Loading...
19808 77TH PL W.pdfF;� D U 0 a LU 0 Z FINDINGS OF FACT I 1. This matter involves a variance request by Winston Whall to (1) increase the maximum allowed height of an accessory structure (detached garage) of 15 feet to 151/2 feet and (2) reduce the required west -side setback from 71/2 feet to 51/2 feet to correct an encroachment from a 1992 single residence addition. The subject structures have already been constructed and are located at 19808 77th Place West. 2. The Edmonds Planning Division has recommended denial of the variance request. 3. The Edmonds Hearing Examiner conducted a hearing on the variance request on October 16, 1997 and issued Findings, Conclusions and Decision denying the variance on October 30, 1997. 4. A closed record appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Decision was held before the City Council on December 16, 1997. Edmonds planning staff summarized the record for the Council. Argument in favor of the proposed variance was presented by the appellant, Winston Whall. Opposing argument was provided by Peter Schuldt, an interested neighbor. 5. The City Council reviewed the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner, the administrative record, a transcript of the hearing before the Hearing Examiner, and arguments by interested parties. Based upon this evidence, the Council determined that the Decision of the Hearing Examiner is affirmed in all respects. 6. In support of its decision, the City Council hereby adopts the Findings, Conclusions, and Decision of the Hearing Examiner on this variance request, Case No. V 97- 113, said Decision dated October 30, 1997. DECISION Winston Whall's appeal of the Hearing Examiner's denial of Mr. Whall's variance request for Case No. V 97-113 is hereby denied. The Decision of the Hearing Examiner denying the variance is hereby affirmed. PA0182274.ISX/0006.130.065 Be 0 I -A -,DATED s ay, of-: ........... Z �,CITY OF EDMONDS. cr lo Ul BARBARA S..IPAHEY Lo OLL ATTEST/AUTTIENTICATED: LU x U), z ISANDRA S. CHASE, CITY, �LFIW L" Uj U) U, LU x u U_ z D 0 PA018nXISX/0M.130.06 _2_ 2 0 a LU LL 0 z CITY OF EDMONDS BARBARA FAHEY 121 STH AVENUE NORTH -EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220 *FAX (425) 771-0221L MAYOR COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT C. Public W,orks Planning/Building Parks and Recreation, Engineering e WasteWater Treatment Plant Transmittal Date: January 27, 1998 To: Winston G. Whall 18336 84th PL W Edmonds, WA 98026 Subject:L V-97-113 AP-97-146 Transmitting FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW For Your Information: _X As you requested: For your file: Comment: Note attachments: Sincerely, Sharla Graham, Administrative Assistant CC: Peter Schuldt Engineering Planning Incorporated August 11, 1890 0 Sister Cities International — Hekinan, Japan COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEHE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCHI�MMBER EARLING, FOR APPROVAL OF THE REMAINING CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. MOTION CARRIED. The agenda Items approved are as follows: Z (A) ROLL CALL Uj inutes APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL METING MR�MS OF JANUARY 6,1998 Uj _j L) (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #19474 THRU #22261 FOR THE WEEK OF LU DECEM13ER 29, 1997, IN THE AMOUNT OF $454,055.66. APPROVAL OF CLAIM uj= _j �­ Appme WARRANTS #19487 THRU #22301 FOR THE WEEK OF JANUARY 5, 1998, IN THE U-) LL Waffants AMOUNT OF S217,327.45. APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #19489 THRU #22594 LU FOR THE WEEK OF JANUARY 12,:1998, IN THE AMOUNT OF $136,873.78. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL WARRANTS #19149 THRU #19296 FOR THE PERIOD OF LL <� DEC EMBER 16 THRU DECEMBER 31,1997, IN THE AMOUNT OF $324,442.09. S2 :,I LLiw (D) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM REBECCA J. SMITH Z (Amount Undetermined), AND GERALD H. McARTHUR ($105.00) Z (E) APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A CLOSED RECORD APPEAL OF THE ]HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION WHICH WAS HELD BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 6,1997.. (Appenant/Applicant: Winston Whall / File Nos. V-97-113 & AP-97-146; Property Location: 19808 77th Place West) Uj (131) AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE A VEHICLE FOR THE PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT FROM THE WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT Z LU CD (G) AUTHOR17AITON TO CONTRACT WITH JAMES MURPHY AUCTIONEERS TO SELL SURPLUS VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT Z (H) APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH PROSECUTOR JEFFREYGOODWIN �-orl- (1) APPROVAL OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH SNOCOM RELATED TO STEVE tdocal PERRY'S SERVICE AS DIRECTOR (J) APPROVAL OF INDIVIDUAL CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT AND SALARY ORDINANCE NO. 3185 RELATED TO STEVE PERRY'S SERVICE AS DIRECTOR OF SNOCOM 0 (L) ORDINANCE NO. 3186 AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF EDMONDS CITY CODE SECTION 832X50, PROHIBITING COMPRESSION BRAKES, To PROVIDE AN EXEMPTION FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES 1, k�v�l Councilmember White explained the Public Safety Committee addressed this issue late last year as it is against the law to skateboard, scooter, roller skate, etc. on any public street in Edmonds. Following a tinear-miss" auto accident, the police informed residents that skateboarding was not permitted even on the block -long cul-de-sac. Approximately 30 citizens participated in the discussion at the Public Safety Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes January 20, 1998 Page 2 0 FIMM ME EJUMVINJUN UITY UUUINUIL Agenda Memo Originator: Planning Division For Action: X For Information: 0! Subject: APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A CLOSED RECORD APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION WHICH WAS HELD BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 16,1997. (APPELLANTIAPPLICANT: WINSTON WHALL / FILE NOS. V-97-113 & AP-97-146; PROPERTY LOCATION: 19808 77TH PLACE WEST). U. 0�1 iw� 0 Y 0 z E. 0 Agenda Time: Agenda Date: Consent January 20, 1997 Exhibits Attached: 1. City Council Minutes of 12/16/97 2. Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law Clearances: Department/Inifials Admin Svcs/Finance _ Community Svcs City Attorney-- Engineering City Clerk Parks & Rec Court Planning — Personnel Public Works Fire Treatment Plant Police City Council Mayor Reviewed by Council Finance Committee: Com—nity Se -Ices Public Safety _ Approvedfor Consent Agenda: Recommend Review by Full Council. Expenditure Amount Appropriation Required: $0 Budgeted: $0 Required: $0 Funding Source: N/A Previous Council Action: On December 16, 1997, the City Council held a closed record appeal hearing. The Council reviewed the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner, the administrative record, a transcript of the hearing before the Hearing Examiner, and arguments by interested parties. Based upon this evidence, the Council determined that the Decision of the Hearing Examiner is affirmed in all respects (see Exhibit 1). Narrative: The attached Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law have been prepared by the City Attorney to support the decision of the Council to adopt the findings, Conclusions, and Decision of the Hearing Examiner dated October 30, 1997 denying the variance request. Recommended Action: Approve Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law (Exhibit 2). 0 r process. He said he would be available to answer questions when the Council considered the CASCD proposal. Mayor Fahey announced that when the Olympic Ballet's guests arrived, they would be introduced between agenda items. z < 4. REPORT ON COUNCEL COACM=E METING5 3: Z �- W� Public Safety Committee cc 2 < Public Safety aj Committee Member White reported on the committee's review of the Fire Department contract with the LU -j U 0 conanifte Esperance Area which will be a model for other newly annexed areas. This was an in rm ti fo a onal V) CY presentation only, no action was taken. An ordinance reducing speed limits along SR 104 and 100th V) LU LU Avenue West Speed limits in newly annexed areas was reviewed; the proposed ordinance was approved as Consent Agenda Item S. The committee reviewed a proposed skateboard ordinance which expands Ui 0� areas in which skateboarding is prohibited and, by not defining other areas, will open them to 2 �:i 9 -j" skateboarding. The ordinance will be on a future Council agenda. The proposed contract for animal UL shelter service with Adix's Bed & Bath for Dogs and Cats was discussed by the committee and was erra anim approved as Item N on the Consent Agenda. A contract with the City of Mountlake T ce for al control services wad discussed; this will be placed on an upcoming Consent Agenda due to some changes z in the contract. An amendment to the Interlocal Agreement which creates the South Snohomish County ; 0 Z �- Narcotics Task Force was discussed and was passed as Item M on the Consent Agenda. A community LU LU member's request for a full-time parking enforcement officer was referred to Chief Hickok for cost 2 =) :D Q� , analysis and a report to the Human Resource Committee in January. The committee discussed the U Lei 0 transfer of Police Administrator Supervisor Steve Perry to SnoCom, as Interim Director. a t:zj Councilmember White noted SnoCom. will reimburse the City for Mr. Perry's salary and benefits. LU ujl� Ly z rurnuoity services Community Service Committee Member Haakenson reported on the review of the Sewer and Stormwater Rate Study d! CO U Y n=iftee implementation. He said Community Services Director Paul Mar presented a workplan and schedule for implementation of the proposed rate increases with a target date of April 1, 1998. Staff is preparing a z summary review of the study results and a detailed public education workplan which will be presented to the Council in January. The committee concurred with this approach and reiterated its position that public education take place prior to the April irnplementation of rate increases. Finance Committee Committee Chairperson Nordquist thanked Councilmember Miller for serving on this committee during the past year. He also thanked Administrative Services Director Art Housler and staff for their 7"" assistance. Councilmember Nordquist reported the committee reviewed a lease of a new copier for Public Works. This item was approved on tonight's Consent Agenda. The advertising policy for community requests was also discussed; Councilmember Miller recommended advertising be done on a 0 quarterly basis. The audit report was reviewed and petty cash expenditures were approved with no discussion. 5. CLOSED RECORD APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMMES DECIAO]y TO DENY THE Closed Record ICAMIS APEUCAMN FOR A YARUNCE TO INCREASE THE MAN159M Appeal, PERU=D HE= OF AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE METACTIED G&UM FgOM W. wball 331M BjA2aWJM kZR5M=I) HEIGHT OF 15-FEET TO 15-FEET ES File No& RMHM 0 V-97-113 & THE REQXIIRFD WES1 SME SMACK FROM I-JMET 6ML(MR, TO 5-FEET 6MMS 3:0 AP-97-146 CORR-FCT AN ENCROACHMENT FROM A 1992 ADD (AppellauttApplicant: Winston Whall / File No. V-97-113 & AP-97-146; Property Location: 19808 77th Place West) Edmunds CitY COUncil Approved Minutes Decernber][6,1997 page 5 Attachment 1 0 A City Attorney Phil 01brechts explained this was a quasi judicial proceeding and asked if any Councilmembers had any potential conflicts or appearance of fairness issues to disclose. Councilmembcr White said be has met Winston Whall on occasion in a Professional capacity and was also acquainted in a professional capacity with his son, Jim, the tenant of the house. He said it had been at least two years since he spoke with either of them with the exception of a call from Jim Whall three weeks ago to inform lifin this would be on the Council's agenda. Councilmember White advised Mr. Whall he was unable to discuss the matter with him. Mr. Olbrechts asked if there was any objection to Councilmerriber White's disclosure. �5 Lu� LU X Peter Scbuldt� property owner to the west of the disputed property, requested