16917 76TH AVE W.pdf74
1�
K7
n I
1� p
__ 1-'- s g c r cu'4TATf1 y ti7f
a i t ax! rl'h ti
DECLARATIONS OF APPLICANT
y E tip
Please answerall questions. yA
1.
What are the physical characteristics,. (i.e. topography,; shape
of lot, etc.) which create,a hardship for you in regard
etc.) ;
development f your propert
i
2:
How does your 'property differ from other property in the same
v'icini`ty?
3.
WA11 this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to
other property or improven�ents'in the vicinity?..
4.
What hardships will result to you'if the variance is not, granted?
Will these hardships ha.v� been c ed;by our own action?
I
5.
Can you make reasonable use -of your property without the variance':
p�
r.g+z;
1
y ( Yt ti
{ I k} F}
7
at ,portion of Tract 121, MEADOWDALE BEACH, according to the plat thereof
ecorded in Volume 5 of Plats, page 38, records of Snohomish County,
►ashington, described as -follows: EX'HIB`�T 3'1
F
leginning at a point 777.00 feet North and 20.00 feet East of the West.
uarter corner of Section 8, Township 27 North', Range East W.M.,.in
nohomish County, Washington..
'henceSouth87'06'00" East, a distance of 180.00 feet;''`
:1
hence North`0'20'00" East, a distance of 87.29 feet, -
hence North 88'37'32" West, a distance of 179.84 feet to an intersection
•ith the West line of said Tract 121;
fence South 0'20'00" West, along said West line., a distance of 82.50 feet',.
time point of beginning.
"
KEPT the West 10 feet thereof for street right of way as conveyed to.the
:ty of Edmonds, by Deed recorded under Recording No. 77083102.53.
J.;
.RCEL B:
non-exclusive easement for road purposes over the following described'
-operty
eginning at a point 767 feet North and 20 feet East of the.West quarter
Drner of Section 8, Township 27 North, Range 4 East W.M., in Snohomish
ounty, Washington;
,ience North 0'20' East, 20 feet;
'ence South 87°06' East, 160 feet;
-fence or, the arc of a curve .to the left having a radius_ of 19.12 feet for .a
istance of 29.00 feet;
hence North 0*20" East, 280 feet;
-ience South.87'06' East, 15'feet;
hence South 0*20' West, 280 feet;
pence on the arc of a curve to the left having a radius of 19.12 'feet -for..a
istance of 30.7 feet;
'ience South 0*20" West, 20 feet;
ience North 87'06' West, 21.5 feet to .the. point of beginning.
KC_EPT that portion thereof lying within the above described Parcel A.,
ituate in the County of Snohomish, State"of Washington.
;�
Co•+Trc ETa. S+0. r t� Aq o a:t- i s S�s7e ,ns
735'1VF 198.
S�t� �,a SBrss
3�G3-SIS1
!�c St'ArV,AS 16�Z CS
�S SC-T &r e 41 & cC,
Cl (kLrfwc� LiA
--U Sc,\Q- I =,
�,
-
<k/
'Ti,
/'^N� (''� -� A l 1 ♦'
' 1
.
l
i
tiR r
zi
4
�
i
,fti t y=rroY '�a" GC i
:! ut ..... �.. x�'....h ..... ... C. u...- .. : �_...... .�. 5.. .. _.... , •.. <x.'.. .. .. ., .'r `mom.. _ _ —:.� .a u...l..\ a..+ 5.x1-y�ffiliS{"�t�~.+fM4�'.+TY' r yyi
t (y 1 n,P•.a `#14Lf�tpr�
rgI, t
y v v ��
F " h
W EX
B I T5
a
. It
s.
It I
h
IL
I tr - 0.A
to IN 40
; w t 1— +t r Obi. {r`L-...+
IL
`.M#5d S N NL/ ? • p3 PO ; r
rQC� .r .N''Nx t • * A�'�b,�, 1 nY� >k.J ..t,. W ry �Y„
1 r. r T•, is �s^ bV 3rb9
nr
i8r 1 84 v, I 3� ' ^`y6 b![L jC
,n t 9(r = p gr Mr
I < i 1 } Ws•o A - .. w'ldus
I J c JS a t' m ri 416E a M.dHlG - as r
Q o
1 Q I a •iP �a -U 6 N M �:;. nr - ad reu�ls N101i;ml, INI
..
