17619 76TH AVE W (2).PDF6221
17619 76TH AVE W
The (,.ity of �Edmonds
STRFXT
FILE
APPLICATION CARD No . ......................................
for
SUM SEVVER PERMT
EASFI;Mh�Z�Ty, No . ......................................
OUTSIDE E] INSIDE E] REPAIRS Ej
OV*TNER ............ �-i . .......... a� ------------- 11. i17 '�5 A"� ------------------------------- ......
.................... ....................................
CONTRACTOR ............................ .............. PERMIT No . ...... lzy��V---
HOUSE No . .............. 1.7L1.:7 .......
— ------- —ez'7 � i
STREET
AVENUE LOT No . .............................................. ----------------------- BLOCK No - ---------- ------------------------------------
NANMADD - ------------------------------------- ------------ ......................
N
APPROVED
%JUL 16 1964
Date
BACKFILL WORK ORDER ISSUED .....................
SEWER WORK ORDER ISSUED ...........................
............... DEPOSIT, $ ...............
...............
This property was checked out on February 25, 1972.
Still on septic tank and has his own well.
Approved:
DATE .....
...................................... By .................. I --------------------
ff
j
r_1TV nr cnAA- is
OFFICE OF PUBLIC WORKSi'&., i-
T. 146
Re - ceiVed of___,�Z Date__�
For No. ov
For No.
� x, el,,_,
Amount No, I
Amount No. 2
o
h_11**n7*_§
4,
CITY: 0
F
Call P
E.Rr�-WATMSEWER., DE RTI"NT, #0810ect' q71107:when-
is ready f�r,�Inspectlon- (No-Insppe,
ti i
A4 FA-Y, Sun�,or
R
--,-7.S1DF.-SEWt 0MMj_.Tr
............ 17619 .76th Avenue West
. . . ........................................................................
...........................................
.............................
............................
....................................
CON -TRACTOR
..................................
-P
e "is ........ j34y 16 .............. jq..�4
1_�r�.JiSslon- ....... . ......... ... I for ...................... days, to R R
With- -Ciiy.-,Sewcrs -,In. ac6o �EPAI or CONNECT a side sewer
Tdance With application on file and governing ordinances.,
k�:avA TTENT
ION - IS. -CA-LLED T THE FOLLOWING:
140TE No.
The owners of 'the Property may obtain a permit to construct. sewer Inside property line. llce�sed Side Sewer Contractor must
be employed to construct -side sewer. In street area. Do not cover any Portion of sewer before it has been Inspected.
NOTE- No� 2--0' is fi full Information
regarding Ordinance 11.16.030 and itegulations govern ng side sewers - w
I
-Blde� sewer must have at least 30 inches coverage at property line and 12 Inches inside property line; minimum grade of 2%.
6Tk No. 3��Tqp of hen you get permit.
- No bends:in' grade shar per than % will be permitted .
N9TE
No.. -4—Trdnches In street must be water settled and surface of
failure due to Improper work street rest d to original condition. Contractors shall be responsible for -
which may deve - lop within one Year oforccompletion.
unlawful to alter or do any other work than Is provided for in the permit, or to do any work on th
pqrtenances except to insert the Pipe Into the wye. e main sewer or Its ap-
APPLICATION
The City of Edmonds for
EASEMENT NO. — -----------------------------------------
SIDE SEWER PERMIT
NEW CONSTRUCTION REPAIRS E] LID NO - ------------------ - ASMT. NO . ..................
OWNER -11 34
. ..... '.L G A S�l ce-A -------------- CONTRACTOR ... La-rC - ------- ----------------------------- PERMIT NO.
.. ., -- -----------------------------------------
JOB ADDRESS ----- 1-1-1-61-9 --------- .. . ....
------- -- .... ... ---- LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO - -------------------------------------- BLOCK NO. - ......... ------------------------
4" P.V.C-. Side scwev-
:rnspec-Tiou Tee.
(j!�,AeeP5
NAME OF
00, cq
Z'—j
t 2.3'
t
&I.
70
I -ID
M
q3'
V� -TH A\je-. W.
------------------------------ --------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------
C-0. (11 "/cep)
Approved:
T ............ L
L
DATE ... ... ). ............ YiW6
CITY OF EDMONDS
.PUBLIC WORKS DEPOMENT
SIDE SEWER PERMIT
FOR INSPECTION
775-2525 Ext. 220,
Permit
Issue Date
PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ON JOB SITE * I
WAVAM
1. Address nstruction
2. Property Legal Description (include all easements)
3. Single Family Residence Multi -Family No. of Units
Commercial L& Af
4. Owner and/or Builder
5. Contractor & License No.
6.* Invasion into City Right -of -Way No,,,- IYes (If Yes Right-of-
way Construction Permit Required Call Dial Dig (342-5344) before
excavation).
7. Cross other private property: Yes No"j Easement required -
attach legal description and county easement number.
READ THE FOLLOWING AND SIGN:
P4
P4
4 a. Property owners must obtain a permit to install side sewers on
>4 their property. A licensed side sewer contractor must be employed to
M - -
construct side.sewers in the public' right-of-way.
b. The side sewer contractor assumes full reponsibility for each
installation for one year.
C. Commercial establishment� requires a minimum of a six inch (6")
P4
z side sewer line.
0 d. Side sewers may not be installe ser than thirty inches (30")
U
to any structure.
0
e. Side sewer lines must be laid mu
9
and maximum grade of 100% (450). -DIG -.1
0 Z
E-4 f. No turn in side s8wer greater han eric -TyRsal owe
between cleanout. All 90 turns mus e co uc d 18FCot( /8
bend) and Wye with removable cap. ING
g. No down spouts, footing drai s or ins ca nne ted
to side sewer system.
h. Pea gravel is required for be 2. 1 nes
through other than granular soil. PTI IT OUNTY
i. Cleanouts are required at 30"-60" rom dU ine
and at minimum intervals of 1001 along sewer 'line run.
j. Trenches within City right-of-way must be restored to original
conditions.'4-,Contractors shall be responsible for right-of-way failure
due to poor compaction of fill.
k. Side sewer must be left uncovered until inspected and approved
by the City.
1. Inspection during normal working hours only. Two (2) working
days notice required. 11� L,
DATE: If.- ;' .4''t _-,
i c—erti ly that I have read
and shall comply With the above
PERMIT FEE:
0 W
CONNECTION FEE:
* PERMIT
M (*r DISAPPROVED BY: Date:
va-Ar-)
B Date:
APPROVED By: TFI;"—Date: -7 1 M175:57
'ST BE POSTED ON JOB SITLd*
10451ift DAY5
SIDE SEWER PERMIT
ITY OF EDMONDS
9 0 1 9 PERMIT N2 '9021
Address of Construction: 0/,
Property Legal Description (Include all easements):
5to Vq sec, �J z 4E�,
W (y) gF
.C.FIVF-D
OR
r%CDI
StateLicenseNo. 3VV1 Building Permit No
Single Fami.ly
El Multi -Family (No. of Units
Commercial
Public
Invasion into City Right-of-WayN.-No El Yes
RW Constructi6n-Permit No.
Cross other Private Property: No 0 Yes
Attach legal description and copy of recorded easement
I certify that -I have read and shall comply 'with all city requirements
as indicated on the back of the Permit Card.
q // 2//� �
Date' /f -
* CALL DIAL -A -DIG (1-800-424-5555) BEFORE ANY -EXCAVATION *
OFFICE USE ONLY
* FO NSPECTION CALL 771-3202, PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. *
Permit Fee: Issued By
Trunk Charge: Date Issued: 1///V/ C/
/Z!
Assessment Fee: Receipt No.::::= ?_2
Lid No.:
Partial Inspection: Date -Initial
Comments
Reason Rejected: Date Initial
Final Inspection Appri Date Initial _CA.)6-.W
** PERMIT MUST BE POSTEP ON JOB SITE **
White Copy:, File Green Copy: Inspector Buff Copy: Applicant
Re0szV!90
The City of Edmonds Side Sp.wer Drawing EASEMENT NO . .. .........................................
NEW CONSTRUCTION REPAIRS LID NO . .................. ASMT. NO . ..................
OWNFR...................................... .............. ......... .......................... CONTRACTOR ...... .............................................................. PERMIT NO. Roal
JOB ADDRESS ..... 1-76-13 ............. .......... t-J ... LEGAL DFSCRIPTION: LOT NO . ...... .... ..... ................... BLOCK NO . ....................................
............. ....................................................................................................................................................
XTAXAV nV AnnT'rTnTT
...............
16'"A L),c-
Arproved:
PWW-0001-11/75 (REV. 11178) DATE .... ....................... By ....... c � - -) 64 �
........... ..........................
MEMO TO: Jim Walker, City Engineer
FROM: Jeannine L. Graf, Building Official
DATE: June 29, 1995
RE: Swift Garage @ 17619 76th Avenue West, Permit 9940137
According to our files we granted final approval on this garage (subject to an Engineering
final inspection) on 5/13/94. It is our understanding that the driveway has not been paved
and the owners do not have the funds to complete this required work. We have contacted
the Engineering Inspector on 5/13/94, 12/27/94, 2/3/95, 3/27/95 and 6/27/95 to resolve
this matter.
The purpose of this memo is to inform you that the Building Division has closed this file
(permit expired 3/1/95) and the resolution of this matter must be processed via the
Edmonds Community Development Code if you so I choose.
8 9 0 o C)
CITY OF EDMONDS
250 - 5TH AVE. N. - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (206) 771-022.0 - FAX (206) 771-0221
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Public Works * Planning * Parks and Recreation 9 Engineering
June 30, 1995 Mailed 7/3/95
Pat Swift
17619 - 76th Ave W
Edmonds, Wa 98026
Re: Permit No. 940137- paving driveway approach
11 -
Dear Ms Swift,
LAURA M. HALL
MAYOR
This letter is a follow up to our previous conversations regarding the engineering
requirement placed on the subject permit to pave the driveway approach. As of
this date, the work has not been completed. As a reminder, the extent of paving
required by our code is a minimum of ten (10) feet wide and twenty (20) feet
back from the edge of the road or to the property line, whichever is greater. In
your case, you need only pave fifteen (15) feet since there is a walkway on your
Side of the street. Please take the appropriate action by July 19, 1995 and call
for an engineering final.
If you have any questions, pfease call me at 771-0220, ext 324.
Sincerely,
Addison L. Chrisman IV
Engineering Inspector
ALC/sf
c: Sharon Nolan, Permit Coordinator
Q- P-�
wal'Ker
SWIFTBOC
0 Incorporated August 11, 1890 0
Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan
Rev 01/0494
'4' "o-4354"T8
JJT # '* -'� i
ar 9 0 . 1 91, -
City of Edmon&
Critical Areas Checklist
The Critical. Areas Checklist contained on
this form is to be filled out by any person
preparing a Development Permit
Application for the City of Edmonds prior
to his/her submittal of a development
permit to the City.