Co ci emb te un hn er Whi -J 1--, En U. remove himself from the decision if he had any personal relationship with the party involved. Mr , Oi Olbrechts said the decision was Councilmember White's to make and asked if Councilmember White felt 2 1 9 his professional relationship with the Whalls would influence his decision. Councilmernber White answered Mr. Olbrechts he ' -J, U- 1<1 no. said did not see an appearance of fairriess issue but Councilmember :1 White could step down if he chose. Councilmember White said he would participate. Mayor Fahey S1pointed UJ out the frequent possibility that there is some knowledge of the individuals involved because z Edmonds is such a small community. She observed Councilmember White would not benefit in any way and therefore did not see any reason he should not participate. LU Lu; 2 =)� Planner Meg Gruwell displayed a site plan of the property. She said this was a closed record appeal and 0-1 the record was included in the Council's packet. She summarized the issues, noting this came to City a tj staffs attention via some complaints. The first was in regard to the setback of the garage which actually LU Uj X U1 touched the existing property line. When staff researched the matter, they learned it w co c d is nstru te without the required building permits; when this was brought to the property ownerts attention, he applied for a lot line adjustment which has been approved to correct the setback problem. As the W CO, CJ Fc building permit was being reviewed, it was determined there was a height problem as well. She clarifi ed if the garage is a detached structure, there is a height issue; if the garage is attached (which it currently 0 z is), there is a setback issue. The property owner chose to correct the height issue a s v e vi thil arianc process. A site plan had been submitted at the time of the 1992 addition and permits were issued. The site plan showed an 8Y2 foot setback which was actually incorrect. During construction, this problem was discovered and a "jog" made in the addition. A recent survey indicated the addition maintains only a SY2 foot setback rather that the required 7Y2 foot setback. Mr. Gruwell explained that the City also received a complaint regarding the setback issue and the applicant has chosen this process to correct the problem. In order to have a variance granted, the applicant must meet six criteria. She pointed out the special circumstances criteria could not be any 0 factor resulting from the action of the owner. The Hearing Examiner determined the criteria was not met and denied the variance. Mayor Fahey reiterated only information contained in the record could be considered; no new evidence could be presented. Councilmember White asked if the garage was on a fotmdation. Ms. Gruwell answered both the garage and the addition were.on foundations. L=Lr I Ir. - &uLawas. owner or nasub / tm tiace west said the variances e M requested were to maximum allowed height of a detached garage from 15 feet to 15Y. feet F-dmndl City COuncil Appmed Minutes December 16,1997 Pap 6 0 and to reduce the required west side setback from 7V2 feet to 5Y2- 6 feet to correct an encroachment from a 1992 addition. He explained the errors in the construction of the height of the garage and the side setback were acts of omission rather than commission. The garage was built in 1990 too close to the property line. In early 1997, Ms. Tilton, the adjacent property owner, notified him that she was considering selling her property and had been advised by a real estate agent that the garage was built too close to the property line and suggested she file a complaint with the City. To rectify this problem, Ms. Tilton agreed to a lot line adjustment which was approved by the City, there was no complaint about the height of the garage. The 6 inch height problem was discovered during the lot line adjustment procedures. The construction of the age is being reviewed by the City Building Dep ent but has SW artm been held up until the variance issue is completed. _J 0 L) UJ Mr. Whall explained the addition to the house was approved by the City and constructed during 1992- -J 1993. During excavation for the foundation, dirt was piled on the west side of the property, obscuring V) LL —0 the exact property line. When the foundation forms were in place, prior to pouring concrete, a line of LU sight reading indicated that the southwest comer of the addition 'may be too close to the property line. A -J revision was made in the plan; however, once the addition was completed, it was detennined that the LL actual setback appeared to be only 5Y7, - 6 feet from the property line. Due to the uncertainty of the location of the property line, a survey of the exact property boundary was done which determined the Uit distance was less than estimated. Z Z Mr. Whall pointed out the Hearing Examiner's conclusions stated the proposed variances would not be LU Lu�� significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or injurious to the property or U Ln improvements in the vicinity. The Hearing Examiner also states the submittal of two complaints 0 demonstrates the improvements made by the applicant or his representative have been found objectionable by at least two parties. Mr. Whall pointed out the complaint by Ms. Tilton did not apply to the height of the garage and was being met by the lot line adjustment. The complaint submitted by Mr. LL Schuldt referred to side setback of new and prior additions as well as the shed. He discussed this issue with 1W. Schuldt during the past six months and neither in his complaint nor during these discussions has he indicated that the encroachments have adversely affected the full utilization of his property or his property rights. He noted the north side of Mr. Schuldfs house, which faces the area of concern, does not Z have any windows or doors and an ungated fence extends north to the property line. Mr. Whall said the Hearing Examiner also referred to a petition signed by nine neighbors (submitted by AIr. Schuldt) who oppose the approval of the requested variances. Mr. Whall questioned why the neighbors were now opposed to his request for the variances as the structures were built 5 -7 years ago with no adverse comments at that time or during the interim years. His conversations with those who Prr-, signed the petition indicated that the 6 inch height violation on the garage and the 1-2 foot side setback on the addition were not the real issue. When they were contacted by Mr. Schuldt and advised the garage was built without City approval and that the setback was in violation of the Code, the real issue to the 0 community was that his son, who lives in the house and was the representative involved in the improvements, "broke the law" and must realize these actions are unacceptable. Due to the conditions upon which the variances were requested and their existence for several years as well as that this had'not been an issue until Ms. Tiltotfs concern, he requested the Council favorably consider the requested variances. 