:svleN •s - 3
i Q a ISv� - J ;-4r kl3�OONO rm . Hsu N w Ar SS18! M 1 { IttII
I I wjL
zz
AA It I
01 .O M ^nMn wH1Y6 ^# 1xi
D 4 �, •- a 1siaN m H1S _ tN M dlA
CC
.yi„
MA
1 _ i t i / I� �r
1 �`
dW
VIIIL
OPIIII
01Sf Md 1341w q}RC as ' At
i B .. p` W -
too
Wit
1 I m W
1 I 1 W ati1 5 d 2 ,.
t I I 1 Xy� a} N. AV i Hlt
zry hu r
_ I t .•� I � Ov _ ��= a Y `3
I �4>1
pIIIIIIIIII
I
1 I
1 t i I
?• I 1
y I I I
I I
I g ,
t 1 I I I
v t I t t I }
t i I
I I I t
I
Lk
-, �(
r �
r
i'
Fi
r
}
't
n
l�
1
i
0
Y �
.� r. , . i . . _.. ,.. ... 'a ... ... .. I 4 ... ..
+
rGt.,,.,
-w.
,. t,'
sill
I ,1
F 10. ,., Y �..
�.'.
► i:`f�
.?....,;
.., I. F,
. .,
.Igloo —
I t
7IF 10 8t-
y, rl
IJ ,
C
Fit
y
Cn H co
I,n W Z L
n I
,x
LTJ O
ro
4 N ` M
d H `3
t-+ rb
FIRM
x x
M
cn C
:t1 U]
n H
z' O-
F3
m
• Fri
UD
• G7 co
d G C-4
Sv N O N-
�1 ►F; tr �1
Fid a
�1 n FJ-
N O` 1=' Ln
N
i� to
U)
ro I trj
0, I row --'
-i �
rN (D Rq
Lam. N-
� � O
In
pa >
� m
Hot
A�I fr
t�
� f 5
Y
� r7 ,
i
+r y
# f
z
III—
±t"
�t ice"'•+-�.�" ryry .✓�£ -•"v. `".
.
f - ,rt r .
� f ij 7'S��,+f �e
', �:; m,
w'9
� ..
4`
F
S. `' �
',
�5
Y� �
] (�
f �
l � � y q,
l
�!
1
{
ty
EXHIBIT
���,�}
��
STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING , EXAMINER � � 3 ���
a�
r.
. - FILES V-5-85
��
�a`
DATE: 4,,_:
1985 �.
HEARING :April. �
� e;
r��;
� ���
I . REQUESTED "ACTION :
�
Variance to reduce the: required street
setback from:25'<to '�
- 16' for a•swimming pool at 16917 76th Ave.,W.,,Edmonds.
II. APPLICANT/OWNER:-
_ Dennis Walker
16917 76th Ave. W.
Edmonds, WA 98020
III. LEGAL DESCRIPTIONz
(See Exhibit 3)
IV. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS:
A. Description of the Subject'Propertyand-Surrounding
Area
The subject property was created by
Edmonds Short �'
Subdivision #5-45=77. A variance was
granted to
allow the lot width of the subject
property to be below
code {72.7G' existing -' 80 ": code) .
The subject property fronts directly
onto 76`th-Avenue.
Access easements form the :southern
and eastern
boundaries of the subject.property.(See
Exhibit 3). The'
existing house is built. to within 16'
of the southern
access easement.
The, -Applicant seeks to construct a
swimming; pool in the
street setback .from 76th Ave: West.
Surrounding development is all single family residential:.
B. Official Street Map
Proposed
R/W Existing R/W
:West - 76th Ave. W. 60'
60''
'r
'�;:
�4
�h �4^�; .
. , .... ,
_ _�
........ .. ...... ..:. r .,_., ..,.. ......... ......... _..................,......
r
..,
. f zQq J.r i47
C. Conformance
to Chapter 20.85.010. r
�
r3
1.
Special Circumstances
While the Applicant's property is somewhat unique in `,
Ytt;
that it is bounded on three, sides by. either a .street or
access easement, there appears to be ample area to buiad
the pool in the "rear" east setback. K
2.
