearing Information Date: June 19, 1997 Time: 9:00 A.M. Place: Plaza Meeting Room .650 Main St., Edmonds Information on this development application can be viewed or obtained at the City of Edmonds Community Services Department, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020. (425) 771-0220. Public comments should also be sent to this address. e ' The decision an this development application willbe..mado"Uhm 120 days afthe data ofuha Letter ofCampletenes, with aAowances madef studies and additional information requests. Note that ability to appeal a decision is contingent upon poracipation in the permit decision process. The removal, mutilation, destruction, or concealment of this This notice may be removed Warningl notice before the hearing dam is a misdemeanor punishable by after. June 19 1997 fine and imprisonment o .: o 32x10 2501' 5549-000-001-0006 Ernest Debella 10020 243rd Pl.SW Edmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-002t0005 Mark Reiff 10102 243rd P1. SW Edmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-003-0004 Bill and Sharon Grader 10108 243rd Pl. SW Edmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-008,0002 Wise Stephenson 10114 243rd Pl.: SW Edmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-018-0007 David B. Hutchison 24222 100th Pl. W. Edmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-006-0001 Jack Jones 24316 101st Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-007-0000 Ray and Pam Arnold 24310 101st Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-008-00 9 Paul 24302 1 W. Edmo A 8020 5549-000-019-0006 Donald Melon 24232 100th Pl. W. Edmonds VIA 98020 5549-000-020-0003 Ro Brown 1 S.W. nds, 98020 5549-000-021-0002 Gerald and Mary Burton 10026 242nd Pl. S.W. Edmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-022-0001 Richard and Sheena Good 10102 242nd P1. S.W. Edmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-023- 000 Kay a th ield 10i S.W. Edmo , 98020 5549-000-024-0009 Steven and Joan Fisher 24301 101st Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-025-0008 Raymond Mitchell 10109 243rd P1. S.W. Edmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-026-0007 Ruth Van Dyke 10103 243rd Pl. S.W. Fdmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-027-0006 Jeff Chubb 10029 243rd Pl. S.W. Edmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-028-0005 Fbster r8na Cleohatr`e Powell 10019 243rd Pl. S.W. Edmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-029-0004 v'd ika Krause 2 W. 198020 3-036 362703-3-036-0105 Strylear Helgeland 24318 100th'Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 98020 3-037 362703-3-037-0005 David Henderson 24324 100th Ave. W. Edmonds, WA 98020 ADJACENT PROP RTY QE:�t� etc �e� �' �; �1 g( Attach this notarized declaration to the adjacent property owners list. Lill On my oath, I certify that the names and addresses provided represent all properties located within 300 feet of the subject P p property. 'o Uh o1 LU� .. ' ` r Signature of Applicant or Applican s Representative , WSubscribed and sworn to before me this day of ~ Q Y�� t� ,19 ZI Notary Public in and for the to �'Of ashington Residing at 7' { r 1, Y t TR uy g APOAWLATempWorms �A A Y,firP MW nb ,x'k?Ci`�cii. e. i. ., MF FILE NO.: V-97-69 APPLICANT: Reiff w NOTICE OF HEARING AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING STATE OF WASHINGTON) - COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) 1, Stephen Bullock, first duly sworn, on oath, depose and say: r That on the 5th day of June, 1997, the attached Notice of Public Hearing was posted as prescribed by Ordinance, and in any event, in the Civic Center and the Library, and where applicable on or near the subject property. S' ne Subscribed and sworn to before me this day o _, 19?: Notary Public in and for the S e of Washington: 1 Residing at 3 r DocumetiS 4 s TIP dt !11 t Y 1 1 t i f P eY3 .*yR ( 4�€• !• r`1 1+: 124 . Y} � tRR t d 3 F1at�-ft;7 T r£t IFti fa^"lc�3 L�}9r7 IF r%S�nr�. �� f = y !fir t yr - ,.._....,.....,:i:.R`.'L2xJAILP.-iWaW%fr[nMWri+..:.;:. .. .. 4 Z.. w_,..... e. ... t� �. Y .urn�y� i7. .1'i •:..