011 Mayor Fahey observed no additional public testimony would be permitted, Mr. Olbrechts said individuals who testified at the original hearing were parties of interest and would have an opportunity to make argument. Edmonds CItY Council ApMved MinUtell December 16,1997 Page 7 0 Peter Schuldt. 19812 77th Plage Mat. Edmond , the property owner to the west pointed out he and Mr. Whall did not have a discussion indicating this situation was not objectionable to him. He would not have filed a complaint if it was not objectionable. During this process, he researched remodeling that has occurred during recent years without permits and discovered a permit was issued only for the major addition in 1993. He urged the Council to review several drawings he submitted in the original hearing. He noted Ms. Gruwell's recommendation was to deny the variance and the Hearing Examiner also denied the variance. These decisions were based on the Code as well as criteria for a variance that were not met. He questioned whether a precedent would be set if the Hearing Examiner's decision was reversed. He requested the Council carefully review the information presented. LJ -! a i tn , LUI Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked what would occur if the denial was upheld. Ms. Cyru an er well sw ed (n ,11 X! the applicant would have to reduce the height of the garage by 6 inches. The addition that did not meet -J I-- LO U. the setback would have to be reduced or a lot line adjustment agreed to with Mr ul - Sch dt. She was W 01 uncertain whether Mr. Schuldt had adequate property between his house and the addition to grant a lot line adjustment. U- (n —0 Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked if there was a setback issue on the nortli property line. Ms. Gruwell 3: said it would be in compliance if the garage were detached. z 1--:; OP Councilmember Myers observed if there had been a building permit requested, this information would LU Uji, have been discussed and this problem would not have arisen. Ms. Gruwell agreed, notin th g e problem Z' with the addition was a result of an inaccurate site plan. 0 a Councilmeraber White asked how the City obtained a site plan. Ms. Gruwell explained the� applicant LU Lu X provides a site plan indicating the lot, where the structure will be located, setbacks, and stru tur g c e hei ht. Councilmember White asked who prepared the site plan. Ms. Gruwell said it is often done by an z architect, however, a small addition is often done by the owner. LU Mayor Fahey remanded the matter to Council for deliberation. 85 z COUNCH2YMMER MTRS MOVED, SECONDED By COUNCILMEMBER BAAKENSON, TO EXTEND THE DISCUSSION FOR FIVE ADDITIONAL MINUTE& MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Van Hollebeke referred to the Hearing Examinees conclusions and read two which he felt surnmarized the process, " 1) The applicant and his representative constructed both the addition and the garage. With a better site plan or survey stakes in the ground they could have avoided the need for a side yard setback variance. With a different design, the garage could easily have been made six inches shorter. It appears that the only reason for applying for the variances is that the past actions of the owner or his representative have not been in conformance with the adopted Ci re ati . ef an ty gul ons Ther ore, y 0 special circumstance which exists was self created and is not related to code requirements as they relate to the subject property. No special circumstances due to topography, or size or shape of the lot have been presented by the applicant as reasons why the variance should be gmted.11 and "2) Other property owners in the vicinity are required to meet setbacks and height limits. Although most of the houses in the neighborhood have garages, these are usually either combined with the primary structure and maintain those regulations, or are attached structures which appear to meet regulations." Councilmember Van Hollebeke said he would support the Hearing Examiner's decision. Edmonds CRY Council Approved Minot" December 16, 1 M Pop 8 0 :' J �J �,Z Council President Earling agreed with the comments made by Councilmember Van Hollebeke. He recalled other occasions when an error occurred and adjustment was required to a structure. He also agreed with the Hearing Examiner's decision. COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCELARMBER VAN HOLLEBEIKE, TO UPHOLD THE HEARING EXAMINER,S RECOMMENDATION. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Fahey welcomed John Wilkins, Olympic Ballet, and his guests Intro4luction from Russia. Mr. Wilkens Winans - thanked the City of Edmonds for its support of the arts and the opportunity they provide artists. He said 0 1 01yrnpic he is a citizen of Edmonds, business owner and also a board member on the South Snoho sh mb Baut mi Cha er of Conunerce. He said he believed in regionalism and that the communities should work together. He introduced Valery Anisimov and Irina Piatkina, two artists from Russia who will be dancing in the LL 0 1 Olympic Ballet's performance of "The Nutcracker,, and invited the Council to attend. I [a Valery Anisimov said this was the fourth time he has been in Echnonds. On previous occasions, he stayed in Edmonds but danced in Everett, Bellevue, and Seattle. He said it was important for the City and artists to have a new theater with a big stage. Irina Piatkina said she was happy to be in the City. She agreed it would be good to have a new theater here. Mayor Fahey encouraged the public to attend the Olympic Ballet performance at Puget Sound Christian College on Saturday, December 20. She thanked the Olympic Ballet for their performances and the enrichment they provide to the community. 