The purpose of the Checklist isto enable
City staff to determine whether any
potential Critical Areas are or may be
present on the subject property. The
information needed to complete the
Checklist should be easily available from
observations of the site or data available at
City Hall (Critical Areas inventories, maps,
or soil surveys).
An applicant, or his/her representative,
must fill out the checklist, sign and date it,
and submit it to the City. The City will
review the checklist, make a precursory site
visit, and make a determination of the
subsequent steps necessary . to complete a
development permit application.
With a signed copy of this form, the
applicant should also submit a vicinity map
or plot plan for individual lots of the parcel
with enough detail that City staff can find
and identify the subject parcel(s). In
addition, the applicant shall include
other pertinent information (e.g. site
plan, topography map, etc.) or studies in
conjunction with this Checklist to assist
staff in completing their preliminary
assessment of the site.
I have completed the attached Critical Area Checklist and attest that the answers provided are
tactual, to the best of my knowledge (fill out the appropriate column below).
Owner / Applicant:
Name
Street Addrew
City, State, ZIP Phone
Signature
Date
Applicant Representative:
E,0 6L501\-1
Name
L A-t) a f (- Z) P-
Street Addrew
F,- >' e r- P- E 7)- k---/ A 5B26 )
City, State, ZIP 7— S-'9 - / z' )/ Phone
e §teg—na
.1 ture
-2-131�y-
Date
C.0
D 2
'F>LD-r PLA�J
ie
14
lob
%01.0
I
.v cw 5T.
pol
tc
16.
0'-I-J�]FtZ: PA-r � C—HAQL11TFC 5,Nlr--r
t2 E I-? (p I Ot -7(,-f' t,,/
F D" 0 N 0 $
r'>Ar4 C E L
PACIFIC GARAGE INC.
616 LAUREL DRIVE
EVERETTv WA 98201
206 259-1311
-,)�5-10 - -
C)e
L-D'r '517-e
1 OU6 t;b
rn
rn-
;.-4
--n
40000
1007
"I
rl,�,.! F: p- : PA-T- e- OA $Z� L C, :5-w
qb
D D r- -S 5, Mo
E L:)
V��Are.17 IF L 1,10. opo- o I e6 000ce
Zz.
IN
PACIFIC GARAGE INC-
616 LAUREL DRIVE
EVERETT, WA 98201
206 259-1311
y
CtTY OF EDMONDS
ITI r:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT S JEET F'L
RIGHT - OF - WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT
I
Z
1�
U
0
0
Z
0
1-
A. *Address or vicinity of Construction
) --? C' / 01 -7 e " ftv - IV ,
9 Owner: Q51r&T'4*'ry
Name
Mailing Address
City, State, Zip Code
Contractor:
Name
Mailing Address
'L'y 0 t4 WQ0�j IN 9� - --Jisasf.
City, State, - Zip Code
Permit No. k,
IssueDate
9 Permit Issued To:
!�' VN ":)
T
9 Type of Work to be Done: TSVON Ivil"
VOW. 0"'), f�aq-'. -Tvo
0 Work n Connection With:
0 Sub or Plat X S3 I ngle Family
El Comml. / Ind. 0 Apt. Condo.
0 Pavement Cut: El Yes A No
State License Number
!;.71 q_A� L-
Telephone Number
* * NO WORK TO BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE * *
B. APPLICANT TO READ AND SIGN
INDEMNITY: Applicant understands and by his signature to this application, agrees to hold the City of Edmonds harmless
from any injuries, damages, or claims of any kind or description whatsoever, foreseen or unforeseen, that may be made
against the City of Edmonds, or any of its departments or employees, including or not limited to the defense of any legal
proceedings including defense costs, court costs, and attorney fees by reason of granting this permit.
Upon issuance of this permit, the contractor is responsible for workmanship and materials for a period of one year
following the final inspection and acceptance of the restoration by the Engineering Division.
Funds held from the Security Deposit (estimated restoration fee) will be held until the final street patch is completed, at
which time a debit or credit will,be processed for issuance to the applicant.
Work is to be inspected. Restoration to be in accordance with City Code. Traffic Control to be in accordance with Traffic
Section of City Code. Street to be kept clean at all times. A 24 - hour notice is required for inspection by Engineering.
Call 775-2525, extension -ftbr 2 ITI
I understand that this permit must be available at the job site for inspection purposes at all times.
Signature Date
Owner or A�e_nt
THIS PERMIT MUST BE POSTED AT THE JOB SITE FOR INSPECTION PURPOSES
CALL DIAL - DIG PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK
C. Issued By: Aol-'
Time Authorized: Vold after -go —days
Special Conditions:
Ammendments:
I& I ';Z0
Permit Fee: 1) -
Security Deposit:
Receipt No.:
Fund III Fee:
Street Cut Dimensions
— X
* * NO WORK TO BEGIN PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE * *
Eng. Div. December 1978
FIELD INSPECTION NOTES (Yund. 111 - Route cony to Street D'ent
Diagram:
Contractor called for inspection Yes No
I
Kork Disapproved By: Date: Bv: Date:
Work Approved Bv: Date:
Inspector:
Enq. Div. December 1978
SNOHOMISH
HEALTH
DISTRICT
Courthouse
Everett, Washington 98201
Area Code 206 259-9440
CLARIS HYATT, M.D., M.P.H.
Health Officer
DAVID A. STOCKTON, M.P.A.
Executive Assistant
DISTRICT MEMBERS
COUNTY
Snohomish
CITIES AND TOWNS
Arlington
Brier
Darrington
Edmonds
Everett
Gold Bar
Granite Falls
Index
Lake Stevens
Lynnwood
Marys�ille
Monroe
Mountlake Terrace
Mukilteo
Snohomish
Stanwood
Suttan
Woodway
STREET FILE
January 17, 1983 ..
RECEIVED
JAN
PUBLIC VVORKS
Mr. Greg Steen
17020 76th Avenue West
Edmonds, Washington 98020
Re: Unapproved Public Water System Serving 11619-
76th Avenue West, Edmonds and Three Additional
Dwellings
Dear Mr. Steen:
The above noted water s 1. ystem was surveyed on,January
5� 1983. Since it 'does serve more than one residen"ce
i� is, according to WAC 248-54 (state rules and
regu�ations pertaining to public water.systems), a
public system and must be operated in Accordance
with that regulation.
Since it.is an old system this office can I grant
provisional approval. While this shouldn t be as
complicated as I first indicated, you will still be
required to comply with certain requirements to
operate this system. These are outlined below:
Since public water is available from the city of
Edmonds, we would suggest connecting to that
system.
If you wish to proceed and obtain provisional . approval
then:
2) Submit a drawing of the systems, showing.the lots
water line location, and if available, -
sizes
3) Submit a drawing of the source, showing depth
and size of spring box and location of spring on
-your property. Indicate potential sources of
.Pollution within a 200-foot radius of the spring
including septic tanks, drainfields, barns, streams,
W
ponds , or roadways.
4) Include technical data to include size.of pressure
tank and pump size (i.e. horsepower). We also need
the property tax account number for the source.
5) We strongly urge you to obtain protective covenants
on the deeds of all properties within a 200-foot
radius of the spring. We have suggested forms
available if you wish to pursue this further.
0'
Mr. Greg Steen
January 17, 1983
Page Two
.6) Since the spring is not adequately,protected with a
suitable casing or cover we question its continued
ability to provide water of sufficient quality.. If
you wish,provisional approval, it will be with the
understanding you will submit quarterly samples for
bacteriological analysis. If you start receiving
unsatisfactory results a means of continuous�disinfection.
will be required.
7) It appears some homes are or*will.be connected to,both
.the City of Edmonds system and yours. In.spite of the
City's requirements we will require that these two
systems be physically separated. Cross.connections
utilizing valves, backflow preventors, or other devices
cannot be accepted..
At your request we performed a certification of your water
supply. As I indicated to you prior to our visit there
is an inspection fee of $50.00. To date, we have not
received payment for our services. Please make your check
payable to Snohomish Health District.
Should you have any questions regarding these matters
please contact me at 259-0693..
Very truly yours,
David N. Compton, R.S.
Environmental Health Specialist II
DNC: 3 s f
CC: Gary Fraser, Department of Social and Health S ervices
City of Edmonds, Public Works Department
A)e LO
EV PLC,
TR 930D 3,/
-OV12 :jo
7%1
I I I
, st
0 � '�9
7—— — , ti7e, s: — —
—/Vw/
83H-Lo
� ...............
U\
ce yc,-( jo llco� as- 00-0-000
-z c-
ROOF ESTIMATE SHEET C
F
F-
7_7
i.; J
J1
Lj
—7-17
T
Fri
7
I- j
LL
7_1
-T
;1" �411�7
L _LJ
-T
I
_j
F
L
CERTAIN -TEED PRODUCTS CORPORATION
SHELTER MATERIALS GROUP
L,jr P. 0. Box 860
CEMINTEED V,11,, Forge, Pennsylvania 19482
QUITCLAIM DEED
YGreq..5�!�qp ........... ................................ ............... '
The Grantor.... herein ............................................ ................. I .. ......... ... . .. .... ....
................. ........ I ................ : ............... ......................................................................... ......................... ......... - ......................... .............................
for the consideration of ................ qut.u-al ... b-e-n-efils_: 0 , e , r , J , y , 0 ..................................................................... * .................................
I him
the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and also of benefits to accrue ............................... ............ by reason of laying
out and establishing a public road through ........... W.5 ................. property, and which is hereafter described, do ...... convey,
release.and quit -claim to the City of Edmonds, State of Washington, for the use of the public forever, as a public road
and highway, the following described real estate, including any interest therein which grantor may hereafter acquire, viz:
W. 10 feet of Lot 18, Meadowdale Sound View Tracts
RAVIMUSIOD
F .1
- 1_13 7 11-SO
WO M-4
CD
CC,
r
UO
0
FT1
C -D
situated in the County of Snohomish, State of Washington.
The -Grantor.... hereby agreetb. and consentf;. to the establishment of said road as surveyed and of record in -the
City of Edmonds Engineer's office as Survey and to the perpetual maintenance of the same as a City
Street, and waive.:$. all claim for damages of whatever kind which may be occasioned to adjacent land by the location,
establishment, construction, drainage and maintenance of said street, and agrees and consents to the right of the City to
make all necessary slopes for cuts and fills whenever they extend beyond the right-of-way line, upon above mentioned
street, all in conformity with standard practices of City street construction, and to the same extent and purpose as If
the rights herein granted had been acquired by condemnation proceedings under Eminent Domain Statutes of the State
of Washington . ...............
........ ... ...................... ... ....... .... . .. ..... .... .. .... ....... .........
Said covenants shall run with the land and be bindin pon the grantor...., .... ........ ..-successors or assiffns.
Dated this ................ I?.( . . .......................... day of ........... ......
. .............. ........... A.D., 19_4U...
. ....... . ... .... ...