Special Privilege,
It would appear, that to grant the variance, woul'd?
result in the grant of special privilege; to allow,"
the proposed variance.
3.
Comprehensive Plan
Ff}
The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the
subject property as low density residential, as are
the adjacent surrounding properties.
The proposed variance appears to conflict with the,.
policies outlined in Chapter 15.20.005. To put the
swimming pool in the street setback would not
.'.
harmonize with the type of development of the homes in
the immediate vicinity.
4.
Zoning Ordinance
The subject property and the surrounding properties
are zoned RS-12.
The proposed variance appear to conflict with
Chapter 16.10.000(A) which states that the proposed
development should be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
5.
Not Detrimental
The proposed variance would add an inappropriate'
use in the street setback from 76th Ave. W. which
would be better located in the eastern portion ofr;
the subject property.
6.
Minimum Variance
The proposed variance appears to be represent a
£
minimum variance request.
t
i
i
�
l
� al
..
r`.t
7'74;�
w
k
I r
I r
1 L
Pj:.
FINDINGS AND DECISION
OF THE BEARING EXAMINER Off' THE
;1
3 ,
s
CITY OF-EDMONDSu
x
y
, f
>' IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FILE: V-5=85
'
OF WALKER FOR APPROVAL OF
,DENNIS
A VARIANCE
DECISION: The requested variance is denied.r
INTRODUCTION
Dennis Walker, 16917 76th Avenue West,. Edmonds, Washington, 98020, ,.
and hereinafter referred to as Applicant, has requested approval
of a variance to reduce the required streetsetback fr0m;25 feet ="
to 16 feet. The subject property is located at 16917`,76th Avenue
West, Edmonds, Washington, and more particularly described as set
r,)
forth in Exhibit 3, which is. attached hereto.
A hearing on the request was held before the Hearing Examiner of
4
the City of Edmonds on April 4, 1985.`
At the 'public hearing the following presented testimony and evi-
r
dence :
:.
f•
Duane Bowman Dennis Walker
Planning Dept. 16917 76th Ave. West
City of Edmonds Edmonds, WA 98020,
Edmonds, WA 98020
Mrs: Dennis Walker Keith Ellis,
16917 76th Ave. West 735 N.E. 198th Street
Edmonds, WA 98020 Seattle, WA 98155
The following exhibits were submitted at the hearing and admitted
as part of the official record:
Exhibit 1 - Staff Report
2 - Application and Declarations
3 - Legal Description
4 - Plot Plan
" 5 - Vicinity Map
" 6 - Letter from Stephen Nofziger
" 7 - Vicinity Map.showing-Nofziger Property
" 8 - Response of Applicant's Representative
J, Z
Ellis of staff report
%.
After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Applicant;
I
evidence elicited during the public hearing; and, as a result of
the personal inspection of the subject property and surrounding
areas by the Hearing Examiner, the following findings of fact and
conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing
Examiner.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The application is•for the'approval of a variance toyreduce.
M
i F
�r
of
Findings and Dec, Sion the
Hearing Examiner of the 'City of Edmonds
Re V-5-85
Page 2
the required street setback from 25 feet to 16 feet on pro
perty located at 16917 76th Avenue West, Edmonds; Washington.".
The request for a reduction of street setbacks is for the
purpose of constructing a swimming pool on the subject
property.
2. The subject property is zoned RS-12 as established in the
_
Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). Section 16.20:
.:
030 of the ECDC requires minimum street setbacks for-RS-1'21.
zoned property to be 25 feet. (Bowman testimony.)
cr:
3. In order for a variance to be granted in the City of Edmonds
the criteria as set forth in Section 20.85.010 of the ECDC'
a
must be met. These criteria include:
A. Special circumstances relating to the property must
exist necessitating the variance;{'
B. The required variance must not result in a special
privilege being granted to the Applicant;
C. The variance must be consistent with the Comprehensive
Policy Plan Map of the City of Edmonds;
D. The variance must be consistent with the purposes of
the zone district in which the property is located;
f
E. The variance must not be significantly detrimental to
the public health, safety or welfare, nor injurious
to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the
same zone; and,
F. The variance must be the minimum necessary to allow`
the same rights enjoyed by other properties in the
same zone.