6. ORDINA= PLO, 31 1997 BJMGET AS A RESMJ_DF_XMEAXJJCJeA= TRANSFERS AND EMMUnIRES OF YAWOUS FUNDS Administrative Services Director Art Housler explained during the year the Council takes action to transfer moneys from one firad to another or increasing expenditures appropriations. Legal audit requirements necessitate the passage of an ordinance. This is done twice a year, in July and again at the end of the year. The proposed ordinance amends the 1997 budget; the increase in appropriations -is $944,860. He provided examples of some of these expenditures such as the transfer from all operating ftmds to the medical self-insurance fund totaling $502,000; fire department labor contract settlement of $63,000; and the replacement of the bucket truck at a cost of $51,000. COUNCILMEMBER MYERS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3179, AMENDING THE 1997 BUDGET AS A RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS. MOTION CARRIED. 7. ORMAME NO, 3180 ADOEJEJG_3WEffAL MGM or nM Ord. #3 ISO YEAR COMMENCING JANUARY 1. 1998 Adopt 1998 Budpt I Administrative Services Director Art Housler explained since the Council received the preliminary budget on November 1, there have been numerous discussions regarding changes to the budget. He explained changes necessary as a result of annexations such as additional staff and additional revenue. He displayed and reviewed 1998 Budget Revisions by Fund. Mayor Fahey noted the revenues from the P-dmOnds CirY Council Approved Minutes D=ember 16,1997 Pep 9 7 LU 0 0 a LU U. 0 Z 2* FINDINGS OF FACT 1. This matter involves a variance request by Winston Whall to (1) increase the maximum allowed height of an accessory structure (detached garage) of 15 feet to 151/2 feet and (2) reduce the required west -side setback from 71/2 feet to 51/2 feet to correct an encroachment from a 1992 single residence addition. The subject structures have already been constructed and are located at 19808 77th Place West. 2. The Edmonds Planning Division has recommended denial of the variance request. 3. The Edmonds Hearing Examiner conducted a hearing on the variance request on October 16, 1997 and issued Findings, Conclusions and Decision denying the variance on October 30, 1997. 4. A closed record appeal of the Hearing Examiner's Decision was held before the City Council on December 16, 1997. Edmonds planning staff summarized the record for the Council. Argument in favor of the proposed variance was presented by the appellant, Winston Whall. Opposing argument was provided by Peter Schuldt, an interested neighbor. 5. The City Council reviewed the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner, the administrative record, a transcript of the hearing before the Hearing Examiner, and arguments by interested parties. Based upon this evidence, the Council determined that the Decision of the Hearing Examiner is affirmed in all respects. 6. In support of its decision, the City Council hereby adopts the Findings, Conclusions, and Decision of the Hearing Examiner on this variance request, Case No. V 97- 113, said Decision dated October 30, 1997. DECISION Winston Whall's appeal of the Hearing Examiner's denial of Mr. Whalls variance request for Case No. V 97-113 is hereby denied. The Decision of the Hearing Examiner denying the variance is hereby affirmed. PA01=74.1SX/OW6.130.065 -I- Affaah-M-Int-2 0 [a 2�j process. He said he would be available to answer questions when the Council considered the CASCD proposal. Mayor Fahey announced that when the Olympic Ballet's guests arrived, they would be introduced between agenda items. 4. RR111011T nN rnTTNrn. vnmmrrrvv mvvrr%TrL, 7 Public S ty afety Committee Member White reported on the committee's review of the Fire Department contract with the .L committee Esperance Area which will be a model for other newly annexed areas. This was an informational presentation only, no action was taken. An ordinance reducing speed limits along SR 104 and 100th Avenue West Speed limits in newly annexed areas was reviewed; the proposed ordinance was approved as Consent Agenda Item S. The committee reviewed a proposed skateboard ordinance which expands areas in which skateboarding is prohibited and, by not defining other areas, will open them to skateboarding. The ordinance will be on a future Council agenda. The proposed contract for animal shelter service with Adix's Bed & Bath for Dogs and Cats was discussed by the committee and was approved as Item N on the Consent Agenda. A contract with the City of Mountlake Terrace for animal control services wad discussed; this will be placed on an upcoming Consent Agenda due to some changes in the contract. An amendment to the Interlocal Agreement which creates the South Snohomish County Narcotics Task Force was discussed and was passed as Item M on the Consent Agenda. A community member's request for a full-time parking enforcement officer was referred to Chief Hickok for cost analysis and a report to the Human Resource Committee in January. The committee discussed the transfer of Police Administrator Supervisor Steve Perry to SnoCom as Interim Director. Councilmember White noted SnoConi will reimburse the City for Mr. Perry's salary and benefits. Co#muaity Com aunity Services Services Committee Member Haakenson reported on the review of the Sewer and Stormwater Rate Study M Committee implementation. He said Community Services Director Paul Mar presented a workplan and schedule for implementation of the proposed rate increases with a target date of April 1, 1998. Staff is preparing a summary review of the study results and a detailed public education workplan which will be presented to the Council in January. The committee