YU
8 3 0 2 0' .0 3 0 rw
I
S-rFtEET FILE,
PLANNING DATA
SITE ADDRESS: 11L Iq '70-1- Ar-:- Lj).PATE: 2 49164 1
ZONING: B-12 PERMIT#: q"/,-L3 I
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 9Y=Qjb 066-1 � Lin
SETBACKS:
Required Setbacks:
Front: Z6 Left Side: IC) Right Side: /0 Rear:
Actual Setbacks:
Front: /.//0' Left Side:-Z& ' Right Side: /o ' Rear:
Noose
FLOOR AREA:
LOT COVERAGE:
Maximum Allowed:- Actual: 1611
BUILDING HEIGHT:
Maximum Allowed:- Actual Height:
SUBDIVISION: IWW�� -�5i)ZPb lieAl!jj?
2jen
CRITICAL AREAS #:
SEPA DETERMINATION:
LOT AREA:
OTHER:
Plan Review By:
PERMIT APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS
To: Applicant FILE
From: Lyle Chrisman, Engineeringwic EET
Owner:,
Address: --
Plan Check No:
Date:
After review of the subject permit application, the following requirements must be met:
1. Construction hours are:
WEEKDAYS — 7:00 A.IVL-10:00 P.IVLWEEKENDS/HOLIDAYS — 10:00 A.M.-6:00 P.M.
2. A separate RIGHT-OF-WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT is required for all work on public property. (ECDC 18.60)
3. Truck haul route plan must be submitted and approved prior to permit issuance.
4 Builderlowner is responsible for containing all temporary runoff and erosion control on site.
(ECDC 18.30.030d)
5. NO WORK SHALL BE DONE WITHIN 15 FEET OF STREAMS OR 10 FEET FROM ANY CLOSED DRAINAGE
FACILITY. BUILDER/OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR IDENTIFYING CONDITIONS ON THE DRAWING....(ECDC
18.30.50G)
6. FILTER FABRIC FENCE SHALL BE INSTALLED AND INSPECTED PRIOR TO CLEARING AND CONSTRUCTION.
(ECDC 18.30)
7. INSPECTIONS ARE REQUIRED ON STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, TIGHTLINES AND CATCH BASIN
INSTALLATION. INSPECTIONS ARE REQUIRED PRIOR TO BACKFILLING. (ECDC 18.30)
8. Repair or replace all defective existing curb, gutter and sidewalk adjacent to the property. If an intersection is involved, a handicap ramp
may be required. Contractor shall meet with the City Engineering staff to determine the extent of repair prior to issuance of the permit.
(ECDC 1&90)
9. Driveway slope shall not exceed 14% without a waiver. Every attempt should be made to keep the slope below 14%. Waiver granted to
%. (ECDC 18.80.060D)
10. Driveways must be paved from property line to City RIGHT-OF-WAY. A separate permit is required. (ECDC 1&80.060C)
11. INSPECTIONS ARE REQUIRED ON DRIVEWAYS AND SIDEWALKS PRIOR TO AND AFTER POURING. (ECDC 1&30)
12. No burning of construction reffise without a permit from the Fire Department.
13. Connection to City water system is required. Ilere is a separate charge for the water meter.
(ECDC 7.20)
14. A back water valve is required if downstairs plumbing is below the elevation of upstream manhole. (ECDC 7.20)
15. Water and sewer main lines should be separated by 10 feet minimum. (ECDC 1&10)
16. Connection to the City sanitary system is required. A separate permit is required.
LID# Fees paid: Yes No Charge�
(ECDC 18.10)
17. Underground wiring is required on all new construction, and for additions, alterations, and repairs that exceed 50% of the total assessed
value of the structure. (ECDC 18.90)
18. A FINAL ENGINEERING INSPECTION IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO THE BUILDING DIVISION GRANTING OCCUPANCY
OF THE BUILDING OR STRUCTURE. (ECDC 18.90)
PRMTREQRDOT
Oro-
REET FILE
wft�
PRMTREQP-D6 --A*
NOV-21-97 FRI 14:30
P. 02
CITY OF EDMONDS BARBAflA FAHEY
250 STH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS. WA 92020 6 (206) 771-0220 . FAX (20(p 771-op2l MAYOR
HEARING EXAMINER
FINDINGS7 CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION
OF TRE HE, ARING EXAMINER
CITY OF EDIVIONDS
aft=
APPELLANT:. Charlotte. Swift
CASE NO.: AP 97-119
LOCATION; 17.619 - 76th Aycnue W. (see Exhibit A, Attachment 1),
A PPE AL; Appeal of a. staff decision to deny a Short Subdivision and deny
tWO of thrOe requested modifications. file No. S-97-S (see Exhilit
A, Exhibit -A, Attachments 2 and 3),
-REVIEW PROCESS: Heanng Examiner conducts public hcarirg and rnakes rinal
decision.
MAJOR ISSUES:
a, Compliance with Edmond3 Cormnunity
Developmeni.
Codr, (ECDC)
Section 16.20.030, 1
, site developmentstandards for the RS, 12 zolle,
b. Compliance with Edmonds Community
Development
Code (ECDCN)
Section 20.7j, stibdivision rcquirements,
c, Complianct with Edmonds Community
Develop-nent
Code (ECDC)
Section 20.85. criteria for approval of a variance.
d. Compliance with Edmonds Community
Development
Code (ECDC)
Section 20.95, staff review requirements,
e, Compliance WjLh Edmonds Community
Developm6t
Code (ECDC)
Chapter 20.105, appeals and -court review,
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION AND DECISION:
Staff Recommendation- Deny the Appeal
Heftring Examiner Decision: Dony the Appeal
PUBLIC HEARING;
After reviewing the official file which included the Plainning Division Staff Advisc),-y Roport; and
after visiting the site, the Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing on the application. The
hearing on tile applicatiori was opened -at 9:12"am., November 6, 1997, in fliv Plaza Roarn,
Edmonds Library, Edmonds, Washington, and closed at 10;04 a.m. Participants at tile public
hearing and the exhibit.i offered and entered are listed in this report, A ver6atim recording of the
hearing iii available in tile Planning Division.
a Incorporated Autlust 11, 1890 a
Sister Chles International - Hekinan, Japan
NOV-21-97 FRI 14:30 P.03
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP 97-119
Page 2
HEARING COMMENTS:
The following is a summary of the comments offered at the public heari I ng,
From the City: 4
Meg G4ell reviewed the staff report and recommended denial of the appeal,
From the Appellant:
Dennis Gordon, Attorncy for the Appellant, saldi
9 Letters in support show a8 much support as opposition and in addition. the letters in
support are from closer in the neighborhood,
@ The staff interpretation of Section 21.55,020 rega.Tding lot arca is incon-cct. After
reading Section 21,55.010 in combination with Section 21-55.020 one must coilclude,
that the cmcinent area should not be deducted.from the totA lot area for Lot 2.
* The easement will serve both Lots 1 & 2. Therefore. how can that access be dcdocted
froun the total square footage for Lot 2?
* The term"normally exclude" is in violation of due process rcquiremenis because
there is no definition in the code as to what ft means,
There are no objective standards to base a decision on. If discretion is not Subject to
standc-trds, then there is a violation of due process.
No other jurisdiction in the area exclude� access easements froin lot area excepL
Whatcom County which has criteria to Suido staff, (Hc- submitted exampics frorn
otheriudzidictions - Exhibit F),
I'lie term "normal" is not used in other jud s diet." or s.
'The only Problem with the required setback regarding the,�outh property line is that
the southeast corner of the existing house is 8'6" from the propci-ty line, 'Flie liousc is
on the lot at an angle so the southwest comcr of the house is 10'6" frorn the south
property linc.
If the. existing house were relocated on the site there would be no issue as the South
setback is the only issue with the existing house. The setback issue is really
insignificunt si.nce only one corner of die house is within the required sciback-
Approval of the rr--quc,5t will not affect the exJsting location of the house.
The property'is large enuugh for two lots.
He doesn't believe that the exceptional circunistwice criteria for a variance niust be
Met in this case, but rather believes only those criteria w1hich are applicable 111ust be
mot. Therefore only tho issue of the area of the lot needs to be addressed.
From the Community:
The following persons spoke in favor of the request:
Rob Michel
Adriana Akers
Supporting comments included Lhe followills:'
• The Swift property has plenty Of rooni to build on.
• A new house would be more attractive than the present front lot area which requires
constant care,
NOV-21-97 FRI 14:31
P. 04
Hearing Exam iner Dccision
Case No. AP 97-119
P-1ge 3
The proposed intrusion into the setback would not be much more t1jall dIaL of',
chii-nney,
This arca was once rural, but is now urban due to the many changes which have
occurred in the neighboThood.
If Property valties are affected at all by a new house they will probably be lie) ped.
A new house will not dramatically increase traffic on the dr*iveway,
The following persaris spoke in opposition to the request:
Jack Parsons
Nathan Coder
Pau I a Parsons
Opposing comments included the following:
a Privacy and the character of the neighborhood would be changed and degraded by the
proposal,
0 The value of existing bomes in the area may go down.
e Several different groups of people would use the dyivc
,way r
,a3crtlent and irilp�,Ict
adjacent neighbors, Those who would use the driveway would hiclLide,
9 Beauty salon clients,
* Auto repair clients,
* Residents of the two houses,
0 Approval of the request would b,-- a grant of speclal privilege and an exceptioli to tile
rulcs which are In place.
a If this is approved, it will set the stage for more people in the neighborhood to
subdivide their lots.
The trees on the Swift property bavc all been taken down.
The appellants haven'ot.put anything in writing regarding a rnov� ofthe hcaul.y S110P.
Response by the, Appellant:
He has a mobile repair business and does not repair cu�tonier& cars on site.
The beauty shop, may be moved to Perrinville.
New landscaping would be added to The new house.
Patrick Swift, said:
Response by the City:
Meg Gru'well responded that:
If the tenn "normally excludc" was rernovtd. from the Se'�ond sen tenco of Section
21.55.020 thcri the third sencence in that section would make no -scilse. The second
wid thil�d Sentences of that section should be read together.
NOV-21-97 FRI 14:32 P.05
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP 97-119
Page 4
WRRESPONDENCE-
Correipondence was submitted by tl-.je followilig Persons supporting the appeal:
Jack and Virginia Kostolyk
Mr. & Mrs. James Q, King
Edith Faste
Gregory David Steen
Don & Fern Thompson
Mr. & Mrs� Ocorge I'landyside
Brad & Adriana Akers
Pete Troka
Judy Bishop
Lois Ruosch
Robin Michel
Comments from those supporting the appeal included the following.,
What is being asked is not in the least unreasonable, and would not create any
problems for immediate neighbors,
There are no objections as long as adrquate access is provided through an easeirient to
propo.icd lot 1.
How can this application be. denied when the nearby Belt a*pplication was approvecr?
Another house will provide additional tax base for the City.
A new house will enhance the neighborhood.
All of the ncw houses that, have been built around here on lots as sniall as 8,000
square feet have been beautiful and have only added to the attractiveness of our street.
a Growth has enhanced the ama and if developers have been allowed 9,000 squal-c foot
lots on like properLy,'individuals should be allowed the Bame.