4. The subject prbperty was part of a two -lot short subdivision,
#S-45-77. At the time of subdivision a variance was granted
to allow the subject property to have a reduced lot width.
The reduced lot width is 72.76.feet; the code requirement is
80 feet. (Staff report.)
5.
0
, i " ti'7 r �kJ�✓F b { y 5�1k2 !
Findings
and Dec ion of the
Hearing
Examiner of the City of Edmonds
Re.
V-5-85 r
Page
3
7.
St is the intent of the Applicant to construct a swimming pool
on the west side of the existing house located on site. Accord
S.
ing to the Applicant,"this is a perfect place for a pool that:;
?.
is not visible to other properties in the vicinity." (Mrs.
Walker testimony.)
:.
p
8.
The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds has determined
that there is adequate area on the east portion of the subject
in a pool. (Bowman testimony.)
property to put P
o_
9.
According to a spokesman for the Applicant, the east portion
ts:
of the subject property may be unstable and has a slope that
creates difficulty in constructing a pool on the east side.
According to the spokesman, a cut would be necessary and the
stability of the site is not guaranteed. Thus, according to
the Applicant's spokesman, the east side is not the desirable
place for the location of the pool. (Ellis testimony.)
10.
The Comprehensive Policy Plan Map designates the subject pro-
perty as low -density residential. (Staff report.)
11.
According to the Planning Department of the City of Edmonds,
the swimming pool to be located as proposed by the Applicant,
will not harmonize with the style of homes in the immediate
vicinity, or the type of development in the area. (Bowman
testimony.)
12.
The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds has stated
that the proposed variance would add an inappropriate use
(Staff report.)
in a street setback from 76th Avenue West.
13.
A spokesman for the Applicant submitted that special circum-
stances do exist for the granting of.a variance because of
the setbacks that the subject property must meet. There are
three street setbacks for the subject property and thus,
according to the Applicant's spokesman, special circumstances
necessitate the granting of a variance for the placement of
the pool on the west side of the subject property. (Ellis
letter.)
14.
The spokesman for the Applicant submitted that the granting
of the variance will -not be a special privilege to the.Ap-
plicant because of the location of the property and the three
(Ellis letter,0
street setback requirements on the property.
15.
The Applicant's spokesman submitted that the requested
variance would be in conformity with the zoning laws of the
City of Edmonds and the Comprehensive Plan, and would not
be detrimental to the properties in the vicinity. (Ellis
testimony.)
r
'
JW
l•
findings
and Dec, ion of. the
Hearing
Examiner of the City of Edmonds
• Page
3 585
�
7.
It is the intent of the Applicant to construct a swimming pool.
'
on the west side of the existing house located on site. Accord
is place for a pool that
ing to the Applicant,"this a perfect
is not visible to other properties in the vicinity." (Mrs.,.
Walker testimony.)
8.
Planning bepartment of the City of Edmonds has determined:'
Theg,
of the subject
tF
that there is adequate area on the east portion
testimony.)
'
property to put in a pool. (Bowman
,.
9.
According to a spokesman for the Applicant, the east portion'
4
of the subject property may be unstable and has a slope that
��'•:
creates difficulty in•constructing a pool on the east side.
the
According to the spokesman, a cut would be necessary and
to
stability of the site is'not guaranteed. Thus, according
is not the desirable
the Applicant's spokesman, the east side
for the location of the pool. (Ellis testimony.)
place
10.
The Comprehensive Policy .Plan Map designates the subject pro-
perty as low -density residential. (Staff report.)
11.
According to the Planning Department of the City of Edmonds,
the swimming pool to be located as proposed by the Applicant
will not harmonize with the style of homes in the immediate
vicinity, or the type of development in the area. (Bowman
testimony.)
12.
The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds has stated
that the proposed variance would add an inappropriate use
(Staff report.)'..
in a street setback from 76th Avenue West..
13.
s
A spokesman for the Applicant submitted that special circum-:
..
stances do exist for the granting of a variance because of
the setbacks that the subject property must meet. There are
three street setbacks•for the subject property and thus,
according to the Applicant's spokesman, special circumstances
necessitate the granting of a variance for the placement of
(Ellis
the pool on the west side of the subject property.
letter.)