� Zr� ... ._,. .mow. .t�. FILE NO.: V-97-69 APPLICANT: REIFF U 0! NOTICE OF HEARING Cn Q AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON } COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH W W I, DIANE M. CUNNINGHAM, sworn on oath, depose and say: OUJ — o U-s, That on the 5th day of June, 1997, the attached Notice of Hearing was mailed as U. 0 required to adjacent property owners, the names of which were provided by the L, applicant. V n O Z Signed Subscribed and sworn to before me this _day of , 19 t f.; Notary Public in and for th to of Washington: ' Residing ate4l-e'� 1�� - i T Uocu M2 ; zrc ,6. LJ The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says that she is Principal Clerk of THE HERALD, a daily newspaper printed and published in the City of • Everett, County of Snohomish, and State of Washington; that said newspaper is a newspaper of general circulation in said County and State; that said newspaper has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of Snohomish County and that the notice ........................................ Hearing Examiner Public Hearing & Development ...................................................................................................... Application, Butterfield Design Group ......................................................................................... . File No.: CU-97-31 ...................................................................................................................................... a printed copy of which is hereunto attached, was published in said newspaper proper and not in supplement form, in the regular and entire edition of said paper on the following days and times, namely: June 5, 1997 ...................................................................................................................................... ....... �........................................................................................ d t t said news a r was larl uted to its subscribers all of said period. ;::........�. ........................... Principal Clerk Subscribed and sworn to before me this ............. 9th June da...........:........................:..........on....f....W....1a..9s...h...ig..n g. ton,and forth S a. residing at Everett, Sn............... .... .................. Notary Public h ®E J 0 QON t .t i°Uasoc- 2 ,A� 5-19.98 Gad OF WAS% 9-2-1 11 ** COUNT # 2 *** SEND *** NO REMOTE STATION I.D. START TIME DURATION I #PAGES COMMENT 1 12063393043 6- 2-97 1:59PM t'14" 2 TOTAL 0:01*14" 2 XEROX TELECOPIER 7020 .QSt. 189v CITY'I�^`J OF EDMONDS BARBARA FAHEY 250 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 86020 • (206) 771.0220 • FAX (206) 771.0221 MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation • Engineering .. Sender's Telecopier Number; (206) 771-0221 din D.WkWorddataiFaxForm. •• Incorporated August 11, 1890 i Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan 'I' z yl' Aft THIS IS A LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT AND SHOULD BE BILLED TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING AND NOTICE OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION Z Name of Applicant Butterfield Design Group cc 21 File No.: GU-97-31 UJ Project Location: 250 4th Ave. S., Edmonds Project Description: Conditional use Permit to allow the construction of an approx. 8, 775 square foot, 2- story office building with underground parking. The subject property is zoned RM- cn 0 u. City Contact: John Bissell - Public Comment Period Due By: 6/19197 Z Name of Applicant: Mark Reiff File No.: V-97-69 Project Location: 10102 243rd Pl. SW, Edmonds us uJi Project Description: Variance to reduce the required street setback adjacent to 244th PI. SW from 25- feet to 7.5-feet to allow the construction of an approx. 1,34 square foot detached garage for an existing single-family residence. The subject property is zoned RS-8. 0— City Contact: Meg Gruwell Public Comment Period Due By: 6/19/97 U- zjPUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION 0 TIME: 9:00 AM Z DATE: June 19,1997 LOCATION: Plaza Meeting. Room - 650 Main St., Edmonds Sandy Chase, City Clerk Publish: June 5, 1997 lnc.189v O CITY OF EDMONDS BARBARA FAHEY MAYOR 250 5TH AVENUE NORTH • EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (206) 771.0220 • FAX (206) 771.0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works • Planning • Parks and Recreation + Engineering June 3,1997 Mr. Mark E. Reiff 10102-.243rd Pl. SW Edmonds, WA 98020 Subject: NEW HEARING DATE Dear Mr. Reiff: Please note that your variance request has been rescheduled for public hearing at the time and place listed below. Because this date is earlier than the July 3rd date given to you earlier, we called on June 2,1997, and confirmed with your wife that this date was acceptable. T Action: Variance File No. Assigned: V-97-69 Date of Hearing: June 19,1997 Time:' 9:00 A.M. or as soon thereafter as'possible. Place: Plaza Room Edmonds Library 650 Main Street Hearing Body: Hearing Examiner Please be aware that your presence at the hearing is highly advisable. If an applicant or his representative is not present, the item may be moved to the end of the agenda. Items not reached by the end of the hearing will be continued to the following month's agenda. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 771-0220. rz Sincerely, Community Services Department - Planning Division Meg lbruwell Planner cc: File No. V 97-69 a COMPLMDOC o Incorporated August 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan rZ �z w d � w {•y �O c� 0 �w w= -J o w Na Z �- r0 ►- w? �0 0 UN w LU = s., F— F— w 0 Z wm ca = o ~� Z 0 O EDMONDS HEARIN EXAMINER MEETING AGENDA JUNE 19,1997 AT 9:00 A.1VIa Plaza Room -Edmonds Library 650.Main Street I. Call to Order L Public Hearings JB ; . a FILE NO. CU 7-31 . location b Butterficld � ., App � y Design Group:for a Conditional ,Use:Permit to , allow the construction of an approximate 8,773 square foot, 2-story office building with underground parking, in an Multiple Residential Zone. The, subject property is located at 256 46 Avenue South and is zoned RM-1.5; 3 MG b. FILE NO. V-97-69; Application by Marls Reiff for a Variance to reduce the required street seek { adjacent to 244th Place Southwest from 25--feet to 7.5 feet to allow the construction of an approximately 1344 square foot detached garage for an existing single-family residence. The subject property is located at 10102 243rd place Southwest and is zoned RS-8. JW c. FILE NO. SM47-48, Application by Michael George, Architect, on behalf of Robert Cole and Jeri Merritt for a Shoreline Substantial Development permit to undertake site grading (approximately 700 cubic yards of cut and 1,000 cubic yards of fill) for the construction of a new single-family residence. ; The subject property is located at 16006 75th Place West and is zoned RS-12. JW d. FILE NO. SM-97-66 Application by BERGERIABAM Engineers, Inc. on behalf of Washington State Ferries for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit to allow the, installation of new steel pile dolphins to replace the existing north outer. floating dolphin, north inner, timber claimer, pile dolphins and the installation of now intermediate steel pile dolphins to accommodate an upgrade to the terminal facility for a broader range of existing vessels. The subject property is located at 71 West Main Street. 3. Administrative Reports -No Reports. 4. Adjournment PARKING AND MEETING ROOMS ARE ACCESSIBLE FOR PERSONS WITH DISABIL nEs (Contact the City Clerk at 771-0245 with 24 hours advance notice foripectal accojitin otlort) 061sn. OCA0ENDAMHE 0 � ® `10 LU M V F=- O F, r £ .._....,n»A:e.„.:an.,.x._.�s._a.s,aua�K.,�i....,,:.;,w.w.na..$�5r•=vsx;,:;�:�-.wa d8�b923A8T83 :.. is`•:q :a`, .r. , �♦ Xr r 4 tifir� vv915�2`� t` h v? ui ` � 7 ai ' fltftb t ++s Za t iCfF<t o" M P.njni{ aCdtj4 CN<nJww �' 2- �a%t btu � ! n 159 i ' „�. Asa y-"o (W �srl 3 a 3L t y{t r f+ d t r-4 Phone: Fox phone: f% eel C C Phone: (206)9a "II m Ij Fax phona: (206)339.3872 REMARI£S: p Urgent p Foryourreview ® Reply ASAP p plaaaaaammmt r .1 Lat Dimensions 34hwck RNUiromords troll: (tt) 13 �N d R Cq dIT: C pa, 'jam 1S rtG $ ri F W 20ae 300 300 100 100" IDWV too" 25" 35% FAR 25' 200,000se 100 100 so 20 s 5 25 35% A•10 45 loac none none so 20 6 5 25 none R•5 48 200,0003F 1S5 iss 60 26 5 5 25 35% RC 35 100,000sf leg 165 1 So 20 5 5 25 W% RP 38 100,000s1" 1 or,"' 16611 s0 20 5 5 25 33% RD 45 100,000af 165 165 so 20 5 5 26 3$% SA-1 35 43,540*f i80 150 .50 20 5 5 25 9574 RU 35 sea 14 42,150 60 65 50 20 5 5 25 sa%r R. z0,aoa 25 20.0003t 85 60 5o 20 5 5 25 9% R• 12,5o0 26 12,3'aog 75 80 50 20 6 6 25 35% R4,600 25 01600ef 70 76 so 20 5 5 25 30% R-6,400 25 8,400ef 65 70 8o 30 5 5 25 35% R'7,200 25 7,20osf 60 65 50 20 5 5 25 34% Wn 25 7,200ef so 85 6o 20 5 5 25 35% T 600 18,53 see 1942 see 18.53 too 10.53 se 2II" 51" is" 75" sea lam UNR 35 7,200 af 60 70 554 25" see 18.42.020 (8)(16) 25td 8014 MR 35 7,20050 00 70 66's fib" soaISA2.020 IB)i1Sl 25` 40% FS 35 none none `'mono 65 2S 5i15" 25 , none mono Ns' 2B none Acne Acne 55 25 none 10 none 35% PCs' 40 none'° nova nono 70 do" none 25 none none 8' u none nano none 55 25 two 10 none Sox GC' 45 none non* nfmo 65' 25 nano 10 Rome 50% IP 65 no nano none 3o'A 80" nano'? 26" none 59% a¢ s0 m.- none none 30 • 30 none 25 AOne W% Lf 50 nano none none 88 2S mne 50 none none HI 65 none none non# 51 26 moo 50 none none 'Greater setback* than thou Goad may eppiy to aroas which are SUbiect to Critical Area Regulations (Chapter 32.10 SCC) Shoreline Management Master Program ju6sdic ion. Soma uses have special sethaf . see SCC 16.4Z100lot $Poe=. (Rer+sed 7!*S) 18.34.2 04/15/97 Ss:59 SNOHOMISH COLNYY Ccmm. DEUEL. 