0 Allowing the Swifts to place asccond home at the front of t.beir property would he
advanti �
ag-ous to the neighborhood assumiiig the new house is of size ancl style, til.it
fits with the rest of the surrouinding bornes.
* Approval of this application should not set a precedent as each ease should be.liandled
on a case -by -case basis.
0 The Growth Management Aci favors development in urban areas to avoi d forLhei.
development in rural areas, This subdivision is an opportunity for EdMollds [0
provide additional housing on a suitable lot,
o It appears the major issue i3 the non -conforming existing housc which only has a
small coiner of the structure which pmtrudes irto the setback,
0 The decision Of Lhe City starf should be overturned in favor of the Swifts.
Correspondence was submitted by the fol lowing persons opposing the appe&l.
Jack aild Paula Parson8
Comments from those opposing the appeal included the following:
Bverything about this proposed subdivision diillh�shes the quality of life. here,
The many beautiful old trees were cut down.
Privacy space between houi;es is to be filled in with anothor housu.
NOV-211-97 FRI 14:32
P. 06
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP 97-119
page 5
4 Another house means more cars coming and going along the proposcd double -use
driveway. Noise will increase, and cvcryone riciarby will be a little 1110re Lrarnped and
have less. of Edmond's. natural beauty.
@ By allowing an eXception to the 12,000 square foot rule will set a precedent for
additional lots in Edmonds.
Nine lettM in opposition to the request were also received from neighbors before city sLaff
denied the application. Those 1,3tters' were included as Atc-achment 7 to Exhibit A, were
acknowledged in Attachmont I to Exhibit A
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:
A. HISTORY
I. Application Chronology
a. FacAt;
1) On January 15, 1997, the appellant submitted an aPPlication to divide
one lot with.a total area of approximately 28,352 qqtiare feet (0.65
acres) into 2 lots in a Single -Family Residential RS-12 zonc,
Subsequently, the appellantsubii,iiucd additional inaterijjis to C0111p]e(c
the application on June 6, 1997, and at that time the appellant also
requested tile following modifications:
(1) a setback modification to reduce the required street setback on the
west side of the proposed lot I from the required 25 fect to a proposed
10 feet (to allow the eKisting house toremain at its current locatiun);
(2) a .5rtback modification to reduce the required side yard setback on
the south silde of the proposed lot I from 10 feeL to 8.6 feet Gilso to
allow the existing 6use to remain at its current location)-,nnd
(3) a lot size modification to reduce the required lot area fron-1 12,000
sQuare feet to 10,334 square'A feet (see Exhibit A, Attachniomt 1), Since
this application was filed.' a code interpretation was made, under
Interpretation * s File No, 97-2, which states that "Flag lots wilich are
accessed by an access easemcnt shall be required 10 provide si(le yard
building setbacks from all property lines." This.nicims that there is no
longer a need to request a setback modification for the west side Of tile
proposed lot 1, as the required ,,etback is now 10 feet,
2) The request for short subdivision, and the two 1110dific*ations not
affected by Tnterpretation File ' No. 97-2 ware denied on AugLINt 1,
1997. . The staff Teport in Exhibit A, Attachment I gives (lie full
reasoning, but in surrimary the one setbftc.k modification was denled
since the reason for the nrrd for the setback was tile fact that the house
was not built according to its approved site plan, bUt w'as constructed
intruding into the setbacks, and therefore tile requost for I�Mdificaticjn
NOV-21-97 FRI 14:33
P. 07
Hearing Exarnincr Decision
Case No. AP 97-119
Page 6
could not meet variance criteria, The lot size niodific�ation was clenied
because the variance criteria also could not be met primarily due to the
location Of the existing house and the choice of access. Because the
modifications Were denied, the subdivision also hLid to be denied.
3) The app-c1lant reque.3tcd a reconsideration on August 14, 1997, The
reasons for the appeal are given in the appeal letter subillitte.d (.qc!e
Exhibit A, Attachment 2). StafN reconsideration was isqicd on
September 8. 1997, and did not result in a change in outcome,
4) The appellant submitted an appeal of the decision on SeMember 22,
1997 to the Heatring Examiner.
B. APPEAL ISSUES
1. Issues raised by the Appellant:
a. Summary of Staterriepts the Aippellan : (See ExIi i b I t A, A 11achnien Is
by t
2 and 3)
1) The "Special Circumstwicc." crit*eria should not apply as the wordin g in
it refers to "use right or privilege" and the variance being sought is for
an area variance, not a, use variance. The use will rjot chjr1ge.
2) Darbie Hvmrs sited and constructed the bome, and tile applicalit relied
on Barbie homes to cormctly sile.the horne, so it was not an "action of'
the owner,"
3) The fence shown on the plat map on the lot to the south of die subje.ct
parcel has been treated as thC property line for more than 30 years:
therefore the 'applicant can apply the doctrine of adverse po,4izes,�jon to
die strip of land. if tha fence defines the south boundary of thr-
property, then the setback of the house to the south property line will
niect the mquirt�d setback,
4) The size of the variance to the south property line ij inconsequential
given that the ditch south of the property line adjacent to UIC 11OLISe Will
cause a person on the Wt to tile south to set any buildings furthersouth
so that it will (ranslate into a 10 foot setback on eidler side of the
fence. (Chapter 20.50 provides that a 5-foot setback could be
appropriate in unusual circu instances.)
5) Because the -setback issues are seen to have errors, lying the lot size
issue -to them is an error. The requested modifications have no impact
on the other.
6) The finding in Section U.B.1d. of the staff docision report di&.�usgcs
the surrounding lot& only, while the Compi-ehelisive 111"111 policy 1,cfers
to the character of the "neighbOThood." The lots zast of Sotirld view
Way [.sic] should bc considered piltt of the neighborhood. ,
7) As stated above, the concept of neighborhood should be expanded to
includa the lots enst of Sound View Way [sic], ancl if it 111clLide(I these
NOV-21-97 FRI 14:33 P.08
Hearing Examiner Deuision
Case No. AP 97-119
Page 7
smaller lots, then how can the neighborhood be all-ected in a
detrimental matincr?
8) The conclusion that the mod
%, ifications would set a "dangrrous
precedent" or that tha surrounding pfoperties would be "cletrimcntally
affectod" is arbitrary and capricious because no findings suppoll that
conclusion, the conclusion only states that it "could" and not that it
66 would" have such an effect, and the conclusion i-s nothing niorc Lhan
unsupported speculation.
9) Also, the. exclusion of the, access easerlient frorri lot aita is void becijige
the tenn "nornial" (in "Lot area meajis tbe totil horizontal area within
the boundary lineg of a lot. Lot area shall norinally exclude,'.. access
ea.gement,4. ...") is so vaS'uc as to its application that the result is to
violuto the Appcllant's constitutional right of due process.
b. Respons - (each re8ponse corresponds to its cormspunding 11LUTIM'
above)
1) Edmond$ Community Development Code (F-CDC) Section 20,75,075
allows appljcant� to request a modification to a requireillellt of tile
subdivision chapter with the subdivision applic�*Lion. ECDC
20.75.075,C states that "the modification may be approved, 01"
recommended for approval, only if all of the requirad findings Set fordl
in Chapter 20.85 ECDC (Variances) can be made, ECDC 20.8.5,0 10 -
Findings - states that "no variance may be approved unless all of' tile
findings in tills section can be made." One of those fill(lings is tile
" SPM41 circurnstance" criteria, Fufthennnore, ECDC Section
20-85-000 states that the city is not allowed to grant use varianceg.
Therefore, the Examiner believes that "use rights and priyilege�%11
to using the property for the uses allowed by die code and relief cail
oPly be rcquestcd from dimensional requirements required by (lie ccdc,
Therefore, the Planning Division acted properly ill applyillg tile
.. special Circumstance" criteria.
2) The "special circumstance" criteria ECDC 20,85.011).X2. states that
11 special OTcumstance 'should not be predicated upon any factor
personal to the owrior, the ability to make inore profitLhle ii.;L Of' the
property. nor any factor resulting frorn the action ofthe owner o ( '
r jrj,Y
past owner of tile same propol,ty" (ernphasis addcd). The location, of
the home was determined by the past owner, either as a corlLl,actol,
building tile house on speculation, or by the owner working willi tile
contractor on &Wmining where tfie house �hould be loented. ill tile
final analysis. the builder could not have built the honle oil tile lot if,
the owner had not agreed with the location. If the builder had
constructed the housc against tht!, wishes Of tile owner, the owner
would have had legal recourse to have the mistake correctud, and if tile
owner did not take advantage of that, then we citn olily msunic that it
NOV-21-97 FRI 14:34 P.09
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP 97-119
Page 8
was an action of the owner of the proporty at the drne'of coil structi oil
which cttused the house. to be located where it is today.
It is important to note that no evidence was submitted to indicate tilat
the City's rules and regulations havc changed wiih respect to lot size
and setbacks as they relate to the subject property since the hOL1Se Was
built. In other words, if the original owner wanted to subdivide the
property at sortie tirne in the future he/she could have located ti-le house
on a differient location on the lot and could have left room to create a
second lot on the subject property. The fact that che house was located
as it was on the lot means any special circurnstance was self created
and does not relate to the property, but rather to the actions of the
owner.
3),. If the fence was declared the property line in an adverse possession
claina (which would be decided in a civil action through the courts and
not through the city), and the property was deeded to the applicant in a
quiet title action, and the applicant applied for a lot finz adjuSMIC111 to
reflect the reviaed property boundaries, LhC1l tile City could
acknowledge property lines different than the ones submitted. Under
that scenario, no variance would be required to the property line to the
south. The lot area may also change, but a lot size modification would
probably still be needed. Until the above inrormation is submittcd, the
property lines will be corisidered to be the oncs submitted oil the short
plat, and this dctcri-nination has been made on those lot lines.
4). One- cannot require one's neighbors to maintain addition-,U setbacks to
the property line� to make up for one-'s building closer to a property
line, unless a lot line adjustment is made. The ChapLer referrcd to,
Chapter 20.50 used to be titled Setback Adjustments. but. that has bacn
deleted 'from the code. The current Chapter 20.50 is Wireless
Cornmunication& Facilities. Setback adjustments can now only be
done through the variance process.
5). As noted above, no error& are seen in the decision regarding seLbucks.
The reason it is stated that the lot needs sevend Modifications hasecl on
the location of the house is because if the house were to be located
further north, for example at a setback of 25 feet from the existi . 11 g rear
property line (i.e., 47 feet further north than it currently is), thu ints
could be reconfigurod so that lot 2 could be a roctangular lot with a
depth of 134 feut. This would Sive both IoLs I tuid 2 udcquatr, -sizc and
width, The only remon this is not being proposed is because of the
location of the houie. -Therefore, the lot size is tied to flie setback
issue because they 4,re both being requested due to the locition of tile
existing house.
6). The applicant is correct in stating that the finding only mentions the
surrounding lots, which is not typically considered a neighborhood.