14.
15.
4 t c
!
Findings
and Decision of the 44s
hearing
Examiner of the City of Edmonds `
Res
V=-5-85
Page
4
16.
A property owner in the vicinity (Nofziger) submitted a letter,
requesting denial of the variance. The property.owner submitted
that a variance had already been granted for the property to al-
low a substandard lot, and the granting of an additional variance
should not be allowed.
17.
The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds recommended denial
of the variance and made the following statement:
It is understandable why the Applicant wishes to use the area ?:
in front of the home, along 76th Avenue West. This area is
relatively flat and would be much easier to build the pro-
posed swimming pool. The problem with the request is that it {
puts an inappropriate use in the front setback, in full view
of the neighborhood.
While the subject property does have some unique circumstances M
t�
due to the number of street and access easements surrounding
the property, together with the relatively level area in front
of the house, staff cannot recommend approval of the variance.
CONCLUSIONS
1.
The application is for the approval of a variance from the
street setback on property located at 16917 76th Avenue West,
Edmonds, Washington. Specifically, the request is fora
reduction in the street setback off 76th Avenue _West from
a 25-foot street setback to one of 16 feet for the purpose
of allowing the construction of a swimming pool on the west
side of the subject property.
2.
In order for a variance to be granted within.the City of
Edmonds the criteria as set forth in Section 20.85.010 of
the ECDC must be met. The -application has failed to meet
11 the criteria
3.
4.
5.
a
(
Special circumstances do appear to exist forthegranting of
a variance in that the subject property has three boundary
lines that are considered streets and, thus, street setbacks
of 25 feet must be met for all three sides of the property.
A special privilege would be granted for the development of
the subject property if a variance is granted. Because the
property is already a substandard lot because of its width
size, any reduction of setbacks would further diminish the
lot from meeting the zoning standards of the.City of. Edmonds.
The requested variance does not appear to be in conformity
with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds in that
it does not meet the policy as set forth in Section 15.20. #
005 of the ECDC. The swimming pool would not harmonize with
{
4- 3 _
" 4 Y i,.Y a' r 1 SniJY3 t L .
5 ✓r
Findings and De. :_sion of the t
Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds
Re: 'V-5-85 ,.
Page 5
r
the surrounding properties in that there would not'bea com
patible land use and would be an incompatible addition to an
tt}`
existing structure that does not harmonize with.the existing
«;<
structures in the area.
a ,fin,
6. The requested variance would not be in conformity with the
sir
zoning standards of the City of Edmonds or the RS-12 zone.,(
In particular it would not meet all the proposed requirementsf;;
of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds.�„y
7. The requested variance does not appear to represent the
minimum necessary to properly develop the property. There:'
is a substantial amount of property on the eastern portion
of the subject property that could be developed as proposed
by the Applicant.,
8. The requested variance would result in a unique use of ;the
property on the western portion of the subject property.:.'
No other properties in the vicinity have a swimming pool.
in the front yard and to allow the subject property to have
one would be inconsistent with the development in the area
and would be detrimental to the surrounding properties.
9. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds has recom-
mended denial of the variance.
10. Testimony from the Applicant and witnesses has been noted
above.
DECISION
Based upon the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions; the
testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing; and, upon
the impressions of the Hearing Examiner, the requested variance
to reduce the required street setback from 25 feet to 16 feet.
off 76th Avenue West is denied. The reason for denial is:
In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds
the criteria as set forth in Section 20.85.010 of the ECDC must,
be met. All the criteria must be met. In the instant case, only
i
part of the criteria are met. Special circumstances exist due to
the fact that the subject property has three street setbacks.