2067710221 Snohomish County Code If rt �`�'Ml<,'e "i�. ocwaca rt gtttne� in- the a (2) On any lot where the natural gradient or Slope, as measured from the front lot line along uu centerline or the lot for a distance of 60 feet, is in excess of 35 percent, then the required front setback may be reduced one foot for each one Percent of gradient or slope in excess of 35 Percent; (3) The depth of a required setback from a street en any lot abutting a hammerhead on a dead end street shall be measured from the extended right -of --way line of the sueet before entering the hammerhead. The depth of this lequlted setback from the extended right-of-way line shall be computed the same way as any other setback on man 1 street. and in no case shall it be less (4) 7bo. minimum setback requirement for buildings existing at the time of creation of a Private road. having legal right of access to the Private roast, which private road is less than 50 feet in width and is incapable of either providing access for more than four lots or being converted to a meat in light of all Potential developments surrounding the particular 104 Shall -be 11ve feet from the. edge of the private mad right-ofway, PROVIDED: (a) a mlWMUM two off-street park- ing stalls shall be Provided within the unencum- bered portion of we property in Conformance with Chapter 18.43 SCC: and (b) when the existing structure is less than 20 feet from the private road, the existing structure may not be moved or cx- panded to encroach closer to the private mad than existed at the time ofcreation of the private road: _ t3 i& ack u m ve, j ?� Pi v rii when tthe ggnnu.30.ftei'%i width and is iricapa`ilc o either ptoviditig access for more than four lots or being converted to a street in light of all potential developments surrounding the patticu- lar Iot shall be five feet from the edge of the ,Private road right-of-way; and 18.36.1 NO.259 003 bubsral Nuabom Cempraheasot Lug tlso Lot srsa Plan Dc Vudons (square feet) All Piamtwo Aaricuhurp or 435.600 or AM" Walas b r/" of a sa when eabd, Forestry Utz 20 xms or 1=of* . When saK A144ru'ood UA%n or High UAw. 7200 Saharbea 9600 Resrdeaeiat Estee 20,00D Runs Causly ou 100.i1oa Ctrs0ltt t+atfs RurA Reserve 100.000 Soathp" Maht ramitY 7= Soobomith Hish orMcdiom Leadvy 7= camw Law t4aaly Northwest Hi=h Deoaty 12J00 73W I.otr rreasl H 9600 SaMtrbtm Attfealtan � S P 100A Urban 7= sobarwa 9.500 Raidvpd SKft 20.000 Rarer 100.000 36=414YAtdaaane 5amar1/122 Of a rtcwben C+chga.MtCby. Suba aem aO"n9'" RaddeaU Eshtta 41.560 Rant S$komisL Urkra too= 7200 vafky 3oh0m 94W Rasideadd Eswe 20M Rant 100,000 (Added Ord. 86-037, 12. May 7, 1986; Amended Ord. 86-079, § 1, October 11. 1986: Amended Ord. 86.093, § 1. September 10. 1986; Amended Or(L 87-010, § 1, Mareh 4, 1987). 18.42.160 ItUrAl resent subdivision. . (1) A rural reserve Subdivision may be created an parcels zoned rural reserve M), if such .Parcels meet the following minimum criteria: acres: (a) Must be a minimum of five contiguous (b) Must comply with Snohomish health district community water supply regulations: He a .� Sawr yahw. Fnn, S (D BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT MAP MARK E. REIFF AND ERNEST & MARY DEBELLA -------CTMF EDMONDS JAN15, 1997 PORTIONS OF LOTS 2,3 & 4 RICHMOND PARK HOMES, VOLI3PG. z SNOHOMISH CO. WAIN THE SE},SW} SEC. 36 T27N,R3E, WM - . c:; 27 v tj F Z-0 �g 25 12'W - 445.03Mawl z Uy 41v— z 21t" i "A" i? U I PARCEL 'H" 2 :21PARCSL Q0.FT' try 115,375 SQ.FT, 516487-05 0S 0 00-001-0006 O N 89" 25' 12" E MiNiMUM SEEKS: STREET — z$• ZONING: RS-8 '-ACG 7.5' PARCEL A Existing SQ. FT. 15,375 p� , _ NEW EQ. FT. 16875 PARCRL TO BE CONVEYED 1,500 SQ. FT. ® PARCEL 8 Existing SQ. FT. 16,875 NEW SQ. FT. 15375 CnE,MO • a�,N, PREPARED BY: ALBSRT W. CHENOWETH �I- CHENOWETH AND ASSOCIATES INC. PS 18130 MIDVALE, AVE N. > Is SHORELINE WA. 98133 l 206-542-2188 ERPIRSE"W:"o '.. 25x1 APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE AND CHECKLIST FRO PLANNINt � ROUTED TO: RETURNED Af4� f Engineering 5/13/97 Engineering P 8 /Q0_, Fire 5/13/97 Fire Public Works 5/13/97 Public Works_ Parr BtvR c 51rf 3/ P7 � _ �q Parks ex Rec. Staff Comments: *PER WHAT SECTION OF THE CODE? *COMMENTS WITHOUT CITATIONS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED *Additional Information Required for Complete Application *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review • Owner MARK E. REIFF • Property Address 10102 243RD PL. SW • Date of Application 5/8/97 • Type REDUCE REAR SETBACKS t • Hearing Required: Yes X No Date of Hearing (if known) I X Application X Fee X APO List Title Report Vicinity Map X Elevations Petition (Official Street Map) X Critical Areas Determination 0 '' Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) X Site Plan (11 x 17) Legals (Existing & Proposed) Environmental Assessment Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) X Dedarations(Variance) X Environmental Checklist $,4 C. 2 $c}v Aft CITY OF EDMONDS BARBARA FAH 250 STH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 9802o - (208) 771.0220 FAX (208) 771-0221 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Public Works - Planning 0 Parks and Rea ation - Engineering LU vj May 27,1997 N uji v7 w; F Mr. Mark E. Reiff N U. 10102 - 243rd Pl. SW u, Edmonds, WA 98020 cn Subject: ASSIGNMENT OF HEARING DATE a zLd Dear Mr. Reiff: I—; Your application is now complete and has been scheduled for public hearing at the time and place listed below. ai Action: Variance C3 File No. Assigned: V-97-69 Date of Hearing: July 3.1997 " a� Time: 9:00 A.M. ( , or as soon thereafter as possible. v Place: Plaza Room Edmonds Library Z 650 Main Street Hearing Body: Hearing Examiner Please be aware that your presence at the hearing is highly advisable. If an applicant or his representative is not present, the item may be moved t the end of the agenda. Items not reached by the end of the hearing will be continued to the following mouth's agenda. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 771-0220. Sincerely, Community Services Department - Planning Division 0. Meg Gruwell Planner cc: File No. V 97-69 e Incorporated Augus 11, 1890 • Sister Cities International Hekinan, Japan =z LU J � O :n o LU LLU Q J rr Q LL_ Lna z E— F— O z }— LULU �0 0 a- 1 LU u,; x Ll �- E_ w_0 z u i to C) _ ar z 0 APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE: V-97-69 AND CHECKLIST FROM: PLANNING ROUTED T0: Public Works 5/ 13/97 Parks & Rec. 5/13/97 Staff Comments: MAY 1 9 1997 RETURNED ENGINEERING Engineering Fire Public Works Parks ez Rec. . " t *PER WHAT SECTION OF THE CODE? *COMMENTS WITHOUT CITATIONS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED *Additional Information Required for Complete Application *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review • Owner MARK E. REIFF • Property Address 10102 243RD PL. SW 4 • Date of Application 5/8/97 1 • Type REDUCE REAR SETBACKS Hearing Required: Yes X No Date of Hearing (if known) X Application X Fee X APO List Title Report Vicinity Map X Elevations Petition (Official Street Map) X Critical Areas Determination Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) --X_Site Plan (11 x 17) Legals (Existing & Proposed) Environmental Assessment Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) X Declarations (Variance) X Environmental Checklist, . 31 W 0 1 ', J I Mil Date: To: From: Subject: The application has been reviewed by the Engineering Division. The Engineering Division has no requirements to impose at this time. The applicant should be aware that if over 2000 square feet of impervious surface is created, storm water detention will be required. A condition of the building permit will be t to pave the driveway and construct a vehicle turnaround on the site. The applicant will need to comply with all the terms of any future permits. The application is considered complete at this time. V97069MM CM OF IMMONAS ENGIIVEEMG DIMON APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE: V-97-69 AND CHECKLIST FROM: PLANNING RECEIVED ,A�f5- /1797 MAY 13 $97 ROUTED TO: . RETURNED PUBLIC; WORKS 4 Engineering 5/13/97 Engineering Fire _51 I L127 Fire Public Works 'W torkNI-iRi Staff Comments: ,*PER WHAT SECTION OF THE CODE? *COMMENTS WITHOUT CITATIONS WILL NOT 13E CONSIDERED *Additional Information Required for Complete Application *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review * Owner MARK E. REIFF • Property Address 10102 243RD PL. SW • Date of Application 5/8/97 I Type REDUCE REAR SETBACKS i Hearing Required: Yes X No�— Date of Hearing (if known) X Application Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11) _X_Fee X Site Plan (I I x 17) X APO list Legals (Existing & Proposed) Tide Report Environmental Assessment Vicinity Map 2roof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) X —Elevations _1-_DeclaraUons (Variance) —Petition (Official Street Map) _I_Environmental Checklist X —Critical Areas Determination APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE: V-97-69 FROM: PLANNING ROUTED TO: RETURNED Engineering 5/13/97 Engineering xiFl ,'1M' Y f 93 141`1`97° tau: Flre S/ f � f7/q 7 Public Works 5/13/97 Public WC( Parks ex Rec. 5/13/97 Parks Rec. Staff Comments: ND —A4L 4 *PER WHAT SECTION OF THE CODE? *COMMENTS WITHOUT CITATIONS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED *Additional Information Required for Complete Application *Additional Studies Required to Complete Review • Owner MARK