Checking a &tionary for a definition of neighborhood revoal,4 -tile
NOV-21-97 FRI 14:35 P. 10
Hearing Examiner Docision
Case No. AP 97-119
Pase 9
people living near one another; a section livocl in by neighbors and
usually having distinguishing charaewristics." Looking for
distinguishing characteristics, the zollitig of tile area correspondN with
the, distinguishing characttristic of lot size. 1A)oking at lots within 600
feet of the subject panel, they are all 7oned either RS- 12 (the M11110 LIS
the subject parcel) or RS-20, which requires a 20,000 square foot
minimum lot size. The lots within 600 square feet are, a., a whole,
c-ycn largcr than. Oie. Immediately adjacent lots, Therefore, though the
finding refers to only the surrounding lots, this fin(tillg'is also an
accurate description of the larger area. The applicant specifictilly
Mentions the lots cast of Sourd View Way [sic]. The Firc
Dcp:artment's address book shows no Sound View Way, so iL is
assumed tbat thry are referring to the lots east of where Sound View
Drive and Sound View Lane dead-end into 72nd Avenue West, These
lots are in the Ch*en-y Hill Lane -and Sea Lawn Acres �uhdivisions and
are zoned RS-8, whiuh requiras only an 8,000 sqURre foot rninimuni lot
size. Cherry Hil) Lane lots are approximately 9,240 square feet in.size,
which incans tbesc. lot,5 are 15 percent larger than is required by the
zone. Because the lots within 600 feet of the subject i3roperly are all
within the sarne, zoning (RS-12) or larger (RS-20), this 1ppears a
sufficient area to constitute a neighborhood with a distinguishing
characteristic * being tile large size of lots. The lots to the east of 72nd
Avenuc Wc,5t al5o constitute a neighborhood, with a sinaller lot being
one,of their distinguishing charactea-is tics. Therefore, as the VIC1111ty
map which they submitted shows, the neighborhood which thig lot
belongs to consists of lots which are larger than the required lot mize,
so the- proposed sinall lot will not be consistent witi-, the character of
the neighborhood,
7) As stated above, the lots east of 72nd Avenue West are in a differcilt
zono, and they all meet and in most cases excer-d thr, required lot sizc,
Expanding the co6ccpt of neighborhood beyond a description of' the
Surrounding lots" to those lots 'Within 600 feet still yiclds lots that are
consider�ibly larger than the rNuired lot size for the RS-12 zone.
Many neighbors also wrote in to say that they considered the large lot
size.q to be a primary feature of the neighborhood, and making the lots
smaller than rcquircd was sccn as being detrimental to (he chanic(er of
the neighborhood.
8). Nino letters, of cornments from neighbors were entered into the record
under 110, of the, 3-97.3 A& decision report and for various reasons
all those who commented -did. not feel granting the modifications and
short subdivision Would enhance their neighb - orhood, The letters
received indicated that the large lot size in the neighborhood is
something that� is highly valued, and the loss of that is cenainly
considered to be &Lrirricntal by the neighbors who wrote in. ECDC
Section 20.75,03 states that modifications can only be approved if all
of the required findings set forth in Chapter 20.85 (Vari,,inces) can bo
NOV-21-97 FRI 14:36
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP 97-119
Page 10
made. The applIcation failed to show how they met all of the required
findings. Allowing modifications which do not * rneel aII of the
requirements would be a precedent that could [lave dfamatic effats oil
the neighborhood and the city as a whole,
9).Thc codr, 5rctioji mentioned above (ECDC 21,55.020) is in its elitirety
"Lot area means the total horizontal area within the bounchtry lines of a
lot, Lot area shall normally exclude any street rights -of -way and
access easements. If additional right-of-way has been requiract in
accordance with the pmvisions of ECDC 18.80.010, note 4, tis ffic
sarne exists or is hereafter amended, lot area shall br, CiLIC111-tted to
include the additional r1ght-of-way required over and above the
standard established by that section."
This definition of lot area has bccn con5i5tently interpreted by City
Auff to moan that street rights -of -way and access ea�ements are alwiiys
excluded unless theyfall into the exclusion givell in the, thii'd sentence.
Prior to the adoption of this definition of lot area in l9so, ale
definition was "'the total horizontal area within the boundary linc.,, of 11
lot, excluding any street right-of-ways and acccss easerncnts." This,
shows the long history of the city excluding streets and acce."
easements from lot area calculations. Because the code in its entire(y
is clear, the appellant has not been denied tbeir right of due process.
Furthermore, while the "normally" is not defined in 'the ECDC, it is
common practice to refer to a dictionaTy to determine the meaning of
words which are not defined in the code. Black's Law Dictionaill-,
defines "nornially" as follows:
As a rule; regatarly; according to rule, general custom. erc.
As notcd above, it has been the general custoin of Oty staff to exclude
easements from lot area calculations.
The appellant's refctoncc to the codes of other jurisdictions is
irrelevant to this appeal, The only code which applies in this case is
the Edmonds Code,
2. Planning Division Comments:
a. Facts:
I ) The application for short subdivision required two modifications to
gain approval. The requested modifications failed to meet the vocluired
variance criteria, go could not be approyed. BCCUUMC OIC NUbdiVision
did not inect the rcquired lot size without the lot size modillication, it
could not be approved Without the modifications being approved.
2) SLa-ff reviowed the deci-don with the reconsidcration request did ilot
find. sufficitnt rcasons givell to change the initial dccisj()jj,
NOV-21-97 FRI 14:36
P. 12
DECISION:
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP 97.119
Page 11
b. Staff Conclusion: Upon reviewing the appeal request and reconsidej�jng
the staff decision, city staff found that the varlancc, criteria are 'lot inet for
the requested modiricationS, and that the subdivision CLUlnot be approved.
3. He-qring Examiner Conclusion -
After reviewing the appeal request, the staff decision, (fie staff reporL on the
appeal, the cominei-its offered at the hearing , the -letters submitled by
neighbors and other mater-D.13 in the file, ilie Hearing Examiner concurs with
staff that all of the,variance criteria have not been met to allow tile requested
modifications and, therefore, the stibdivision cannot be approved as it -has
been submitted,
Based upon the foregoing findings and conclusions, the appeal is denied,
Entered this 20th day of November. 1997, pursuant to the,authority gFdlltcd the I Hcarings,
Examiner under Chaptcr 20. 100 of the Community Development Code of the, City of Ednioncls,
Ron McConnell
Rearing Examiner
RECONSIDERATIONS AND APPEALS
The following is a Summary of the deadlines and procedurcs for filing reconsideration's and
appeals. Any persorl wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should
contact the Planning Deparmient for further procedural infomiation.
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Soction 20,100,010.0 allows for the HeOling
Examiner to reconsidej- 'his decision or
recommendation If a written request is filed wifin ten (10) working days of the date of [lie
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 intcrcst ill a tract of land
which is the subject of �ach doci.4ion or recommendution. The reconsideration request must
cite ipeCifiC Mf6renecs to the, findings and/or the criteiia contained in the ordinances
governing the type of application being reviewed.
NOV-21-97 FRT 14:37
P. 13
Hearing Examiner Decision
Case No. AP 97-119
Page 12
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 WriLing, and shall include the
decision being appealed along wifli the name of the project and thr, date 01'Che decision, the
narno of the'individual or group appcaling the decisi on, 'their interest in tile rn� , itter, and
Tcusons why.the appellant believes the decision to be wrong. The appeal must be fjlcd with
tile Community Development Director within fourteen (14) calendar daysafter the date of the
decision beingappealed.
EXHIBITS:
The following exhibits were offurcd and entered into the record.
A. Planning Division Advisory Report
B. Letter from Jack and Virginia Kostelyk, dated October 21, 1997
C, Letter from Mr. and Mrs, James Q. Kihg, dated NovetTiber 2, 1997
D. Letter from Edith Faste, dated November 4, 1997
E, Map of the area with 10 letters in support
F. Code citations from other counties
G. Lctter from Yack Parsons
14. Letter from Rob Michel
PARTIES 00 RECORD;
Charlotte Swift
17619 76h Avenue West
Edmonds, WA 08026
Jack and Paula Parsons
7520 176" 8,W.
Edmonds, WA 98026
Robin Michel
8022 212kh �treet S,W,
Edmonds, WA 98026
Jack and Virginia Kostelyk
8229 212'h St, S,W.
Ednionds, WA 98026
Dennis Jordan
4202 Hoyt
Edmonds, WA 98204
Nathan Coder
17629 76" Avenue S.W.
Edmonds, WA 98026
Brad and Adriana Akers
1715 761h Avenue West
Edmonds, WA 98026
.LN4r. and Mrs- James Q, King
7426 Soundview Drive
Edmonds, WA 98026
NOV-21-97 FRI 14:37
F. 14
Edith Fastc
17727 76'h Avenue West
Edmonds, WA 98026
Don and Fern Thompson
7413 Soundview Driye,
Edmonds, WA 98026
Pete Troka
17527 76th Avenue West
Edmonds, WA 98026
Lois Ru0sch
7501 Braernar Drive,
Edmonds, WA 98026
,Hearing Exarnincr D=kion
Case No. AP 97-119
Nge 13
1
Greg.Steen
17619 76'h Avenue West
Edmonds, WA 98026
Mr. and Mrs. Handyside
7411 Soundview Drive
Edmonds, WA 98026
1xidy Bishop
1752476 lh Avenuc Wr,.5t
Edmonds, WA 98026
`
START
1
10000'000
10000'000 SW COR
1
TRAV
S
0-45-36
E
105'390
2
9894.619
10001'398
2
TRAV
N
89-09-20
E
247.270
'3
9898'263
10248'641
3
TRAV
N
1-08-05
W
74'830
4
9973'079
10247'159
4
TRAV
N
89-20-49
E
118'220
5
9974'427
10--!S5'471
5
TRAV
N
18-31-00
W
31'870
6
10004.648
10355'350
6
TRAV
S
89-15-04
W
345'380
7
10000'133
10010'000
7
TRAV
S
89-15-04
W
10'000
8
10000'003
10000'001
1
10000'000
10000'000 SW C0R
S
11-41-42
W
0.003
CLOSING LINE
933'060
DISTANCE
TRAVERSED
346824'792
PRECISION
AREA:
29408.14
Square
Feet
0'6751 Acres
START
1
10000.000
1
TRAV
S
0-45-36
E
105.390
2
9894.619
2
TRAV
N
89-09-20
E
10.000
�9
9894.767
9
TRAV
N
0-45-36
W
105.370
10
10000.127
10
TRAV
S
89-15-04
W
10.000
8
9999.997
1
10000.000
N
0-34-33
W
0.003
CLOSING LINE
21-30.760
DISTANCE
TRAVERSED
69455.108
PRECISION
AREA:
1053.78 Square
Feet 0.0242 Acres
10000.000 Sw COR
10001
10011.397
10009.999
10000.000
10000.000 Sw COR
- -- - .., . 0* -
ZIOT �
(�$6566'
START
3
9898.263
3
TRAV
N
1-08-05
W
74.830
4
9973.079
4
TRAV
N
69-20-49
E
118.320.