concurred with this approach and reiterated its position that public education take place prior to the April implementation of rate increases. IFinance Einance Committe 1commi,,,, I Committee Chairperson Nordquist thanked Councilmember Miller for serving on this committee during the past year. He also thanked Administrative Services Director Art Housler and staff for their assistance. Councilmember Nordquist reported the committee reviewed a lease of a new copier for Public Works. This item was approved on tonight's Consent Agenda. The advertising policy for community requests was also discussed; Councilmember Miller recommended advertising be done on a quarterly basis. The audit report was reviewed and petty cash expenditures were approved with no discussion. C 4,01 ROU N&MI W4111 L014N A14 111VOINNI)DION- Reco v,L;jc=;LYjjjW4j r It: 64 M Elm I W,ff.,vk4 , L V A I,, I Ju- Appeal 11 **111j_WT41WV RIUVILIJ N DI[j)) Z �Dll§ W. whall M *1 6. U_ w JA 0 k7j, TV Via of Let File Nos, jjjl-;J- TV ILI) KM fka, "ugl_ 31RIIIAW - - 9 V 97-113 & RD11 AW?& SO AP-97-14 C CT AN E ACHMUEN1 FRO— - '992 ADDITE (Appellant/Applicant: Winston Whall / File No. V-97-113 & AP-97-146; Property Location: 19808 77th Place West) a City Attorney Phil Olbrechts explained this was a quasi judicial proceeding and asked if any Councilmembers had any potential conflicts or appearance of fairness issues to disclose. Councilmember White said he has met Winston Whall on occasion in a professional capacity and was also acquainted in a professional capacity with his son, Jim, the tenant of the house. He said it had been at least two years since he spoke with either of them with the exception of a call from Jim Whall three weeks ago to inform him this would be on the Council's agenda. Councilmember White advised Mr. Whall he was unable to discuss the matter with him. Mr. Olbrechts asked if there was any objection to Councilmember White's disclosure. -J 1--: Ln u. Peter Schuldt property owner to the West of the disputed property, requested Councilmember V te Ali LU 0 remove himself from the decision if he had any personal relationship with the party involved. Aft. Olbrechts the decision said was Councilmember White's to make and asked if Councilmember White felt his professional relationship with the Whalls would influence his decision. Councilmember White (no answered no. Mr. Olbrechts said he did not see an appearance of fairness issue but Councilmember T Ulm White could step down if he chose. Couricilmember White said he would participate. Mayor Fahey Z pointed out the frequent possibility that there is some knowledge of the individuals involved because 0 Edmonds is such a small community. She observed Councilmember White would not benefit in any way UJ UJ; and therefore did not see any reason he should not p articipate. 2 :)1 W, 0 —1 Planner Meg Gruwell displayed a site plan of the property. She said this was a closed record appeal and C3 t:� the record was included in the Council's packet. She summarized the issues, noting this came to City LU uJ X L)i staffs attention via some complaints. The first was in regard to the setback of the garage which ac ally tu U. touched the existing property line. When staff researched the matter, they learned it was constructed Z without the required building permits; when this was brought to the property owner's attention, he U) applied for a lot line adjustment which has been approved to correct the setback problem. As e th 0 building permit was being reviewed, it was determined there was a height problem as well. She clarified Z if the garage is a detached structure, there is a height issue; if the garage is attached (which it c tly urren is), there is a setback issue. The property owner chose to correct the height issue via this variance process. A site plan had been submitted at the time of the 1992 addition and permits were issued. The site plan showed an 8Y2 foot setback which was actually incorrect. During construction, this problem was discovered and a "jog" made in the addition. A recent survey indicated the addition maintains only a 5 Y2 foot setback rather that the required 7Y2 foot setback. P- Mr. Gruwell explained that the City also received a complaint regarding the setback issue and the applicant has chosen this process to correct the problem. In order to have a variance granted, the applicant must meet six criteria. She pointed out the special circumstances criteria could not be any 01 factor resulting from the action of the owner. The Hearing Examiner determined the criteria was not met and denied the variance. Mayor Fahey reiterated only information contained in the record could be considered; no new evidence could be presented. Councilmember White asked if the garage was on a foundation. Ms. Gruwell answered both the garage and the addition were on foundations. Winston Wball. -1 — said the variances requested were to increase the maximum allowed height of a detached garage from 15 feet to 15y, feet Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes December 16,1997 Page 6 and to reduce the required west side setback from 7Y2feet to SY2- 6 feet to correct an encroachment from a 1992 addition. He explained the errors in the construction of the height of the garage and the side setback were acts of omission rather than commission. The garage was built in 1990 too close to the Property line. In early 1997, Ms. Tilton, the adjacent property owner, notified him that she was considering selling her property and had been advised by a real estate agent that the garage was built too < close to the property line and suggested she file a complaint with the City. To rectify this problem, Ms. LEI Tilton agreed to a lot line adjustment which was approved by the City; there was no complaint about the height of the garage. The 6 inch height problem was discovered during the lot line adjustment procedures. The construction of the garage is being reviewed by the City Building Department but has 01 L-0 01 been held up until the variance issue is completed. to tW Ui X, -J �—� Mr. Whall explained the addition to the house was approved by the City and constructed duri En LL ng 