E. REIFF 3 • PropertyAddress 10102 243RD PL. SW f e Date of Application 5/8/97 • Type REDUCE REAR SETBACKS • Hearing Required: Yes X No Date of Hearing (if known) :E X Application Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 1.1) X Fee X Site Plan (11 x 17) X APO List Legals (E)isting & Proposed) Title Report Environmental Assessment Vicinity Map Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) X Elevations --A_Declarations (Variance) Petition (Official Street Map) —A_Environmental Checklist X Critical Areas Determination Illi �7 0 0 APPLICATION ROUTING FORM FILE V-97-00:­ AND CHECKLIST. FROM: PLANNING ROUTED TO: RETURNED Engineering 5/13/97 Engineering Fire 5/13/97 Fire Public Works 5/13/97 "Public Works Parks ex Rec. 5/13/97 Parks ex Rec. Staff Comments: *PER WHAT sEcnoN OF THE CODE? *COMMENTS WITHOUT CITATIONS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED *Additional Information Required for Complete Application *Addiflonal Studies Required to Complete Review • Owner MARK E. REIFF • Property Address 10102 243RD PL. SW • Date of Application 5/8/97 • Type REDUCE REAR SETBACKS • Hearing Required: Yes X No� Date of Hearing (if known) X _Application Site Plan for Short Subdivision (8.5 x 11), X Yee K_Site Plan (I I x 17) X APO List _Legals(Existing & Proposed) -Title Report _Enironmental Assessment Vicinity Map Proof of 2-Year Occupancy (ADU) X_Elevatlons X pectarations (Variance) Petition (Official Street Map) x EnvironmentalCheddist X Critical Areas Determination E city of e(f�nonds RSC E -4 land use application MAY - 7 1997 ❑ ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD ❑ COMP PLAN AMENDMENT �/ ❑ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 47 FILE # V ZONE ❑ HOME OCCUPATION ❑ FORMAL SUBDIVISION DATE REC'D BY ❑ SHORT SUBDIVISION FEE �°�'Z•, RECEIPT# ❑ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT ❑ PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT HEARING DATE ❑ OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT / STREET VACATION HE ❑ STAFF ❑ PB ❑ ADB ❑ CC ❑ REZONE ❑ SHORELINE PERMIT ACTION TAKEN: Of VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ APPEALED ❑ OTHER APPEAL# Applicant n f k.- F (ze iyg Phone , 'q (- / 5 `z j Address _ /010a AL15 P1 'SCE Ed YKe ricl i 48Qn Property Address or Location `6(avk2 Property Owner 1,56 vv\ Q Phone 5an-,Q. Address 5c w,(� Agent "' Phone -- Address Tax Acc # Sec. Twp. Rng. Legal Description L 0 4 1 , ExCPp4 Ar -Ike WQS+ 10 Fee4- 1'herQQ4'0 -C(g'gE.k'.. wlik kt\e west- hale L!3+ 10!avid �aefher w�-!t^ Details of Projector Proposed Use 12Pa r" Var iQyw2. I r Elm. s e d Qon, e The undersigned applicant, and his/ her/ its heirs, and assigns, in consideration of the processing of the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable attorney's fees,. arising from any action or infraction based in whole or in part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/ her/ its agents or employees. The undersigned applicant grants his/ her/ its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and posting attendant to this application. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/ OWNER/ AGENT_ '-M OS? "Dl1 �IF i:r C% T Tf ),ju P.I.1 -LIL4 lS.V, Whale Etj J"i 141 #1- Special Circumstance Criteria The special circumstances for address 10102 243rd PL SW, Edmonds WA are: even though the lot size will be 16,800 sq. ft. after the lot line adjustment, there are basically 2 elevations to the lot. There is an upper elevation, where the house, grass and flowerbed area are. And a lower elevation, where the proposed garage will be. The upper elevation sits 4'higher than the lower. The lower elevation is the only feasible area to build a garage on my lot. Also, when I purchased the property 6 years ago Snohomish County had a rear set back of 5 feet because the small road behind me was classified a Private Driveway, of which I could not use to access my backyard. With the annexation of my property last year and the small development to the southwest (5 lots of which only 2 homes have been built to date), there has been an enlargement and elevation change (raised 3-4 feet) of 244th PL SW, and due to this my rear set back has changed from 5 'to 25 and I still do not have access of my back yard from 244th PL SW My main purpose for purchasing this home was to have space available to build a garage to meet the specifications I need and desire. REMvEo MAY - 7 1997 PERMIT COULTER 0 #2. Not a Grant of Special Privilege The reasons I believe this is not a grant of special privilege are: Picture A: Two houses to the east of my property is a house that has been built 5' from the property line. The address to this