.5
9974.427
5
TRAV
N
18-31-00
W
31.870
6
10004.648
6
TRAV
S
89-lS-04
W
200.340
11
10002.029
11
TRAV
S
29-45-56
W
77.410
12
9934.832
12
TRAV
5
1-10-18
E
38.510
13
9896.330
1'31
TRAV
N
89-09-20
E
131.270
14
9898.265
3
9898.263
S
33-17-05
E
0.002
CLOSING LINE
672.550
DISTANCE
TRAVERSED
402952.576
PRECISION
AREA:
15906.47
Square
Feet
0.3652 Acres
10248.641
10247.159
10365.471
10355.350
10155.027
10116.597
10117.384
10248.640
10248.641
START
3
9898.263
10248.641
3
TRAV
N
1-08-05
W
74.830
4
9973.079
10247.159
4
TRAV
N
1-08-OS
W
30.150
is
10003.223
10246.S62
15
TRAV
S
89-lS-04
W
91.550
11
10002.026
10155.020
11
TRAV
S
29-45-56
W
77.410
12
9934.829
10116.590
12
TRAV
S
1-10-18
E
38.510
1--,
9896 .
10117.377
13
TRAV
N
89-09-20
E
131.270
14
9896.262
102 . 46.63'--,
3
9898.263
10248.6,41
N
80-S7-54
E
0.008
CLOSING
LINE
443.720
DISTANCE
TRAVERSED
52773.335
PRECISION
AREA:
12472.50 Square
Feet 0.2863 Acres
v * 1 1, -
0 1
START 9 9894.767
9 TRAV N 0-45-36 W" 105.370 10 10000.127
10 TRAV A 89-15-04 E 145.000 11 10002.023
11 TRAV S 29-45-56 W 77.410 12 9934.826
12 TRAV S 1-14-00 E 38.510 13 9896.325
13 TRAV S 89-09-20 W 106.000 14 9894.762
9 9894.767
N 1-14-01 W 0.004 CLOSING LINE
472.290 DISTANCE TRAVERSED
112082.650 PRECISION
AREA: 12443.99 Square Feet 0.2857 Acres
6)/W!�5
100111397
10009.999
10154.987
10116.556
10117.385
10011.397
10011.397
4- o7- 2- ME 7-
START
9
9694.767
10011.397
9
TRAV
N
89-09-20
E
106.000
16
9896.329
10117.38,5
16
TRAV
N
1-14-00
W
38.510
17
9934.830
10116.557
17
TRAV
N
29-45-56
E
60.000
18
9986.914
10146.344
A
TRAV
S
89-15-04
W
136.150
19
9985.135
10010.205
19
TRAV
S
0-45-36
E
90.370
20
98M773.
10011.404
9
9894.767
10011.397
S
51-37-36
W
0.009
CLOSING LINE
431.030
DISTANCE
TRAVERSED
48031.373
PRECISION
AREA:
10334.85 Square
Feet
0.2373 Acres
START
18
9986.914
.10146.344
18
TRAV
S
89-15-04
W
136.150
19
9985.135
10010.205
19
TRAV
N
0-4S-36
W
15.000
20
10000.133
10010.006
20
TRAV
N
89-15-04
E
145.000
.21
10002.028
10154.994
21
TRAV
S
29-45-56
W
-17.410
22
9986.915
10146.351
9986.914
10146.344
S
79-06-32
W
0.007
CLOSING
LINE
313.560
DISTANCE
TRAVERSED
43678.022
PRECISION
AREA:
2108.67
Square
Feet
0.0484 Acres
----------------
Coordinates
stored
i ---------------------------------------
Friday June.6,
1997
1:57 PM
0
0
Memorandum
DATE: February 21, 1997
TO: City of Edmonds
FROM: Robert Nehring, PE
RE: Charlotte Swift's Two Lot Short Plat
GRADING
0 J WA
SXJN L
. . . . . . . :241-9
I FxPiRES 10/26/ ?2 1
There will be no site disturbance for this short plat. The storm detention, sewer stub and
water service are all to be bonded around. There is no grading proposed for this parcel.
All improvements are to be done by the future owner of lot 2 under the building permit
phase. These improvements will be comprised of individual lot storm water detention, for
lot 2, as per the City's standard detention chart, as well as installation of a sanitary sewer
connection to the adjacent sewer line and water service connection.
DRAINAGE
There is an existing pumphouse on -site that constantly discharges water to the area
surrounding itself This drainage is collected in two channels which converge near the
northeast comer of the garage and then flow to the north. There is also a french drain
which collects sub -surface water from the hill prior to it reaching the house and discharges
near this channel intersection as well. There is no expected change to this drainage due to
all of the improvements being downhill from these channels. There are also two ditches
which converge just prior to entering the property near the southwest comer of the house.
It appeared that there use to be a second ditch which drained through the middle of the lot
and after interviewing the residents they confirmed that there use to be a ditch a long time
age when they use to have a circle driveway accessing their property. When the driveway
was removed, all the water was concentrated to the main ditch channel along the south
property fine. It is evident, by the plant growth along the ditch, that this ditch has been in
existence for awhile. The only improvement to this drainage will be to straighten out the
existing ditch channel along the south property line. This can be done by removing the
existing culvert near the southwest comer of the house and installing a new culvert in line
with the property line or else just by opening up this section as a new ditch and allowing
for the drainage to continue to flow.
For detention on lot 2 it is recommended that the improvements be bonded around so as
to allow for the builder of this lot to be able to locate the detention where it best suits his
needs and size it according to his actual proposed structure. This should be a relatively
simple task with the aid of the City's standard detention charts.
C-)
Mi
m
6i
w
REPLArl" OF A PORTION OF AIEADOIYDALE. SOUND VIEW TRACTS
A REPLAT OF TRACTS 156 & 157 — PLAT OF MEADOWDALE BEACH
SW 114, SW 114, SEC.8, T.27N., RAE., W.M.
51", EDGE OF
ASPHALT
ROADWAY SCALE. 1 50'
0 25 50 700
BASIS OF BEARINGS: MEADOWDALE SOUNJ
VIEW TRACTS, VOL 11. PC. 51
c)
CENTERLINE BEARING OF 76TH AW. W
EX PUMP LINE TABLE
HOUSE NO. BEAR I NC- DISTANCE
20
N
C6
N 0 1 '08'05 W(C).�
104.9B(C)
105.76(P)
(4
00
S
C-0
2 14.4
0
Nt
n
LO 4-
p p
LO ir�
LZ
C)
co co
04
U
0)
Lf)
15' SHARED DIW
1:4- n 11� *-. ..
Jo cd cc
Q0
N 01'
�74..
L I
N 89 15 '04"
W
10 - OO(C)
L2
N 89 09 '20 "
E
10. OW c
LJ
N 00 *35 '56 "
W
15.00 c�
L4
N 29 * 45 '56"
E
0
17.4 11 C
L5
S 0 1 '08 '05 "
W
30. 15(C)
L6
N 78'37 '00"
E
37.87(C)
L7
N 01 ' WOO"
W
38. 5 1 ( C)
i" w
704-�98(c)
ca
105.70\(P)
EX.
'0 LqARACE G= 15,90,�,SF
N=12,472 SF
1.5' 2nd STORY
�,qUTCROPPING
EX.
(t
HOU
ji 761
L7
40
loss IV
ESM"
BSBL(TYP)
U17LJTY,ESW T M 10'. 13SBL
C.O. AND 6'SdE SEWER 1,E
TO BE INSTALLED AT 2
Sp,,,BSBL '(-C
TIME OF BUILDING PERMIT I JZ444 c
4--
INDiwDUAL LOT 2 N = 10 . . . . . . ....
DETENTION TO RE DONE A I
\ J11. I -
TIME OF BUILDING rft�kltl.
APPROX. LO&716N-OF
EX. SAN. SEWER
SERVICE FOR LOT I
20' 105:39(C
....... 76TH A VE.
13 - IV
Q� WA
31244
F- EXPIRES 10/2
t
k--w- - -
.31 lrl'�cN
— 105.1,�7(c) T--
11
704.98(C)
FRUI T TREES
IOBSBL
CL
8.61
v-1
04 1
SECOND STORY
DECK Z�j
LQ
—CH TO BE
N REALIGNED
-F'� ALONG P.L
cr) cr)
P-p
C16
0) m-
00 ou
x
co
3' HOGWIR� FENCE I
AT 4. 1
STORM INAINALit Fit-t
"Wd TRASH RACK
T PICK UP DITCH
FLOW
SW COqNER
)C7-
N 00-45'36" W(P)(M)
EX. C1
EX. STORA
estern
Surveyors
I JWI"OW 14 W�y SWM. EVERM, WAL. MM
FAX (425)3W-2708
CHARLOTTE
SIV 1141 STY 114, SEC-8
,F2.yi— 12- R�
GE OF ROAD
T
�R=EDEDGE OF SIDEWALK
356-2700
OR
742-5500
PRELIMINARY
DRAINAGE PLAN
S WIF T
T.27N., RAE., IF.M.
RLL 615 7 1 T.L. QUALLY I 142C
REV. BY DATE DWG. FILENAM JJOB NO.
07 RLL 615197 92076EtqGA)wcj92-076—A
7 " = 50'
1 of 11
v
0
0
REPLAT OF A PORTION OF MEADOWDALE SOUND VIEW TRACTS
A REPLAT OF TRACTS 156 & 157 — PLAT OF MEADOWDALE BEACH
S fV 1/41 S W JX4, SEC. 8, T.27N., R.4E., W.M.
EDGE OF
"ov AV, .:;,
ASPHALT
ROADWAY
i
SE COR SCALE: 1" 50'
TR. 23 j
Immum u=
0 25 50 100
10( -OF BEARINGS. MEADOWDALE SOUND
A�o Jo(
BASIS
VIEW TRACT5; VOL11, PG. 51
EX.
PUMF� CENTERLINE BEARING OF 76TH AVE. W.
I HOUSE
0) MEETS OR EXCEEDS
20'
ui
Q)
ui
N 01 *08'05
104.98�C)
105.76 P)
14.1
00
14.4'-
4'�
Lo to
'o
Qu
00 IR
'o
V
'o
a C14
N
......... ...
MODIFICATION W
15' SHARED DIW
U TILI TY ESM T
Z 108 SF
APPROX. LOCATION OF
EX SAN SEWER —
SERVICE FOR LOT I
20'
105.39(
C4
S
S-, ---125.41 (C)
____ 76 TH A VE.
WA,
1 1916
EXPIRES: 5-25-119�
C) SurNE r 31"YVANU AS ran
04 WAC 332-130-090, PART(l)(C).
<z
ol
00
WAC 332-130-100(l)
INSTRUMENT USED: WILD TC-1010
SURVEY PERFORMED BY FIELD TRAVERSE
I—SW-,,C,OR. TR. 23
I a w
N 01 *08.05
74.83(6),
104.98t�'1)4
1 04.1 98 C
04 P) C�4 U) "i
105.76 (
BSBLLTY�)
10 F-_
U) I
EX,
\-qF C14
LARAG G 15,906',$F
0)
N=12,472 SF
1.5' 2nd STORY
OUTCROPPING j,U
E
FRUIT TREES
I O'BSBL
to
N:
j, ,,
It
041
N CN
r<
VUINUA 11VIV 13
CN 04 'ju' u 'j 0
SIDE YARD
T C
17619 SETBACK
Y
SECOND) SF�ORY
DECK
lo's.s.