1992- 0 1993. During excavation for the foundation, dirt was piled on the west side of the property, obscuring the exact property line. When the foundation forms were in place, prior to pouring concrete, a line of sight reading indicated that the southwest comer of the addition may be too close to the property line. A LL revision was made in the plan; however, once the addition was completed, it was determined that the D) actual setback appeared to be only 5Y2 - 6 feet from the property line. Due to the uncertainty of the Z location of the property line, a survey of the exact property boundary was done which determined the distance was less than estimated. Z LU LW Mr. Whall pointed out the Hearing Examiner's conclusions stated the proposed variances would not be U CO significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or injurious to the property or 0 improvements in the vicinity. The Hearing Examiner also states the submittal of two complaints in demonstrates the improvements made by the applicant or his representative have been found LL 1-� objectionable by at least two parties. Mr. Whall pointed out the complaint by Ms. Tilton did not apply to 01 zi the height of the garage and was being met by the lot line adjustment. The complaint submitted by Mr. LU U) Schuldt referred to side setback of new and prior additions as well as the shed. He discussed this issue with Mr. Schuldt during the past six months and neither in his complaint nor during these discussions has 0 Z he indicated that the encroachments have adversely affected the full utilization of his property or his property rights. He noted the north side of Mr. Schuldt's house, which faces the area of concern, does not have any windows or doors and an ungated fence extends north to the property line. Mr. Whall said the Hearing Examiner also referred to a petition signed by nine neighbors (submitted by Mr. Schuldt) who oppose the approval of the requested variances. Mr. Whall questioned why the neighbors were now opposed to his request for the variances as the structures were built 5 -7 years ago with no adverse comments at that time or during the interim years. His conversations with those who signed the petition indicated that the 6 inch height violation on the garage and the 1-2 foot side setback on the addition were not the real issue. When they were contacted by Mr. Schuldt and advised the garage 0 was built without City approval and that the setback was in violation of the Code, the real issue to the community was that his son, who lives in the house and was the representative involved in the improvements, "broke the law" and must realize these actions are unacceptable. Due to the conditions upon which the variances were requested and their existence for several years as well as that this had not been an issue until Ms. Tilton's concern, he requested the Council favorably consider the requested variances. Z Mayor Fahey observed no additional public testimony would be permitted. Mr. Olbrechts said individuals who testified at the original hearing were parties of interest and would have an opportunity to make argument. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes December 16,1997 Page 7 0 0 a LAJ X F- U- Z Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked if there was a setback issue on the north property line. Ms. Gruwell said it would be in compliance if the garage were detached. Councilmember Myers observed if there had been a building permit requested, this information would have been discussed and this problem would not have arisen. Ms. Gruwell agreed, noting the problem with the addition was a result of an inaccurate site plan. Councilmember White asked how the City obtained a site plan. Ms. Gruwell explained the applicant provides a site plan indicating the lot, where the structure will be located, setbacks, and structure height. Councilmember White asked who prepared the site plan. Ms. Gruwell said it is often done by an architect; however, a small addition is often done by the owner. Mayor Fahey remanded the matter to Council for deliberation. COUNCILMENMER MYERS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMENMER HAAKENSON, To EXTEND THE DISCUSSION FOR FIVE ADDITIONAL MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Van Hollebeke referred to the Hearing Examiner's conclusions and read two which he felt summarized the process, " 1) The applicant and his representative constructed both the addition and the garage. With a better site plan or survey stakes in the ground they could have avoided the need for a side yard setback variance. With a different design, the garage could easily have been made six inches shorter. It appears that the only reason for applying for the variances is that the past actions of the owner or his representative have not been in conformance with the adopted City regulations. Therefore, any special circumstance which exists was self created and is not related to code requirements as they relate to the subject property. No special circumstances due to topography, or size or shape of the lot have been presented by the applicant as reasons why the variance should be granted." and 112) Other property owners in the vicinity are required to meet setbacks and height limits. Although most of the hous'es in the neighborhood have garages, these are usually either combined with the primary structure and maintain those regulations, or are attached structures which appear to meet regulations." Councilmember Van Hollebeke said he would support the Hearing Examiner's decision. Edmonds OY Council Approved Minutes December 16,1997 Page 8 0 1 4. 41 Council President Earling agreed with the comments made by Councilmember Van Hollebeke. He recalled other occasions when an error occurred and adjustment was required to a structure. He also agreed with the Hearing Examiner's decision. COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIELMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEIKE, TO UPHOLD THE HE ARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION. MOTION CARRIED. 