house is: 24324 100th Ave W, Edmonds WA. Picture C: Two houses to the west of my property is a house that has an outbuilding directly on the property line. The address to this house is 10114 101st Ave W, Edmonds WA. - ------------ --------- RECEIVED MAY PERMIT COUNTER 0 •`, i t � � S" Y j i t � 5 t � I q i1,y k } , #3. Comprehensive Plan z A copy of the Comprehensive Plan was not available to me: My �' property was annexed into Edmonds less than 1 year ago. Your last oc �l Comprehensive Plan was done on June 20,1995. It is a single family ${ residence and will remain so. v wui �C cn Q �f z 6—� W W! t C� a' W aE ui cnr a z { t ® _ f a ': k F yr �$ at xs n ai,gv,. , F4ga PERMIT �P^ 4z � COUIVTER ' - t r. .:..tip•;. E ps The Zoning Ordinance for my property is RS-8. The standards are: A. Minimum Lot Sq. Ft. = 8,000 sq ft My property is 15,200 sq ft, it will be 16,800 after the lot line adjustment. B. Minimum Lot Width = 70 ft My property is 102 ft, and will be 112 ft after the lot line adjustment. C. Minimum Street Set Back = 25 ft My property in front is 50 ft. In the rear is the reason for the variance. D. Minimum Side Set Back = 7.5 ft MY Property is 7,5 ft. E. Minimum Rear Set Back =15 ft My property has 2 street set backs F. Maximum Height for House = 25 ft My property is 15 ft. G. Maximum Coverage = 35 % My property is 16,800 sq ft total. The house is 1400 sq ft = 8.3% The proposed garage is 1344 sq ft = 8% For a total coverage % of 16.3% H. Maximum Height for Outbuilding =15 ft Proposed Outbuilding will be 14.5 ft. The proposed garage meets all the criteria for RS-8 zoning, except for the rear set back (the reason for the variance). Also, the proposed garage will be a wood structure with 8 " beveled siding, raised panel entry doors, a 4-12 pitch roof with composition, and a roof with 16" overhangs. It will be a will NOT be a looks like a square bnice ox. It will e. b painted to matcpole h the house and bed C t�!EA very aesthetic looking. MAY - 7 1997 PERMIT COUNTER #5. Non Detrimental The proposal for which I seek a variance will be non detrimental to others because of the topography of my lot and others surrounding it. The area where the proposed garage will be located is the lower elevation of my lot. The surrounding neighbors are all elevated above my lot. To the south of my property there are no houses. It is all greenbelt. Therefore, there will be no views obstructed. Property values will not decrease for the surrounding neighbors because the proposed structure will blend well with the surrounding neighborhood. There is one situation I would like you to bear in mind. A year and h half ago when the developer repaved and widened 244th PL SW, (the ? street in the back of the property where I need the variance), he �! raised the road 4 ft on the east end of my property and I lost all w Ui: 2 =; privacy in my backyard. Anyone walking or driving down o 244th PL SW can now look right into my back yard. At that time n no-one was concerned about my privacy or what my feelings were = U LL about the loss of it. So, b approving this variance, I will re -gain the g privacy lost with the newdevelopment in the rear. 244th PL SW, Edmonds, is a private road with no outlet (dead end). z It services 13 homes, 3 of which there are just lots (no homes built yet). It is a very low usage road with a speed limit of 25 mph. On my side of the road there is a 6" curb which is supposed to be a 35 mph barrier. There is also a 10 foot area between the road and my property line which has shrubs and small trees planted. I am going to purchase more plants and shrubs to be planted in that area (on my side of the fence) for privacy and to help restrict the view of the proposed garage from 244th PL SW. If this variance is allowed it will not be injurious or harmful to any person on my property or the surrounding properties. RECEIVED MAY - j 19P PERMIT COUNTEp r P ZI z LU 0 LA- z A A #6. Minimum Variance Needed I believe this is the minimum variance needed to accommodate and complete this project You can see from the enclosed drawings that the only way to utilize the garage is to set it back further on the property line. It needs to be entered from around the carport. I have also purchased 10 ft of property on the east side to help accommodate this project. My wife and I are planning on adding on to the family and will be putting an addition on the house where the carport exists. Therefore, to tear down the carport is also not an option for easier access to the proposed garage. In the last 6 years I have put alot of time and effort into remodeling the house (hardwood floors, cedar ceilings, every wall has been taken out, new