ESM'
BSBL(Typ)
10' BSBL
t6 1, 10,
2'
G = 12,444 SF
N = 10,334 SF
MODIFICATION "C"
MINIMUM LOT SIZE
L
IL3 "47fr)
- 105.37(C) -
MODIFICA nON "B"
a 04—
FRONT YARD
54
SE TBA CK
P-P
00 co
ZZ
6i
EX. DRAINAGE cii
DITCH
3' HOGKlRE FENCE
CL
AT 4 5',
Z
00
EDclt OF
co
SIDEWALK SiV COR.
N
- - / I __-'LOT 18, v-
f2
---_I \ _j-R1W
N 00"4536- w(p)(M) \749A8(M) \___EDGE OF kbAD
L-A.F. NO. 8,302040302\_EX. CATCH BASIN
1,056 SF
estern
Surve o
c_.
13OW HWY 99 EN"M, WA- 9=4
FAX (425)-W-2708
CHARLOTTE
SW 114, SW 114, SECA
WN. B Y DATE I PROJECT MANA
DKR 6 /9 7 1 T. L.
DwG. nLENAME ICHK. BY
92076SP7.DWG I KLL
LLY
356-2700
1 OR
742-5500
PRELIA41NARY
SHORT PLA T FOR:
SWIFT
T.27N., R.4E., fV.M.
GER I F.B. NO. I SCALE'
142C I " = 50'
92-076—A 1 1 of
0
REPL4T OF A PORTION OF MEADOWDALE SOUND VIEW TRACTS
A REPLAT OF TRACTS 156 & 157 - PLAT OF IvIEADOWDALE BEACH
SW 114, SW 1/4, SEC.8, T.27N., R.4E., W.M.
LEGEND
0 SET 112"x 24"REBARICAP
WSI 16916
(A� FND MONUMENTICASE
xSET CONCRETE NAIL KlJH
FLASHER WSI 16916
G CROSS AREA
(INCLUDING AREA MTHIN SHARED DRIVEWAY)
N NET AREA
(EXCLUDING AREA MTHIN SHARED DRIVEWAY)
(P) PLA T
(M) MEASURED
(C) CALCULATED
BSBL BUILDING SETBACK LINE
C,i FRUIT TREES
SHORT PLAT DATA
TOTAL ACREAGE = .6509 ACRES
TOTAL SQ. FT. = 28,352 SF
EXISTING ZONING = RS-12
LINE TABLE
NO. BEARING -DISTANCE
Ll N 89'15*04" IN 10-OO(C)
L2 N 89*09'20" E 10-OO(C).
L3 N 00*35'56" W 1 5 00 C
L4 N 29-45-56- E 17:41ffl
L5 S 01*08'05" W 30.15(C)
L6 N 18*31*00' E 31.87(C)
L7 N 01*14'00" W 38.51(C)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION [TOTAL PARCEL]
TRACT 18 AND AN UNDIVIDED 1112TH INTEREST IN THAT PORTION OF 7RACT 23,
LYING SOUTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF TRACT 17, EXTENDED EASTERLY ACROSS
SAID TRACT 23, PLAT OF MEADOWDALE SOUND VIEW TRACTS, ACCORDING TO
THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 51, RECORDS OF
SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON,
EXCEPT THE WEST 10 FEET OF LOT 18 AS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS
FOR ROAD PURPOSES UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 8302040302.
SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON.
356-2700
7—Cestern — OR
I 1\ % 11 L.
Surveyors 742-5500
of WA
c- F PRELIMINARY
cq
IMOO H 99 SOUTH, EWRETT, WAL, OU04 1 SHORT PLAT FOR:
FAX (425)356-2708
+ 41 16916
'7 �'
CHARLOTTE SWIFT
1 S'r li�.
SW 1/4, Sif 1/4, SEC.8, T.27N., I?.4E., Ir.M.
L Lo
OWN. BY DATE
PROJECT MAN AGER
F.B. NO.
SCALE
EXPIRES: 5-25-1998
DKR 616197
I T.L. QUALLY
142C
I " = 50'
DWG. FILENAME
CHK. BY
B NO.
TJ_0
92-076—A
SH T. NO.
2 of 21
92076SPl.DWG
KLL
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: CHARLOTTE SWIFT JOB NO. 92-076-A
NOVEMBER 1996
L834
TOTAL PARCEL:
TRACT 18 AND AN UNDIVID ED 1/12 INTEREST IN THAT PORTION OF TRACT 23, LYING
SOUTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF TRACT 17, EXTENDED EASTERLY ACROSS SAID
TRACT 23, PLAT OF MEADOWDALE SOUND VIEW TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT
THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 51, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH
COUNTY, WASHINGTON;
EXCEPT THE WEST 10 FEET OF LOT 18 AS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS
FOR ROAD PURPOSES UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 8302040302.
SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS.
SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON.
LOT 1:
TRACT 18, TOGETHER WITH AN UNDIVIDED 1/12 INTEREST IN THAT PORTION OF
TRACT 23, LYING SOUTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF TRACT 17, EXTENDED EASTERLY
ACROSS SAID TRACT 23, PLAT OF MEADOWDALE SOUND VIEW TRACTS, ACCORDING
TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 51, RECORDS OF
SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON;
EXCEPT, THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 18;
THENCE N.89009'20"E., ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 18, A DISTANCE OF
10.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE CONTINUE N.89009'20"E., A DISTANCE OF 106.00 FEET;
THENCE N.01 014'00"W., A DISTANCE OF 38.51 FEET;
THENCE N.29045'56"E., A DISTANCE OF 77.41 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE NORTH
LINE OF SAID TRACT 18;
THENCE S.89015'04"W., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 18, A DISTANCE OF
145.00 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE EAST LINE OF PARCEL CONVEYED TO CITY OF
EDMONDS UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 8302040302;
THENCE S.00045'36"E., A DISTANCE OF 105.37 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT
OF BEGINNING.
TOGETHER WITH AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS, DRAINAGE AND UTILITIES
OVER, UNDER, ACROSS AND UPON THE NORTH 15.00 FEET OF THE EAST 145.00 FEET
OF THE WEST 155.00 FEET OF SAID TRACT 18.
SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS.
SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON.
"'w WORAW 5 -26 -
LEGAI-1834 110696 KLL REV 010997 KLL REV 052997 RIC REV 060697 KLL PAGE 1 OF 2
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED): CHARLOTTE SWIFT JOB NO. 92-076-A
NOVEMBER 1996
L834
LOT 2:
TRACT 18, PLAT OF MEADOWDALE SOUND VIEW TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT
THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 51, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH
COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 18;
THENCE N.89009'20"E., ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 18, A DISTANCE OF
10.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING,
THENCE CONTINUE N.89009'20"E., A DISTANCE OF 106.00 FEET;
THENCE N.01014'00"W., A DISTANCE OF 38.51 FEET;
THENCE N.29045'56"E., A DISTANCE OF 77.41 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE NORTH
LINE OF SAID TRACT 18;
THENCE S.89015'04"W., ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 18, A DISTANCE OF
145.00 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE EAST LINE OF PARCEL CONVEYED TO CITY OF
EDMONDS UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 8302040302;
THENCE S.00045'36"E., A DISTANCE OF 105.37 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT
OF BEGINNING.
SUBJECT TO AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS, DRAINAGE AND UTILITIES OVER,
UNDER, ACROSS AND UPON THE NORTH 15.00 FEET THEREOF.
SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS.
SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON.
LEGAI-1834 110696 KLL REV 010997 KLL REV 052997 RIC REV 060697 KLL PAGE 2 OF 2
CITY OF EDMONDS — -
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
OWNER NAME NAME OF BUSINESS
Rq —, S \."I I F.- —)
MAILING ADDRESS -/
) -?(0 / q 7 G A
FC>MONO_S 93, t>?-(- 1-74/1 !3c.)
NAME 114?1- 4"
ADDRESS
ZIP
ADDRESS
(oI6
CITY ZIP UMBER
TELEPHONE IN
STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXP ATION DATE
Legal Description of Property - include all easements
Property
Tax Account 0 1 t"'OOG
Parcel No.
&RESIDENTIAL
NEW
PLUMBING
1:1
ADDITION
COMMERCIAL
MECHANICAL
11
E] APT. BLDG.
El
REMODEL
SIGN
GRADING
FENCE
El REPAIR - CYOS.
I- x -FT)
WOODSTOVE
E] DEMOLISH INSERT
SWIM POOL
HOT TUB/SPA
RETAINING WALL/
EARAGE
TIC5A,,RPORT ROCKERY
RENEWAL
(TYPE OF USE, BUSINESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN:
6,Ae,4,1,- F
NUMBER
NUMBER OF
CRITICAL.
F
DWELLING
I
AREAS
I
STORIES
UNITS
NUMBER
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE (ATTACH PLOT PLAN)
7 --1 r- 'r,� 4 V 0 -r-- f'% e'�:, A (2A6 E
HEAT SOURCE: GLAZING
1A
Plan C heck No.
This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY.
Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewEllks,
driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission.
Permit Application: 180 Days
Permit Limit: 1 Year - Provided Work Is Started Within 180 Days
"Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns and
0 successors in interest, agrees to indemnify, defend and hold
(n
w harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials,
employees, and agents from,any and all claims for damages of
a:
whatever nature, arising diredtly or indirectly from the issuance
of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to
modify, waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance
0
2 nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance
provision."
I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application; that the
PERMIT
NUMBER
JOB
ADDRESS 17r '26 tel
LEGAL DESCRIPTION CHeCKI SUBDIVISION NO
3 4 0 1,37
— SUITE! APT #
LI
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP. TESCP Approved 0
EXISTING REQUIRED DEDICATION Aw Permit Required 13
Street Use Permit Req'd E3
PROPOSED Inspection Required
Sidewalk Required 13
P
E
P
E
U
X
R
0
S
L
P
M
A
T
E
C
I
METER SIZE LINE SIZE NO. OF FIXTURES PRV REQUIRED
YESD NO0
I R rA t>7 16 0, (A
((00 ;,.1)
04
ENGINEERING MEMO DATED REVIEW5P BY
SIGN AREA SEPA REVIEW
0
ALLOWE ROPOSED COMPLETE 1EXEMPT
EXP A
�ARIANCE OR NNIN
M�EVW BY
U
SETBACKS — FEET HEIGHT LOT
FRONT SIDE REAR;7�2 M
WE -MARKS
CHECKED BY TYPE OF CONSTRU)ION ICODE
SPECIAL INSPECTOR � fAREA
REQUIRED
13 YES
PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 305
FINAL INSPECTION REQUIRED
ADS
OCCUPANT
OCCUPANT
LOAD
PLAN CHECK FEE
L14—
.BUILDING
CIO
PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
GRADINGIFILL
STATE SURCHARGE
STORM DRAINAGE FEE
ENG. INSPECTION FEE
PLAN CHECK DEPOSIT
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
information given is correct; and that I am the owner, or th.e d U
ATTENTION.