However, to grant a variance just on that criterion would be the
grant of a special privilege and would be to ignore the other
criteria. The most critical criterion that is not met by the
i
request is that the variance would be detrimental to other pro-
perties. A swimming pool in a sub -standard area would not enhance
fitt•,
the aesthetics of the neighborhood or add to the quality of the
i
neighborhood. No other properties have swimming pools in the
front (west) yards. To grant the variance would create a unique
and privileged feature.
s i Ii S q1r ti` ,yl'x FF �' `iM1_ y
t 5 K r
S d rwr:
• - � ".' - i, 'kq1; \; F `St �}fj cl , t 1,11 c1 �..�Tl �t
a�rr'
Findings and De`_-�Sion of the Y r54 ,S 4
Hearing Examiner_ of the City of Edmonds tsh'°, }� a N�
a ?us
`Re: V=5-85 a k,
Page 4 G�Yh t L`
i Y
2 5 5 t i
Entered this lst day of May,,1985, pursuant to the authority granted}
the Hearing`Examner under. Chapter 20.100 of'the Community De.�elop
ment Code of the City of Edmonds'.
24
APGOWF
i
S M. DRISCOLL
earing Examiner
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL g
5
Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds. ,.
for appeal may filed with the Planning Department, City of
Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within
fourteen (14) days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final
action.
j,
In this matter, any appeal must be received by the Department
prior to 5:00 p.m,. on May 15, 1985.
t
:i
RAJg�r.•�.14'
a • .L a _;.+ _ .. t.., 4,9. . , .. _ J7
t
lf7, V
{ t 'i d e r ,J� 1 L: faty��rn`•fJj't
RM
.. ('•. F /�. kt IZ vtt�h7�n1'r hfP'a.J
TA
AQUATIC SYSTEMS
a
735 NORTH EAST 198TH STREET • SEATTLE, WA 98155
(206) 363-5833 1-800-362-5151 TELEX 709-032
n.
a
a
a
Sr.
t"t .d In .., .J r..11.!:
p
1 Ir 1'r)!+ _ 4'a
� J a l_J'...?r'`.i �. .r.F .I I, :� •y I. it' ._..1' i n.la .- - �.i.: s
:-r r-` i, ' -- i •. . , �. 1. _r G.i �' 'C.. ::t J. S. :i. " i1 L_ +" i l�.
L~t�:, D. c= _{-,.cJ F 11'1t'
1 _ -
ti ry r1 1 Y jn :.i,_.' rrl `• _.ir Y 1 :f! I traf llsr 1- t r:
1.
z is C: c�xnctrri,
t_). l._ { ._ :J'1'. 'l., t-1 t_`• ... 4-)n r, , ,
L / et. r .�+. ( -1 h i 4 1 i �.t I 1 +_• : '_ �.: i '1._\ t L ...t l i�1 _ Li t{ •r... s a d p r- i 4t e G:, l•.1 4 _"J
1 '�. 1a • ' L. +'— t. •E '� ''. I1! it _i 1 \r 'K t.ti• .L11L r. lt1C)1 e., 'r�'17
s. l_ := 2 1 +_i .� _. CJ t_.._t < _> t_.. J i...l +._ •C . .-. » .' : " L_' .. I i -t_. l_t i ._t 1 t1! t.-1 LJ d -F e r.:^ 7 i... t LI n d 4. S •1 h
r ± u) �. , - � "'t y7 i_ i"1 _ i:: l-' �.) f_r l:: l''. �=� � . - _ 1 . ,af: 1. 1 •?: � :' Et! (— ;= _ +�
h
ir: ..it ,:.lr
i.•_);1 4:.��.,�'�! �...::_ -+.- 4_,2 _ ~.tu,J�., t_ _�.7.;.. _!.t 6, it tl.�'t_ t
4
P. C!j 1iC".� _. inQ '" general �'L.t);}�.:ic
:.yi_'1'): L(t r: r'iy1 C;,_.J v'i
ct t_;:'i)-1e Int G'C -the 1]acI i n the ° !J"L-'-_ar`' e as-L setb t_t'C 1: c`t SS LIgCil St Od 4
(4c�t_11 d djo S'L't_(rb the ni.tl..trM l C:rnstl- tint 0+. the al OPe cif t!►�' � �ncj,
- i� -1 C
and �\ :,_:...• � _G : on o hi C �tr--e , ot_(I d-nCn�lnter _surf tC� l,:ttt�r t;nr�
I. .tf);=lC?Y :: +.y jr;' i11=+r i i; i? facttll:. tJ� i -t'F R=T_a\b 1 f Ioc_. 'I=7.C)n :'. i 5t!^06d1.v
I r :CHT,1iiiC`;li+'CI l at- I t=(_:,P,t 1 _ n (] t� a v,.1 iY in ficl Pool n
it :Jt`;:?\'r f tl'il `.'at 1`11�C IJOU! � 1 tF !:)E'? c r�Y rtnt of r:ip)ec:7.a
1.. r
P:1r=. v I �:L-, �s .c,C r AppI i ;=.�n-L. 1_1 _+_.EkUT)G.- 1_, zoning as t�,t (tI i need does not.