sheetrock, put up, texturized and painted in the entire house, a new roof, furnace, skylights the outside of the house has been paintednew windows were installedlandscaping of the property, the house has been completely remodeled). With all this invested in the house, it would be a shame to have to start over in another home. We currently own a boat, truck, camper, dirt bikes, car trailer, and 2 commuting cars, plus various tools and lawn equipment. An option of a smaller garage is also not possible. Even with this enlarged garage we will still not be able to have all our vehicles garaged. I feel that what I have proposed is the minimum variance needed for thL- project. We really enjoy living in the Edmonds are. It is a great community and a wonderful place to raise a family! PERMIT COUNTER y- M 21 CONDITIONAL WAIVER t If yes; how is site developed? 5. Describe the'general site topography,4 appE�+.• Flat: less than 54eet el6i on change over -entire site. �995 Trotting: slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise•df )0-feet aver�a �ra1N� j horiztitttalistattae itf !66-fret). :a ... • ...:i:+.:�.: •�!:.:��<; �. .• .� Vt' : ern tXsll.ii 04 +?i *i!ttrti•,►1zi *Hilly:...: slopes present all site of mote than 15% and less than 30%-(.a;vetticarrise rj of 10-feet over d horizontal distance of 93 to b6-feet). Steep: grades of greater than'30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-thet iiver horizontal distance of less than 33-feet). Other (please describe): 6. Site contains areas of year-round stabling water: f V 0 ; Approx. Depth: 7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: NQ ; Approx. Depth: What season(s) of the year? 8. Site is in the floodway OQ1 floodplain of a water course. 9. Site contains a creek or an area where water flows across the grounds surface? Flows are year- round? Il,G Flows are seasonal? (What tittle of year? ). 10. Site is primarily: forested ; meadow ; shrubs ; mixed ; urban landscaped (lawn,shrubs etc) 1—rrr5 11. Obvious wetland is present on site: _t,y4 . �+ For City Staff Use Only— I. Site is Zoned?J ti 2. SCS mapped soil type($)? 14 44.4 V r ore✓ (.,4.v� — i0d-;Pq.4L� 2— ff `0 3(Otr•e, 3. Wetland inventory or C.A. map indicates wetland present on site? :-,Critical Areas inventory or C.A. trap indicates Critical Area oti site? �JD 5:. 'Site within designated earth subsidence landslide h=rd area? 6. site designated on the Environmentally Sensitive Areas Map? A/U .DETERMINATION 'STUDY REQUIRED WAIVER / Reviewed by: V Plan t 1 s' �c._ �,�`°: '(`+ aY•}"`" a �. �`M t 7 tt"" '*�%_,�kjl�iCr r i s5 C}�, } :� , �- F,i . eat- f d �, x t f1 t t•'t. 7 It>v�l 13 kYk�y^1,. 4gf �� t(">c ......- ., ..�...... Y.. ,, a.k.....1.v.•;'} _.Y'S.. {..,` "L e ..,y. �r�•.� ". �C;'Y` r ... ;.Y k' .. : .:.I4:�U�� �) . r'3Y.Jk4 ��M1�yj z "" AbJACEPiT PROP RTY Ot"#N QS= s �,�1 dS Attach this notarized declaration to the adjacent property owners list: no U, On my oath,,I certify that the names and addresses provided represent all properties U. o located within 300 feet of the subject property, Z X1 •���... ©1 S M /Y/ r Si c�a —�� Signature of Applicant or Applican s Representative t °; W Subscribed and sworn to before me this cc}} day U. z 0 Z Notary Public in and for the to of Washington Residing at 4 x ro APO.doc\EATemp\fonns r $ `i1541 taMx'. ,err rb 4 � a .r.=w�^,'i�,: a>�.f$�' w U. 5549-000-003-0004 5549-000-022-0001 3-037 362703-3-037-0005 2 Bill and Sharon Grader Richard and Sheena Good David Henderson * Mi 10108 243rd Pl. SW 10102 242nd Pl. S.W. 24324 100th Ave. W. U. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 � x� z �,. 5549-000-005-0002 5549-000-023-0000 0. z Loise Stephenson Kayla Beth Somnexfield w w 10114 243rd Pl.: SW 10110 242nd Pl. S.W. 2 5 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 t3 P w wJ 5549-000-018-0007 5549-000-024-0009 x g David B. Hutchison Steven and Joan Fisher 24222 100th Pl. W. 24301 101st Ave. W. z Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 LU yr r r i z 5549-000-006-0001 5549-000-025-0008 Jack Jones Raymond Mitchell 24316 101st Ave. W. 10109 243rd Pl. S.W. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-007-0000 5549-000-026-0007 Ray and Pain Arnold Ruth Van Dyke 24310 101st Ave. W. 10103 243rd Pl. S.W. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 5549-000-008-0009 5549-000-027-0006 Paul and Gail Donner Jeff Chubb 24302 101st Ave. W. 10029 243rd Pl. S.W. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 8'3 5549-000-019-0006 5549-000-028-0005 Donald Melon Fbster"-aiacl C!I&oW re Powell 24232 100th Pl. W. 10019 243rd Pl. S.W. Edmonds WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020