116 _J; LU El Mayor Fahey welcomed John Wilkins, Olympic Ballet, and his guests from Russia. Mr. Wilkens -i nftoducb... L) fauests. thanked the City of Edmonds for its support of the arts and the opportunity they provide artists. He said 0impic he is a citizen of Edmonds, business owner and also a board member on the South Snohomish Chamb (n (n UJ B,11.t U, X: er -j �-� of Commerce. He said he believed in regionalism and that the communities should work together. He (n LLJ introduced Valery Anisimov and Irina Piatkina, two artists from Russia who will be dancing in the Olympic Ballefs performance of "The Nutcracker" and invited the Council to attend. r, -n� Valery Anisimov said this was the fourth time he has been in Edmonds. On previous occasions, he (D 01 stayed in Edmonds but danced in Everett, Bellevue, and Seattle. He said it was importan th ty X Uil t for e Ci f-- X.. and artists to have a new theater with a big stage. Z 01 Irina, Piatkina said she was happy to be in the City. She agreed it would be good to have a new theater here. 0 Mayor Fahey encouraged the public to attend the Olympic Ballet performance at Puget Sound Christian 0-1 U J Lu" College on Saturday, December 20. She thanked the Olympic Ballet for their performances and the enrichment they provide to the community. 0i Z, 6. ORDIN Inn'? nyrn.17 LU 0 E TRANSFERS AND EXPENDI31MS OF MARIOUS FUNDS 0 Administrative Services Director Art Housler explained during the year the Council takes action to transfer moneys from one fund to another or increasing expenditures appropriations. Legal audit requirements necessitate the passage of an ordinance. This is done twice a year, in July and again at the end of the year. The proposed ordinance amends the 1997 budget; the increase in appropriations is $944,860. He provided examples of some of ese expenditures such as the sfer f ont all operating th tran r funds to the medical self-insurance fund totaling $502,000; fire department labor contract settlement of $63,000; and the replacement of the bucket truck at a cost of $5 1,000. COUNCILMEMBER MYERS MOVED, SECONDED By COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING, To ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3179, AMENDING THE 1997 BUDGET AS A RESULT OF 0 UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS. MOTION CARRIED. 7. ORDINANCE No. 3180 AD!2PTIN_G _THE MAL BUDGET OF THE Ord. #3180 Adopt 1998 YEARLDAUE&CRnIANVARKLM Budget I Administrative Services Director Art Housler explained since the Council received the preliminary budget on November 1, there have been numerous discussions regarding changes to the budget. He explained changes necessary as a result of annexations such as additional staff and additional revenue. 1,J He displayed and reviewed 1998 Budget Revisions by Fund. Mayor Fahey noted the revenues from the Edmonds City Council Appmved Minutes N—cember 16,1997 Page 9 0 A% newly annexed areas are low in 1998 because property tax revenue is not received from these areas until 1999. Mr. Housler noted the Council requested a transfer of $120,000 to the Building Repair and Maintenance Z Fund and instructed staff to reduce the General Fund budget by $ 100,000. < '2' l.- I UJI Mr. Olbrechts observed an appropriation for the Edmonds Alliance for Economic Development (EAED) was included in the proposed budget; this was considered a remote conflict for Councilmember Van _J Hollebeke under State conflict laws. He explained that Councilmember Van Hollebeke, as an officer (n of the EAED, was prohibited from influencing the Council's vote on this item F s vote would not urther hi U) UJ count on that budget item. LU (n U. UJ 0 Council President Earling asked if the changes requested at the Council's Special Meeting had been 2 �: accomplished. Mr. Housler answered yes. 0! -J U. COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED By COUNCILMZMBER VAN X Uti HOLLEBEEE, FOR APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 3180, ADOPTING THE FIN ALBUDGET �- X Z I. - FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998. MOTIONCARRIED. The ordinance approved is as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 3180 OF TIRE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE LU LW FINAL BUDGET OF THE CITY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING jANUARY 1, 1998, U Lnj PROVIDING FOR MONTHLY REVENUE REPORTS AND F SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. UMG A IBM WHEN THE SAME 0 2-5 tj W UJ 01(t. #3181 1998 8. ORDINANCE NO,3181- 19%i U. 0 Z Salary Ord. forNon- Represe]nted Community Services Director Paul Mar explained that Exhibit A showed employees who are part of the LU (a non -represented group and Exhibit B was the salary schedule. 0 Z COUNCILMEMBER MYERS MOVED, SECONDED By COUNCIELMEMIDER VAN HOLLEBEIKE, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NO. 3181, THE 1998 SALARY ORDINANCE FOR NON -REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES. MOTION CARRIED. The ordinance approved is as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 3181 OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING THE SALARY RANGES FOR NON -REPRESENTED EXEMPT PERSONNEL; REPEALING ORDINANCE NUMBERS 3064 AND 3145, THE 1997 SALARY ORDINANCES; PROVIDING FOR INSURANCE BENEFITS, INCLUDING LIFE AND DISABILITY INSURANCE; AND FUCING A TIME WH] C1N THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. salary Ord. 9. APPROVAL OF 0 for Mayor -urrimunity Services Director Paul Mar explained the requested action was an increase in the salary for the Mayor's position from $60,000 annually to $65,000 annually. He explained justification for the increase in salary which included an ordinance passed by the Council in 1994 that indicated a desire to gradually bring the salary into conformance with other jurisdic ons as well as 0 de for a pe o review. This is the first time since that ordinance was passed th ti Pr vi ri dic at the salary has been reviewed. On an 0 annualized basis, the $5,000 increase was a 2.7% annual increase. He said the Council packet also included internal and external salary comparisons, which also justify the increase in the Mayor's salary to $65,000. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes December 16,1997 Page 10 0