a 'c_hr( '' mac.?t b::t:: k ��s L,s, mct ncr-ma:
„ 'The000, (.ca:;? d In e, 'sr:t_:i c sed b a s-i +oc)t 1):i clih n._'��:t.tr.zil I�aradc!c�n
i (ar,CtD WI-I.s. C 1 in tl_tY-! i iJ40l,.t3. d i:'+_.' :�:i tLt..ted t_tPon a r"0C t?I �f ad ja(_enis
'CC) 'Lhc <;i:I"'i:1-'�. r11 =J (-ou"d i::E?`� '1=I:E� j"1F:iSI1l.. 'ir-om' ViGt�Jing clny
1(1rt: G!�) t7 t.hE ()r,I c,r)d bipc:-tt_( e D i f E i-10,tl..(rctl C=47ni�trrlC'ti on
l'thC (4(-1ud Fence c:1i:! i- t_I.e r v v\:ou;.d '1.pnd in nrAtbt-a11 wz•'Li� t-hL
sure- unr_! i (-1(_I LiY-i�Fa„
4.1 Y 1 , r.; = r e t,.:, 1_ l f; !' '7:. i t.. G)..'1C_'r cir \1li' l�(_?L` t„ cllly .aLher
`c\t' i1u
i
4
t:
,w
AE
Iry
A,
.1'
jIt
Sri-:•
''
v
A
�:'S
F
nor
11 t.li<: ,�1'f, Tt{t 7flt"y^fit f�S�t
�
,:
",1; ; rjf} t, re""„}�¢`rJlir;'r•��j
,Sfi.Ci'+M (� iLe�kl
f
'
f
it
t di
I +F t yt 9YFf
FILE
Walker '
.NO..
'APPLICANT
AFFIDAVIT
OF MAILING
f
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
F
ss.
COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH )
Kelly Madrid
'bath
being first duly sworn, on
deposes and says:
That on the 26th
day of
March ,Zg 85 ,the attached
i
Notice of Public Hearing
Was.'mailed
as required to adjacent property owners,.
f
the names of which were
provided.by
the applicant.
Signed-,
Subscribed "and sworn to
before me this
day of
19
I
Notary Public in and
for the
State of Washington
Residing at
f
1
1
,
.._��........:.....___......-=. �._�_._._�._ _.......... .........�.:r ....,_ ..� .. ,.. ..-:._ _... --_ ... .:..__. __-_. ._.._..... ... _.. _ _ w--,• •r••-rt,+�•e `3"""u y.` t{.) t4a�ficL �.�?yt`
s
n 1°
C"IT7OF ErL)"`m`"ON"-'D&' , h�
,• r s r
AOft
r
r ® x
T10%E L I &4w% a MrEAR,'
i;
THE HEARI NG EXAMINER WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING
THURSDAY, APRIL 4 85
19 , ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION-,�.
FILE NO. V-5-85 1,
REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED 25' STREET SETBACK'
6' A SW ING POOL ?`
FRO TH
�,
I{
s.
PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION 16g17 76TH AVENUE WEST, EDMONDS
r ZONE DISTRICT -
THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT 7' 30 P ,M., IN THE : PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY
BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL,
YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS t
WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER.
IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR
FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY
AT THE MEETING.
i
I
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE
NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252).
THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR
CONCEALMENT OF THIS NOTICE BEFORETHE DATE
W A R ark 45 1 Nm OF THE HEARING IS A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE
r.
BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT.
I
THIS NOTICE MAY RE REMOVED AFTER APRIL 4, 1985
tIt- c...-•L. _ _ _ _ _ "%�J'f�'.;Y'�'.q •,..:- �•e ✓'�✓'•':f' 3" '••''^=' .C:*.�Ty^.'y.tiF�l
am
•F
1
f