Ir
authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with city a
THIS PERMIT
state laws regulating construction; and In doing the work author,
AUTHORIZES
ed thereby, no person will be employed in violation of the La
ONLY THE
Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's Compen
WORK NOTED
tion Insurance and RCW 18.27.
INSPECTION
GENT) DATE IGNED
DEPARTMENT
CITY OF
EDMONDS
ATTENTION
CALL FOR
INSPECTION
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE
UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR
771-0220
A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC
CHAPTER 3.
APPLICATION APPROVAL
This application is not a permit until
signed by the Building Official or his/her
Deputy; and fees are paid, and receipt is
acknowledged in space provided.
E
DATE
DATE
17
I--,- V�, / k4a,"P-x �/ , ') , \ -/:�
ORIGINAL — File YELLOW — Inspector
PINK — Owner GOLD — Assessor
L5
Z-
Z
7
`V I EW
BUILDING PERMIT RE Multiple
Commercial
BUILDING ADDRESS_�
BLDG. DEPT. SUSPEN S E DATE INITIAL
DATE
. I
OFFICE ADMIN. -SGTftv!Sa
CITY ENGINEER (check)
0 Access Slope and Vehicle Access
0 Drainage Plan
E]Street File
0 Legal Descripti6n
0 Quit Claim
0 Easement
;0,Calculate -Sewer.Connection
���ER/SEWER DIVISION
-Size:'
mp le t� �'Bui 1 din'g' . P t'.Review
ermi
STREET'DIVISION
Comp'lete!Buildinig Permit',Review
OFFICE ADMIN'—'— LOG OUT -TO BLDG-.-' DEPT.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION -(COMPLETE).
2 COPIES OF SITE PLAN
2 COPIES OF FIRE PROTECTION PLAN
(PREVIOUSLYREVIEWED BY FIRE DEPT.)
3 COPIES OF DRAINAGE PLAN 14ITH CALCULATION.
REQUIRED BY SUBDIVISION 0 1
GREATER THAN 2,000 SQ. FT
-IMPERMEABLE SURFACE 11
LESS THAN 20000 SO. FT_,13
CHECK ZONING'REnuIREMENTS' (SETBACKS)
T"31 COPY OF ENGINEERINO-CHECK LIST
1 COPY OF PU:�LIC WORKS IMEMO
MULTIPLE OR CO11211ERCIAL
YES WrACH COPY OF ADB APPROVAL INCL. ALL DW,TINGS)
Zd
/P""S-UBDIVI-SION — YES[j NAME,
DATED RECORDED
NUMBER
No (ATTA(�.COPY'OF -REOUIRF2,U,NM)
CHECK SEWER DRAWIN AN D ATTACH COPY
IS DEDICATION REQUIRED YESFf (OBTAIN OU CLAI10
CITY CODE
NO
DOES CITY HAVE EASEMENT ON PROPERTY
. YES[] (ATTACH COPIES OF DRAWINGS)
r_v
NO
CHECK LEX ACCESS* INGRES
YES
NO
HAS SEWER ASSESSMENT BEEN PAID
YES L.I.D. NO.
PLAT NO.
10
UTILITIFAI
WYES
E
UI,F�'MULTI'PLE: 'JNCLUDE NUMBER OF UNITS
IF r_0."_�ERCIAL: IN4CLUDE NVY13ER OF FJXTC�Rr V,,!;ZTS
PUBLIC WORKS DEPART-OU aiECKLISr
BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW 4 Vr k/
Caddress) (date)
0
Street Rijit-of-Way Existl
M&7
REQD .0
Z
Access Easemmts Exist* 7,4
REQD
Utility EaseTient Existing jj��
REQD
Lot Per Subdivision Plat.
Assessor MAP ef
Site Plan Checked for Accuracy
Z
Lhderground 14iring Reqd. t�?
0
Check Accuracy of Legal Desmiption
Z
Review by /-
Date_
Existing*Water Main Size
Water Main Required
Service Line Required
Hydrant Size Existing,
ce.
Hydrant Reqd Per Fire Code
Size
Detector Check YEter Reqd.
Cross Connection Inspection
Fire Department Comnents
44
:3
7
t4ater Meter e �eqd.
Review b
L/
Date �)-,4
Septic Tank Design Approved '
Date
Septic Tank'Permit Reqd.
Permit NO.
Sanitary Se%,&r Availability,
Proj.
Drm,dng No.
File No.
Side Sewer Availability 101671111 e��
Sanitary Sewer Connection Fee PWqd.
:3:
Review by
Date r
W
--
to
Open Ditch Existing__,LL-_..5-Reqd._
41 5-
X:
Culvert'Reqd. t'- LY-14
Size 12-
W
Catch Basin Reqd. 1--e) --
Indicate on Site Plan
0
Shoulder drainage main tain collection on
swale open runoff
Manhole reqd.
Indicate on Site Plan
Soil Conditions and Ground Water Field Checked
Review by
Revised: lvlO-1977
0
e _7
DATE 7t�
MEMO TO: Building Division
Planning Department
FROM: Engineering Division
Publ ic Works Department
. 17(�19
771-
SUBJECT:
After review of the subject Building Permit application, we have the following
comments:
1. -Connection to City water system required.
2. Connection to City sanitary sewer system required.
3. -Right-of-way permit required for any work on City property.
4. -Driveway slope not to exceed 14%
5. -Backwater valve required if downstairs plumbing is below elevation of
up�tream manhole.
6. -Water and sewer lines to be separated by 10 foot I minimum.
BD 6/82
USE
CITY OF Ebmd7DS ZONE
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION JOB
NAME (OR NAME OF BUSINESS) ADDRESS
LEGAL DE
Ak_ 41 -S 1--�e
0 MAILING ADDRESS
Z
0 -7
E
W-JADDRESS
I A�3
.,jC -/
TELEPHONE NUMBER
NAME
,8 A R /3 /4 )-,/
ADDRESS
do
CITY
4
TELEPHONE NUMBER
-2
e 3 0 L
STATE LICEKSE NUM13ER
CITY LICENSE NUMBER
LSA(� n // -a --,L3 -0 6
Legal Description of Property - include all easements
(show below or attach four copies)
Pf P0 /I L/ 4 ),:5- (11',0 a
re? A cr,5 —
13A o - a o -- )-or-1 e
4- So, 3-j, 37'
01:-� 93 A-S qFA-5. D A-'
L,&J NEW RESIDENTIAL El PLUMBING
[_�
1:1
ADD/ALTER NON-RESIDENTIAL
MECHANICAL
1:1 E]
El
REPAIR RETAINING WALL
SIGN
EXCAVATE
0 El
FENCE
0
DEMOLISH OR FILL
1— x _FT)
r__l PRE -MOVE INSP.1
M swim
SIDE SEWER WATER LINE
CIE
U
LO NUMBER OF STORIES
LU
NUM BER OF
I
- 6 e+��2 -
E ING
D W LL,
I
0 , I:�-
UNITS
NATURE OF WORK TO BE DONE (ArTACH PLOT PLAN)
R )�S/ 0,4td-AF, -
It/.4 / L/ ,9, r t *0 t_1 *2 -1-. o v o ?-u- I
A
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP.
45—
EXISTING 0 REQUIRED DEDICATION 140
PROPOSED&_
RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION PERMIT REQUIRED 0
STREET USE PERMIT REQUIRED i I
SEE ENGINEERING MEMO DATED
SEE PIW DEPT. REVIEW CHECK LIST DATED
REMARKS
0
Z
cc
W
W
Z
Uj
METER SIZE
BUILDING SUPPLY SIZE
FIXTURE UNITS
cc
UA
REMARKS
SIGN AREA
ENV. REVIEW
ADB NO.
ALLOWED
PROPOSED
COMPLETE EXEMPT
SHORELINE 0
VARIANCE OR CU
PLANNLNG REVIEW BY
DAT
YARDS
LOT COVER GE
2-111;-FRONT
/0
Z5
N4
Z
Z
SIDE
REA FII
�
5
REMARKS
IL
BY I TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION I CODE I HEIGHT
SPECIAL INSPECTOR AREA OCCUPANC ' Y OCCUPANT
REQUIRED GROUP LOAD
171 YES I;NO
PLAN CHECK FEE
BUILDING
PLUMBING
MECHANICAL
This Permit covers work to be done on private property ONLY. GRADING/FILL
Any construction on the public domain (curbs, sidewalks,
driveways, marquees, etc.) will require separate permission.
Permit Application: 180 Days
Permit Limit: 1 Year - Provided Work Is Started Within 180 Days
"Applicant, on behalf of his or her spouse, heirs, assigns and
,n successors In interest, agrees to Indemnify, defend and hold
ow harmless the City of Edmonds, Washington, its officials,
.m employees, and agents from any and all claims for damages of
< whatever nature, arising directly or indirectly from the issuance
of this permit. Issuance of this permit shall not be deemed to
modify,.waive or reduce any requirement of any city ordinance
0 nor limit in any way the City's ability to enforce any ordinance TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
provision."
I hereby acknowl;dge that I have read this application; that the
Information given Is correct; and that I am the owner, or the duly
ATTENTION
authorized agent of the owner. I agree to comply with city and
THIS PERMIT
state laws regulating construction; and In doing the work authoriz-
AUTHORIZES
ed thereby, no person will be employed In violation of the Labor
ONLY THE
Code of the State of Washington relating to Workmen's Compensa-
WORK NOTED
tion Insurance—
INSPECTION
DA7 SIGNJ!�,.
S1 AT E (D�O
DEPARTMENT
�AGEVT)
CITY OF
THIS SITE IS LOCATED IN THE CITY
EDMONDS
OF EDMONDS. LOCAL SALES TAX
ATTENTION SHOULD BE CODED 31.04.
775-2525
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USI�, OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE
UNTIL A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR
A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC
CHAPTER 3..
JAN 7
J
102-7
0
Z
VALUATION
APPLICATION APPROVAL
This application Is not a permit until
signed by the Building Official or his
Deputy; and fees arepaid, and receipt Is
acknowledged In space provided.
OFFICIAL'S SIGNATURE
DATE
ORIGINAL — File YELLOW — Inspector',
PINK — Owner GOLD — Assessor,
�g - ft-ft WA ?759.9.
10 A'IAC —5o,,Ic,,4 V-It�al IrAAC77-5
(900 — 0— &0
'J.5
6',� L 3,q'
-7,6 W,